# Make Your Own Team Rankings.



## sportkingJSP13 (Jul 11, 2005)

Make Your Own Team Rankings.
This should be interesting


----------



## sportkingJSP13 (Jul 11, 2005)

1.Heat
2.Spurs
3.Pistons
4. Pacers
5. Nets
6. Suns
7. Rockets
8. Kings
9. Cavaliers
10. Nuggets
11. Warriors
12. Mavericks
13. Grizzlies
14. Knicks
15. Wizards
16. Lakers
17. Bucks
18. Clippers
19. Celtics
20. Bulls
21. Sonics
22. Timberwolves
23. Jazz
24. 76ers
25. Hawks
26. Magic
27. Trailblazers
28. Bobcats
29. Hornets
30. Raptors

^^^ Those are my rankings. What do you think?


----------



## Deke (Jul 27, 2005)

sportkingJSP13 said:


> 1.Heat
> 2.Spurs
> 3.Pistons
> 4. Pacers
> ...


so much bulls hate... we had the 3rd best record in the east. come on


----------



## mjm1 (Aug 22, 2005)

BenGordon said:


> so much bulls hate... we had the 3rd best record in the east. come on


if you do not lose curry, you will be exactly the same as last season, with the addition of darius. This will hurt your team, for every single team in the east has considerably improved. You better hope the bulls get something better than tt and sweetney in return for curry LOL.


----------



## NugzFan (Jul 26, 2002)

sportkingJSP13 said:


> 1.Heat
> 2.Spurs
> 3.Pistons
> 4. Pacers
> ...


heat should be higher. at least ranked 0.


----------



## NugzFan (Jul 26, 2002)

i think what hurts the bulls the most is not that they got worse but that teams like the cavs, bucks, new jersey, new york and indiana gained on them (or even passed them).

but they are underrated. not as good as last year but not as bad as people say.


----------



## casebeck22 (Jul 20, 2005)

sportkingJSP13 said:


> 1.Heat
> 2.Spurs
> 3.Pistons
> 4. Pacers
> ...


Heat are too high until they show me otherwise.


----------



## mjm1 (Aug 22, 2005)

whats interesting is that 4 out of the top 5 teams are in the east. its seems, that this offseason has brought a shift in power.


----------



## casebeck22 (Jul 20, 2005)

mjm1 said:


> whats interesting is that 4 out of the top 5 teams are in the east. its seems, that this offseason has brought a shift in power.


Your right. I think that this was put in motion a while ago. I could see it coming.


----------



## sportkingJSP13 (Jul 11, 2005)

is anyone gunna make their own.


----------



## mjm1 (Aug 22, 2005)

its very difficult to make Team Rankings before training camp. The lists some people make now, would only anger others. They tend to be homerish lol. I shall wait until just before the season begins, after preseason, to rank teams fairly.


----------



## sportkingJSP13 (Jul 11, 2005)

casebeck22 said:


> Heat are too high until they show me otherwise.


listen to their starting line up

pg- Jason Williams
sg- Dwayne Wade
sf- Antoine Walker
pf- Udonis Haslem
c- Shaq

you will stop them, spurs, maybe but still. THIS IS ONLY MY *OPINION*. You guys can make your own.


----------



## sportkingJSP13 (Jul 11, 2005)

mjm1 said:


> its very difficult to make Team Rankings before training camp. The lists some people make now, would only anger others. They tend to be homerish lol. I shall wait until just before the season begins, after preseason, to rank teams fairly.


yea I understand. But still, its fun to do. Training Camp is starting soon so we will see.


----------



## mjm1 (Aug 22, 2005)

sportkingJSP13 said:


> listen to their starting line up
> 
> pg- Jason Williams
> sg- Dwayne Wade
> ...


its a talent upgrade from last season, but the chemistry they _*had*_ on and off the court last year will never be the same again.


----------



## NugzFan (Jul 26, 2002)

mjm1 said:


> whats interesting is that 4 out of the top 5 teams are in the east. its seems, that this offseason has brought a shift in power.


whats more interesting is that you have concluded that there has been a shift in power based on some random fans power rankings. :eek8:


----------



## mjm1 (Aug 22, 2005)

NugzFan said:


> whats more interesting is that you have concluded that there has been a shift in power based on some random fans power rankings. :eek8:


dude, i agree with that list and believe it to be a realistic prediction, even if it is a little homerish to rank the heat over the defending champions.


----------



## Amareca (Oct 21, 2002)

The Nets are a top 5 team? LOL!


----------



## mjm1 (Aug 22, 2005)

Amareca said:


> The Nets are a top 5 team? LOL!


yup, they went on a 20-5 run at the end of the season with carter and kidd, with one of the worst benches. Now they have: Kidd Carter and Jefferson together in the beginning of the season, and the best bench in the kidd era (better than the bench they had in 2001.


----------



## casebeck22 (Jul 20, 2005)

Amareca said:


> The Nets are a top 5 team? LOL!


You are the man, you get my rep for that. No way the Nets are a top five team. Someone give me a reason why they are a top five team with no post man when these teams are in the league:
Miami, Detroit, Indiana, San Antonio, Phoenix. Those are five easy pics that prove that New Jersey is not a top five team.


----------



## Amareca (Oct 21, 2002)

The Nets aren't even a top 10 team. Their big men are worse than the average 4/5 backup players.


----------



## sportkingJSP13 (Jul 11, 2005)

casebeck22 said:


> You are the man, you get my rep for that. No way the Nets are a top five team. Someone give me a reason why they are a top five team with no post man when these teams are in the league:
> Miami, Detroit, Indiana, San Antonio, Phoenix. Those are five easy pics that prove that New Jersey is not a top five team.


Suns b4 the Nets...hah you make me laugh.


----------



## mjm1 (Aug 22, 2005)

casebeck22 said:


> You are the man, you get my rep for that. No way the Nets are a top five team. Someone give me a reason why they are a top five team with no post man when these teams are in the league:
> Miami, Detroit, Indiana, San Antonio, Phoenix. Those are five easy pics that prove that New Jersey is not a top five team.


Kidd>Nash (depends on health)
Carter>Marion (no question)
Amare>Collins (do i have to explain)
Krstic> Kurt Thomas (krstic younger and more potential)
Our bench is arguably equal to if not better then the Suns.


----------



## sportkingJSP13 (Jul 11, 2005)

I'm not a Nets fan but I still think Nets have got Suns beat.


----------



## mjm1 (Aug 22, 2005)

sportkingJSP13 said:


> I'm not a Nets fan and I'm not a Pacers Fan but still I think Nets got Pacers beat


reps to you, we have beaten the pacers in every playoff series. Now i wanna see the pacers without Reggie Miller


----------



## Amareca (Oct 21, 2002)

Nets fans are officially idiots.

"Kidd>Nash (depends on health)
Carter>Marion (no question)
Amare>Collins (do i have to explain)
Krstic> Kurt Thomas (krstic younger and more potential)"

This ist total BS.

I could just say Nash+Amare > All Nets players combined.

Can't wait to see Amare destroy your pathetic big man this season.


----------



## VeN (May 10, 2005)

Oh come on, look where he placed the Mavs.... Under the Cavs? Rockets? Warriors?! Nuggets? KINGS? OMFG... SO MUCH Mavs Hate. I could go on and on with those rankings. 

Anyways..

1. San Antonio
2. Pistons
3. Pacers
4. Heat
5. Suns (debatable this season, dont think theyll be as good as last year.)
6. Mavs 
7. Nuggets
8. Rockets
9. Sonics
10. Lakers (will surprise this year and I hate them..)
11. Bulls


----------



## X-Factor (Aug 24, 2004)

VeN said:


> 1. San Antonio
> 2. Pistons
> 3. Pacers
> 4. Heat
> ...


