ESPN Power Rankings 2013/14

[Sarcastic]

http://espn.go.com/nba/powerrankings/_/year/2014/week/-1

[All Net]

Nets 3rd? What?

[bdreason]

Terrible rankings. Here are my top 10;


1. Heat
2. Spurs
3. Thunder
4. Clippers
5. Warriors
6. Pacers
7. Bulls
8. Nets
9. Grizzlies
10. Rockets

[TheReal Kendall]

Terrible rankings. Here are my top 10;


1. Heat
2. Spurs
3. Thunder
4. Clippers
5. Warriors
6. Pacers
7. Bulls
8. Nets
9. Grizzlies
10. Rockets

This looks about right.

I'm surprised they got the Suns above the 76ers

[ispin69]

1. Heat
2. Indy
3. Spurs
4. Thunder
5. Bulls
6. Clippers
7. Warriors
8. Nets
9. Mavs
10. Grizzlies

[ChuckOakley]

Same top 3 for me....

1. Miami
2. Indy
3. Brooklyn
4. Houston
5. SAS
6. LAC
7. OKC
8. Chicago
9. GSW
10. Memphis

CBS had BK at #5.

[bagelred]

which means that the Knicks better get something out of Amar'e Stoudemire and Andrea Bargnani -- as well as Metta World Peace and a full-strength Iman Shumpert -- to keep up.

What a moron. Why wouldn't they "get something" out of all four of them? As of right now, they're all healthy.

That's like saying "Well, the Pacers BETTER get something out of Scola, Copeland, Granger, and Stephenson...." :hammerhead:

As usual, Knicks will have to exceed the "analysts" expectations.

[The JKidd Kid]

1. Heat
2. Spurs
3. Nets
4. Pacers
5. Bulls
6. Clippers
7. OKC
8. Grizzlies
9. Rockets
10. Warriors

[zoom17]

Why are people overrating the nets there going to be the Eastern version of the 2012 lakers old and past the primes a couple years too late:roll: :roll: :roll:

[The JKidd Kid]

What a moron. Why wouldn't they "get something" out of all four of them? As of right now, they're all healthy.

That's like saying "Well, the Pacers BETTER get something out of Scola, Copeland, Granger, and Stephenson...." :hammerhead:

As usual, Knicks will have to exceed the "analysts" expectations.

Other than last season, when have the Knicks ever "exceeded" anyone's expectations. The franchise is known for under achievement.

[bagelred]

Other than last season, when have the Knicks ever "exceeded" anyone's expectations. The franchise is known for under achievement.

No they aren't. They're known for having terrible rosters. The 00's were f-cking horrendous rosters.....

"Except for last year" lol...well isn't that the year that matters since it's basically same core roster, same coaching staff, except the roster is now younger, healthier, and (in theory) better with their moves?

[ChuckOakley]

Why are people overrating the nets there going to be the Eastern version of the 2012 lakers old and past the primes a couple years too late:roll: :roll: :roll:
There have been 4 "super" teams

2003 Lakers with Payton and Malone who made the Finals
2008 Celtics who won it all
2010 Heat who made the Finals

All had great regular seasons.

Why would you compare them to the one that failed who:
a. Had an unhappy an injured Howard
b. Had no depth after they top 4
c. Had a broken down Nash, Kobe and Pau
d. Had an egomaniac in Kobe who drove Dwight away and hurt his team when on the court with inefficient scoring and terrible D
?

[bagelred]

Why are people overrating the nets there going to be the Eastern version of the 2012 lakers old and past the primes a couple years too late:roll: :roll: :roll:

Agreed. This year's Nets = Last years Lakers. I think they'll be better than the Lakers, but the chances of semi-disaster are right there. WITH a rookie head coach.

[Heavincent]

What a moron. Why wouldn't they "get something" out of all four of them? As of right now, they're all healthy.

That's like saying "Well, the Pacers BETTER get something out of Scola, Copeland, Granger, and Stephenson...." :hammerhead:

As usual, Knicks will have to exceed the "analysts" expectations.

You're delusional if you think you're gonna get anything out of Amare or Bargs.

[Shade8780]

keep rondo please.

[The JKidd Kid]

No they aren't. They're known for having terrible rosters. The 00's were f-cking horrendous rosters.....

"Except for last year" lol...well isn't that the year that matters since it's basically same core roster, same coaching staff, except the roster is now younger, healthier, and (in theory) better with their moves?

You said as usual, not last season. Even disregarding those teams, the first two years of the Melo Amare era they underachieved like they were getting paid to.

[The JKidd Kid]

Agreed. This year's Nets = Last years Lakers. I think they'll be better than the Lakers, but the chances of semi-disaster are right there. WITH a rookie head coach.

