List the teams that will win 57+ games next season.

[It's A VC3!!!]

Last season there were only 4 teams that won 57 or more games. That list included the Heat, Thunder, Spurs and Nuggets. The Clippers and Grizzlies won 56 games each.

Next season will be a super competitive season for about 10 teams. Here is my list. (If these teams are relatively healthy).

Heat (67)
Nets (60)
Knicks (57)
Bulls (59)
Thunder (61)
Clippers (60)
Warriors (57)

Anyone disagree, if so what's your list include.

[Fallen Angel]

Nets are not winning 57 games lol stop being such a homer.

I see the Spurs, Heat, Thunder, and maybe the Clippers winning 57 games or more next season.

[It's A VC3!!!]

Nets are not winning 57 games lol stop being such a homer.

I see the Spurs, Heat, Thunder, and maybe the Clippers winning 57 games or more next season.
If they are healthy they can. They won 49 games last season with Gerald Wallace and Reggie Evans in the starting lineup. Winning 8 more games isn't something other-wordly.:confusedshrug:
In addition to our starting unit, out bench is downright lethal.

[plowking]

What's everyone smoking to make them think the Warriors are so good? They're a team that could miss the playoffs this coming season and I wouldn't be shocked, even after what they did last season.

Maybe its just me, but I see them scraping in to the playoffs just like last year.

[Solefade]

What's everyone smoking to make them think the Warriors are so good? They're a team that could miss the playoffs this coming season and I wouldn't be shocked, even after what they did last season.

Maybe its just me, but I see them scraping in to the playoffs just like last year.


This. I said this in another thread but we don't even know if they're truly better with Iggy at the expense of Jarrett and Landry.

I see Bulls being a top regular season team and then losing to the Pacers/Heat when it matters :lol

[It's A VC3!!!]

What's everyone smoking to make them think the Warriors are so good? They're a team that could miss the playoffs this coming season and I wouldn't be shocked, even after what they did last season.

Maybe its just me, but I see them scraping in to the playoffs just like last year.
Again, if health doesn't derail them, they could be a really potent team. They pushed the Spurs to 6 games last season and added Iggy while still retaining their core. I think they will be a better team all-around. I don't think they will "miss the playoffs" though. That seems a bit far-fetched for a young team will this much talent.

[JimmyMcAdocious]

Miami, Chicago, OKC, Spurs, and Clippers.

[RedBlackAttack]

What's everyone smoking to make them think the Warriors are so good? They're a team that could miss the playoffs this coming season and I wouldn't be shocked, even after what they did last season.

Maybe its just me, but I see them scraping in to the playoffs just like last year.
I pretty much agree. Yes, they secured Iggy, but they also lost Jarrett Jack and Carl Landry. Jack, in particular, was a pretty key guy for them last season and when they went small with Curry, Jack and Thompson, it gave teams a lot of problems matching up.

I'm not saying Iggy won't help, particularly with defensive intensity, but will that give them +10 wins over last season? I don't see it.

[tikay0]

Miami, Chicago, OKC, Spurs, and Clippers.

This.

Nets and Knicks ain't winning no damn 57 and 60 games. GTFOH.

Not hating, but c'mon, KG and PP are gonna take a bunch of nights off, and the Knicks will go through their usual dry spell from behind the arc.

[RedBlackAttack]

Again, if health doesn't derail them, they could be a really potent team. They pushed the Spurs to 6 games last season and added Iggy while still retaining their core. I think they will be a better team all-around. I don't think they will "miss the playoffs" though. That seems a bit far-fetched for a young team will this much talent.
That's another thing... They were remarkably healthy last season. Curry played in 78 regular season games, while Thompson played all 82. Does anyone really see that happening again?

I'm not saying I don't like what the Warriors have done, though I do think they'll miss Jack more than people are realizing... But the optimism is a little too extreme, imo. I don't see any way this team wins 57 games.

[JimmyMcAdocious]

Will Iggy give them 10 more wings? Probably not.

But what about Iggy, (let's assume) a healthy Bogut and Curry all season, and presumably improved overall roster, since they heavily relied on 4 players who are still on their rookie contracts during the playoffs.

I don't think they reach 57, tho.


Other than the one hampered year, Curry plays an average of 77 games a season in his other 3. I don't know the figures. I'm guessing that's at least average for an NBA player. :confusedshrug: Bogut is the one you worry about.

[It's A VC3!!!]

This.

Nets and Knicks ain't winning no damn 57 and 60 games. GTFOH.

Not hating, but c'mon, KG and PP are gonna take a bunch of nights off, and the Knicks will go through their usual dry spell from behind the arc.
That's fine. You have your opinion. But when KG and PP do take nights off, we have AK and Terry that will fill in for them. That's not a huge drop off at all. Actually, our lineup is better with AK in it. Plus, I look at it this way. Gerald and Reggie have been replaced by Pierce and Garnett. That change alone guarantees us 5 more wins.:lol

[NugzFan]

Last season there were only 4 teams that won 57 or more games. That list included the Heat, Thunder, Spurs and Nuggets. The Clippers and Grizzlies won 56 games each.

Next season will be a super competitive season for about 10 teams. Here is my list. (If these teams are relatively healthy).

Heat (67)
Nets (60)
Knicks (57)
Bulls (59)
Thunder (61)
Clippers (60)
Warriors (57)

Anyone disagree, if so what's your list include.

7 teams winning 57+?

has that ever happened before in the history of the nba?

also it gives the other 23 teams an average of 35 wins. seems low.

[chips93]

i think just the bulls, thunder, heat, and spurs will win 57+

i think rose comes back, and gets the bulls' offense back on track, and they get close to 60 wins

[RedBlackAttack]

Will Iggy give them 10 more wings? Probably not.

But what about Iggy, (let's assume) a healthy Bogut and Curry all season, and presumably improved overall roster, since they heavily relied on 4 players who are still on their rookie contracts during the playoffs.

I don't think they reach 57, tho.
Jarrett Jack averaged 30 minutes a night last season for 13 points, 6 assists and three rebounds on good efficiency. He was probably the best backup guard in the NBA and he finished most games on the floor.

Who is replacing his production?

[The_Yearning]

I don't see the Spurs winning much. I think their finished.

[Solefade]

That's fine. You have your opinion. But when KG and PP do take nights off, we have AK and Terry that will fill in for them. That's not a huge drop off at all. Actually, our lineup is better with AK in it. Plus, I look at it this way. Gerald and Reggie have been replaced by Pierce and Garnett. That change alone guarantees us 5 more wins.:lol


With 3/5 of the Nets starters from last year, they couldn't even beat the shittiest Bulls squad ever assembled (on paper). I don't see KG, PP, AK putting them over the hump of a team like the Bulls during the regular season with Rose and Deng back.

[It's A VC3!!!]

That's another thing... They were remarkably healthy last season. Curry played in 78 regular season games, while Thompson played all 82. Does anyone really see that happening again?

I'm not saying I don't like what the Warriors have done, though I do think they'll miss Jack more than people are realizing... But the optimism is a little too extreme, imo. I don't see any way this team wins 57 games.
They'll miss Jack a lot. He was Mr. Big shot for them. He was also the pioneer of the bench unit. Their bench is not horrid either. They have Barnes, O'Neal (whatever's left of him), and Speights. TBH, a lot of points are being brought up that I didn't fully consider. 57 probably seems like too many wins for the Warriors. I still think they end up with 48-53 wins.

[chips93]

also it gives the other 23 teams an average of 35 wins. seems low.

well there could be a bunch of tanking teams, so maybe that will inflate the win totals of the contenders?

[RedBlackAttack]

I think the Nets could be a dangerous team come playoff time if they're able to remain healthy... but staying healthy all regular season may not jive with winning 57+ games. It will take a lot of effort to get there and I'm not sure that's really what this particular roster should be concerned about.

I would personally aim for 50 wins and preserve PP/KG for the postseason at all costs.

[It's A VC3!!!]

7 teams winning 57+?

has that ever happened before in the history of the nba?

also it gives the other 23 teams an average of 35 wins. seems low.
4 teams had 57 or more wins last season. 2 had 56, and 1 had 54. Those were the top 7 teams in the league last season. so if those 56 wins teams won 1 more and the 54 win team won 3 more, it would've been 7 57 win teams.

plus, last season there were 10 teams under the 35 win average. those teams hurt the average.

[tikay0]

With 3/5 of the Nets starters from last year, they couldn't even beat the shittiest Bulls squad ever assembled (on paper). I don't see KG, PP, AK putting them over the hump of a team like the Bulls during the regular season with Rose and Deng back.

Plus a brand new coach in Jason Kidd. C'mon man.

For all we know, he might turn out to be one of the worst coaches in NBA history (exaggerating, but you never know).

[JimmyMcAdocious]

Jarrett Jack averaged 30 minutes a night last season for 13 points, 6 assists and three rebounds on good efficiency. He was probably the best backup guard in the NBA and he finished most games on the floor.

Who is replacing his production?

Iggy? Jack gave them another ball handler, allowed Curry to play off the ball, and hit some clutch shots.

OK, so you allow Curry, or Klay, or Lee, or Barnes, or whomever to shoot the more clutch shots now and the rest Iggy has been doing his entire career. Now he's finally on a team that won't ask him to be more than he's not. Plus he's a better and more versatile defensive player. You just mess with the rotations a bit and rely more on the starters than a sixth man.

And obviously I'm presuming this, but I really feel like you are overlooking the overall likely improvement in Thompson, Barnes, Green, and Ezeli's games. Green and Barnes hit their strides late in the year and Klay's already a borderline allstar player going into the year I feel NBA players typically make their biggest jump.