Mavs are too high, and Sonics and Lakers are not Top 10 teams. Call me crazy, but I think the Nuggets are going to be better then the Suns this year.


----------



## reHEATed (Jun 29, 2003)

1. Spurs
2. Heat
3. Pacers
4. Pistons
5. Houston
6. Suns
7. Kings
8. Mavs
9. Nuggets
10. Nets
11. Cavs

middle teams are a wash like usual

25. Jazz
26. Magic
27. Blazers
28. Hawks
29. Raptors
30. Hornets


----------



## NJ+VC (Feb 8, 2005)

Kidd>Nash
Carter>Marion
Jefferson>Jackson
Collins<Amare
Kristic<Thomas

But individual stats don't tell the story.....


----------



## sportkingJSP13 (Jul 11, 2005)

Amareca said:


> Nets fans are officially idiots.
> 
> "Kidd>Nash (depends on health)
> Carter>Marion (no question)
> ...


^^^ way wrong. You are gunna say that the Nash&Amare combination is better than Richard Jefferson, Vince Carter, & J-Kidd combination. wow! you need to rethink your facts.


----------



## Seuss (Aug 19, 2005)

1. Bobcats
2. Hornets
3. Bulls
4. Clippers
5. Hawks



That should make everyone happy =)


----------



## Ron Mexico (Feb 14, 2004)

1.Heat
1.Spurs
1.Pistons
1. Pacers
1. Nets
1. Suns
1. Rockets
1. Kings
1. Cavaliers
1. Nuggets
1. Warriors
1. Mavericks
1. Grizzlies
1. Knicks
1. Wizards
1. Lakers
1. Bucks
1. Clippers
1. Celtics
1. Bulls
1. Sonics
1. Timberwolves
1. Jazz
1. 76ers
1. Hawks
1. Magic
1. Trailblazers
1. Bobcats
1. Hornets
1. Raptors


----------



## Seuss (Aug 19, 2005)

lol Ron you put my quote in your signature. Yay!


----------



## DWadeistheTruth (Apr 25, 2005)

Top 10 f the scrub teams
1 Spurs
2Indiana
3Miami
4Detroit
5Phoenix
6Dallas
7Houston
8Denver
9Nets
10Sacramento


----------



## mjm1 (Aug 22, 2005)

DWadeistheTruth said:


> Top 10 f the scrub teams
> 1 Spurs
> 2Indiana
> 3Miami
> ...


tis a good list, better than many ive seen.


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

SunsFan57 said:


> lol Ron you put my quote in your signature. Yay!


I think it's a marvelous quote. While being funny, it expresses the xenophobia of Americans, comparing unfavorable characteristics of a poster to people of different countries. The generalization seems innocent, though, and that is what makes it special. Without realising it, society has made a racist out of all of us.

:rofl:


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

mjm1 said:


> reps to you, we have beaten the pacers in every playoff series. Now i wanna see the pacers without Reggie Miller


Get real. You Nets trolls are hillarious. Nets are not a top tier team, get it through your ****ing head. Your getting very annoying.


----------



## mjm1 (Aug 22, 2005)

R-Star said:


> Get real. You Nets trolls are hillarious. Nets are not a top tier team, get it through your ****ing head. Your getting very annoying.


get this through your ****ing head, neither are the pacers if ron artest continues his lunatic ways!


----------



## Seuss (Aug 19, 2005)

Premier said:


> I think it's a marvelous quote. While being funny, it expresses the xenophobia of Americans, comparing unfavorable characteristics of a poster to people of different countries. The generalization seems innocent, though, and that is what makes it special. Without realising it, society has made a racist out of all of us.
> 
> :rofl:





rep for you!


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

mjm1 said:


> get this through your ****ing head, neither are the pacers if ron artest continues his lunatic ways!


Taken from RPMcMurphy:



> If they think we're going into the stands again, then they have the I.Q. of a rabbit. - _Stephen Jackson_


----------



## mjm1 (Aug 22, 2005)

Premier said:


> Taken from RPMcMurphy:


i dont think he would be stupid enough to attack another fan, but i dont think he can grasp the mental aspect of the game.


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

Artest has more basketball intelligence than most players in the league. Just watch him on defense. He understands much more than the average NBA player.

Oh, and about his attitude? Charles Barkley says hi.


----------



## mjm1 (Aug 22, 2005)

Premier said:


> Artest has more basketball intelligence than most players in the league. Just watch him on defense. He understands much more than the average NBA player.
> 
> Oh, and about his attitude? Charles Barkley says hi.


lol, ok ok. i wasnt saying anything about his intelligence. its just, it seems like he cant keep his head in the game with him pursuing a career in music and such.


----------



## NugzFan (Jul 26, 2002)

mjm1 said:


> dude, i agree with that list and believe it to be a realistic prediction, even if it is a little homerish to rank the heat over the defending champions.


oh i see - this totally justifies the "shift of power"


----------



## mjm1 (Aug 22, 2005)

NugzFan said:


> oh i see - this totally justifies the "shift of power"


when 4 out of 5 of the top teams are in the east. YES


----------



## joshed_up (Aug 6, 2005)

sportkingJSP13 said:


> 1.Heat
> 2.Spurs
> 3.Pistons
> 4. Pacers
> ...


wow, im a Nets fan, but Nets over Rockets?? :eek8: 
Kings over Mavericks?


----------



## NugzFan (Jul 26, 2002)

mjm1 said:


> yup, they went on a 20-5 run at the end of the season with carter and kidd, with one of the worst benches. Now they have: Kidd Carter and Jefferson together in the beginning of the season, and the best bench in the kidd era (better than the bench they had in 2001.


get lost - they went 17-8 (23-14 if you extend it longer) in the east and still have an average-at-best bench (presently...no one cares that kidd USED to have weaker benches) and a weak frontcourt. not top 5. period.


----------



## NugzFan (Jul 26, 2002)

sportkingJSP13 said:


> I'm not a Nets fan but I still think Nets have got Suns beat.


no friggin way. suns are a little waeker than last year but they are still great. definitely better than new jersey.


----------



## joshed_up (Aug 6, 2005)

wadeshaqeddie said:


> 1. Spurs
> 2. Heat
> 3. Pacers
> 4. Pistons
> ...


Mavs above Kings, Nuggets above Suns(maybe?)


----------



## NugzFan (Jul 26, 2002)

X-Factor said:


> Mavs are too high, and Sonics and Lakers are not Top 10 teams. Call me crazy, but I think the Nuggets are going to be better then the Suns this year.


i wish but i doubt it.


----------



## joshed_up (Aug 6, 2005)

DWadeistheTruth said:


> Top 10 f the scrub teams
> 1 Spurs
> 2Indiana
> 3Miami
> ...


this is a great list. no way Nets are top 5 though im a fan.
but a question on Indiana over Miami? 
i believe Dallas/Houston/Denver/Phoenix MIGHT be interchangeable.


----------



## NugzFan (Jul 26, 2002)

sportkingJSP13 said:


> ^^^ way wrong. You are gunna say that the Nash&Amare combination is better than Richard Jefferson, Vince Carter, & J-Kidd combination. wow! you need to rethink your facts.



throw marion in there and the suns trio beats the nets trio. suns>nets.


----------



## Brolic (Aug 6, 2005)

how does Denver look against the Suns?


----------



## NugzFan (Jul 26, 2002)

mjm1 said:


> when 4 out of 5 of the top teams are in the east. YES


the joke is you think that 4 of the 5 best teams are in the east based on some kids power rankings, that you happen to agree with :laugh:


----------



## mjm1 (Aug 22, 2005)

NugzFan said:


> no friggin way. suns are *a little waeker* than last year but they are still great. definitely better than new jersey.


nice spelling, and UNDERSTATEMENT. Joe Johnson and q-rich gone. Kurt Thomas, Grant, and raja bell in return. Wow now thats great!