Too bad this Nets team and that Lakers team have absolutely NOTHING in common.

[Sarcastic]

Nets are super team?:oldlol:

[ChuckOakley]

Nets are super team?:oldlol:
Refers to a team with a collection of big name players and a bloated payroll with high expectations.

[Sarcastic]

Refers to a team with a collection of big name players and a bloated payroll with high expectations.

Then you have to include last year's Lakers in the mix, and they lost in the first round.

[Heavincent]

Nets are super team?:oldlol:

Better than the Knicks.

[ChuckOakley]

Agreed. This year's Nets = Last years Lakers. I think they'll be better than the Lakers, but the chances of semi-disaster are right there. WITH a rookie head coach.
Luckily they bolstered their bench with some highly paid assistants.

L.Frank - highest paid assistant in the L
R.Rogers - Brook's big man coach his rookie year
E.Hughes - from Toronto's staff
J.Welch - Karl's right hand man
J.Prunty - head coach for Great Britian's national team
C.Klask - stats guys from Pistons


Meanwhile I don't think vets like KG, PP, JT, JJ and Deron will need much coaching.

Guys are reaching at straws trying to hope this team fails.

[ChuckOakley]

Then you have to include last year's Lakers in the mix, and they lost in the first round.
I did....


There have been 4 "super" teams

2003 Lakers with Payton and Malone who made the Finals
2008 Celtics who won it all
2010 Heat who made the Finals

All had great regular seasons.

Why would you compare them to the one that failed who:
a. Had an unhappy an injured Howard
b. Had no depth after they top 4
c. Had a broken down Nash, Kobe and Pau
d. Had an egomaniac in Kobe who drove Dwight away and hurt his team when on the court with inefficient scoring and terrible D
?

1 out of 4 have failed.

[The JKidd Kid]

Luckily they bolstered their bench with some highly paid assistants.

L.Frank - highest paid assistant in the L
R.Rogers - Brook's big man coach his rookie year
E.Hughes - from Toronto's staff
J.Welch - Karl's right hand man
J.Prunty - head coach for Great Britian's national team
C.Klask - stats guys from Pistons


Meanwhile I don't think vets like KG, PP, JT, JJ and Deron will need much coaching.

Guys are reaching at straws trying to hope this team fails.

Exactly, both Paul Peirce and KG can miss the entire season and they would still have a better team than last years.

[ChuckOakley]

Meanwhile last years team won 49 games.

They won 49 despite:

-Evans and Wallace started giving them no spacing
(PP and KG replace them)

-It being their 1st year together
(they gained valuable experience and experienced players)

-9 new players, 2 new starter, 3 other starter who never played a game together
(They kept 4/5 starters and their 6th man Blatche and added players used to playing with each other)

-Two terrible coaches
(Kidd and Frank and a stacked bench will be much better)

-D.Will playing terribly for half the season
(17/7 on 41/35% to 23/8 on 48/42%)

-Them lacking any heart, chemistry or leadership
(Heart - KG + PP, chemistry = KG, PP, JT + AK with Deron, Leadership = KG, PP and Kidd)

-We were 2.5 man team.. Deron, Lopez and 1/2 JJ (who was arguably the most clutch player in the league last year)

Yes they lost to the Bulls (which I said on here before the series started they would in 6 or 7) since

-Chicago owned us (and Miami and NY in the RS 9-3 overall between those 3 teams)
-Chicago had a far superior coach
-Chicago had a far superior D
-Chicago had Noah and Boozer (who dominated Evans)
-Chicago had more experience, chemistry and heart than any team
-Nate played out of his mind

It was blessing we lost as it highlighted our weaknesses and forced the FO to address them.

The actual changes

Hump to Garnett
Wallace to Pierce
Bogans to Kirilenko
Brooks to Terry
Stackhouse to Anderson
Bad Deron to Good Deron
Bad Coaches to a much improved coaching staff

[The JKidd Kid]

Meanwhile last years team won 49 games.

They won 49 despite:

-Evans and Wallace started giving them no spacing
(PP and KG replace them)

-It being their 1st year together
(they gained valuable experience and experienced players)

-9 new players, 2 new starter, 3 other starter who never played a game together
(They kept 4/5 starters and their 6th man Blatche and added players used to playing with each other)

-Two terrible coaches
(Kidd and Frank and a stacked bench will be much better)

-D.Will playing terribly for half the season
(17/7 on 41/35% to 23/8 on 48/42%)

-Them lacking any heart, chemistry or leadership
(Heart - KG + PP, chemistry = KG, PP, JT + AK with Deron, Leadership = KG, PP and Kidd)

-We were 2.5 man team.. Deron, Lopez and 1/2 JJ (who was arguably the most clutch player in the league last year)

Yes they lost to the Bulls (which I said on here before the series started they would in 6 or 7) since

-Chicago owned us (and Miami and NY in the RS 9-3 overall between those 3 teams)
-Chicago had a far superior coach
-Chicago had a far superior D
-Chicago had Noah and Boozer (who dominated Evans)
-Chicago had more experience, chemistry and heart than any team
-Nate played out of his mind

It was blessing we lost as it highlighted our weaknesses and forced the FO to address them.

