NBA Power Rankings, WEST. - Page 2

Assani Fisher · #11 10-10-2007, 04:22 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And yeah, your L.A. ranking is silly. L.A. was the 4th best team in the West(perhaps in the league) last year before the injury bug hit them. If I put the over/under on the Lakers finish at #8, would you really bet the under?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd bet that they finish worse than 7.5.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think thats a pretty borderline bet. If you made it 8, then I'd take it with you. But with N.O. and Memphis looking improved its going to be much harder to make the playoffs this year. Of course there could be a team that falls off, but its really tough to pick one.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll give you 1.5 to 1. I'd wager 300 to win 200.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're giving me 1.5-1 on over(you're taking under) the Lakers being the 7.5 seed?

Hmmm....I'll think about it. I would need a clause that states if Kobe gets traded or hurt the bet is off though to even consider it.

rakes.a.beach · #12 10-10-2007, 04:27 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And yeah, your L.A. ranking is silly. L.A. was the 4th best team in the West(perhaps in the league) last year before the injury bug hit them. If I put the over/under on the Lakers finish at #8, would you really bet the under?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd bet that they finish worse than 7.5.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think thats a pretty borderline bet. If you made it 8, then I'd take it with you. But with N.O. and Memphis looking improved its going to be much harder to make the playoffs this year. Of course there could be a team that falls off, but its really tough to pick one.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll give you 1.5 to 1. I'd wager 300 to win 200.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're giving me 1.5-1 on over(you're taking under) the Lakers being the 7.5 seed?

Hmmm....I'll think about it. I would need a clause that states if Kobe gets traded or hurt the bet is off though to even consider it.

[/ QUOTE ]

To clarify, I'm wagering 300 or 150 to win 200 or 100 that the Lakers will finish worse than 7.5th seed. I'd wager between 75 to 300.

I can't make any addition rules. If I say Kobe can't be traded/hurt, then I'd also have to say that a player like Kidd/Marion/Oneal can't be added on the lakers. Or that Nash/Duncan/AI/Tmac can't be hurt.

I'm going to bed now. Let me know what you think.

Billy Bibbit · #13 10-10-2007, 05:24 AM

Cool post.

That series between Houston and Utah was so close that I don't have a strong argument for putting either team ahead of the other (and I don't think either team got significantly better this summer). They're both better than Denver. In addition to the problems others have mentioned, I just don't think Denver will ever be 100% when the playoffs start. They have too many injury-prone players.

The Lakers should be right about the same place they were last year. Golden State is the team that I think will drop into the lottery. Baron Davis played so well in the playoffs that it's like everyone completely forgets that for most of his career he's been injury-prone and a 30% three-point shooter. His performance vs. Dallas isn't going to carry over and when he's not playing like a superstar this is a below average team.

It's worth mentioning that Memphis had 5 fewer wins than expected wins last year, so they were already better than their record even ignoring the guys who are healthy again. No reason this team shouldn't challenge for a playoff spot again.

vixticator · #14 10-10-2007, 05:36 AM

With how much certainty does one of Dallas, San Antonio or Phoenix make the Finals? 85%+? I think the NBA should extend the regular season and push the playoffs down to four teams per conference. Or, less. Playoffs take three months as it is and most of the teams in it don't have much chance. Kind of silly.

ClarkNasty · #15 10-10-2007, 10:21 AM

Houston's actually pretty deep this year. If Yao and TMac are healthy, they are a very good team. My only concern with them is adaping to a new system/coach.

ClarkNasty · #16 10-10-2007, 11:19 AM

Lakers are better than you give credit for. Golden State is worse.

tuq · #17 10-10-2007, 12:12 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
2nd. Spurs - [censored] you San Antonio.
1st. Suns - LONG LIVE STEVE NASH MVP!!!

[/ QUOTE ]
I am in love with another man for the first time.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think Steve Nash might disagree with this statement from you.

[/ QUOTE ]
Steve Nash is not a man, he is a god, thus my statement is accurate.

tdarko · #18 10-10-2007, 12:31 PM

I actually hope Dallas doesn't get much credit this year.

Two years ago they were a super-talented team that was thought of as only a reg season team and they get to the finals only to find out that the refs are getting paid to give the more marketable Shaq and Wade show the title. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Then last year they were the once again super-talented but now weathered and tested playoff team with high expectations. They win a trillion games and meet up w/ the only team that truly had their number all year--their worst possible match-up and get ousted in an embarrassing way. Don't read that as an excuse b/c obv they didn't perform (ugh, so so ugly). Maybe they should have lost more games, moved down to the 6th seed and played the team they beat out in the playoffs the year before and went 3-1 against during the reg season who eventually went on to win the champ [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

So, I think if they are kind of in the background this year it will be good for them--kind of like SA was last year.

I agree with Clark on Hou, injury-free that team is pretty good.

My top 8 is:

1. Pho
2. SA
3. Dal
4. Hou
5. Uta
6. Den
7. Lal
8. GS

tuq · #19 10-10-2007, 12:41 PM

[ QUOTE ]
So, I think if they are kind of in the background this year it will be good for them--kind of like SA was last year.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, the burden of expectations couldn't have helped at all. 67 wins, flirting with 70 wins, coming off the Finals the year before. Meanwhile SA flew under the radar all season long, much like Dallas this year coming off a disappointing season with rumors that they were too old, etc. That had to have helped. Certainly semi-luckboxing their way past the Suns and then not having to face Dallas in the WCF didn't hurt them either.

I'll admit to rooting for GS in that series, if only because of what a huge upset it would be if they won, the Nellie-Cuban subplot, etc. But if I knew the Spurs were gonna beat the Suns I would have been a Mavs fan so I could at least have a rooting interest in the WCF. The Jazz just weren't on the same level, sorry.

tarheeljks · #20 10-10-2007, 12:44 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Houston's actually pretty deep this year. If Yao and TMac are healthy, they are a very good team. My only concern with them is adaping to a new system/coach.

[/ QUOTE ]

i wonder if their d will be as good w/o jvg