----------



## NugzFan (Jul 26, 2002)

kamaze said:


> how does Denver look against the Suns?


not good. swept us last year. tough matchup for us because they can out run us. 

might be a little easier this year since theyve lost alot of their outside threats which makes it easier to double amare. 

maybe 2-2 split.


----------



## mjm1 (Aug 22, 2005)

NugzFan said:


> the joke is you think that 4 of the 5 best teams are in the east based on some kids power rankings, that you happen to agree with :laugh:


no, its the basic consensus of all major sports writers that the east, is in fact, stronger than the west at this time.


----------



## NugzFan (Jul 26, 2002)

mjm1 said:


> nice spelling, and UNDERSTATEMENT. Joe Johnson and q-rich gone. Kurt Thomas, Grant, and raja bell in return. Wow now thats great!


heer, enjoiy corecting thiss speling - no1 kares aboot speling. 

and yes the suns arent as good but considering they were AWESOME last year and far above the nets, they are still a great team and still better than the nets. wtf is up with your 2nd grade logic?

do you think every team that improves is better than every team that gets worse?


----------



## X-Factor (Aug 24, 2004)

NugzFan said:


> i wish but i doubt it.


The Suns lost two of there starting five players from last year. And look at what the Nuggets did after the break last year. They made a change and something clicked. Mark this: Nuggets are going to be the Three seed in the West next year.


----------



## mjm1 (Aug 22, 2005)

X-Factor said:


> The Suns lost two of there starting five players from last year. And look at what the Nuggets did after the break last year. They made a change and something clicked. Mark this: Nuggets are going to be the Three seed in the West next year.


well yea, theyll win there division with no problem guaranteeing them at least the third seed.


----------



## NugzFan (Jul 26, 2002)

mjm1 said:


> no, its the basic consensus of all major sports writers that the east, is in fact, stronger than the west at this time.


:laugh: great stuff man. great stuff.


----------



## NugzFan (Jul 26, 2002)

X-Factor said:


> The Suns lost two of there starting five players from last year. And look at what the Nuggets did after the break last year. They made a change and something clicked. Mark this: Nuggets are going to be the Three seed in the West next year.


and the suns will be #2. i think we are good but the suns are great.


----------



## mjm1 (Aug 22, 2005)

NugzFan said:


> and the suns will be #2. i think we are good but the suns are great.


they will not be #2


----------



## mjm1 (Aug 22, 2005)

NugzFan said:


> :laugh: great stuff man. great stuff.


dude, its the truth! the east is stronger than the west.


----------



## NugzFan (Jul 26, 2002)

mjm1 said:


> they will not be #2


who wins the pacific?


----------



## mjm1 (Aug 22, 2005)

NugzFan said:


> who wins the pacific?


the kings will give them a run for their money.


----------



## NugzFan (Jul 26, 2002)

mjm1 said:


> the kings will give them a run for their money.


you seem to be implying the suns are the favorites to win the division.

who wins the pacific this year?


----------



## mjm1 (Aug 22, 2005)

NugzFan said:


> you seem to be implying the suns are the favorites to win the division.
> 
> who wins the pacific this year?


the suns will be considered the favorites when the season starts. However, i see the kings winning the division.


----------



## reHEATed (Jun 29, 2003)

I think the east has 3 of the top 5, but then a lot of west teams come after that (Suns, Kings, Mavs, Nuggets all before Nets). The east is topheavy while the west is a lot more competitive and well rounded


----------



## Air Fly (Apr 19, 2005)

1. Spurs
2. Miami
3. Detroit
4. Huston
5. Pacers
6. Dallas
7. Phoenix
8. Nets
9. Kings
10. Sonics

Thank you very much.


----------



## mjm1 (Aug 22, 2005)

Air Fly said:


> 1. Spurs
> 2. Miami
> 3. Detroit
> 4. Huston
> ...


now compare that list to two seasons ago.


----------



## IbizaXL (Sep 21, 2005)

right now im feeling lazy, so ill just rank the top 10. maybe later ill rank the other teams

1. Spurs (by default)
2. Heat
3. Pacers
4. Rockets
5. Suns
6. Pistons
7. Nuggets
8. Kings
9. Nets
10. Mavericks

anyone who thinks otherwise, let me know! if im convinced by what you say.....i might change my rankings! ( mark stein aint ****! lol) :biggrin:


----------



## Brolic (Aug 6, 2005)

the Mavs will be better than the Nets not so sure about Sac though


----------



## IbizaXL (Sep 21, 2005)

yeah dude your right, damn, wtf was i thinking?......


----------



## IbizaXL (Sep 21, 2005)

1. Spurs (by default)
2. Heat
3. Pacers
4. Rockets
5. Suns
6. Pistons
7. Nuggets
8. Mavericks
9. Kings
10. Nets

ok....to me that pretty much feels right..


----------



## mjm1 (Aug 22, 2005)

gio30584 said:


> 1. Spurs (by default)
> 2. Heat
> 3. Pacers
> 4. Rockets
> ...


for the kings, this season lies in the hands of peja.


----------



## Brolic (Aug 6, 2005)

I took your ranking just switched a little(reg season)

1Spurs
2Heat
3Pacers
4Nuggets
5Suns
6Rockets 
7Pistons
8Mavericks
9Nets 
10kings


----------



## VeN (May 10, 2005)

X-Factor said:


> Mavs are too high, and Sonics and Lakers are not Top 10 teams. Call me crazy, but I think the Nuggets are going to be better then the Suns this year.



OK look again and tell me, who below the Mavs are better..

1. San Antonio
2. Pistons
3. Pacers
4. Heat
5. Suns (debatable this season, dont think theyll be as good as last year.)
6. Mavs
7. Nuggets
8. Rockets
9. Sonics
10. Lakers (will surprise this year and I hate them..)
11. Bulls

I would think its pretty obvious how this list came about.. And I still think its questionable about the Suns. ALthough Houston MAY surprise and be better than the Nugs. The Lakers and Bulls are my two wildcard teams to surprise this year too. I think the reunion of Kobe and Phil means success for the Lakers. While the Bulls will continue to be good like last season.


----------



## mjm1 (Aug 22, 2005)

VeN said:


> OK look again and tell me, who below the Mavs are better..
> 
> 1. San Antonio
> 2. Pistons
> ...


where are the nets???


----------



## Brolic (Aug 6, 2005)

ven I dont know about the sonics Lakers and the Bulls


----------



## VeN (May 10, 2005)

kamaze said:


> ven I dont know about the sonics Lakers and the Bulls


yea i know but i like those teams  lol

hey everyone had a little fanboy in their ranklings


----------



## VeN (May 10, 2005)

1. San Antonio
2. Pistons
3. Pacers
4. Heat
5. Suns (debatable this season, dont think theyll be as good as last year.)
6. Mavs
7. Nuggets
8. Rockets
9. Nets (may flip flop with the Rockets)
10. Cavs


----------



## DWadeistheTruth (Apr 25, 2005)

VeN said:


> yea i know but i like those teams  lol
> 
> hey everyone had a little fanboy in their ranklings


Not me. I had the Spurs and Indiana over the Heat. When it comes to this stuff, I don't like to do homer picks. Is never been my thing.


----------



## VeN (May 10, 2005)

So did I, but I guess Im a little bias on the lower tier teams. And yea, Im a Mavs fan, that placed the Suns higher (although I think we will be better this season)


----------



## IbizaXL (Sep 21, 2005)

im glad the east is getting better! im basing this on many ppl rankings and other places. it seems many agree that the East is beginning to get alot more respect. im tired of hearing some ppl say how some elite teams like the pacers, pistons, heat, benefit for being in the "weaker" eastern conference. well this upcoming season were going to have to include the cavaliers, and speciailly the nets. as for the celtics and bulls.....they got awesome young talent and if they keep developing and adding talent to their rosters, a couple of season from now theyll be among the elite also. heck, they might even surprise this season. anyway, just wanted to point that out.