[Wally450]

The only 4 teams that are winning 60 games next year are the Heat, Bulls, Thunder and Spurs.

[RedBlackAttack]

Iggy? Jack gave them another ball handler, allowed Curry to play off the ball, and hit some clutch shots.

OK, so you allow Curry, or Klay, or Lee, or Barnes, or whomever to shoot the more clutch shots now and the rest Iggy has been doing his entire career. Now he's finally on a team that won't ask him to be more than he's not. Plus he's a better and more versatile defensive player. You just mess with the rotations a bit and rely more on the starters than a sixth man.

And obviously I'm presuming this, but I really feel like you are overlooking the overall likely improvement in Thompson, Barnes, Green, and Ezeli's games. Green and Barnes hit their strides late in the year and Klay's already a borderline allstar player going into the year I feel NBA players typically make their biggest jump.
I just don't look at that roster and see 57 wins. Iguodala will have a similar role on this team as he had in Denver last year. He was good, not great.

It will be a very different GSW team from last year. Iggy is obviously a completely different kind of player from Jack, who is a good shooter and very clutch. They should be improved defensively. Offensively? I'm not so sure. They have a more conventional lineup this season which may work in their favor or maybe not.

Also, like I said, I'd be sort of surprised if their backcourt was as healthy this season. I'm not saying Curry or Thompson are injury prone (certainly not Thompson), but those guys playing 160 of 164 games? It just seems unlikely to me.

I felt like they pretty much maxed out last season with 47 wins. Teams don't max out every year and, in fact, a lot of times they flame out. I don't think GSW will do that, but I also don't see them with close to 60 wins. I'd guess a win total probably around the same... 45-50 wins.

[KG215]

Seven teams is being VERY generous and just won't happen. Going back the last 10 seasons (excluding the 2012 lockout season) there's never been more than 5 teams win 57+ games in the same season, and that happened only once; 4 teams won 57+ 3 times; and 3 teams won 57+ 5 times.

[poido123]

Iggy? Jack gave them another ball handler, allowed Curry to play off the ball, and hit some clutch shots.

OK, so you allow Curry, or Klay, or Lee, or Barnes, or whomever to shoot the more clutch shots now and the rest Iggy has been doing his entire career. Now he's finally on a team that won't ask him to be more than he's not. Plus he's a better and more versatile defensive player. You just mess with the rotations a bit and rely more on the starters than a sixth man.

And obviously I'm presuming this, but I really feel like you are overlooking the overall likely improvement in Thompson, Barnes, Green, and Ezeli's games. Green and Barnes hit their strides late in the year and Klay's already a borderline allstar player going into the year I feel NBA players typically make their biggest jump.

I agree with you man.

I don't see how replacing Jack and Landry with Iggy doesn't make them better? Landry is pretty much replaced by Speights, they added a serviceable backup centre Oneal, they have Barnes to come off the bench and provide a spark. This team is definately better and capable of winning 57+ games.

[aj1987]

Heat - 68
OKC - 61
Clippers- 59
Bulls - 58
Grizzlies - 58

[KG215]

Going back to my other post, if you go by recent history, five teams will be the max, and three 57+ win teams is the most likely to happen.

Miami
OKC
Spurs
Bulls

My fifth team would be either the Clippers or Pacers.

[poido123]

I just don't look at that roster and see 57 wins. Iguodala will have a similar role on this team as he had in Denver last year. He was good, not great.

It will be a very different GSW team from last year. Iggy is obviously a completely different kind of player from Jack, who is a good shooter and very clutch. They should be improved defensively. Offensively? I'm not so sure. They have a more conventional lineup this season which may work in their favor or maybe not.

Also, like I said, I'd be sort of surprised if their backcourt was as healthy this season. I'm not saying Curry or Thompson are injury prone (certainly not Thompson), but those guys playing 160 of 164 games? It just seems unlikely to me.

I felt like they pretty much maxed out last season with 47 wins. Teams don't max out every year and, in fact, a lot of times they flame out. I don't think GSW will do that, but I also don't see them with close to 60 wins. I'd guess a win total probably around the same... 45-50 wins.

Replacing Jack with a proven allstar with elite perimeter defense, addressing a key need for the Warriors is a big upgrade. They have the scoring firepower, what they really needed was a 2nd or 3rd option on offense who can provide good defense and they got exactly that. Now they have the luxury of bringing Barnes off the bench, but I can see why you come to your conclusion. No question Jack was important for the warriors last year, but let's not understate the addition of an experienced allstar to the team who addresses key needs.

They also have thompson, barnes and curry another year older and likely to of improved more, this team is definately better and I would be confident they will reach over 47 wins.

[RedBlackAttack]

Seven teams is being VERY generous and just won't happen. Going back the last 10 seasons (excluding the 2012 lockout season) there's never been more than 5 teams win 57+ games in the same season, and that happened only once; 4 teams won 57+ 3 times; and 3 teams won 57+ 5 times.
At some point it becomes a question of mathematics. If there are going to be that many elite teams, there would have to be a great number of really awful teams next year. All those wins have to come from somewhere.

There are definitely some teams like the Celtics and Sixers which will likely see their win totals plummet, but on the flip side, a few of the bad teams from last year made strides in the offseason that should result in quite a few additional wins.

It would be really surprising if there were close to this many teams with 57+ wins.

[juju151111]

What's everyone smoking to make them think the Warriors are so good? They're a team that could miss the playoffs this coming season and I wouldn't be shocked, even after what they did last season.

Maybe its just me, but I see them scraping in to the playoffs just like last year.
I doubt it. They are definitely betterr and I'm pretty sure it's Bogut being healthy that is making people pick them high. If Bogut is truly healthy again 57 wins isn't out of the question.

[juju151111]

That's another thing... They were remarkably healthy last season. Curry played in 78 regular season games, while Thompson played all 82. Does anyone really see that happening again?

I'm not saying I don't like what the Warriors have done, though I do think they'll miss Jack more than people are realizing... But the optimism is a little too extreme, imo. I don't see any way this team wins 57 games.
Adding Iggy will replace Jack scoring and adds better defense. Bogut is healthy unlike last season. The young guys like Curry,Thompson,Barnes etc... get better most likely.

[leMVP]

Heat Spurs Thunder Clippers Warriors Bulls

[juju151111]

I just don't look at that roster and see 57 wins. Iguodala will have a similar role on this team as he had in Denver last year. He was good, not great.

It will be a very different GSW team from last year. Iggy is obviously a completely different kind of player from Jack, who is a good shooter and very clutch. They should be improved defensively. Offensively? I'm not so sure. They have a more conventional lineup this season which may work in their favor or maybe not.

Also, like I said, I'd be sort of surprised if their backcourt was as healthy this season. I'm not saying Curry or Thompson are injury prone (certainly not Thompson), but those guys playing 160 of 164 games? It just seems unlikely to me.

I felt like they pretty much maxed out last season with 47 wins. Teams don't max out every year and, in fact, a lot of times they flame out. I don't think GSW will do that, but I also don't see them with close to 60 wins. I'd guess a win total probably around the same... 45-50 wins.
They are young team. You have to factor in their improvements of Curry,Thompson,Barnes and Iggy can definitely take on Jack production. The big thing is Bogut who will be the defensive anchor.

[KG215]

At some point it becomes a question of mathematics. If there are going to be that many elite teams, there would have to be a great number of really awful teams next year. All those wins have to come from somewhere.

There are definitely some teams like the Celtics and Sixers which will likely see their win totals plummet, but on the flip side, a few of the bad teams from last year made strides in the offseason that should result in quite a few additional wins.

It would be really surprising if there were close to this many teams with 57+ wins.
Looking at it, there have been years where multiple teams finish with 55 or 56 wins, and just miss 57; but even then there's only been two instances in the last 10 seasons where 7 teams total finished with 55+ wins. So predicting more than 3-5 teams to win 57+ games is being pretty generous.

Hell, I don't even know if six or seven 57+ win teams is mathematically possible. I'm sure it is, but that would mean there's quite a few terrible teams.

2003: 57+ wins (3); 55-56 wins (0) = 3 total
2004: 57+ wins (3); 55-56 wins (2) = 5 total
2005: 57+ wins (4); 55-56 wins (0) = 4 total
2006: 57+ wins (3); 55-56 wins (0) = 3 total
2007: 57+ wins (3); 55-56 wins (0) = 3 total
2008: 57+ wins (3); 55-56 wins (4) = 7 total
2009: 57+ wins (4); 55-56 wins (0) = 4 total
2010: 57+ wins (3); 55-56 wins (1) = 4 total
2011: 57+ wins (5); 55-56 wins (2) = 7 total
2013: 57+ wins (4); 55-56 wins (2) = 6 total

[niko]

I'd peg both the Knicks and Nets around 55 wins. The Knicks because of the continuity from the prior year and the fact we can't possibly have more injuries (knock on wood) and the Nets for the fact if they are out there pedal to the medal trying to win 60 games, they'll crash and burn in the playoffs. They are way to old to press that hard.

[Crown&Coke]

Another thing about the W's is they will have to manage expectations. Something that has derailed many a teams before. They will no longer be just a team on the schedule during a west coast trip.

[RedBlackAttack]

They are young team. You have to factor in their improvements of Curry,Thompson,Barnes and Iggy can definitely take on Jack production. The big thing is Bogut who will be the defensive anchor.
I'm not even arguing against them probably being better next year. Win totals don't necessarily mean "better" or "worse," it is about opportunity. Like I said, I felt like they pretty much maxed out last year with 47 wins. I couldn't see that particular roster winning any more than that, but I do think they probably could have done slightly worse if a few bounces don't go their way or if Curry/Thompson miss an average number of games.