The actual changes

Hump to Garnett
Wallace to Pierce
Bogans to Kirilenko
Brooks to Terry
Stackhouse to Anderson
Bad Deron to Good Deron
Bad Coaches to a much improved coaching staff

:applause: You, my friend just saved me about 20 minutes of typing.

[ChuckOakley]

No, the Nets don't have a top 10 player, but when you have arguably the best starting 5 and arguably the best bench in the game, you should do ok in the regular season.

They are 4-5 deep at each position.

D.Williams / Livingston / Taylor / Terry
Johnson / Terry / Anderson / Pierce
Pierce / Kirlienko / Shengelia / Johnson / Anderson
Garnett / Evans / Teletovic / Blatche / AK
Lopez / Blatche / Plumlee / Garnett

[It's A VC3!!!]

Nets are super team?:oldlol:
When Joe Johnson is your worst starter, your a super team.. When you have Andray Blatche, Jason Terry, AND AK47 coming off your bench, your a super team. Hence why ESPN has them third. I think being third is a little high. Fifth in the NBA was my prediction but regular season isn't the main goal.

[SilkkTheShocker]

The Knicks aren't good

[The JKidd Kid]

Isn't it funny how the Knicks trolls disappear whenever anyone brings up an argument with actual logic behind it. :lol

[Smoke117]

"playoffs Roy Hibbert" Uh...just like during the regular season, he didn't do anything till he faced the Heat. In the two series before the Pacers faced the Heat he was nothing special.

[christian1923]

"playoffs Roy Hibbert" Uh...just like during the regular season, he didn't do anything till he faced the Heat. In the two series before the Pacers faced the Heat he was nothing special.
What? He murdered the Knicks

[Trentknicks]

What? He murdered the Knicks
He murdered an injured Tyson Chandler.

[TheReturn]

He murdered an injured Tyson Chandler.
Chandler was injured?

[Derka]

Gonna have to listen to this "They have to trade Rondo!" crap all season...annoying. ESPN just hoping and praying he ends up on another super team because that's what they do.

Meanwhile, bdreason's list is dead on.

[kurple]

atlanta, minny, dallas and portland ahead of denver? :roll:

[ChuckOakley]

atlanta, minny, dallas and portland ahead of denver? :roll:
You do realize...

a. Denver let COY Karl (an excellent RS coach) for a rookie coach who will have a new system to install?

b. They lost their best defender and starting SG Iggy?

c. Their starting SF Gallo is out for a bit?

d. They traded their starting C Koufos for a back up PF?

e. All other Western playoff teams improved significantly (except Memphis and OKC who improved marginally) as did Dallas, Minny and Portland?

f. They overachieved last season? (as exposed in the PO loss)

g. They added some terrible defenders? (Foye, Robinson, Hickson)

[tmacattack33]

Nets 3rd? What?

I agree. They should be 2nd.

[niko]

I don't think the Nets should be over the Spurs or Bulls. Which would make them 5th, which is splitting hairs. Spurs is my main beef, Bulls i guess you could assume Rose falloff so nets are better. My only beef with the rankings is the verbiage which basically doesn't follow the logic for some other teams which says if the roster got better, they improve. Knicks roster got better, we are regressing. Everyone else, improves. huh?

Just an aside, I don't agree with the Kidd hire being full proof because he has good assistants though, if the assistants are good but he's not (which we would assume would be the case IF their was a problem) it's an awful dynamic. He has to be a good coach, he can't be lost but everyone looks to Lawrence Frank. I don't see why he wouldn't be a good coach, but I'm hearing basically it almost doesn't matter because of his assistants. That's ridiculous. Power divided all over is a terrible leadership structure.

[SamuraiSWISH]

Super Teams:

2004 Lakers - Failure
2008 Celtics - Won
2010 Celtics - Failure
2011 Heat - Won
2012 Heat - Won
2012 Thunder - Failure
2013 Lakers - Failure
2014 Nets - ?

[KG215]

Super Teams:

2004 Lakers - Failure
2008 Celtics - Won
2010 Celtics - Failure
2011 Heat - Won
2012 Heat - Won
2012 Thunder - Failure
2013 Lakers - Failure
2014 Nets - ?
The 2012 Thunder are considered a "Super Team" even though KD, Russ, Harden, and Serge were 21 and 22 year olds and all were drafted by the Thunder?