----------



## ravor44 (Feb 26, 2005)

Ron Mexico said:


> 1.Heat
> 1.Spurs
> 1.Pistons
> 1. Pacers
> ...


this is the best list..lol :clap: :cheers:


----------



## IbizaXL (Sep 21, 2005)

damn! i forgot that suns lost joe johnson and Q. Rich, two guys from their starting lineups
1. Spurs (by default)
2. Heat
3. Pacers
4. Rockets
5. Pistons
6. Suns
7. Nuggets
8. Mavericks
9. Kings
10. Nets

....slight change in my rankings....lol 
i put pistons over suns...


----------



## NugzFan (Jul 26, 2002)

mjm1 said:


> where are the nets???


new jersey. for now.


----------



## joshed_up (Aug 6, 2005)

NugzFan said:


> new jersey. for now.


probably wouldn't mind if they stayed there. lol.


----------



## sportkingJSP13 (Jul 11, 2005)

joshed_up said:


> wow, im a Nets fan, but Nets over Rockets?? :eek8:
> Kings over Mavericks?


ok this is my last time saying this, That was my OPINION!!!! If you dont like my rankings then make your own and we'll see what yours looks like.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

Preseason Rankings for me

1. San Antonio - World champs enuff said
2. Indiana - weaker version had best record 2 years ago
3. Detroit - still dangerous and deeper than last year
4. Phoenix - Amare is the new shiznit
5. Miami - Shaq just got paid, he won't play 70 this season.
6. Dallas - They have plenty of replacements for Finley's production
7. Sacremento - Peja and Bonzi playing for contracts; might have chemistry issues
8. Houston - Lot of health concerns on this team
9. Cleveland - LeBron has plenty surrounding him this time
10. Denver - Teams will match their intensity this season. Can they match it for 82 games?
11. New Jersey - This team has no post depth
12. Memphis - Will Pau Gasol take the next step?
13. Philadelphia - If this team had some depth they could be higher
14. Lakers - Kobe gets into the playoffs this year
15. Washington - Gilbert Arenas is better than you think.
16. New York - Stephon Marbury stakes his claim for real this time.

17. Minnesota - How long will KG accept this?
18. Chicago - Will struggle all season long
19. Milwaukee - If Bogut is better than I think they go higher
20. Seattle - Caught lightning in a bottle last season
21. Orlando - Could see Hill dealt this season
22. Golden State - Teams will be ready for them this season
23. Utah - Luster comes off AK47 this season
24. Boston - This team wasn't that good without Toine
25. Clippers - Same old Clippers
26. Atlanta - Not yet
27. Portland - the new young guns
28. Toronto - future superstar talk for Bosh dies down
29. Charlotte - better talent but other are better 
30. New Orleans - Might be better than I think depending on Paul


----------



## sportkingJSP13 (Jul 11, 2005)

ravor44 said:


> this is the best list..lol :clap: :cheers:


it is ALMOST identical to mine.


----------



## sportkingJSP13 (Jul 11, 2005)

MemphisX said:


> Preseason Rankings for me
> 
> 1. San Antonio - World champs enuff said
> 2. Indiana - weaker version had best record 2 years ago
> ...


pretty good, exept you have Miami at 5:eek8:  :naughty:


----------



## sportkingJSP13 (Jul 11, 2005)

Preseason has started so I think time to bring this back up! Start Posting.


----------



## Deke (Jul 27, 2005)

i'm kinda getting tired reading these predictions. almost every thread i end up mentioning the bulls still underrated. i will say this though, would you give up on the nets chances of making the playoffs if nenad got injured in a preseason game for the entire regular season? i doubt it, at least i hope. and curry probably isnt even as good a player as nenad.


----------



## farhan007 (Jun 6, 2003)

VeN said:


> 1. San Antonio
> 2. Pistons
> 3. Pacers
> 4. Heat
> ...


wow... that is one crappy list... nets on the same tier as rockets??? wha???? give a god damn explination please!!


----------



## Auggie (Mar 7, 2004)

spurs
heat 
pistons
pacers
suns
rockets
cavs
nuggets
nets
mavs
kings


----------



## NugzFan (Jul 26, 2002)

farhan007 said:


> wow... that is one crappy list... nets on the same tier as rockets??? wha???? give a god damn explination please!!


homer


----------



## farhan007 (Jun 6, 2003)

NugzFan said:


> homer


lol... how many people here actually think the nets are better than the rockets?

im a homer because i think the rockets are better than nets?


----------



## THE'clip'SHOW (Sep 24, 2002)

MemphisX said:


> Preseason Rankings for me
> 
> 1. San Antonio - World champs enuff said
> 2. Indiana - weaker version had best record 2 years ago
> ...


Damn your posts always make me laugh.

Kobe gets into the playoffs huh? Did you watch any games last year. Oh yeah I forgot their gonna have Smush Parker start at PG they'll get 50-60 wins. Crazy. 
I like to comment on the clippers because I obviously follow them closest. How does it make any sense to say "25. Clippers - Same old Clippers"? Whats the same?

Half of the quotes next to your picks are rediculous. 
28. Toronto - Future superstar talk for Bosh dies down. 
18. Chicago - Will struggle all season long. 

I guess I really dont expect much, but a good laugh.


----------



## NugzFan (Jul 26, 2002)

farhan007 said:


> lol... how many people here actually think the nets are better than the rockets?
> 
> im a homer because i think the rockets are better than nets?


no. the rockets are better than the nets.

but you are still a homer.


----------



## VeN (May 10, 2005)

farhan007 said:


> wow... that is one crappy list... nets on the same tier as rockets??? wha???? give a god damn explination please!!



That was before the trades theyve made this offseason. Check the date before you flip out..


----------



## TonyMontana_83 (Dec 4, 2004)

> but you are still a homer.


I am rubber and you are glue, what you say bounces off of me and sticks to you. :tongue:

Here's my list. Feel free to name-call, attack and be in bewilderement.


1. *San Antonio*- duh
2. *Miami Heat*- Time to see what Stan Van Gundy is made out of
3. *Indiana Pacers*- I expect them to pick up where they left off before the brawl.
4. *Houston Rockets*- A little high for them? Maybe, maybe not.
5. *Detroit Pistons*- It'll be fun watching them play a higher tempo offense this year.
6. *Dallas Mavericks*- Can they make it past the 2nd round this year? Intuition says not
7. *Denver Nuggets*- Gosh damn it, I can't believe I'm doing this.
8. *Phoenix Suns*- When Stoudemire comes back bump them up to top 5.
9. *Cleveland Cavaliers*- I love the Larry Hughes/Lebron James combination. 
10. *Chicago Bulls*- I like Curry, but the Bulls might have gotten addition by subtraction here.
11. *Seattle Sonics*- Until proven otherwise, the Sonics are near the top 5 in the West.
12. *New Jersey Nets*- Will last year's hot finish trickle over to this year? Probably not.
13. *Memphis Grizzlies*- They have many doubters to prove wrong this year, including myself.
14. *Golden State Warriors*- Is B.Diddy really the leader Golden State so badly needs.
15. *Washington Wizards*- Antonio Daniels will not be able to replace Larry Hughes.
16. *Sacramento Kings*- Anybody who doesn't like this: You go to hell- you hear me? You go to hell and you die.
17. *Utah Jazz*- The Jazz finally have a quality PG and are finally healthy. Two huge positives.
18. *LA Lakers*- They will miss the playoffs again. Sorry Lala land. Too much competition.
19. *New York Knicks*- They would be lower if it wasn't for Larry Brown's arrival.
20. *Minnesota Timberwolves*- Garnett will keep them from being horrible.
21. *Milwaulkee Bucks*- mmmm, that reminds me, I need some beer. Anyways, I'm not sold on Bogut.
22. *Philedelphia 76ers*- Their GM is such an idiot. Chris Webber needs to hang 'em up.
23. *Portland TrailBlazers*- They aren't as bad as some people think.
24. *Boston Celtics*- Somebody, anybody, please save Paul Pierce from this sinking ship.
25. *Atlanta Hawks*- They might win over 30 games this year. Hooray.
26. *Los Angeles Clippers*- They should be 5 spots higher. Oh well.
27. *Orlando Magic*- Quickly becoming the NBA's forgotten team.
28. *Toronto Raptors*- Sam Mitchell should not be an NBA coach, in fact, he shouldn't be coaching anywhere.
29. *Charlotte Bobcats*- Blah Blah Blah Blah, who gives a ****.
30. *New Orleans Hornets*- Good luck Chris Paul, you're gonna need it.


