NBA top 40- Bill Simmons style

[Dids]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Explain

"but think he needs to refocus himself" RE: Gilbert.

[/ QUOTE ]

-cut down on deep 3 pointers early in the shot clock. gilbert is an excellent 3 point shooter and should be higher than 35 percent from 3s.
-forget about the whole team USA thing, or at least stop talking about it and scoring 50 points on the coaches that cut him.
-get out of "hero mode" at the end of game, and stay with the team game.
-maintain defensive intensity like superstars kobe and d-wade. don't be like vince and carmelo.

im a huge agent zero fan, and think he is awesome for the NBA. but the playoffs are coming, and washington is a legit contendor in the east, so gilbert needs to get his [censored] together.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll grant you the first point. The rest of it just seems like projecting pop psych onto a guy. I don't know if you've read his blog entry that addresses things, but by my metrics, he's got his [censored] together moreso than a ton of other players.

[Green Kool Aid]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Honestly, I can't understand how, based on GKA's selection criteria, Shaq would be in anyones top 40.

[/ QUOTE ]
He gives you a chance of winning a championship w/in the next year or two.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wait wait wait

If you select Shaq under my criteria, keep in mind Dwyane Wade does not come with him as a package deal.

[kidcolin]

No he doesn't. Not as your first pick.

Unless you catch him in one of those spiteful off-seasons where he intends to prove the world wrong and gets in tip top shape, you can only pencil him in for 60 games, tops. Since being traded to LA, he's only played 70 games or more 3 times. One of those was year 1 with MIA.

So you have to build a team strong enough the get through the regular season where 25% of it is spent without your "dominant" big man. When he is healthy, you'll be lucky to get 30 minutes a game out of him. He'll have flashes of brilliance, but also major duds. On average you're looking at sub-20/sub-10 a game. Right now he's good for 17/7.

So yeah, if you're lucky enough to get some vintage Shaq games in the playoffs, you'll probably win those games. But you first have to get to the playoffs, and it's nice if you're not a bottom seed when you do so as to ease your path to the Finals.

Unless you've already got Lebron, Wade, or Kobe, Shaq's a bad pick. Even then, there are probably options that will still allow you to contend for a ring while being a better long term choice for your franchise.

[Assani Fisher]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Honestly, I can't understand how, based on GKA's selection criteria, Shaq would be in anyones top 40.

[/ QUOTE ]
He gives you a chance of winning a championship w/in the next year or two.

[/ QUOTE ]

exactly. In the last 20 years only 6 franchises have won titles. All of this youth and potential isn't really going to help as much as you guys think. I mean, I realize that guys like Tyson Chandler, Emaka Okafor, Andre Iguodala, etc. are good players who are young, but they're not what makes championship teams. You're not going to contend because of these players alone.

Imagine for a second that we were doing a complete redraft of the entire league using a snake style draft(#1 pick in first round picks last in second round). Under your rankings, the team picking #20 could get Steve Nash at #20 and Shaq at #41. I would think that after the first 2 rounds are drafted, nearly everyone would be saying that they have the best team so far.

Now contrast that to the team that started out its franchise with Josh Smith and Andris Biedrins. Or how about Gerald Wallace and Al Jefferson. These teams have 2 good(not great) young players who will get better, but theres no way that you could be sure in any way that they'd ever be a contender. Meanwhile the Nash/Shaq team would probably be the odds on favorites the next year for the title!

[Green Kool Aid]

Assani (AKA Nash#1fan),

How do you feel that a couple of nameless people told me over IM that they wouldn't have Nash in the top 40?

What do you think about Nash's ranking of 20?

[capone0]

Look at the criteria.

The criteria isn't is this team going to the most titles. If it was then the list would be very different. I guess that's actually the most important thing if you really want to get down to it.

[Assani Fisher]

The more I look over your rankings the more I think you way overrate youth. Theres no way that Pao Gasol would be taken over Duncan or Garnett simply because hes 4 years younger. Duncan/Garnett gives you a great start to a championship team. Sure Gasol will give you 4 extra years, but I really doubt he makes you a contender like the other two do.

[Assani Fisher]

[ QUOTE ]
Assani (AKA Nash#1fan),

How do you feel that a couple of nameless people told me over IM that they wouldn't have Nash in the top 40?

What do you think about Nash's ranking of 20?

[/ QUOTE ]The point of my post was to:

1. Show how Shaq was underrated
2. Show how you've overrated youth

I really didn't mean it was a commentary on Nash. For the veteran players I think you have Nash rated adequately, so I don't think I disagree with you simply regarding him. But I think I'd have nearly all of the veterans ranked higher than you do, as I would rather have a legit shot at a title for a few years and then rebuild than have a bunch of good but not great young players.

I really don't think I need to say anymore regarding Nash, as we've been through this 100 times. If you really want to know, I'd probably put him right next to Duncan/Garnett as I think he is just as valuable and his 2 years age difference isn't as big of a deal since he will play longer due to not relying upon athleticism.

[Assani Fisher]

[ QUOTE ]
Look at the criteria.

The criteria isn't is this team going to the most titles. If it was then the list would be very different. I guess that's actually the most important thing if you really want to get down to it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, my fault. I took this to be:

If you were starting a franchise and could sign any player at the same price for the same amount of years(so we disregard their current contracts) in which order would you like to have each player.


If that is incorrect, then I apologize, as I'm arguing something completely different then.

[Assani Fisher]

[ QUOTE ]
No he doesn't. Not as your first pick.


[/ QUOTE ]

Any player after #30 would be your second pick.