[Budadiiii]

Super Teams:

2004 Lakers - Failure
2008 Celtics - Won
2010 Celtics - Over-achieved
2011 Heat - Choked
2012 Heat - Won
2012 Thunder - Over-achieved
2013 Lakers - Failure
2014 Nets - ?
fixed

[el gringos]

Heat
Thunder
Spurs
Pacers
Bulls
Knicks
Clippers
Warriors
Brooklyn
Houston
Denver
New Orleans

[SamuraiSWISH]

fixed
2010 Celtics didn't overachieve, Rondo / Allen / Pierce / Garnett should've been expected to get to the Finals. They underperformed in the regular season, yes. But that was because they coasted.

2012 Thunder were a young super team, with three legitimate all-stars, who I agree did overachieve. But they overachieved because James Harden balled in the WCF and dragged them to the Finals over the Spurs. His play and break out was the reason they got there.

And is basically what got him paid. His entire 2012 season, and especially his playoffs was his coming out party to the league.

[chips93]

What a moron. Why wouldn't they "get something" out of all four of them? As of right now, they're all healthy.

both of them have missed a lot of games the last two years

i think its pretty reasonable to question how much production you are going to get out of a player(s) when they have missed as much time as bargs and amare have.

[Nero Tulip]

People shouldn't put OKC that high. Does anyone actually think they're a contender for the title? They have admittedly a couple great players, but lots of holes in their roster.

[Dbrog]

Let's be honest.

Heat
.
..
...
....
....
.....
......
Everyone else


With that said, they are severely underrating the Lakers. I'm not saying they will contend, but they will certainly be better than Wizards, Pistons, Pelicans, and probably a few others. I think Boston will end up being very underrated as well.

Also...:roll: :roll: @ putting the Pacers at #2. It's a very bad joke.

[NugzFan]

You do realize...

a. Denver let COY Karl (an excellent RS coach) for a rookie coach who will have a new system to install?

b. They lost their best defender and starting SG Iggy?

c. Their starting SF Gallo is out for a bit?

d. They traded their starting C Koufos for a back up PF?

e. All other Western playoff teams improved significantly (except Memphis and OKC who improved marginally) as did Dallas, Minny and Portland?

f. They overachieved last season? (as exposed in the PO loss)

g. They added some terrible defenders? (Foye, Robinson, Hickson)

some of these are valid, although gallo is coming back sooner than anticipated, losing a role player in koufus is minor, the guys we added still bring something to the team, and not every team improved like you said (and some who did still arent going to make up 20 games on us).

we are definitely winning less than 57 games...but espns rankings are the same hype machine they have always done. by april they will look like a joke (not for denver necessarily....just overall).

[It's A VC3!!!]

The 2012 Thunder are considered a "Super Team" even though KD, Russ, Harden, and Serge were 21 and 22 year olds and all were drafted by the Thunder?
I agree. The 2012 Thunder weren't a super team. People need to stop throwing the term super team around. The 2013 Lakers weren't a super team either. They were only four deep and one of those players were injured for half the season. A team only three deep isn't a super team.

[chips93]

People shouldn't put OKC that high. Does anyone actually think they're a contender for the title? They have admittedly a couple great players, but lots of holes in their roster.

they won 60 games last year, and are a really really young team, so they are going to get better.

losing martin sucks, but hes a sieve on defense, and jeremy lamb, and reggie jackson should be able to make up for him, to an extent

okc still have 2 top 10 players, and another all-star level big man, all under 25. other than the heat, no team is in a better position to win titles for the next 5-10 years.

[Nero Tulip]

they won 60 games last year, and are a really really young team, so they are going to get better.

losing martin sucks, but hes a sieve on defense, and jeremy lamb, and reggie jackson should be able to make up for him, to an extent

okc still have 2 top 10 players, and another all-star level big man, all under 25. other than the heat, no team is in a better position to win titles for the next 5-10 years.

They only have 4 good players. The rest is either "meh", "too young to do anything in the playoffs", or "downright awful".

In the next 5 years? Sure, they'll be competitive. Might even win a title. But with this roster they won't do anything.

It's not a terrible position to be in, all they need is role players. But unless they sign someone, they'll get out in the first or second round.

[chips93]

this team won 60 games last year though, 2nd best record in the league

all they lost from that team is a good spark plug off the bench, who played no defense.

and their team is full of young guys, all of whom are gonna get better.

i think people are letting the harden trade color their view of okc. sure it was a bad trade, but they are still in a great position.


They only have 4 good players. The rest is either "meh", "too young to do anything in the playoffs", or "downright awful".

they only had 5 good players two years ago and they got to the finals, and the four remaining players have only gotten better.