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

Boston is a sinking ship?

They have a future star in Al Jefferson, someone who could either become a star or be a complete bust in Gerald Green, someone who is one of the best defenders in the league in Tony Allen, someone who can defend and rebound in Kendrick Perkins, someone who can distribute the ball in Dan Dickau, and someone who could potentially end up as a good starting point guard in Marcus Banks.

They will be decent (38-42 wins) this season, but they have a nice future lined up for them with two '07 selections.


----------



## TonyMontana_83 (Dec 4, 2004)

Premier said:


> Boston is a sinking ship?
> 
> They have a future star in Al Jefferson, someone who could either become a star or be a complete bust in Gerald Green, someone who is one of the best defenders in the league in Tony Allen, someone who can defend and rebound in Kendrick Perkins, someone who can distribute the ball in Dan Dickau, and someone who could potentially end up as a good starting point guard in Marcus Banks.
> 
> They will be decent (38-42 wins) this season, but they have a nice future lined up for them with two '07 selections.



Ok, let me rephrase then. Somebody, anybody please save Paul Pierce from this sinking ship; which may or may not be resurrected in the near future.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

THE'clip'SHOW said:


> Damn your posts always make me laugh.
> 
> Kobe gets into the playoffs huh? Did you watch any games last year. Oh yeah I forgot their gonna have Smush Parker start at PG they'll get 50-60 wins. Crazy.
> I like to comment on the clippers because I obviously follow them closest. How does it make any sense to say "25. Clippers - Same old Clippers"? *Whats the same?*
> ...



The Clippers still have no depth and a bunch of me first gunners.

Toronto sucks and Bosh is going to settle into being a very good but not great player.

Chicago will struggle to score points especially against upper level defenses.


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

TonyMontana_83 said:


> Ok, let me rephrase then. Somebody, anybody please save Paul Pierce from this sinking ship; which may or may not be resurrected in the near future.


It is not like Boston does not have any veteran players aside from Pierce. Ricky Davis is an above-average starting wing player. Raef LaFrentz is a capable starting big man. Mark Blount, well, Mark Blount can shoot.

Boston is a 'mediocre' ship that will improve with the development of its young players.


----------



## NugzFan (Jul 26, 2002)

TonyMontana_83 said:


> I am rubber and you are glue, what you say bounces off of me and sticks to you. :tongue:


i liked you better when you were rude and confrontational.


----------



## TonyMontana_83 (Dec 4, 2004)

NugzFan said:


> i liked you better when you were rude and confrontational.


 That's a shame.


----------



## THE'clip'SHOW (Sep 24, 2002)

MemphisX said:


> The Clippers still have no depth and a bunch of me first gunners.


NO DEPTH!

C - Chris Kaman, Z Rebraca, C. Wilcox
PF - Elton Brand, C. Wilcox, W McCarty, J Singleton
SF - Corey Maggette, W McCarty, Y Koralev, R White, Singleton
SG - Cuttino Mobley, Q Ross, D Ewing
PG - Sam Cassel, S Livingston, D Ewing

You wish you had that depth. 

That has to be one of the most versatile teams in the league. All of these players can play more than one position -
Cassel
Livingston
Ewing
Mobley
Maggette
McCarty
Singleton
Wilcox

Ross could play SF because of superb defense and White could also play SG if he had to.
Thats 10 players who play multiple positions.

Try again.


----------



## NugzFan (Jul 26, 2002)

THE'clip'SHOW said:


> NO DEPTH!
> 
> C - Chris Kaman, Z Rebraca, C. Wilcox
> PF - Elton Brand, C. Wilcox, W McCarty, J Singleton
> ...



again, just HAVING 12 or more guys doesnt make you deep.

every team has 12 or more guys. you listed too many scrubs to be considered a deep team. nice starting 5 but the bench? eh.


----------



## farhan007 (Jun 6, 2003)

VeN said:


> That was before the trades theyve made this offseason. Check the date before you flip out..


even before the trades the rockets were better by a pretty good margin


----------



## sportkingJSP13 (Jul 11, 2005)

this is funny wathcing everyone fight over this. hah:laugh:


----------



## sportkingJSP13 (Jul 11, 2005)

I'm still gunna stick with my ratings. but i still wanna see othe ideas.


----------



## Ras (Jul 25, 2005)

*1)* San Antonio
*2)* Indiana
*3)* Miami
*4)* Detroit
*5)* Houston
*6)* Dallas
*7)* Denver
*8)* Cleveland
*9)* Sacramento
*10)* Seattle
*11)* Milwaukee
*12)* Philadelphia
*13)* New Jersey
*14)* LA Lakers
*15)* Washington
*16)* Chicago
*17)* Golden State
*18)* Orlando
*19)* New York
*20)* Utah
*21)* Minnesota
*22)* Boston
*23)* Memphis
*24)* Phoenix (without Amare)
*25)* LA Clippers
*26)* Portland
*27)* Toronto
*28)* Atlanta
*29)* Charlotte
*30)* New Orleans


I didn't put much thought into this list, so don't get too opinionated on it.


----------



## Free Arsenal (Nov 8, 2004)

I'm going Conference by Conference.

East:
1. Heat
2. Pacers
3. Nets
4. Pistons
5. Bulls
6. Wizards
7. Knicks
8. Sixers
9. Caveliars
10. Celtics
11. Magic
12. Bucks
13. Bobcats
14. Hawks
15. Toronto

West
1. Houston
2. Spurs
3. Denver
4. Kings
5. Dallas
6. Clippers
7. Suns
8. Lakers
9. Warriors
10. Sonics
11. Minnesota
12. Utah
13. Trail Blazers
14. Hornets
15. Grizzlies


----------



## farhan007 (Jun 6, 2003)

Free Arsenal said:


> I'm going Conference by Conference.
> 
> East:
> 1. Heat
> ...


wow... hold up there.... im the biggest rocket homer as it gets... but Rockets>Spurs???? not yet...


----------



## Free Arsenal (Nov 8, 2004)

farhan007 said:


> wow... hold up there.... im the biggest rocket homer as it gets... but Rockets>Spurs???? not yet...


I'm going by record, not by what happens in the playoffs. Rockets will get a fast start, and if I know JVG from the days I used to be a Knick homer, it will only get better, but they won't be as good as the Spurs in the late season.

Spurs always seem to start slow, so I don't think they'll catch the Rockets in record when time comes to playoffs.


----------



## farhan007 (Jun 6, 2003)

Free Arsenal said:


> I'm going by record, not by what happens in the playoffs. Rockets will get a fast start, and if I know JVG from the days I used to be a Knick homer, it will only get better, but they won't be as good as the Spurs in the late season.
> 
> Spurs always seem to start slow, so I don't think they'll catch the Rockets in record when time comes to playoffs.


it is a good posibility that the rockets could have a better record than the spurs in the regular season but at the end of the day the spurs more than likely will do better in the real season...


