Least Talented Teams out of the Contenders

[Fudge]

1. Oklahoma City
2. Miami
3. Chicago
4. San Antonio
5. Los Angeles Clippers
6. Cleveland

[SupermanOnSteroids]

:biggums:

[J Shuttlesworth]

lol wtf?

Spurs are still the most talented team in the league, if healthy.

This Cavs team has never played together. Having the years of experience that the Thunder has and the talent makes them the 2nd most talented team in the league. Same for Clippers.

Miami is not the 2nd most talented team in the league

Spurs
Thunder
Cavs
Clippers
Bulls

[Fudge]

Miami is not the 2nd most talented team in the league
Who said this? :biggums:

[T_L_P]

Thunder are first.

Thunder fans can't even decide if Durant or Westbrook is their best player, and one of them is the MVP.

Two of the top 1 players in the league. :eek

[J Shuttlesworth]

Thunder are first.

Thunder fans can't even decide if Durant or Westbrook is their best player, and one of them is the MVP.

Two of the top 1 players in the league. :eek
I could agree with this, but Popovich puts the Spurs over the edge IMO. Age is a factor, but I swear i've been saying that every year and they always prove me wrong :lol

[Young X]

OKC has the MVP and the "best PG" why are they 1st?

[J Shuttlesworth]

OKC has the MVP and the "best PG" why are they 1st?
Obviously, Fudge has no faith in KD or the Thunder, and is doing early damage control for when they lose this year.

[Lebronxrings]

Like I said before okc and spurs are STACKED.

There is no way to beat them unless you have a mj cast or Kobe cast.

[Fudge]

OKC has the MVP and the "best PG" why are they 1st?
Meh, outside of those two and Ibaka, their roster is dog shit.

[Lebronxrings]

Also nice try putting cavs last. Agenda is plainly obvious.

[T_L_P]

I could agree with this, but Popovich puts the Spurs over the edge IMO. Age is a factor, but I swear i've been saying that every year and they always prove me wrong :lol

We're up there for sure. But I still think superstars are the most important thing. The Thunder have two megastars. The Spurs have two fringe-stars.

1. OKC
2. Clippers
3. Spurs/Cavs (talent, not necessarily chemistry

[JohnFreeman]

OKC is stacked

[J Shuttlesworth]

We're up there for sure. But I still think superstars are the most important thing. The Thunder have two megastars. The Spurs have two fringe-stars.

1. OKC
2. Clippers
3. Spurs/Cavs (talent, not necessarily chemistry
If you consider coaching, I'd say Pop counts as a superstar, definitely over Brooks or Blatt. I understand the reasoning behind putting OKC over the Spurs, and the Clippers too (especially if you consider CP3's choking in the equation)

[Le Shaqtus]

Like I said before okc and spurs are STACKED.

There is no way to beat them unless you have a mj cast or Kobe cast.

Except they got beat by the Mavs, the Grizz, and the Spurs respectively the last 4 years in the post season.

[Fudge]

Ooo tell em Shaqtus. Put some ether on dat sweet azz!!

[J Shuttlesworth]

Except they got beat by the Mavs, the Grizz, and the Spurs respectively the last 4 years in the post season.
On paper, they have all the player talent they need to win multiple chips.

They also have Brooks :roll:

The Heat also lost to the Mavs and the Spurs, and most ISHers have been saying that the 2014 Heat would have lost to the grizzlies in the first round.

[T_L_P]

If you consider coaching, I'd say Pop counts as a superstar, definitely over Brooks or Blatt. I understand the reasoning behind putting OKC over the Spurs, and the Clippers too (especially if you consider CP3's choking in the equation)

I personally wouldn't consider a coach part of the talent. If we do, how far do we take it? Is RC a star? Pat? Phil? I agree the Spurs have championship hopes and everything, but I read this thread as the best players. :confusedshrug:

When you look at the names on the page, Thunder/Clippers/Cacs are all slightly better than the Spurs imo. Coaching tips the favour in the Spurs' direction, but just looking at the squad? Spurs are the weakest of that bunch.