Just because I'm predicting the win total to be around the same doesn't automatically mean I'm saying the team is exactly on par with last year's. A team can improve from season to season without it necessarily showing up in the win column every year.

[Bandito]

I see the Nets winning at most 49 to 50 games in the season because they were taking it easy in the reg season and kill it in the playoffs with this veteran team.

[NewYorkNoPicks]

Last season there were only 4 teams that won 57 or more games. That list included the Heat, Thunder, Spurs and Nuggets. The Clippers and Grizzlies won 56 games each.

Next season will be a super competitive season for about 10 teams. Here is my list. (If these teams are relatively healthy).

Heat (67)
Nets (60)
Knicks (57)
Bulls (59)
Thunder (61)
Clippers (60)
Warriors (57)

Anyone disagree, if so what's your list include.

None of the mentioned teams will win 57 games aside from the Heat and the Thunder.

As a Knick fan I can also say we will not meet this feat... 50 and 32 is a likely record.

[EnoughSaid]

With the competition going up this year you expect that many teams to win 57 games? No, not happening. You're going to have one or two teams in each conference (Miami, Chicago/Indiana and then San Antonio/OKC) that will win 57 or more but everyone else will be around 50-53.

[clipps]

There won't be that many because there's gonna be more competitive teams won't surprise me if no team wins 60 games.

[qrich]

There will probably be more 57+ win teams this next season due to the amount of squads that are tanking of Andre Bustins or Jabari Buster.

[It's A VC3!!!]

There will probably be more 57+ win teams this next season due to the amount of squads that are tanking of Andre Bustins or Jabari Buster.
Also, we were very close last year. Four teams achieved 57 + wins. Two were at 56 and one was at 54. The NBA is going in a totally different direction. Free agents and veterans only want to play for contenders now,making weak teams even weaker and strong teams even stronger. The NBA has 10 really, really good teams and 20 shitty to average teams. I still stand by my prediction. I think there will be seven 57+ win teams next season.

[The JKidd Kid]

I see the Nets winning at most 49 to 50 games in the season because they were taking it easy in the reg season and kill it in the playoffs with this veteran team.

They won 49 games last year and all they did was upgrade. I honestly think that Garnetts mere presence on the floor will win them 5 more games than last year, let alone Pierce and their back up SF being better than last years starter in Kirilenko.

I dont think people understand how much the Nets improved with this trade. Their starting PF from last year is now the 3rd big off the bench and their back up SF this year is better than last years starter. Not to mention that Kirilenko by himself is worth more than their entire bench last season (Minus Blatche) combined. Sure they might not win 57 games, but even if Pierce and Garnett dont play one game next season they will still have a better team.

[Trentknicks]

I'd peg both the Knicks and Nets around 55 wins. The Knicks because of the continuity from the prior year and the fact we can't possibly have more injuries (knock on wood) and the Nets for the fact if they are out there pedal to the medal trying to win 60 games, they'll crash and burn in the playoffs. They are way to old to press that hard.

Pretty much this. Don't think the Knicks have the absurdly hot run to start and finish the seasons but they did get markedly better, deeper, younger and by default healthier than last season. I think this causes us to not have the dry spell in the middle of the year and we win around that 50-55 win mark.

Last season Knicks against Eastern Conference 'Elite':
3-1 VS Heat
2-2 VS Nets
0-4 VS Bulls
2-2 Vs Pacers

Don't think they beat the Heat 3 times but don't think they lose all games to the Bulls either. Really don't think the East becoming 'top heavy' will change our W/L mark all that much.


OP I really think your overshooting with the Nets big time, before you make such predictions: think, is anyone else agreeing with me? Not hating, just think there is too many things working against the Nets winning over 55 games, especially if they want to be healthy for the playoffs.

Would put the Nets right on par with the Knicks in the 50-55 win column. Sure they got a much improved roster from last season, but if Pierce starts, every Nets starter has experienced a solid amount of injury in the last couple of seasons. Even if we are assuming their pick ups (Pierce, KG, Terry, AK) are as healthy as last year, they are all pinned to miss 10-20 games each. It's also possible that all except AK47 will miss back to backs to keep themselves fresh. Couple that with the fact that Deron, JJ & Lopez aren't without injury concerns, and you'll need to work in all of the new players in with a first year coach.

[It's A VC3!!!]

Pretty much this. Don't think the Knicks have the absurdly hot run to start and finish the seasons but they did get markedly better, deeper, younger and by default healthier than last season. I think this causes us to not have the dry spell in the middle of the year and we win around that 50-55 win mark.

Last season Knicks against Eastern Conference 'Elite':
3-1 VS Heat
2-2 VS Nets
0-4 VS Bulls
2-2 Vs Pacers

Don't think they beat the Heat 3 times but don't think they lose all games to the Bulls either. Really don't think the East becoming 'top heavy' will change our W/L mark all that much.


OP I really think your overshooting with the Nets big time, before you make such predictions: think, is anyone else agreeing with me? Not hating, just think there is too many things working against the Nets winning over 55 games, especially if they want to be healthy for the playoffs.

Would put the Nets right on par with the Knicks in the 50-55 win column. Sure they got a much improved roster from last season, but if Pierce starts, every Nets starter has experienced a solid amount of injury in the last couple of seasons. Even if we are assuming their pick ups (Pierce, KG, Terry, AK) are as healthy as last year, they are all pinned to miss 10-20 games each. It's also possible that all except AK47 will miss back to backs to keep themselves fresh. Couple that with the fact that Deron, JJ & Lopez aren't without injury concerns, and you'll need to work in all of the new players in with a first year coach.
I agree with your sentiment. Injury is obviously a concern. That's why our depth will be very crucial. I still think the Nets win near 60 games next season though. Paul and KG playing 20 minutes a game is much, much, MUCH better than Wallace and Evans playing 25 mpg. Even if they are on a time constraint the Nets will be better, and that's not even factoring how much better our bench is then last year. Maybe the Nets do win 50-55 games like you say. That's very possible too.

[Trentknicks]

I agree with your sentiment. Injury is obviously a concern. That's why our depth will be very crucial. I still think the Nets win near 60 games next season though. Paul and KG playing 20 minutes a game is much, much, MUCH better than Wallace and Evans playing 25 mpg. Even if they are on a time constraint the Nets will be better, and that's not even factoring how much better our bench is then last year. Maybe the Nets do win 50-55 games like you say. That's very possible too.
I thought Evans came up pretty big for you guys last year? Swear he grabbed a lot of key rebounds and even contributed a bit on offense as a starter, no too bad for a vet min guy? :confusedshrug:

[305Baller]

Heat
Heat

and

Heat

[The JKidd Kid]

I thought Evans came up pretty big for you guys last year? Swear he grabbed a lot of key rebounds and even contributed a bit on offense as a starter, no too bad for a vet min guy? :confusedshrug:

He's absolutely worth his salary, the problem with him is that he is too much of an offensive liability and defensive non-factor to be a starter. The spacing issues that he and Wallace caused are some of the worst I've ever seen, that's the main problem is that he is not just non-existent on offense, he actually hurts the team when he's on the floor. Great guy to have off the bench, but only the stupidest of the stupid coaches would play him more than 15 minutes per game.

[All Net]

Heat
Spurs
Clippers
Thunder
maybe Pacers

[NugzFan]

ok so lets set o/u of 57 win teams at 6.5

who has the over?

[KyleKong]

Thunder, Heat, Spurs, Clippers.

Maybe the Nuggets, they won 50+ last year, they might pull it off again.

[boozehound]

i think just the bulls, thunder, heat, and spurs will win 57+

i think rose comes back, and gets the bulls' offense back on track, and they get close to 60 wins
these are the 4 I would expect. Long shots for griz, clips in the west and pacers, nets in the east.

[boozehound]

Thunder, Heat, Spurs, Clippers.

Maybe the Nuggets, they won 50+ last year, they might pull it off again.
lost their gm, coach (entire style and identity along with it), best starting player and their starting center.

[KyleKong]

lost their gm, coach (entire style and identity along with it), best starting player and their starting center.

They did fine when Melo left, the nuggets haven't really changed their roster that much since their GM left, and as long as the coach runs high octane offense, no real changes made.

[NugzFan]

lost their gm, coach (entire style and identity along with it), best starting player and their starting center.

while i agree we are NOT winning 57, its not because we lost masai, KK and karl. losing iggy and gallo will hurt the most.

[Fresh Kid]

Again, Wassup with all tha knicks hate? damn:banghead:

[KG215]

ok so lets set o/u of 57 win teams at 6.5

who has the over?
Well, considering the last 10 years the most 57 win teams in one season has been 5, and that only happened once, I think an o/u of 6.5 is a little high. I'd set it 5.5 and still take the under. For betting purposes the best o/u on number of 57+ win teams is probably 4.5.

[Fresh Kid]

nets and pacers sucks tho, Tha top two overrated in tha league.

[Dr. Cheesesteak]

Well, considering the last 10 years the most 57 win teams in one season has been 5, and that only happened once, I think an o/u of 6.5 is a little high. I'd set it 5.5 and still take the under. For betting purposes the best o/u on number of 57+ win teams is probably 4.5.
hopefully those are facts, b/c I'm gonna make my 57+ win team predictions based on that!

I'm taking the under at 4 - Heat, Bulls, Thunder, Clippers

[SpurrDurr]

Heat OKC and SAS. Maybe Clips and Bulls as well. No way that the Nets win 57 games during regular seasons.