----------



## Free Arsenal (Nov 8, 2004)

farhan007 said:


> it is a good posibility that the rockets could have a better record than the spurs in the regular season but at the end of the day the spurs more than likely will do better in the real season...


Oh, put me in the "told you so" section in your sig. :biggrin:


----------



## supermati (Mar 28, 2005)

1) San Antonio
2) Miami
3) Detroit
4) Indiana
5) Houston
6) Suns
7) Nuggs
8) Cavaliers
9) Dallas
10) Seattle


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

sportkingJSP13 said:


> listen to their starting line up
> 
> pg- Jason Williams
> sg- Dwayne Wade
> ...


Ok, I didn't read any comments past this one... but... yeah.

You're only 12, so at 10, I doubt you were paying attention when the Lakers signed Gary Payton and Karl Malone and the basketball world was crapping in their pants about the Lakers breaking hte all time 72-10 win record with their 4 hall of fame players. That team looks great on paper, and based on sheer talent alone, will win 50 or more games, but I will be very suprised to see them win against the Pistons or the Spurs. Stan Van Gundy is a nice coach, not great, but hes ok. However, he is going to have a hard time getting this team to play together. Antoine Walker is about as useful as a boulder without the ball in his hands. He can't play defense, doesn't play off the ball on offense. He can chuck 3s though, but has a tendency to shoot them off the dribble with a defender in his face early in the shot clock. Or at least during his first run in Boston and Dallas he did, (I can't really say much about last season). He shows signs of nice passing now and then, but doesn't do it within the flow of hte offense. Oh, and I've already mentioned it, but his defense is atrocious. Jason Willaims is another player who needs the ball to be effective and has sketchy shot selection. He can throw flashy passes but can't efficiently run a half court offense nor can he even effectively control the tempo of the game. Oh, and of course, his defense sucks.

Last season the Heat had good role players and built a nice cohesion on the court. They had guys who could shoot, who could defend, role players could get their numbers without disrupting the team's flow. Now they have 2 new guys who are more talented, but demand the ball. Like I said, the team will win 50+ games, but it would suprise me to see them defeat the Spurs or Pistons.


----------



## THE'clip'SHOW (Sep 24, 2002)

NugzFan said:


> again, just HAVING 12 or more guys doesnt make you deep.
> 
> every team has 12 or more guys. you listed too many scrubs to be considered a deep team. nice starting 5 but the bench? eh.


Well if you consider the backups at every position : 

C- Rebraca
PF - Wilcox
SF - Waltah
SG - Ross
PG - Livingston (the future)

who is a scrub..your best arguement is Ross and believe me he's not a scrub (he's not great, but he's not a scrub).


----------



## NugzFan (Jul 26, 2002)

Free Arsenal said:


> I'm going Conference by Conference.
> 
> East:
> 1. Heat
> ...


:laugh:


----------



## NugzFan (Jul 26, 2002)

THE'clip'SHOW said:


> Well if you consider the backups at every position :
> 
> C- Rebraca
> PF - Wilcox
> ...


all but livingston. scrubs.


----------



## THE'clip'SHOW (Sep 24, 2002)

lol What am I thinking debating things with a 13 year old. :whoknows:


----------



## TonyMontana_83 (Dec 4, 2004)

If Nugzfan is only 13 that means he's been stalking Jazz boards since he was like 8.


----------



## Ras (Jul 25, 2005)

THE'clip'SHOW said:


> lol What am I thinking debating things with a 13 year old. :whoknows:


It really irritates me when people do this; simply because he's younger (if he even is 13) doesn't mean his opinion is less valid. Every person's opinion should be just as credible as the next, unless there is a reason why it shouldn't be: constant bias, uninformed...How old are you by the way?


----------



## TonyMontana_83 (Dec 4, 2004)

LOL. I seriously doubt Nugzfan is 13. Usually people don't turn into _edited _until they reach adulthood.

No personal attacks. - Premier


----------



## NugzFan (Jul 26, 2002)

THE'clip'SHOW said:


> lol What am I thinking debating things with a 13 year old. :whoknows:


yet you are the one who has no idea what you are talking about. ironic. :laugh:


----------



## NugzFan (Jul 26, 2002)

Ras said:


> It really irritates me when people do this; simply because he's younger (if he even is 13) doesn't mean his opinion is less valid. Every person's opinion should be just as credible as the next, unless there is a reason why it shouldn't be: constant bias, uninformed...How old are you by the way?


exactly. too bad the kids a homer.


----------



## NugzFan (Jul 26, 2002)

TonyMontana_83 said:


> LOL. I seriously doubt Nugzfan is 13. Usually people don't turn into _edited_ until they reach adulthood.


now thats the tonymontana i remember!


----------



## THE'clip'SHOW (Sep 24, 2002)

Ras said:


> It really irritates me when people do this; simply because he's younger (if he even is 13) doesn't mean his opinion is less valid. Every person's opinion should be just as credible as the next, unless there is a reason why it shouldn't be: constant bias, uninformed...How old are you by the way?


Why dont you go back and read his posts along with memphixx's. Anyone can just make statements and not support them. I'm sure he isn't 13, but his debating skills are at that level. I asked him for an opinion or an explanation... all I got was a one word response. 
These type of posters are all to common on this board and thats why I hardly come here. I'm not even sure why I responded to this, guess I dont want to go back to working.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

THE'clip'SHOW said:


> Why dont you go back and read his posts along with memphixx's. Anyone can just make statements and not support them. I'm sure he isn't 13, but his debating skills are at that level. I asked him for an opinion or an explanation... all I got was a one word response.
> These type of posters are all to common on this board and thats why I hardly come here. I'm not even sure why I responded to this, guess I dont want to go back to working.


What? You upset because I don't think the Clips have depth, then you post their roster and it looks like an NBDL affiliate after 7 players but I can't back up my posts? Don't get mad 'Twan!


----------



## NugzFan (Jul 26, 2002)

THE'clip'SHOW said:


> Why dont you go back and read his posts along with memphixx's. Anyone can just make statements and not support them. I'm sure he isn't 13, but his debating skills are at that level. I asked him for an opinion or an explanation... all I got was a one word response.
> These type of posters are all to common on this board and thats why I hardly come here. I'm not even sure why I responded to this, guess I dont want to go back to working.


all i said is that they were scrubs because they are. its quite simple.


----------



## NugzFan (Jul 26, 2002)

MemphisX said:


> What? You upset because I don't think the Clips have depth, then you post their roster and it looks like an NBDL affiliate after 7 players but I can't back up my posts? Don't get mad 'Twan!


:laugh:

its not OUR FAULT that they clips have no depth.

why is he mad at us?


----------



## sportkingJSP13 (Jul 11, 2005)

Drewbs said:


> Ok, I didn't read any comments past this one... but... yeah.
> 
> You're only 12, so at 10, I doubt you were paying attention when the Lakers signed Gary Payton and Karl Malone and the basketball world was crapping in their pants about the Lakers breaking hte all time 72-10 win record with their 4 hall of fame players. That team looks great on paper, and based on sheer talent alone, will win 50 or more games, but I will be very suprised to see them win against the Pistons or the Spurs. Stan Van Gundy is a nice coach, not great, but hes ok. However, he is going to have a hard time getting this team to play together. Antoine Walker is about as useful as a boulder without the ball in his hands. He can't play defense, doesn't play off the ball on offense. He can chuck 3s though, but has a tendency to shoot them off the dribble with a defender in his face early in the shot clock. Or at least during his first run in Boston and Dallas he did, (I can't really say much about last season). He shows signs of nice passing now and then, but doesn't do it within the flow of hte offense. Oh, and I've already mentioned it, but his defense is atrocious. Jason Willaims is another player who needs the ball to be effective and has sketchy shot selection. He can throw flashy passes but can't efficiently run a half court offense nor can he even effectively control the tempo of the game. Oh, and of course, his defense sucks.
> 
> Last season the Heat had good role players and built a nice cohesion on the court. They had guys who could shoot, who could defend, role players could get their numbers without disrupting the team's flow. Now they have 2 new guys who are more talented, but demand the ball. Like I said, the team will win 50+ games, but it would suprise me to see them defeat the Spurs or Pistons.


yea actually at 10 I was still probably following the NBA 10x more than ur 16 year old ***!!! Especially considering I have PLAYED competitive basketsince I was 5 odds are I follow the NBA! Also it doesnt take rocket science to figure out that Miami and LA are 2 DIFFERENT teams appearently u think that just because the LAKERS didnt do as good as expected that MIAMI will not do as good as expected! Miami could beat that record! Miami could win the finals! Yet Miami couldn't but as I said there THIS IS MY OPINION! If you think that you know so much lets see ur predictions!