[Nero Tulip]

this team won 60 games last year though, 2nd best record in the league

all they lost from that team is a good spark plug off the bench, who played no defense.

and their team is full of young guys, all of whom are gonna get better.

i think people are letting the harden trade color their view of okc. sure it was a bad trade, but they are still in a great position.



they only had 5 good players two years ago and they got to the finals, and the four remaining players have only gotten better.

You can win with an 8 player deep team, but that's the limit. They're 6 players deep now, and one of them is Perkins. Now they badly need one of the younger guys to contribute, and everyone knows how this will go in the playoffs.

Again, it's not an awful problem to have. They could bring the right guys and be competitive. But as it stands they have an exactly 0% chance of winning the title.

[chips93]

You can win with an 8 player deep team, but that's the limit. They're 6 players deep now, and one of them is Perkins. Now they badly need one of the younger guys to contribute, and everyone knows how this will go in the playoffs.

Again, it's not an awful problem to have. They could bring the right guys and be competitive. But as it stands they have an exactly 0% chance of winning the title.

i guess we'll just have to agree to disagree

as far as im concerned, they were the second best team in the league last year, before russ went down, and could have won the title had he not went down.

if they get some growth from the younger guys, which is pretty likely, they should get back to where they were last year.

if they get great growth out of the younger guys, which is less likely, but still very feasible, they have a great shot at winning the title. not favorites or anything, but right there with the spurs and bulls, as next in line after the heat.

[russwest0]

People shouldn't put OKC that high. Does anyone actually think they're a contender for the title? They have admittedly a couple great players, but lots of holes in their roster.

Just arguably the MVP fav going into next season, a borderline top 5 payer in Westbrook and a team of young guys with high potential all improving (Ibaka, Jackson, Lamb..) Oh, and role players who have been with the team for a while as well. Collison, Sefolosha, Fisher, etc.

Also only coming off 60 wins, improving wins every single year since getting KD. Only have Ibaka, Russ, KD each improving ever year. Sefolosha as well.

So nah, you right. ESPN had them graded well. Worse than the Nets, Clippers, Rockets.

Continuity and Chemistry are of zero importance to some of you clowns, I swear.

Around OKC the enthusiasm for this training camp is as high as it has ever been. Given the all around improvements of the members of the team + Lamb and Reggie Jackson ready to step into new roles I'd be shocked if OKC isn't a better team next year.

Though clowns at ESPN thank we are a borderline top 10 team in the NBA because we lost the MIGHTY KEVIN MARTIN (who was worse than DEREK FISHER for us once Westbrook went down)

I swear people buy way too much into hype. ZERO reason to think some of these teams will even be close to OKC's level this season.

[russwest0]

Let's be honest.

Heat
.
..
...
....
....
.....
......
Everyone else


With that said, they are severely underrating the Lakers. I'm not saying they will contend, but they will certainly be better than Wizards, Pistons, Pelicans, and probably a few others. I think Boston will end up being very underrated as well.

Also...:roll: :roll: @ putting the Pacers at #2. It's a very bad joke.

Yes, the Heat are that much better than everyone else when everyone else even worth a damn had major injuries and Miami was still one lucky shot/coaching mistake from losing the Finals in 6 games. Not to even mention that all of their roster except a few players is on the decline...

[KG215]

They only have 4 good players. The rest is either "meh", "too young to do anything in the playoffs", or "downright awful".

In the next 5 years? Sure, they'll be competitive. Might even win a title. But with this roster they won't do anything.

It's not a terrible position to be in, all they need is role players. But unless they sign someone, they'll get out in the first or second round.
Seems like you're underestimating how good and how far a team can go in the playoffs when you've got the second best player in the league who's in the heart of his prime and another borderline top 5 or top 10 player who's also in the heart of his prime. Yes, they're depth leaves something to be desired this year, and they're relying on some young, unproven players, but if Reggie Jackson takes that next step, then they've got a very good core four with KD, Russ, Serge, and Reggie.

I mean did people forget or just not realize that Jackson averaged 15-4-5 and on good efficiency in the playoffs last year after Russ got hurt? He was OKC's second most consistent player after KD, and he was a 23 year old second year player getting the first playoff minutes of his career. Nick Collison is one of the best and most underrated bench bigs in the league, and if Lamb progresses and improves throughout the year, then OKC will be able to bring three very solid players off the bench to mix and match with KD, Russ, and Serge.

[brantonli]

Just arguably the MVP fav going into next season, a borderline top 5 payer in Westbrook and a team of young guys with high potential all improving (Ibaka, Jackson, Lamb..) Oh, and role players who have been with the team for a while as well. Collison, Sefolosha, Fisher, etc.