[NugzFan]

Again, Wassup with all tha knicks hate? damn:banghead:

picking the knicks to NOT win 57 isnt hate.

its reality.

[NugzFan]

Well, considering the last 10 years the most 57 win teams in one season has been 5, and that only happened once, I think an o/u of 6.5 is a little high. I'd set it 5.5 and still take the under. For betting purposes the best o/u on number of 57+ win teams is probably 4.5.

obviously its high. i was partly mocking all the people who think 7 is possible.

7 teams are not winning 57+ next year.

[Trentknicks]

I think a lot of people are overlooking the main thing: where are all these extra wins going to come from?

In the West:
Portland, Minnesota, NO, Dallas all got better and won't be easy wins anymore.

Likewise in the East:
Detroit, Cleveland, Washington and Charlotte all got considerably better to the point where they are all competitive.

A lot of the easy wins won't be there as there are less bottom feeders.

[niko]

nets and pacers sucks tho, Tha top two overrated in tha league.
You're the worst poster on the site. You can't even troll well.

[NuggetsFan]

it), best starting player and their starting center.

Loss of Karl is going to hurt how many games we win this season, going forward it's a good thing. Best starting player? Lawson easily. Anybody who see's it any other way didn't watch the Nuggets. Gallo had a case when Lawson started slow and he was firing but got hurt. Iggy had zero case.

Kosta was solid but with Mozzy/McGee + some small ball we should be easily be able to make up that 20 minutes a night. He fell apart HARD in the playoffs too, probably why we could only get Arthur for him.

Anyways assuming teams stay relatively healthy than..

Miami
OKC

Would be the only one's I'd be confident in. SA if they don't slow down, Chicago if Rose returns to form being my longshots.

[ChuckOakley]

MIA + OKC are near locks

SAS, BK, INDY, HOU, LAC are maybes

NY, CHI, GSW, MEM are nos

[ChuckOakley]

Would put the Nets right on par with the Knicks in the 50-55 win column. Sure they got a much improved roster from last season, but if Pierce starts, every Nets starter has experienced a solid amount of injury in the last couple of seasons. Even if we are assuming their pick ups (Pierce, KG, Terry, AK) are as healthy as last year, they are all pinned to miss 10-20 games each. It's also possible that all except AK47 will miss back to backs to keep themselves fresh. Couple that with the fact that Deron, JJ & Lopez aren't without injury concerns, and you'll need to work in all of the new players in with a first year coach.
Nets won 49 games last season despite:

-Avery + PJC as coaches
-Evans and Wallace the worst forward combo in the NBA
-D.Will playing well about 1/2 the season
-9 new players on the team and players like Wallace and Lopez never had played together

Also, our depth is what will carry us.

PP, KG and JT will play under 30 minutes a night and look at how much depth we have at each position. So many players can play multiple positions. If PP or KG misses time.. that means more minutes for AK, AA, Blatche and Evans/Teletovic.


PG: D. Williams / Livingston / Taylor / Terry
SG; JJ / Terry / Anderson / Pierce / D.Williams
SF: Pierce / AK / Shengelia / Anderson / JJ
PF: Garnett / Evans / Teletovic / AK / Blatche
C: Lopez / Blatche / Plumlee / Garnett

All last season I said many times NY was the better team, but I am rather confident saying that right now BK has the better team on paper/healthy (which is all we have to go by)

[Fresh Kid]

You're the worst poster on the site. You can't even troll well.
Im not trolling bitch, im speaking truth. Stop hating on your fellow knicks fans.

[Fresh Kid]

picking the knicks to NOT win 57 isnt hate.

its reality.
I know u ain't talking nuggets fan.

[Djahjaga]

7 teams winning 57+?

has that ever happened before in the history of the nba?

also it gives the other 23 teams an average of 35 wins. seems low.

Always happens on ISH. People overlook the fact that each win is a loss for another team.

Similar with projections for starting 5s. We have people suggesting 5 players will score 100 points between them :roll:

Anyway, I can see Miami, San Antonio, and OKC each winning around to 60-63ish.

Bulls are still a question mark in my mind.

It's hard for me to see Indiana winning 57 games without a better offense, but it may improve with Scola and the return of Granger.

Honestly can't see the Knicks being much better than they were last year. And I remain skeptical of Brooklyn, even though I think Paul and Kevin have plenty left in their tanks.

Warriors and Rockets - can't see them integrating their new players quickly enough to win 57 games. But their record won't be indicative of their strength come playoff time.

[ChuckOakley]

And I remain skeptical of Brooklyn, even though I think Paul and Kevin have plenty left in their tanks.

Can I ask why?
Especially if you think KG and PP have plenty left?
We're basically adding your two best players last season (Rondo was injured) for nothing to a 49 win team that beat you guys 3-1.

[Djahjaga]

Can I ask why?
Especially if you think KG and PP have plenty left?
We're basically adding your two best players last season (Rondo was injured) for nothing to a 49 win team that beat you guys 3-1.

I guess I would boil my concerns down to chemistry. Our teams were good (when they were good) because guys really knew how to play with each other. Part of the reason why Ray leaving hurt us so much was because, even though his role had declined steadily, we knew where he'd be in crucial moments and how he liked to play/where his favorite spots were/where he liked the ball/etc.

Identity and execution are crucial for a title contender, and neither come without chemistry. Very few teams can develop chemistry on the fly after such big roster turnover.

I'd love it if they won the Atlantic, though.

[ChuckOakley]

I guess I would boil my concerns down to chemistry. Our teams were good (when they were good) because guys really knew how to play with each other. Part of the reason why Ray leaving hurt us so much was because, even though his role had declined steadily, we knew where he'd be in crucial moments and how he liked to play/where his favorite spots were/where he liked the ball/etc.

Identity and execution are crucial for a title contender, and neither come without chemistry. Very few teams can develop chemistry on the fly after such big roster turnover.

I'd love it if they won the Atlantic, though.
Ehh..we won 49 games last year with 9 new faces and 2 coaches.

This year we kept 4 out of our 5 starters from last season and our 6th man Blatche.

Chemistry will be much better this season.

- They brought in KG and PP for that reason... chemistry and heart
- KG, PP, JT all have experience from the C's. JT played with Kidd on the Mavs. AK played with D.Will, etc.
- Humphries was a distraction with the divorce going on and the media around him.
- Wallace would call people out to the media and didn't mesh well with PJC
- Brooks was a malcontent who asked to be included in the deal
- PJC is gone who was known as a terrible player's coach. Kidd on the other hand should have the respect of everyone from day 1

[Djahjaga]

Ehh..we won 49 games last year with 9 new faces and 2 coaches.

This year we kept 4 out of our 5 starters from last season and our 6th man Blatche.

Chemistry will be much better this season.

- They brought in KG and PP for that reason... chemistry and heart
- KG, PP, JT all have experience from the C's. JT played with Kidd on the Mavs. AK played with D.Will, etc.
- Humphries was a distraction with the divorce going on and the media around him.
- Wallace would call people out to the media and didn't mesh well with PJC
- Brooks was a malcontent who asked to be included in the deal
- PJC is gone who was known as a terrible player's coach. Kidd on the other hand should have the respect of everyone from day 1

They certainly have the potential to win that many games, but I'm not comfortable predicting 57 wins just yet. Far too many unknowns for my liking.

A big question mark is Kidd himself. What system will he run? All we know now is that he's gonna be emphasizing defense (which should be easy with KG, who can turn any mediocre defensive team into at least half decent). But what of the tempo? How will an up-tempo game affect Pierce and KG? Will they get back on D or go for offensive boards? What kind of shots will they be looking for on offense? How will they divide up their plays between PnR, post, iso, etc.? How will the defense fare when KG sits? We know Kirilenko can defend, but who will take responsibility for coordinating the defense? You'll find (as Celtics fans realized very early on) that every second KG is off the floor is another spent wishing he could be on it.

Then there are more superficial questions, which are still very important: whose "team" is it? D-Will's, prob, but Lopez will almost certainly lead them in points, blocks, FG%, and fouls drawn. Who take the last shot (more figurative than literal. Obviously it will depend on the circumstances, but in a pinch, when nothing's working, do you give the ball to D-will for a PnR and spread the floor or go for an iso with JJ or PP?)?

I'm just unsure at the moment. It's just not as simple as adding players, as we found out with the Lakers last season (injuries notwithstanding -- on that note, be wary of Lakers fans attempting to revision last season as one that failed because of injuries; the Lakers sucked when they were healthy, too, right up until the end of the season when they had an easy schedule. But I digress...)

[ChuckOakley]

They certainly have the potential to win that many games, but I'm not comfortable predicting 57 wins just yet. Far too many unknowns for my liking.

A big question mark is Kidd himself. What system will he run? All we know now is that he's gonna be emphasizing defense (which should be easy with KG, who can turn any mediocre defensive team into at least half decent). But what of the tempo? How will an up-tempo game affect Pierce and KG? Will they get back on D or go for offensive boards? What kind of shots will they be looking for on offense? How will they divide up their plays between PnR, post, iso, etc.? How will the defense fare when KG sits? We know Kirilenko can defend, but who will take responsibility for coordinating the defense? You'll find (as Celtics fans realized very early on) that every second KG is off the floor is another spent wishing he could be on it.

Then there are more superficial questions, which are still very important: whose "team" is it? D-Will's, prob, but Lopez will almost certainly lead them in points, blocks, FG%, and fouls drawn. Who take the last shot (more figurative than literal. Obviously it will depend on the circumstances, but in a pinch, when nothing's working, do you give the ball to D-will for a PnR and spread the floor or go for an iso with JJ or PP?)?

