Top Ten Teams 2009-2010

[Luther]

NBA.com has Portland @ #8....I disagree...What do you think? Top Ten Teams IMO..

1.) Lakers (Adding Ron Artest is either going to be a huge improvement over Ariza or a small improvement over Ariza...Either way the defending champs just made progress..)

2.)Cavs (Shaq is only going to make the team better.)

3.)Celtics (The addition of Sheed just made the Celtics starting 5 the best in the L IMO. I don't think their bench is that great though.)

4.)Magic (If Nelson stays healthy all season and picks up where he left off before he got hurt..This team could be back in the finals.)

5.)Blazers (With everyone coming back healthy and improved from last years 54 win season I can definitely see the Blazers in the WCF. Getting Martell back healthy and adding Andre Miller is going to make for one interesting season. Batum playing great overseas and Oden showing improvement is also very good news. Thank god Steve Blake is no longer our starting PG..)

6.)Spurs (Adding RJ for basically nothing was a great move..While I think the Spurs are going to have another great year, I think Portland is going to be better thus the #2 team in the West..)

7.)Nuggets (Losing Kleiza and Dahntay Jones is bad news for Denver fans. I don't think the Nugs come anywhere close to their success from last year.)

8.)Mavs (The Matrix to Dallas could prove to be a great pickup.)

9.)Hawks (Adding Crawford and Joe Smith were both good moves for Atlanta. I think they have a breakout year.)

10.)Utah (Sloan is a great coach. No major roster moves keep the Jazz in the mix but out of title contention.)

 

[oldmangrouch]

At best, I say 6th (with the Spurs ahead of us). At worst, 8th (Mavs and Nuggs ahead of us also).

 

[Minstrel]

At best, I say 6th (with the Spurs ahead of us). At worst, 8th (Mavs and Nuggs ahead of us also).

Almost the same for me. At best 6th (Celtics, Lakers, Cavs, Magic, Spurs ahead), at worst 7th (add Nuggets).

"Worst" in terms of variance for a healthy team. Any key injuries and all bets are off.

 

[Natebishop3]

I think we're going to finish ahead of San Antonio this season, but that's just my opinion.

 

[Cake]

"Worst" in terms of variance for a healthy team. Any key injuries and all bets are off.

If I'm reading that as: we're the worst team in terms of variance between being healthy and having a key injury...I strongly disagree. I think we're the deepest team in the league. If you're talking about 'key' injuries, like losing our best player...sure, we wouldn't win nearly as many games. But key injuries will kill any team. Boston SUCKED without KG. LA would SUCK without Kobe. Cleveland might win 25 games without Lebron.

We're actually, in my opinion, the team BEST suited to lose our best player. Fernandez can pick up the slack at SG and Bayless could slide into the backup role as a super scorer off the bench. PG...we can afford to lose either Blake or Miller. We're 3 deep at SF and all three bring their own strengths. We could affort to lose any one of them. PF - we're thin, but I think our rotation is okay at least. C - we have one of the best backups in the league no matter who starts.

 

[Minstrel]

If I'm reading that as: we're the worst team in terms of variance between being healthy and having a key injury...I strongly disagree.

No, that's not what I meant, I was perhaps unclear.

I meant, my use of "at best" and "at worst" referred to the range of variance that I see for Portland if they remain healthy.

Clearly, the literal worst that could happen for Portland involves key injuries and one can't properly predict for that. My comments weren't about the probabilities of that. Just the upper end and lower end of variance for a healthy Portland team.

 

[Eastoff]

If I'm reading that as: we're the worst team in terms of variance between being healthy and having a key injury...I strongly disagree. I think we're the deepest team in the league. If you're talking about 'key' injuries, like losing our best player...sure, we wouldn't win nearly as many games. But key injuries will kill any team. Boston SUCKED without KG. LA would SUCK without Kobe. Cleveland might win 25 games without Lebron.

We're actually, in my opinion, the team BEST suited to lose our best player. Fernandez can pick up the slack at SG and Bayless could slide into the backup role as a super scorer off the bench. PG...we can afford to lose either Blake or Miller. We're 3 deep at SF and all three bring their own strengths. We could affort to lose any one of them. PF - we're thin, but I think our rotation is okay at least. C - we have one of the best backups in the league no matter who starts.

i don't know who you are, but i like your statement

 

[BClutch]

Assuming no injuries to anyone on our team I'd say we are likely to end the season anywhere between 7th and 4th.