Also only coming off 60 wins, improving wins every single year since getting KD. Only have Ibaka, Russ, KD each improving ever year. Sefolosha as well.

So nah, you right. ESPN had them graded well. Worse than the Nets, Clippers, Rockets.

Continuity and Chemistry are of zero importance to some of you clowns, I swear.

Around OKC the enthusiasm for this training camp is as high as it has ever been. Given the all around improvements of the members of the team + Lamb and Reggie Jackson ready to step into new roles I'd be shocked if OKC isn't a better team next year.

Though clowns at ESPN thank we are a borderline top 10 team in the NBA because we lost the MIGHTY KEVIN MARTIN (who was worse than DEREK FISHER for us once Westbrook went down)

I swear people buy way too much into hype. ZERO reason to think some of these teams will even be close to OKC's level this season.


The main reason people are down on OKC is because of their lackluster production outside of the two main guys. The OKC fans keep saying they see Jackson and Lamb effectively replacing Martin, but Martin was the few guys on the Thunder who could create for himself! Banking on player improvement along is always risky, and for now most ppl who aren't fans if OKC don't believe that the improvement will be so huge that it can keep OKC in contention.

[russwest0]

The main reason people are down on OKC is because of their lackluster production outside of the two main guys. The OKC fans keep saying they see Jackson and Lamb effectively replacing Martin, but Martin was the few guys on the Thunder who could create for himself! Banking on player improvement along is always risky, and for now most ppl who aren't fans if OKC don't believe that the improvement will be so huge that it can keep OKC in contention.

This is absolutely foolish. Reggie Jackson was getting more minutes than Martin at the end of the season because he's just better. I doubt we even attempted to resign Martin. Especially with Lamb destroying everyone in the D-League.

Martin is good at two things and shit at everything else. Good at 3pters and FT shooting. Lamb can do that shit almost as well and Reggie getting more minutes will be great.

People thinking that OKC is going from a young 60 win team to instant shit because they lost Kevin Martin are retarded. KD, Russ, Ibaka, Sefolosha, and Collison have all improved each year in OKC up to this point and will probably continue to. No one ever points that out. Reggie Jackson and Jeremy Lamb can both replace Martin easily.

OKC should be an even better team than last year and people have the DAMN CLIPPERS over them? A team that couldn't even get out of the first round when OKC could even without Westbrook?

What a damn joke

[East_Stone_Ya]

The Jazz have to feel fortunate. They let both of their marquee free agents walk in free agency, have committed to playing kids with Jefferson and Millsap gone and nonetheless appear to have widespread support from their fan base even with lots of losses ahead in the short term. Special.

:biggums:

[ChuckOakley]

This is absolutely foolish. Reggie Jackson was getting more minutes than Martin at the end of the season because he's just better. I doubt we even attempted to resign Martin. Especially with Lamb destroying everyone in the D-League.

Martin is good at two things and shit at everything else. Good at 3pters and FT shooting. Lamb can do that shit almost as well and Reggie getting more minutes will be great.

People thinking that OKC is going from a young 60 win team to instant shit because they lost Kevin Martin are retarded. KD, Russ, Ibaka, Sefolosha, and Collison have all improved each year in OKC up to this point and will probably continue to. No one ever points that out. Reggie Jackson and Jeremy Lamb can both replace Martin easily.

OKC should be an even better team than last year and people have the DAMN CLIPPERS over them? A team that couldn't even get out of the first round when OKC could even without Westbrook?

What a damn joke
OKC has some major questions

1. How does RW come back?
2. They've downgraded from Harden to Martin to Lamb
3. They still have Perkins in the middle
4. They aren't able to go over the tax even if it makes them better
5. They are susceptible to teams with post play as most their losses last year were to team with strong post play.. like Memphis who won 4-1 in the playoffs and 2-1 in the regular season where the only win was when Memphis was missing Prince, Ed Davis and Pondexter. Brooklyn blew them out in OKC because Lopez and Blatche went off for 35 points at Center and they beat BK by 6 in BK because Lopez did not play
6. They did not improve in the off-season unless you count signing D.Fisher and R.Gomes, while the rest of the West playoff teams did for the most part.

They will still win 55ish games and be a top 3 team in the West, but I don't think they are any better.

[Nero Tulip]

I don't think they'll be in the top 3 this year. SAS, Mem, Lac and Hou will be better. I see a 5/6 seed and a first round exit. I'm far from a hater by the way, I like this team but I'm a realist.