I'm just unsure at the moment. It's just not as simple as adding players, as we found out with the Lakers last season (injuries notwithstanding -- on that note, be wary of Lakers fans attempting to revision last season as one that failed because of injuries; the Lakers sucked when they were healthy, too, right up until the end of the season when they had an easy schedule. But I digress...)
I'm not saying they will win 57 either.. I have them as a maybe, I was just wondering why you had your doubts and you answered them well. I don't know the answers for a lot of questions, nor does anybody until training camp starts.

What I do feel comfortable saying is:
They will win more games than last year (49)
They will be better than the Knicks
I like their chances against anyone in the East other than Miami

[Djahjaga]

I'm not saying they will win 57 either.. I have them as a maybe, I was just wondering why you had your doubts and you answered them well. I don't know the answers for a lot of questions, nor does anybody until training camp starts.

What I do feel comfortable saying is:
They will win more games than last year (49)
They will be better than the Knicks
I like their chances against anyone in the East other than Miami

:cheers:

Like I said, I will be watching them with a lot of interest. Would love it if they won more than the Knicks and made it to the ECF against Miami. The East should be interesting this year if everyone can stay healthy.

[The JKidd Kid]

They certainly have the potential to win that many games, but I'm not comfortable predicting 57 wins just yet. Far too many unknowns for my liking.

A big question mark is Kidd himself. What system will he run? All we know now is that he's gonna be emphasizing defense (which should be easy with KG, who can turn any mediocre defensive team into at least half decent). But what of the tempo? How will an up-tempo game affect Pierce and KG? Will they get back on D or go for offensive boards? What kind of shots will they be looking for on offense? How will they divide up their plays between PnR, post, iso, etc.? How will the defense fare when KG sits? We know Kirilenko can defend, but who will take responsibility for coordinating the defense? You'll find (as Celtics fans realized very early on) that every second KG is off the floor is another spent wishing he could be on it.

Then there are more superficial questions, which are still very important: whose "team" is it? D-Will's, prob, but Lopez will almost certainly lead them in points, blocks, FG%, and fouls drawn. Who take the last shot (more figurative than literal. Obviously it will depend on the circumstances, but in a pinch, when nothing's working, do you give the ball to D-will for a PnR and spread the floor or go for an iso with JJ or PP?)?

I'm just unsure at the moment. It's just not as simple as adding players, as we found out with the Lakers last season (injuries notwithstanding -- on that note, be wary of Lakers fans attempting to revision last season as one that failed because of injuries; the Lakers sucked when they were healthy, too, right up until the end of the season when they had an easy schedule. But I digress...)

The defense will be similar to the defense that Boston has run, as Lawrence Frank helped to run that offense and Kidd has said that Frank will run the defense. Also, what you mentioned in the clutch is a good thing to have. If Joe is off than we can go to Pierce or Deron-big PNR, or if Joes hot we can just got to him etc. Its a good thing to have options in the clutch.

The offensive system is going to be similar to what the Nets and Mavericks ran, which was a free flowing offense that relies on the PG making decisions on the fly, similar to what Deron did in Dallas. Kidd has also been quoted that there will be more PNR early in the offense before the defense sets up. This team is so versatile and full of veterans that almost any NBA caliber offense could work.

The other things you mentioned are things that change throughout the season and depending on matchups, such as tempo and rebounding. Most teams change that many times during the season.

The problem with the Lakers was non-complementing play styles, such as Pau preferring the low post, Dwight refusing to run PNR and Nash and Kobe clashing for ball handling duties. Not to mention a lack of depth and injuries hurt their team. The Nets are deep and their players are not injury prone, all of their starters except Garnett because of rest played in the 70-80 games range.

[Doranku]

I'd say 4 teams will end up above the 57 win mark.

Not the Nets
Not the Nets
Not the Nets
Not the Nets

I think Not the Nets might have an outside shot at winning 57 games too, but these are the 4 teams who are a lock imo.

[RIP CITY]

The only team that is a lock to me is the Heat. LeBron never gets hurt and unless Wade suffers a season ending injury they will be fine and win at least 60 games.

The Spurs will definitely win 50 again this year but 57 might be a touch too high. I wouldn't be surprised at all if they did win 57, maybe even 60 but age is going to catch up with them eventually. It could be this season. I will say yes they win 57 again this year but wouldn't be surprised if they fell alittle short.

Oklahoma City could win 57+ but when is Westbrook going to return? Is he going to miss time early in the season? Because without Westbrook the Thunder might not even be a 50 win team, they'll need Westbrook to play most of their games to get 57 wins.

Chicago could win 57 if Derrick Rose comes back and plays at his typical level but that's not a guarantee at this point. If Rose is close to 100% I definitely think they win 52-55 games.

Brooklyn has alot of questions. Age, health, chemistry, Coaching being the biggest. I think if they do mesh and stay healthy they are definitely capable of winning as many as 60 games. But I think with the needed rest they will give their starters, time needed to mesh and Jason Kidd finding the right rotations/minute distribution that they will probably be in the 50-55 range.

Indiana is a team that is built more for the Playoffs than the regular season. Their offense should be improved with the addition of Scola and the return of Granger. I definitely think they will win 50 games this season but because of some possible offensive droughts that they will fall short of 57.

The Clippers are a team built for the regular season so I could see them overachieving and winning 57 but I think this team is pretty overrated. Chris Paul is a great player but outside of him no one on that team really scares me. Blake is soft and overrated. Jordan is an ok big but he's not an intimidating presence in the paint. The only good defenders on the team are Dudley, Jordan (inconsistent), Paul and Barnes, the rest of their team is filled with average to poor defenders. The whole team is soft outside of Dudley and Barnes. Doc Rivers is an upgrade over Vinny Del Negro but I don't think he's nearly as good as he's hyped up to be. Like I said, they are a run and gun team that will be able to score, they're built for the regular season, so they could win alot again like last year but this team is not a true contender in my opinion and I don't think they will win 57 games.

The Warriors are a very good team, I think they will win 50-54 games but I don't think they are good enough to win 57+. I think they will be better and will again cause problems in the Playoffs due to them being a hard team to matchup with but I don't view them as a real contender. They're close, they need another physical big man though.

Houston should be improved but I don't think they are a finished product roster wise. They don't have much outside of Howard, Harden, Parsons, and Asik. I like Donatas Motiejunas' potential but I'm not sure he's there yet. They just don't have a deep enough team yet, they'll need to fill that roster out more in the next couple seasons.

So, basically, the Heat and Spurs are the only teams I'm confident can win 57+ this year. The Thunder, Nets and Bulls are the only other teams I could see winning 57+. No way 7 teams do it.

[NugzFan]

I know u ain't talking nuggets fan.

I'm not. I'm laughing at you.

[fpliii]

Heat, Spurs, Thunder, Clippers are likely. Pacers or Bulls might pull it off, but I don't think we'll see more than 4 teams doing it.

[It's A VC3!!!]

The only team that is a lock to me is the Heat. LeBron never gets hurt and unless Wade suffers a season ending injury they will be fine and win at least 60 games.

The Spurs will definitely win 50 again this year but 57 might be a touch too high. I wouldn't be surprised at all if they did win 57, maybe even 60 but age is going to catch up with them eventually. It could be this season. I will say yes they win 57 again this year but wouldn't be surprised if they fell alittle short.

Oklahoma City could win 57+ but when is Westbrook going to return? Is he going to miss time early in the season? Because without Westbrook the Thunder might not even be a 50 win team, they'll need Westbrook to play most of their games to get 57 wins.

Chicago could win 57 if Derrick Rose comes back and plays at his typical level but that's not a guarantee at this point. If Rose is close to 100% I definitely think they win 52-55 games.

Brooklyn has alot of questions. Age, health, chemistry, Coaching being the biggest. I think if they do mesh and stay healthy they are definitely capable of winning as many as 60 games. But I think with the needed rest they will give their starters, time needed to mesh and Jason Kidd finding the right rotations/minute distribution that they will probably be in the 50-55 range.

Indiana is a team that is built more for the Playoffs than the regular season. Their offense should be improved with the addition of Scola and the return of Granger. I definitely think they will win 50 games this season but because of some possible offensive droughts that they will fall short of 57.

The Clippers are a team built for the regular season so I could see them overachieving and winning 57 but I think this team is pretty overrated. Chris Paul is a great player but outside of him no one on that team really scares me. Blake is soft and overrated. Jordan is an ok big but he's not an intimidating presence in the paint. The only good defenders on the team are Dudley, Jordan (inconsistent), Paul and Barnes, the rest of their team is filled with average to poor defenders. The whole team is soft outside of Dudley and Barnes. Doc Rivers is an upgrade over Vinny Del Negro but I don't think he's nearly as good as he's hyped up to be. Like I said, they are a run and gun team that will be able to score, they're built for the regular season, so they could win alot again like last year but this team is not a true contender in my opinion and I don't think they will win 57 games.

The Warriors are a very good team, I think they will win 50-54 games but I don't think they are good enough to win 57+. I think they will be better and will again cause problems in the Playoffs due to them being a hard team to matchup with but I don't view them as a real contender. They're close, they need another physical big man though.

Houston should be improved but I don't think they are a finished product roster wise. They don't have much outside of Howard, Harden, Parsons, and Asik. I like Donatas Motiejunas' potential but I'm not sure he's there yet. They just don't have a deep enough team yet, they'll need to fill that roster out more in the next couple seasons.