Dallas, San Antonio, and Boston are all possibly better than us next year. They are also all old and likely to have troubles with injuries. Depending on how well Dallas and San Antonio mesh as well as how all three teams avoid injuries could affect our end location significantly. These are the teams I think could move past portland or be overcome.

The Magic could be really good next year, but they are a significantly different team now that they've exchanged Turkey for Carter. It's possible they'll be better than last year, it's also possible they don't mesh well and do way worse. I suspect they'll do about the same, and they're playoff fate will rest on Bostons health and . . .

Cleveland. Shaq may make them better in the playoffs. I don't see him improving their record in the regular season much due to health and how hard it would be to improve on last years record. This is similar to the situation with the Magic. They look better on paper, but Shaq could get injured again, or maybe the spark just won't be there this year.

The only way I see us getting ahead of the Lakers is if Kobe or Gasol get injured, Artest has a complete meltdown, or Oden channels Bill Walton pre-humously. Non of these things seem highly likely.

Denver has made no major changes that I'm familiar with and I think the blazers aging a year makes them much better. The Blazers should be better than them barring injury or Denver making a trade.

 

[Wizard Mentor]

The truth it, IMHO, that we are still an X-factor. How will Oden play? How will Miller and Webster mesh with the team? What roles will different players have and will they accept them? If things come together, we could literally challenge for a championship, maybe even win it. However, things could also go south. I have a feeling that Webster, Bayless, and maybe Outlaw will be distractions this year.

 

[REDIVIDER]

the list looks ok, though these things generally don't end up as predicted

i could see the wizards, if healthy, finishing with better records than teams like the hawks or jazz

the hornets are another team that could crack the top ten in records

i like the placement of portland ahead of san antonio for fifth but san antonio will be more of a threat in the playoffs

 

[Cake]

No, that's not what I meant, I was perhaps unclear.

I meant, my use of "at best" and "at worst" referred to the range of variance that I see for Portland if they remain healthy.

Clearly, the literal worst that could happen for Portland involves key injuries and one can't properly predict for that. My comments weren't about the probabilities of that. Just the upper end and lower end of variance for a healthy Portland team.

Gotcha. you were probably plenty clear. I was drunk. Still am.

 

[tlongII]

#1.

 

[DaRizzle]

yes we are ...and it feels good

 

[MrJayremmie]

Almost the same for me. At best 6th (Celtics, Lakers, Cavs, Magic, Spurs ahead), at worst 7th (add Nuggets).

Word.

 

[crandc]

I think we're going to finish ahead of San Antonio this season, but that's just my opinion.

I agree. I really don't see who in the West, aside from maybe a healthy & focused Laker team, you can reasonably put ahead of a healthy and focused Blazers team. And I honestly believe Portland will be more focused than LA. Kobe Bryant wanted to prove he can win a title without Shaq, and he did. Artest is a VERY wild card. They are not getting any younger.

Who else? Spurs will be good but are battling Father Time. Rockets? No way. Denver? Maybe, no more than that. Hornets? Good but won't be great with that loser owner. Mavs? See Spurs above. Suns? Better than some might think but their window is definitely closed. Who else? Warriors? bad joke. Kings? Grizzlies? OKC?

 

[mook]

I've penciled us in for 60 wins. I know I wasn't the only one here.

Last year there were only three teams to win 60 or more games.
The year before that 2 teams did it.
The year before that 3 teams did it.
Both of the years before that 1 team did it.
The year before that 3 teams did it.

So if I'm right and we win 60 games, the odds are probably pretty good we'll be a top 3 team.
So I'm going with:
#1. Lakers
#2. Cleveland
#3. Blazers
#4. Orlando
#5. A bunch of guys in the rear view mirror.

 

[Tince]

I think Orlando is going to disappoint this year based on the expectations people seem to have.

 

[e_blazer]

Preseason prognostications are fun, but I don't really pay too much attention to them. Going into the '76-'77 season, the Sixers, Lakers, Nuggets, Rockets, Bullets, Celtics, and probably the Bulls would have been rated higher than the Blazers. The Blazers caught fire at the right time and we all know how that turned out.

This year, I think the Blazers have to be taken into consideration as serious contenders for the first time in a long time. A lot will depend upon injuries, but I think that the Blazers, as the youngest contenders, have the biggest probability of significant improvement over last season. In the West, the Lakers still have the edge in experience and remain the favorite until some other team can knock them out. After that, I don't think any one of the other contenders has a significant edge over the others. The East? Who cares until the Finals?