[KG215]

OKC has some major questions

1. How does RW come back?
2. They've downgraded from Harden to Martin to Lamb
3. They still have Perkins in the middle
4. They aren't able to go over the tax even if it makes them better
5. They are susceptible to teams with post play as most their losses last year were to team with strong post play.. like Memphis who won 4-1 in the playoffs and 2-1 in the regular season where the only win was when Memphis was missing Prince, Ed Davis and Pondexter. Brooklyn blew them out in OKC because Lopez and Blatche went off for 35 points at Center and they beat BK by 6 in BK because Lopez did not play
6. They did not improve in the off-season unless you count signing D.Fisher and R.Gomes, while the rest of the West playoff teams did for the most part.

They will still win 55ish games and be a top 3 team in the West, but I don't think they are any better.
You are aware that it's possible for teams to improve without making a bunch of flashy off-season moves, right? Durant, Ibaka, Westbrook, and Reggie are all 25 years old or younger, and should be better and continue improving to some extent the next several years. That applies to Jeremy Lamb, Steven Adams, and Perry Jones, too, but to a lesser extent.

I will admit I wouldn't be surprised with some level of stagnation or slight decline this year due to how many young, unproven guys we will be relying on, but I think it was set-up for steady improvement the next 2-4 years.

Now, Westbrook missing the first month or so of the season will cause some setback in his improvement and cost the team some wins, so we really may not know until around the All-Star break if the team is improved or not. And I say around the All-Star break because he'll be out until December sometime, and it will probably take another few weeks to work off some of the rust.

Oh, and Reggie outplayed Martin in the playoffs last year and he's young; so if he improves I'm not sure how much of a "downgrade" that really is. they're completely different players, though and we will miss Martin's floor-spacing. But Jackson is a better shot creator, finisher, and defender than Martin.

[ChuckOakley]

You are aware that it's possible for teams to improve without making a bunch of flashy off-season moves, right? Durant, Ibaka, Westbrook, and Reggie are all 25 years old or younger, and should be better and continue improving to some extent the next several years. That applies to Jeremy Lamb, Steven Adams, and Perry Jones, too, but to a lesser extent.

I will admit I wouldn't be surprised with some level of stagnation or slight decline this year due to how many young, unproven guys we will be relying on, but I think it was set-up for steady improvement the next 2-4 years.

Now, Westbrook missing the first month or so of the season will cause some setback in his improvement and cost the team some wins, so we really may not know until around the All-Star break if the team is improved or not. And I say around the All-Star break because he'll be out until December sometime, and it will probably take another few weeks to work off some of the rust.

Oh, and Reggie outplayed Martin in the playoffs last year and he's young; so if he improves I'm not sure how much of a "downgrade" that really is. they're completely different players, though and we will miss Martin's floor-spacing. But Jackson is a better shot creator, finisher, and defender than Martin.
It's because RW, Durant and Iabaka have improved that they were able to off-set the loss of Harden and their general lack of roster improvement relative to the field.

But the point is how much better they could if they were willing to spend and hadn't made certain moves.

[KG215]

It's because RW, Durant and Iabaka have improved that they were able to off-set the loss of Harden and their general lack of roster improvement relative to the field.

But the point is how much better they could if they were willing to spend and hadn't made certain moves.
First off, it wasn't that they weren't willing to spend. They offered Harden a 4yr/$55M deal. He could've been making just under $14M/year on a contender in a 3rd option/2b role. And I don't think they were ever planning on re-signing Kevin Martin unless he was willing to take a paycut. He's on the wrong side of 30, is a terrible defender, can't create his own shot well enough and, most importantly, he wasn't ever going to be fully utilized in a 3rd/4th option role in OKC which also means he wasn't going to be worth the $7M+/year he wanted. That also sort of applies to Harden but to a greater extent.

But you missed my point...I think. Going by almost every statistical measure, OKC was better last year than they were in 2012. That's not to say they wouldn't have been even better if they still had Harden, but that just speculation. OKC now has a core of four players 25 years old or younger that is the best 25 and under core in the league...by far. And they're still, already, one of the 3-5 best teams in the league when healthy. I'm somewhat hesitant to include Reggie Jackson in that "core four" until I see him take on an entire season or two with an increased role, but still. But those four players (KD, Russ, Ibaka, and Reggie) should and probably will continue to improve their games in some aspect for the next 3-5 years. Then there's another group of young, unproven players who I think have good skills and specific abilities that could allow for them to be good role players: Lamb, PJ3, Steven Adams, and Andre Roberson. So, that's potentially an entire 8-man rotation for the Thunder in the future where everyone is currently 25 years old or younger. Obviously the lesser guys like Jackson, Lamb, Jones, Adams, and Roberson need to develop and at least master something that makes them a valuable role player, but time is still on OKC's side to some degree.