So, basically, the Heat and Spurs are the only teams I'm confident can win 57+ this year. The Thunder, Nets and Bulls are the only other teams I could see winning 57+. No way 7 teams do it.
Good assessment. Mimics my opinions as well. Especially the Spurs assessment. I don't think they win 57 although they are capable of doing so. Houston is a 46-52 win team, definitely not near 57. my only disagreement is with the clippers. they won 56 games last year and improved their roster. in addition, paul and blake will get better. i don't think they can do worse than last year. I have them at 56-63.

[niko]

If healthy the Nets could easily win 57 games. I just don't see any reason why people expect them to be healthy. Brook just had surgery on his foot that is sidelining him for two months, that might be nothing but the fact that area is still experience enough stress to bend the screw is not a positive. JJ had foot problems that were killing him in the playoffs, Deron has been injured off and on with nagging things for years, ditto AK47 and Pierce and Garnett are really old. Even limiting minutes is not a guarantee people don't get hurt when they are old.

I think the IF HEALTHY on the Nets is a much bigger deal than people are treating it as.

[The JKidd Kid]

If healthy the Nets could easily win 57 games. I just don't see any reason why people expect them to be healthy. Brook just had surgery on his foot that is sidelining him for two months, that might be nothing but the fact that area is still experience enough stress to bend the screw is not a positive. JJ had foot problems that were killing him in the playoffs, Deron has been injured off and on with nagging things for years, ditto AK47 and Pierce and Garnett are really old. Even limiting minutes is not a guarantee people don't get hurt when they are old.

I think the IF HEALTHY on the Nets is a much bigger deal than people are treating it as.

Lopez had surgery for a non-medical reason, it was a bent screw, the thing you just made up about the amount of stress on the screw being a problem is complete bs. JJ had plantar fasciitis, which he said healed 2 weeks after the playoffs and it is not a serious injury in the first place and most players can play through it. Deron only had ankle problems this season and during the All-Star break he got treatment and it hasnt bothered him since. In fact, he actually decided not to get the surgery that he thought he needed because he had healed so well. His only other recent injury was his wrist surgery and its been a full season since then and he hasnt had any complications. Pierce and Garnett were both healthy this season and only missed games because of rest and bumps and bruises, nothing serious.

Every team has injury concerns. The Knicks entire starting 5 is injury prone, Wades knees are made of glass, Currys ankles are made out of tissue paper, Rose is coming of an ACL tear, CP3 has chronic knee problems, Dwight has back issues, Westbrook tore his miniscus, Parkers hamstring could rip at any minute etc. etc. Injuries are a huge concern for many teams and the Nets players arnt any more injury prone than other teams as Peirce, Garnett, Lopez, Johnson and Deron were all relatively healthy at the end of last season and heading into the play offs.

[JBrizzy]

Jason Kidd is a first-year coach. What a team to have for your first year as a coach.

I think his inexperience there hurts them a little bit. I know he's got a great Bball IQ but he's untested so who knows.

[Trentknicks]

Lopez had surgery for a non-medical reason, it was a bent screw, the thing you just made up about the amount of stress on the screw being a problem is complete bs. JJ had plantar fasciitis, which he said healed 2 weeks after the playoffs and it is not a serious injury in the first place and most players can play through it. Deron only had ankle problems this season and during the All-Star break he got treatment and it hasnt bothered him since. In fact, he actually decided not to get the surgery that he thought he needed because he had healed so well. His only other recent injury was his wrist surgery and its been a full season since then and he hasnt had any complications. Pierce and Garnett were both healthy this season and only missed games because of rest and bumps and bruises, nothing serious.

Every team has injury concerns. The Knicks entire starting 5 is injury prone, Wades knees are made of glass, Currys ankles are made out of tissue paper, Rose is coming of an ACL tear, CP3 has chronic knee problems, Dwight has back issues, Westbrook tore his miniscus, Parkers hamstring could rip at any minute etc. etc. Injuries are a huge concern for many teams and the Nets players arnt any more injury prone than other teams as Peirce, Garnett, Lopez, Johnson and Deron were all relatively healthy at the end of last season and heading into the play offs.

Felton has only ever had on and off injuries in his career.
Shumpert's only had 1 bad injury and has recovered fine.
Melo's fine and is not remotely 'injury prone'.
Chandler you could make a case is semi injury prone but it's not like he's consistently missing 30+ games.

Nothing Niko said was wrong or biased, so stop being a butthurt little girl about things. No one has a problem with the Nets winning 55+ games if healthy, but even the biggest Nets homer (if there's one worse than you) would agree that health will be a pretty serious concern for the Nets.

[niko]

Lopez had surgery for a non-medical reason, it was a bent screw, the thing you just made up about the amount of stress on the screw being a problem is complete bs. JJ had plantar fasciitis, which he said healed 2 weeks after the playoffs and it is not a serious injury in the first place and most players can play through it. Deron only had ankle problems this season and during the All-Star break he got treatment and it hasnt bothered him since. In fact, he actually decided not to get the surgery that he thought he needed because he had healed so well. His only other recent injury was his wrist surgery and its been a full season since then and he hasnt had any complications. Pierce and Garnett were both healthy this season and only missed games because of rest and bumps and bruises, nothing serious.

Every team has injury concerns. The Knicks entire starting 5 is injury prone, Wades knees are made of glass, Currys ankles are made out of tissue paper, Rose is coming of an ACL tear, CP3 has chronic knee problems, Dwight has back issues, Westbrook tore his miniscus, Parkers hamstring could rip at any minute etc. etc. Injuries are a huge concern for many teams and the Nets players arnt any more injury prone than other teams as Peirce, Garnett, Lopez, Johnson and Deron were all relatively healthy at the end of last season and heading into the play offs.

Yes, the Knicks have injury problems, less than last year because
1) We know Amare will be out (we got another PF off the bench in Bargs in anticipation).
2) The AARP squad off the bench is gone. Camby, Kidd, Rasheed, Thomas - I loved them all but they all broke down.

The Nets are old. The stuff you wrote about Deron is false, he's had nagging injuries on and off for years. Maybe you think he was dogging it, last year clearly early in the season he was hurt. And the stuff i bolded is because you are just being so obtuse, they put a screw in Lopez foot to keep it from breaking again, and THE SCREW BENT. It's not supposed to bend, it means the strain in the area bent it. The good news? They caught it, because eventually it would have injured him. The bad news? Just that it happened, you don't want injured, Lopez, foot and surgery in a sentence.

You're just being a huge homer, how the Nets can have an old team and you argue injuries won't be a problem is ridiculous. Old players get hurt more, it's just how it is.

[Trentknicks]

Yes, the Knicks have injury problems, less than last year because
1) We know Amare will be out (we got another PF off the bench in Bargs in anticipation).
2) The AARP squad off the bench is gone. Camby, Kidd, Rasheed, Thomas - I loved them all but they all broke down.

The Nets are old. The stuff you wrote about Deron is false, he's had nagging injuries on and off for years. Maybe you think he was dogging it, last year clearly early in the season he was hurt. And the stuff i bolded is because you are just being so obtuse, they put a screw in Lopez foot to keep it from breaking again, and THE SCREW BENT. It's not supposed to bend, it means the strain in the area bent it. The good news? They caught it, because eventually it would have injured him. The bad news? Just that it happened, you don't want injured, Lopez, foot and surgery in a sentence.

You're just being a huge homer, how the Nets can have an old team and you argue injuries won't be a problem is ridiculous. Old players get hurt more, it's just how it is.
Want to guess who is the J Kidd Kidd and which two are me and you :cheers:
http://gifrific.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Blake-Griffin-Blocks-Deron-Williams.gif

[niko]

Want to guess who is the J Kidd Kidd and which two are me and you :cheers:
http://gifrific.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Blake-Griffin-Blocks-Deron-Williams.gif
He's just a homer. He appeared this offseason and responds to every thread saying everything is 100% perfect. It'sAVC3 is nuts but at least he doesn't think everything will be perfect. At no point have i said the Knicks are better, the Nets suck, or something like that. But i'm also not buying into this thought the Nets will balance minutes, and that will work out. The Knicks played Rasheed 10 minutes here and there and his foot snapped. Amare played over his 20 minute limit once and the knee was shot again. Kidd just completely fell apart. Camby's foot trouble never ended. Old is old....the Nets aren't asking these players to last the season, they want them to last and be healthy and productive through June. That's a lot.

[Trentknicks]

He's just a homer. He appeared this offseason and responds to every thread saying everything is 100% perfect. It'sAVC3 is nuts but at least he doesn't think everything will be perfect. At no point have i said the Knicks are better, the Nets suck, or something like that. But i'm also not buying into this thought the Nets will balance minutes, and that will work out. The Knicks played Rasheed 10 minutes here and there and his foot snapped. Amare played over his 20 minute limit once and the knee was shot again. Kidd just completely fell apart. Camby's foot trouble never ended. Old is old....the Nets aren't asking these players to last the season, they want them to last and be healthy and productive through June. That's a lot.
I'm pretty stoked Kiddlovesnets has decided to take a leave of absence, he/she/it is downright obsessed with the Knicks and Spurs and is a horrible, horrible poster.

On a brighter note, I'm really glad the Knicks got younger in Bargs and MWP and added more athleticism in Hardaway, Leslie, Tyler & hoping we can snag Udrih and call it an offseason.

[niko]

I'm pretty stoked Kiddlovesnets has decided to take a leave of absence, he/she/it is downright obsessed with the Knicks and Spurs and is a horrible, horrible poster.

On a brighter note, I'm really glad the Knicks got younger in Bargs and MWP and added more athleticism in Hardaway, Leslie, Tyler & hoping we can snag Udrih and call it an offseason.
He's not a bad poster, he just fights endlessly with Knick trolls. he fought back and forth endlessly with Wilds09 during the playoffs, it was just inane. Plus he's a Spurs fan, he was trolling the Warrior fans hard, the Heat fans, etc. Stuff a fan would do.

