Re: 2006-07 NBA Discussion Thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
I believe with his athleticism and just with age and maturity and being in the game he will make drastic strides with defense and that in itself would make him much better. Do you disagree?

[/ QUOTE ] I would agree. Athleticly speaking, he won't get better than he currently is. He can improve his D, and his teamwork. But the overall change isn't that much more. Thats my point. He is sick now, but there isn't going to improve all that much. And this should not be construded to mean he won't go down as one of the all time greats.

Re: 2006-07 NBA Discussion Thread
 

TSC,

Yea, this is basically how I feel about him as well. Athletically I agree he is at a level where improvement would be too difficult but I do think that if he improved these other aspects of his game such as D that the change wouldn't be drastic, per se, but noticable.

Re: 2006-07 NBA Discussion Thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
Blazers will be better than 28-32 wins, I am thinking 35-38.

[/ QUOTE ]

0-3 in the preseason so far, although I went to the GS game and there are signs of promise. As Nate said, "We'll have to play a perfect game to beat most teams." and they will. Feel happy knowing that Zach looks great and if he can keep his head on straight (a BIG if), he could be an All-Star. He toyed with GS down low, asbolutely toyed with them. Yeah I know they're undersized...but he's in shape and he's got that quickness back. And be happy knowing in Roy they appear to have a guard that can drive and finish that they haven't had since when....I can't even remember. On the other hand, Magloire looks like dogshit.

Next year's the year to care about and especially the year after that, this year just hope for some improvement.

As far as Bonzi, he works out well for a quick rental but he's a pain in the ass over a long haul. Mostly my comment about LAC > Houston was a thinking that I feel LAC is being underrated this year more than I think Houston sucks.

Re: 2006-07 NBA Discussion Thread
 

I have a tough time believing Jordan was better in the mid 90's. Sure he may have been smarter and more focused, but he was a beast in the late 80s & early 90s. Athletes rarely get better with old age, and Jordan was no exception, despite what he says.

Basketball players get better during their early 20s, and peak around 27 or 28, so common belief says that Lebron should get better. But he's already so freakishly scary, it's unfathomable to me to think about how he should be getting better in the upcoming years.

Orlando will be a top 4 east team, and I wouldn't be surprised if they win 50 games. They should've drafted Ronnie Brewer. JJ WTF?!

When's the KG for half daBulls trade going down? McHale, you idiot, give up & start over.

NL - Watch the Suns, if you don't enjoy them, then you'll never like watching the NBA. Unless you're more the slow it down & work it inside-out type of fan.

Blazers & ATL will be frontrunners for G Oden.

Re: 2006-07 NBA Discussion Thread
 

TSC,

I like the cut of your jib in this thread.

That said, most everyone is predicting various teams to have up years - Milwaukee, Portland, New York, Orlando, etc. Something has to give. This reminds me of when The Sports Guy made his NFL predictions and there were more wins than losses. Specifically, the Western Conference is so strong that I think you need to ratchet down the win column a few games for most teams just because they're going to be playing each other 2/3 of their games.

In the next day or two I'll make a predictions poll thread if someone doesn't beat me to it. I'd like to see what people think.

Re: 2006-07 NBA Discussion Thread
 

tuq- Nobody will beat you to it. Do it.

Ralph- MJ was only 25/26 when the 80's ended and according to you (age 27 & 28) hit his peak in the early 90's. Lebron will be 27/28 in 2011/2012...so what gives? You are telling me Lebron will hit his peak at the age of 23 maybe 24 and never get any better, never learn anything else? Weird.

Re: 2006-07 NBA Discussion Thread
 

imo Denver is the team that's going to lose a lot more games than people think. I felt that way last year after I saw them in person and was proven correct, I don't see what's changed. They won 44 and petered out, that was way below expectations - some said they might be the best team out west lol. I'll throw it out there, Carmelo is overrated and will get his points but won't win anything meaningful unless he's surrounded by the *perfect* cast which I doubt will ever happen. If I were a Nugget fan, I'd especially fear a Carmelo after signing a big contract extension.

Re: 2006-07 NBA Discussion Thread
 

I don't know for certain, but I think the number of NBA seasons played may be something to look at. I think the rigors of an NBA season are much more intense physically than that of a college season. Even though Lebron is young, playing that many games has to be a factor. I don't think its unreasonable to say that he could reach his peak physically around that age. Obviously he will still learn a lot more, but one you combine his physical ability, and likely gameplaying intelligence, I do think his peak will be around 24-25.

Re: 2006-07 NBA Discussion Thread
 

of course Lebron could suprise the hell out of us and replace MJ as the benchmark for which all talent is measured against. In which case, this whole discussion goes out the window.

Re: 2006-07 NBA Discussion Thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
On the other hand, Magloire looks like dogshit.

[/ QUOTE ] when has signing a FORMER all star ever worked out? My buddy is so sold on magloire [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]