And people have to understand Harden was never going to truly flourish in OKC, and under the new CBA being repeat tax offenders will be brutal to small market teams. That's the only and main reason I think OKC's front office was a little frugal this year. They knew after this season, and for the foreseeable future, they were going to be paying the luxury tax...so why not try to stay under it one more year so the repeat offender penalties don't kick in a year sooner? What FA were they going to sign that would've really, without a doubt, put them over the top? This also gives them a year or so to see what they've got in some of their young guys, and assess whether or not they want them to be a part of their future plans.

Is any of that ideal? Of course not. And, as an OKC fan, I'd be lying to you if I said I was 100% happy with how things have played out. But I understand most of the reasons behind their decisions, and know there's more to those decisions than what most fans know.

[ChuckOakley]

First off, it wasn't that they weren't willing to spend. They offered Harden a 4yr/$55M deal. He could've been making just under $14M/year on a contender in a 3rd option/2b role. And I don't think they were ever planning on re-signing Kevin Martin unless he was willing to take a paycut. He's on the wrong side of 30, is a terrible defender, can't create his own shot well enough and, most importantly, he wasn't ever going to be fully utilized in a 3rd/4th option role in OKC which also means he wasn't going to be worth the $7M+/year he wanted. That also sort of applies to Harden but to a greater extent.

But you missed my point...I think. Going by almost every statistical measure, OKC was better last year than they were in 2012. That's not to say they wouldn't have been even better if they still had Harden, but that just speculation. OKC now has a core of four players 25 years old or younger that is the best 25 and under core in the league...by far. And they're still, already, one of the 3-5 best teams in the league when healthy. I'm somewhat hesitant to include Reggie Jackson in that "core four" until I see him take on an entire season or two with an increased role, but still. But those four players (KD, Russ, Ibaka, and Reggie) should and probably will continue to improve their games in some aspect for the next 3-5 years. Then there's another group of young, unproven players who I think have good skills and specific abilities that could allow for them to be good role players: Lamb, PJ3, Steven Adams, and Andre Roberson. So, that's potentially an entire 8-man rotation for the Thunder in the future where everyone is currently 25 years old or younger. Obviously the lesser guys like Jackson, Lamb, Jones, Adams, and Roberson need to develop and at least master something that makes them a valuable role player, but time is still on OKC's side to some degree.


And people have to understand Harden was never going to truly flourish in OKC, and under the new CBA being repeat tax offenders will be brutal to small market teams. That's the only and main reason I think OKC's front office was a little frugal this year. They knew after this season, and for the foreseeable future, they were going to be paying the luxury tax...so why not try to stay under it one more year so the repeat offender penalties don't kick in a year sooner? What FA were they going to sign that would've really, without a doubt, put them over the top? This also gives them a year or so to see what they've got in some of their young guys, and assess whether or not they want them to be a part of their future plans.

Is any of that ideal? Of course not. And, as an OKC fan, I'd be lying to you if I said I was 100% happy with how things have played out. But I understand most of the reasons behind their decisions, and know there's more to those decisions than what most fans know.
Didn't Durant want Belinelli?
They could have signed him if they were willing to spend.

Plus I feel there is a contradiction here.. either they were willing to pay Harden and pay the tax or they weren't and still haven't.

Why do they have to pay the tax after this season?
Don't some players expire?
The tax should go up as well.

Even then I think it's BS that Bennett would move the team to a small market and use that as an excuse not to spend. He's worth $500m, one of his minority investors $1.5b and the group that owns the team as a whole is loaded.

[KG215]

Didn't Durant want Belinelli?
They could have signed him if they were willing to spend.

Plus I feel there is a contradiction here.. either they were willing to pay Harden and pay the tax or they weren't and still haven't.

Why do they have to pay the tax after this season?
Don't some players expire?
The tax should go up as well.

Even then I think it's BS that Bennett would move the team to a small market and use that as an excuse not to spend. He's worth $500m, one of his minority investors $1.5b and the group that owns the team as a whole is loaded.
The tax is going to be almost unavoidable going forward due to the increase in salary for Westbrook and Durant going forward. It'll depend on what they do with Thabo who is the only expirer. Some of the younger players have team options, but I think we'll pick all of those up with the exception of Thabeet.

And it's a fine line in my opinion, but just because they were willing to spend and go into the tax to keep Harden, doesn't mean they were necessarily willing to overspend for someone like Belinelli. That's a pretty big gap in ability, production, and impact. The front office has said they are will to spend and go into the luxury tax for the right player(s), and I don't think Belinelli is someone that would've definitively put them over the top.

And there's no, "plus, they were willing to pay Harden and spend the tax ore they weren't." The 4yr/$55M offer is a fact which means they would've had $60M+/year tied up in KD, Russ, Ibaka, and Harden had he accepted that offer. Add in all the other contracts for the rest of the team and they would've had a payroll of $75M+.