Saw a Hardaway Knick jersey too, that shit is weird. Threw me off.

[Legends66NBA7]

So who's the starting PF for New York, Bargs or Amare ?

[fpliii]

So who's the starting PF for New York, Bargs or Amare ?

Also, whatever happened with Ivan Johnson? I heard there was mutual interest?

[Legends66NBA7]

Also, whatever happened with Ivan Johnson? I heard there was mutual interest?

I heard that too. Nothing else has been mentioned since the talks, though.

[niko]

So who's the starting PF for New York, Bargs or Amare ?
Not Amare. Maybe Bargs if he impresses. I think ultimately it's Melo starting, Bargs backing up, Amare icing his knees.

What is the chance Amare plays enough to be effective all year?

[Trentknicks]

So who's the starting PF for New York, Bargs or Amare ?
It will be either a Melo/Bargs/Chandler or MWP/Melo/Chandler front court. I'm really intrigued to see how Bargs does next to Melo as their potential together is quite ridiculous from an offensive standpoint.

Stat will play in the second unit with Kenyon Martin to help him with rebounding & defense. Stat seems to play well alonside JR also.


Also, whatever happened with Ivan Johnson? I heard there was mutual interest?
Knicks are apparently still in talks with him, but signed Jeremy Tyler to a 2 year, partially guaranteed deal for both years. He's younger and has a higher ceiling, so wouldn't be out of the ordinary to see Ivan Johnson either signed or get a camp invite.

[Legends66NBA7]

Not Amare. Maybe Bargs if he impresses. I think ultimately it's Melo starting, Bargs backing up, Amare icing his knees.

What is the chance Amare plays enough to be effective all year?

Well, I think I read in the thread that Amare would starting... which I obviously think is down right stupid. Bargs should start, since he can be a proper stretch 4 and not have all the pressure squarely on him.

Melo shouldn't start for small-ball reasons. New York should just play a proper starting 5 with Bargs. I don't think Bargs is going to be that effective coming off the bench.

[Legends66NBA7]

It will be either a Melo/Bargs/Chandler or MWP/Melo/Chandler front court. I'm really intrigued to see how Bargs does next to Melo as their potential together is quite ridiculous from an offensive standpoint.

Stat will play in the second unit with Kenyon Martin to help him with rebounding & defense. Stat seems to play well alonside JR also.

Yeah, I would role with Melo/Bargs/Chandler. I also like the second idea of putting MWP instead of Amare at the 3 and moving Melo at the 4. You get the 3 point shooting and defense for that small-ball unit.

[Trentknicks]

Yeah, I would role with Melo/Bargs/Chandler. I also like the second idea of putting MWP instead of Amare at the 3 and moving Melo at the 4. You get the 3 point shooting and defense for that small-ball unit.
Everyone laughing at the suggestion that Bargs might start because 'Melo plays better at the 4', doesn't understand that Melo playing SF next to Bargs will occupy the exact same space as a 4.

I think Bargs will do well in NY as he has a lot of help around him; Melo, JR to shoulder scoring load; Chandler, Kenyon Martin and even MWP and Shumpert to cover his lack of defense and rebounding. He's got all the tools to succeed and I think the change of scenery is what he needed.

Pretty happy that the Knicks have got plenty of lineups that they can run that are legit good NBA level line ups.

E.g. Traditional: Felton/Shumpert/Melo/Bargs/Chandler

Small ball: Felton/Shumpert/MWP/Melo/Chandler

Run and Gun: Felton/Jr/Shumpert/Amare/K Mart

And obviously dual pg lineups and what not, should be an interesting offseason.

[It's A VC3!!!]

Nothing Niko said was wrong or biased, so stop being a butthurt little girl about things. No one has a problem with the Nets winning 55+ games if healthy, but even the biggest Nets homer (if there's one worse than you) would agree that health will be a pretty serious concern for the Nets.

Health will be a very big issue for the nets. If one player goes down well have another that will step in and perform great but we can't have two or three people fighting through injury like last year.

[The JKidd Kid]

He's just a homer. He appeared this offseason and responds to every thread saying everything is 100% perfect. It'sAVC3 is nuts but at least he doesn't think everything will be perfect. At no point have i said the Knicks are better, the Nets suck, or something like that. But i'm also not buying into this thought the Nets will balance minutes, and that will work out. The Knicks played Rasheed 10 minutes here and there and his foot snapped. Amare played over his 20 minute limit once and the knee was shot again. Kidd just completely fell apart. Camby's foot trouble never ended. Old is old....the Nets aren't asking these players to last the season, they want them to last and be healthy and productive through June. That's a lot.

I'm not actually a homer, I'm just disputing your incredibly negative view of the nets such as saying non injury prone players are injury prone and claiming that Kidds DUI is a "problem".

[niko]

I'm not actually a homer, I'm just disputing your incredibly negative view of the nets such as saying non injury prone players are injury prone and claiming that Kidds DUI is a "problem".
Kidd's DUI isn't a problem, it should be a concern of the Nets when hiring him. If you think a pattern of immaturity in his personal life isn't a concern then you just don't want to think anything can go wrong. I'm not saying (nor have i ever) said don't hire him but your opinion is always "the nets are fine, it's overstated". Kidd beating up his wife, getting a new psycho wife, getting a DUI, overstated. Nets are all old, no that's overstated. I get it, nothing can wrong with the Nets. Hang on to that and see how far it gets you.

And everyone wants to stick their head in the sand about Brook and his foot but when he was out two weeks this year every Net fan went into utter panic and cursed his name. You all think the same thing i do, you just think if you don't say it out loud you don't need to worry about it.

[Heavincent]

Not Amare. Maybe Bargs if he impresses. I think ultimately it's Melo starting, Bargs backing up, Amare icing his knees.

What is the chance Amare plays enough to be effective all year?

What makes you thinks Bargs even has a chance of "impressing"? In your own words:


Note To The Board: Bargnani Sucks - No One Wants Him

Stop with the stupid trade scenarios. The Knicks do not want him. The Lakers do not want him. No one wants him. His mom doesn't like him, even she calls him soft. He is garbage. The Raptors have sucked for what feels like forever, and they want him gone. He is not the solution to the Lakers problems. He is not the solution to the Knick's problems. Teams do not make trades in order to get worse.

HE IS COMPLETE AND UTTER GARBAGE AND NO TEAM IS GOING TO TRADE FOR HIM TO SOLVE THEIR PROBLEMS.

Stop. Anyone who posts anything about Bargnani in a trade or as a solution is a moron.

[boozehound]

I think Bargs will do well in NY as he has a lot of help around him; Melo, JR to shoulder scoring load; Chandler, Kenyon Martin and even MWP and Shumpert to cover his lack of defense and rebounding. He's got all the tools to succeed and I think the change of scenery is what he needed.

wait. so what is he doing in these situations? Hes a shooter who isnt really that great of a shooter and who rebounds and defends well below replacement level.

I do think he needed a change of scenery, but I also think the knick fans who expect a lot out of him are going to be disappointed.

[niko]

What makes you thinks Bargs even has a chance of "impressing"? In your own words:
He doesn't need to impress me, he needs to impress Woodson or the Knick hire ups. The fact of the matter is to take the primary backup up spot from Amare requires health only. Starting would require hitting open jumpers and spacing the floor well. It's possible, but certainly not something I'd bet on.

He replaced Camby who never played and Novak who unfortunately over the course of two post seasons proved he couldn't hack it. (How he never worked on getting open more is beyond me). He also got Novak's salary off the books for 2015 and Melo's shopping spree. Other than that find me anywhere i said Bargs would do anything.

[It's A VC3!!!]

I do think he needed a change of scenery, but I also think the knick fans who expect a lot out of him are going to be disappointed.
I agree. I certainly hope that Knick fans aren't expecting him to be a 20 PPG scorer, or even half of that.

He should average what Rashard Lewis averaged for the Heat last season, 5-8 PPG. And come playoff time, he might not get a lick of playing time. I don't think Woodson would play Bargz against the Pacers front court, Nets or Bulls front court. Not even against their back-ups.

[niko]

I agree. I certainly hope that Knick fans aren't expecting him to be a 20 PPG scorer, or even half of that.

He should average what Rashard Lewis averaged for the Heat last season, 5-8 PPG. And come playoff time, he might not get a lick of playing time. I don't think Woodson would play Bargz against the Pacers front court, Nets or Bulls front court. Not even against their back-ups.

Bargs will play more than that. Woodson has a way with people who need to get their shots up. He can easily score 10 a game, he did that before in Toronto as garbage as he was.

Any Knick fan who is waiting to see Barg's amazing contribution though deserves a slap in the head.

[It's A VC3!!!]

Bargs will play more than that. Woodson has a way with people who need to get their shots up. He can easily score 10 a game, he did that before in Toronto as garbage as he was.

Any Knick fan who is waiting to see Barg's amazing contribution though deserves a slap in the head.
What about in the playoffs though, if Amare is injured? Will Woodson really play Bargz 30 mpg on KG and Evans ( would average 25 rpg with bargz guarding him). or on boozer, or on david west? the Knicks need toughness to guard the strong front courts in the east. that's their biggest hole right now.