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

sportkingJSP13 said:


> yea actually at 10 I was still probably following the NBA 10x more than ur 16 year old ***!!! Especially considering I have PLAYED competitive basketsince I was 5 odds are I follow the NBA! Also it doesnt take rocket science to figure out that Miami and LA are 2 DIFFERENT teams appearently u think that just because the LAKERS didnt do as good as expected that MIAMI will not do as good as expected! Miami could beat that record! Miami could win the finals! Yet Miami couldn't but as I said there THIS IS MY OPINION! If you think that you know so much lets see ur predictions!



I don't even know why I'm going to respond to this...

Playing basketball when you are 5 is hardly competitive, and I have actually played competitive basketball as well, and chances are... most people on this board have. Why not post something productive and basketball related, you cuold at least address what I wrote seeing as at 10 you were... "following the NBA 10x more than my 16 year old ***".


----------



## sportkingJSP13 (Jul 11, 2005)

Drewbs said:


> I don't even know why I'm going to respond to this...
> 
> Playing basketball when you are 5 is hardly competitive, and I have actually played competitive basketball as well, and chances are... most people on this board have. Why not post something productive and basketball related, you cuold at least address what I wrote seeing as at 10 you were... "following the NBA 10x more than my 16 year old ***".


u were playing competitive basketball? u r probably thinking regular basketball. Competitive as in I travel like to other places like for exapmle I live in Memphis and I had a basketball tournament in Louisville like 3 weeks ago. I just now quit playing competitve bc I am also playing soccer and basketball for my school! Oh and also if I'm 12 then why the hel* would u be sayin this stuff! I'm guessing maybe cause I'm the only person u can diss out of all the ppl that posted in here! Actually u cant even diss me when u try u r only dissing urself!


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

sportkingJSP13 said:


> u were playing competitive basketball? u r probably thinking regular basketball. Competitive as in I travel like to other places like for exapmle I live in Memphis and I had a basketball tournament in Louisville like 3 weeks ago. I just now quit playing competitve bc I am also playing soccer and basketball for my school! Oh and also if I'm 12 then why the hel* would u be sayin this stuff! I'm guessing maybe cause I'm the only person u can diss out of all the ppl that posted in here! Actually u cant even diss me when u try u r only dissing urself!


LOL calm down. Is it that hard to imagine that you may not be the only person on a board (thats about basketball) who has played competitively?

Saying what stuff? What did I say? That I know what competitive basketball is? This whole board knows what competitive basketball is. I simply responded to one of your posts. And where did I try and diss anyone? By making fun of your:

"yea actually at 10 I was still probably following the NBA 10x more than ur 16 year old ***!!! Especially considering I have PLAYED competitive basketsince I was 5 odds are I follow the NBA!" 

comment? 

Read that aloud to yourself. Then maybe you'd understand...


----------



## Bone Crusher (Jan 1, 2005)

1. Pacers - A great team with impressive young talent off the bench. The play of rookie Danny Granger puts them over the top. He's been spectacular so far.

2. Spurs - Great team that's aging, however they're still the odds-on favorites coming into the season.

3. Pistons - Flip Saunders is no Larry Brown, however the Pistons will still be contenders, just not the favorites in the East anymore.

4. Heat - Talent but potentially horrible chemistry. Shaq's also a fat againg injury prone moron.

5. Mavericks - The Mavs are always near the top yet noone takes them serious as contenders untill they get defense. They're getting there.

6. Kings - The Kings are a bigtime sleeper team. They had a disappointing 04-05 season due to injuries, but any team that starts Mike Bibby, Brad Miler, Peja Stojakovic, Bonzi Wells, and Shareef Abdul-Rahim has to be taken serious.

7. Suns - They're top-5 without the Amare injury. However wiuth his injury, and with the losses of Joe Johnson and Q Richardson, they cannot be ranked higher thasn #7.

8. Rockets - A bit of an overrated team. They're getting better but will need to develop better chemistry to take the leap to legit contender.

9. Nuggets - George Karl is a great coach, and he's got some nice talent to work with in Denver.

10. Cavs - A lot of changes. They certainly look good on paper, however its how you play as a team that counts.

11. Sonics - Underrated team. They never got the respect they deserved last year and they're not getting it this pre-season either. Daniels loss hurts a bit, however James was worthless.

12. Nets - Overrated. Great star power at the 1-2-3, however they're an injury prone team with questionable coaching and team defense.

13. Jazz - A bunch back season for Jerry Sloan and the Jazz. AK-47 is his usual All-Star self, and he's surrounded by a strong supporting cast including the very solid Carlos Boozer and talented rookie point guard Deron Williams.

14. Wizards - Probably a bit underrated. Larry Hughes loss will hurt them, but exchanging the next-to-worthless Kwame Brown for the solid Caron Butler and then picking up Antonio Daniels were two great moves.

15. Warriors - Overrated. They've got the great duo in Davis and Richardson, however after that theres not a whole lot to get excited over. Their center can't score, their power forward can't play defense, their bench is weak, and the have a questionable coach in Mike Montgomery.

16. Bulls - Bull's fans whine a lot, but #16 is a fair pre-season ranking for them. First of all, the East has improved. The Bulls team of last year doesn't finish #4 this year, no way, no how. Second of all, they lost their #1 scorer in Eddy Curry. Who replaces him in the starting lineup? Ancient Antonio Davis? That's not a good thing..

17. Knicks - They will definantly be improved. Curry gives them the interior presence they've been lacking since Ewing left town, and if Marbury can focus more on getting his teammates involved, there's no reason Larry Brown can't lead the talented Knicks to the playoffs.

18. Timberwolves - The Wolves season rides on 4 things - Szczerbiaks health, McCants play, Jaric's play, and Caseys coaching. If all 4 of those things go well for them, they're a huge sleeper in the West. If 3 out of 4 go well, they're in the playoffs. If 2 out of 4 go well, they're atleast serious contenders for the playoffs. If 1 out of 4 go well, Kevin Garnett's on TV crying by the All-Star break. If 0 out of 4 go well, KG kills himself before Christmas.

19. Lakers - It's very hard to guage the Lakers. They've got a great duo in Kobe and Lamar. They've got a legendary coach in Phil Jackson. However, after that, there's a whole lot of question marks. The Lakers could make the playoffs, or finish with the leagues worst record. It all depends on Kobe abd Lamars health, and how well Kwame produces.

20. Magic - What's there to say about Orlando really? They've got a future superstar, a selfish current superstar, and a washed up superstar. If we could invent a time machine, and make it so all 3 of these superstars were playing at their peaks, Orlandos a serious contender. Unfortuantely for the Magic fans we cant do that. As it is they'll win around 36 games and Francis will be gone by next offseason.

21. 76ers - The 76ers just aren't that good. Webber's too injury prone and washed up, and Iverson's on his way to matching him. Iggy is a nice youngest, but after that there's not much to look at. I think it's time trade A.I. for some hot young talent while his values still high and start over. Philly fans cant be happy with 40ish wins every year.