[niko]

What about in the playoffs though, if Amare is injured? Will Woodson really play Bargz 30 mpg on KG and Evans ( would average 25 rpg with bargz guarding him). or on boozer, or on david west? the Knicks need toughness to guard the strong front courts in the east. that's their biggest hole right now.
No, he'd be out backup. Evans barely played in the playoffs because everyone stopped guarding him and he made the games 4 on 5, so i'm not particularly worried about Evans. Exactly what i said would happen with Evans is what did happen (perhaps you forgot your rant about getting rid of him?)

Bargs is a backup replacing Novak and Camby. When did he a 30 minute a game player?

[It's A VC3!!!]

No, he'd be out backup. Evans barely played in the playoffs because everyone stopped guarding him and he made the games 4 on 5, so i'm not particularly worried about Evans. Exactly what i said would happen with Evans is what did happen (perhaps you forgot your rant about getting rid of him?)

Bargs is a backup replacing Novak and Camby. When did he a 30 minute a game player?


I was under the impression that Bargnani was a back-up for Amare. And when Amare eventually goes down, Bargnani will have to play 30 minutes per game will Kenyon Martin backing him up.

[niko]

I was under the impression that Bargnani was a back-up for Amare. And when Amare eventually goes down, Bargnani will have to play 30 minutes per game will Kenyon Martin backing him up.
We didn't have Amare all last year, and we didn't have Bargnani last year. Why they would be these irreplacable cogs now makes no sense.

[ChuckOakley]

Niko.. how do you see the minutes being distributed?
Can you do a break down?

[niko]

Niko.. how do you see the minutes being distributed?
Can you do a break down?
Not yet really, but i can try. I have to see how they use Bargs. I have literally no idea how they are using him. Once i see what they are thinking and who our final big is, i'll have a much better idea. I think the Knicks still play small a lot. Matching up to your opponent with less talent isn't a good strategy, which is what the Knicks would be doing by using Bargs as the primary backup 4/5. He's replacing players whose impact was nominal and nonexistant (in Novak and Camby). I also think we may still get another rotation big, not necessarily and end of bench guy.

I'll take a look at it later though. I just don't see him at 30 minutes a game.

[It's A VC3!!!]

I'll take a look at it later though. I just don't see him at 30 minutes a game.
He's not but my point was in regard to if amare is injured. Then he will play 30 mpg. If amare is healthy he should be around the 16-23 mpg mark.

[The JKidd Kid]

Kidd's DUI isn't a problem, it should be a concern of the Nets when hiring him. If you think a pattern of immaturity in his personal life isn't a concern then you just don't want to think anything can go wrong. I'm not saying (nor have i ever) said don't hire him but your opinion is always "the nets are fine, it's overstated". Kidd beating up his wife, getting a new psycho wife, getting a DUI, overstated. Nets are all old, no that's overstated. I get it, nothing can wrong with the Nets. Hang on to that and see how far it gets you.

And everyone wants to stick their head in the sand about Brook and his foot but when he was out two weeks this year every Net fan went into utter panic and cursed his name. You all think the same thing i do, you just think if you don't say it out loud you don't need to worry about it.

I am arguing that injuries aren't going to affect this team any more than another team. The Nets players arnt injury prone at all Deron played 78 games, Lopez played 71, Pierce played 77 and Johnson played 74. The only one in their starting lineup that missed a large amount of games was Garnett and that was mostly do to rest. Injuries won't be more of a problem for this team than any other.

Kidds Domestic abuse case was 10 years ago and has been addressed thoroughly. His DUI is a misdemeanor and in no way affects his job. I would consider 2 cases within a 10 year span to be a history. These wont affect his abilit to be a coach.

I do think that the Nets will be fine, but that's my job as a fan. I admit that the team isn't perfect and certain things can hurt this team such ad Kidds inexperience, Pierce and Garnett's inevitable decline and lack of athleticism outside Deron and Kirilenlko however, I don't believe that a DUI or non-injury prone players suddenly becoming injury prone are going to affect this team whatsoever.

[niko]

He's not but my point was in regard to if amare is injured. Then he will play 30 mpg. If amare is healthy he should be around the 16-23 mpg mark.
I think either way he will be at the 16-23 mark because Woodson won't play him if he is inneffective in a particular game. Just my thinking.

[niko]

I am arguing that injuries aren't going to affect this team any more than another team. The Nets players arnt injury prone at all Deron played 78 games, Lopez played 71, Pierce played 77 and Johnson played 74. The only one in their starting lineup that missed a large amount of games was Garnett and that was mostly do to rest. Injuries won't be more of a problem for this team than any other.

Kidds Domestic abuse case was 10 years ago and has been addressed thoroughly. His DUI is a misdemeanor and in no way affects his job. I would consider 2 cases within a 10 year span to be a history. These wont affect his abilit to be a coach.

I do think that the Nets will be fine, but that's my job as a fan. I admit that the team isn't perfect and certain things can hurt this team such ad Kidds inexperience, Pierce and Garnett's inevitable decline and lack of athleticism outside Deron and Kirilenlko however, I don't believe that a DUI or non-injury prone players suddenly becoming injury prone are going to affect this team whatsoever.

I didn't think Kidd's background should have prevented him from getting the job, but your point that it's of no concern is patently ridiculous, it's clearly something that needs to be thought about. Going from player who liked to party with his teammates to coach who can't do that, it's of course a thought. For you it's not because a concern means someting might go wrong, same as you think the Nets age is not a concern, Lopez foot is not a concern. If you were a Knick fan Amare would be healthy, JR not a schmuck and Melo would learn to pass.

[L3B120N J4M35]

as much as Jack helped the Warriors, he hurt us ALOT in the playoffs. jack is soooo bad defensively watching. he's the reason manu hit that 3 to win the game. remember when he was throwing the ball in and never called a time out in the crucial moments against the spurs. He did help a lot, but he kind of hurt us too in a way. hopefully iggy will pick up the secondary ball handler and defensive player to help us become a better team.

[The JKidd Kid]

I didn't think Kidd's background should have prevented him from getting the job, but your point that it's of no concern is patently ridiculous, it's clearly something that needs to be thought about. Going from player who liked to party with his teammates to coach who can't do that, it's of course a thought. For you it's not because a concern means someting might go wrong, same as you think the Nets age is not a concern, Lopez foot is not a concern. If you were a Knick fan Amare would be healthy, JR not a schmuck and Melo would learn to pass.

I admit that I am optimistic, but not in an unrealistic way. I mentioned that I think age is a problem and I acknowledged that. I don't think that Lopezs foot is a concern because the bent screw is unrelated to him being injury prone, screws arnt supposed to bend, I agree, however I doubt that it will cause an injury and I believe that it was a faulty screw, which is much more likely than there being enough force on it to bend it. I also agree with most of the things you said about Kidd, but I believe that he will address the things you mentioned such as partying with team mates because it is his job to do so. Also, I don't believe that his criminal record shows any sort of recurring problem. His two crimes are unrelated and stand-alone crimes, his problems related to them haven't resurfaced. I also believe that King has thought about his issues and has decided that they are unlikely to hurt the team in the future.

[niko]

I admit that I am optimistic, but not in an unrealistic way. I mentioned that I think age is a problem and I acknowledged that. I don't think that Lopezs foot is a concern because the bent screw is unrelated to him being injury prone, screws arnt supposed to bend, I agree, however I doubt that it will cause an injury and I believe that it was a faulty screw, which is much more likely than there being enough force on it to bend it. I also agree with most of the things you said about Kidd, but I believe that he will address the things you mentioned such as partying with team mates because it is his job to do so. Also, I don't believe that his criminal record shows any sort of recurring problem. His two crimes are unrelated and stand-alone crimes, his problems related to them haven't resurfaced. I also believe that King has thought about his issues and has decided that they are unlikely to hurt the team in the future.
it's fine you are very optimistic but my disagreement with you is always that you consider the possible downside as this strange anomaly. The Knicks brought in a bunch of old guys to play 10 minutes here and there, they all exploded at one point or another. You brought in three old guys to fill major roles, and two of them (Pierce and Terry) were as ineffective as ineffective could be by the end of the season because they were shot. Could they bounce back? Yes. But i wouldn't bet on it. i could easily see the Nets with 3,4 guys missing significant time or ineffective for a long time due to injury. I just went through it last year.

[It's A VC3!!!]

You brought in three old guys to fill major roles, and two of them (Pierce and Terry)
If by major roles you mean playing no more than 25 minutes a game, and being no better than a third option, then your right. Paul and Kevin both said it too. They are being brought in to be a presence FIRST, and then contribute however they can. Even Paul had this to say today.

[I][B]"I think people don

[The JKidd Kid]

it's fine you are very optimistic but my disagreement with you is always that you consider the possible downside as this strange anomaly. The Knicks brought in a bunch of old guys to play 10 minutes here and there, they all exploded at one point or another. You brought in three old guys to fill major roles, and two of them (Pierce and Terry) were as ineffective as ineffective could be by the end of the season because they were shot. Could they bounce back? Yes. But i wouldn't bet on it. i could easily see the Nets with 3,4 guys missing significant time or ineffective for a long time due to injury. I just went through it last year.

It could happen, but again I think it's much more unlikely than what the media is saying. Pierce and Garnett played a very large role and they stayed healthy last season. Now they are being moved into a smaller role where they will play less minutes and won't have to use as much energy. I am almost 100% sure that Pierce will bounce back, as he will be asked to be a 4th, 5th or even 6th option considering Blatches role. Terry on the other hand I Doubt will bounce back, but all we need him to do is shoot around 40% from 3 as Blatche will be the main bench offense.

KGs and Peirces mere presence on the floor is better than anything Wallace or Evans offered last season. Even if those 2 guys went down for long periods of time, you could just insert Kirilenko and Evans and still have a better starting 5 than last years 49 win team.