22. Clippers - Clippers have great talent, they just never seem to go anywhere. It will probably continue again this year. They need a great coach as bad as any team in the league. This is the L.A. team Phil Jackson should've went to.

23. Bucks - I dislike Buck fans. They overrated their unproven team as much as any team in the league. That is all.

24. Grizzlies - After flirting with being a good team the past 2 seasons, the Grizz fall back down to Earth and their usual crappiness. They just don't have the talent to go anywhere, and untill they either pick up a star or Pau Gasol grows some balls, they'll stay that way.

25. Celtics - Paul Pierce will be begging to be traded before the All-Star break. The Celtics are trying to rebuild and still make the playoffs, but I don't see that happening. Trade Pierce for a hot young point guard prospect and a pick and call me back in 4 years.

26. Hawks - Being ranked #26 must feel like winning a championship to the Hawks. This is a seriously talented young team, but can they ever mesh like a team should? I doubt it. This is one of those teams that have the young talent that Philly or Boston would like, and they sure could use a franchise player like A.I. or Pierce....

27. Bobcats - Okafor is underrated. Why people were slobbing Ben Gordons knob and (rightfully so) hyping up Dwight Howard, Emekas R.O.Y. season got a bit overlooked. Throw in 2 promising rookies in Raymind Felton and Sean May and the Bobcats may just hit the 25 win mark this season.

28. Blazers - Bad team, however there's a future with Telfair, Webster, and Randolph if he can ever get his head out of his ***.

29. Hornets - Damn. Don't know what to say about the Hornets. I'm not sure why they traded Baron Davis so cheap to be honest, Surely they could've gotten more? I would suggest trading Magloire now before he moves on in the as a FA in the offseason, but if all you can get back is the same level of **** you got in the Davis deal don't even bother. J.R. Smith and Chris Paul are a nice young duo though. And thats about it.

30. Raptors - Yikes. My advice for Toronto - don't pick up any more bad contracts and don't trade any of your picks. In a year or two, you'll finally have soem cap and young talent to begin forming a respectable young team. In the meantime atleast hockeys back so the Toronto sports fans have something worthwhile to watch.


----------



## Bone Crusher (Jan 1, 2005)

Wow there were a ton os typos in that post. I guess that's what happens when you right a complete NBA preview in 30 minutes at 5 in the morning.


----------



## sportkingJSP13 (Jul 11, 2005)

Drewbs said:


> LOL calm down. Is it that hard to imagine that you may not be the only person on a board (thats about basketball) who has played competitively?
> 
> Saying what stuff? What did I say? That I know what competitive basketball is? This whole board knows what competitive basketball is. I simply responded to one of your posts. And where did I try and diss anyone? By making fun of your:
> 
> ...


 
i dont like to argue but have u noticed that u r 18 and I'm 12 and u r acting like i'm a 4 year old and ur my grandpa except meaner and worse. There is only 6 years between us when u think about it is a long time but when i think about I think it is a little time and when I'm ur age. I will have alot better stuff to do then rather than posting on basketball boards. please just drop this. wtf


----------



## sportkingJSP13 (Jul 11, 2005)

Bone Crusher said:


> 1. Pacers - A great team with impressive young talent off the bench. The play of rookie Danny Granger puts them over the top. He's been spectacular so far.
> 
> 2. Spurs - Great team that's aging, however they're still the odds-on favorites coming into the season.
> 
> ...


 
I dont agree with ur rankings but I like the way u gave a reason for everything and explained urself.


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

Bone Crusher said:


> 1. Pacers - A great team with impressive young talent off the bench. The play of rookie Danny Granger puts them over the top. He's been spectacular so far.
> 
> 2. Spurs - Great team that's aging, however they're still the odds-on favorites coming into the season.
> 
> ...


I'm not sure you can put the Suns at 7, imo they'll be a middle of a pack playoff team at best without Amare. Maybe a 5th to 8th seed. Nash was the MVP last season, and hes good, but hes not THAT good. He's not going to rack up the same assist numbers without a dominant inside presence and sharpshooters that can trail the break, and with more defensive attention focused on himself, his shooting percentages are going to drop. The Suns weren't a deep team last season, and they've improved their bench, but they still don't have a true center, Shawn Marion is going to playing out of position again. I think that the Rockets should get the nod over them for now. 

The Spurs aren't exactly aging... Duncan is 29, Ginobili is 28, and Parker is 23. Their core is still young, and they were never a team that relied as much on athleticism and youth as they do on defense and offensive execution. Also, there should be no doubt that the Pacers ar going to be a top team in the east, but the Pistons should still be the favorites. They are going to be alot better on offense this season with Flip Saunders, who isn't Larry Brown, but a great coach nonetheless. They were never as good on offense as they could have been last season. They were always above average-good, but they could be a great offensive team with the players they have. If they keep their defensive identity as well as overhaul their offense, they could very well challenge the Spurs again this season.


----------



## sportkingJSP13 (Jul 11, 2005)

Drewbs said:


> I'm not sure you can put the Suns at 7, imo they'll be a middle of a pack playoff team at best without Amare. Maybe a 5th to 8th seed. Nash was the MVP last season, and hes good, but hes not THAT good. He's not going to rack up the same assist numbers without a dominant inside presence and sharpshooters that can trail the break, and with more defensive attention focused on himself, his shooting percentages are going to drop. The Suns weren't a deep team last season, and they've improved their bench, but they still don't have a true center, Shawn Marion is going to playing out of position again. I think that the Rockets should get the nod over them for now.
> 
> The Spurs aren't exactly aging... Duncan is 29, Ginobili is 28, and Parker is 23. Their core is still young, and they were never a team that relied as much on athleticism and youth as they do on defense and offensive execution. Also, there should be no doubt that the Pacers ar going to be a top team in the east, but the Pistons should still be the favorites. They are going to be alot better on offense this season with Flip Saunders, who isn't Larry Brown, but a great coach nonetheless. They were never as good on offense as they could have been last season. They were always above average-good, but they could be a great offensive team with the players they have. If they keep their defensive identity as well as overhaul their offense, they could very well challenge the Spurs again this season.


 
I agree!


----------



## TonyMontana_83 (Dec 4, 2004)

I would put the Suns in the top 10 because I believe it was their style of play and the way Steve Nash plays that got them so many wins last year. Losing Amare is a big punch to the gut, but they can still win over 50 games.


----------



## The-Future-Phenom (Oct 4, 2005)

Let me just say this.

1.Spurs-defending champions.
2.Miami-loaded and ready to go.
3.Phoenix-what hasn't been said about this team's upside, (would be higher if Amare wasn't hurt).
4.Detroit-they're always going to be in the mix.

Those are the top 4 teams in the league this year. No question asked. I cannot believe some of the responses I read on this thread. It really put a doubt in my mind if anyone really understands and comprehends NBA basketball.


----------



## Amareca (Oct 21, 2002)

"Nets are a top 5 team"



mjm1 said:


> yup, they went on a 20-5 run at the end of the season with carter and kidd, with one of the worst benches. Now they have: Kidd Carter and Jefferson together in the beginning of the season, and the best bench in the kidd era (better than the bench they had in 2001.





mjm1 said:


> Kidd>Nash (depends on health)
> Carter>Marion (no question)
> Amare>Collins (do i have to explain)
> Krstic> Kurt Thomas (krstic younger and more potential)
> Our bench is arguably equal to if not better then the Suns.





sportkingJSP13 said:


> I'm not a Nets fan but I still think Nets have got Suns beat.





sportkingJSP13 said:


> ^^^ way wrong. You are gunna say that the Nash&Amare combination is better than Richard Jefferson, Vince Carter, & J-Kidd combination. wow! you need to rethink your facts.


Yes wrong, Steve Nash and 2 random guys of Phoenix' top 1"0 rotation beats that easily.


----------

