West dominates first NBA power rankings but Blazers only ranked 8th

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Kinda BS that the Warriors and Mavs are ranked ahead of us.
 
Nah, it's fair; we ended up 8th or so last year, and didn't make huge draft/FA improvements... let us be underrated and get up to 4th by the end.
 
"The Blazers were a below-average defensive team in the regular season and got smoked by the Rockets and Spurs in the playoffs. The additions of Steve Blake and Chris Kaman don't exactly move the needle on that end of the floor, especially in regard to forcing turnovers, where this team ranked dead last in 2013-14"

Who didn't get smoked by the Spurs in the playoffs but to say that the Blazers were smoked by the Rockets when we won the series is a joke.
 
SlyPokerDog said:
Who didn't get smoked by the Spurs in the playoffs but to say that the Blazers were smoked by the Rockets when we won the series is a joke.
Click to expand...

I think they meant got smoked defensively, not got blown out of the series. Defense is definitely the thing that will keep the Blazers from contending...offense is very good.
 
Minstrel said:
I think they meant got smoked defensively, not got blown out of the series. Defense is definitely the thing that will keep the Blazers from contending...offense is very good.
Click to expand...

The Blazers defense was better than the Rockets defense in that series. I don't see how you can consider that being smoked. Add in the fact that the Blazers won the series it would prove that the Blazers defense wasn't smoked.
 
Not to mention the Spurs had a higher margin of victory over both the Heat and the Thunder compared to the Blazers.
 
I could see a spot or two move up or down, but overall about right. Blake and Kaman aren't big moves. If no other moves are made I predict 50-54 wins
 
6th in the West. We finished 5th in the West last year. I'm not upset.
 
Yeah I think we will jump Dallas, Cleveland, Chicago, and Golden State. But I prefer to be lower to start out. We play best as under dogs.

On a side note I think Denver at 22 is way too low.
 
I thought the ranking was fair. Blazers played out of their minds during the first half of the season and won a series that could have gone either way.

Kaman and Blake could end up surprising the league, but I think/hope what is more likely going to surprise is the development of some young players. If not, could be a step back in overall record for the Blazers.

Am really hoping to take a step forward this this season, but I unfortunatley don't see it. Maybe if Lillard's comes in with intense defense, it would jump this team up.
 
The only thing that matters is where they end up at the end of the season.
 
No complaints overall since this stuff doesn't mean squat anyway. I think bumping the Warriors up that high is silly given the only major change is the acquisition of Livingston. With his knees, counting on him to move the needle seems a bit precarious. On paper, the Mavs did a major upgrade with Parsons & Chandler. It remains to be seen how that works out on the court, but I won't complain about them being ranked there at this point.

The moves the Blazers made weren't splashy, so you wouldn't expect much media attention. That said, I think Blake and Kaman are going to make a significant difference that most people nationwide, and here, are underestimating. The Blazers starters played competitively with everybody last season. It was the nosedive when the bench came in that cost a bunch of losses. Mo really didn't fit Stotts' system very well and probably cost as many wins as he did occasionally help avoid losses. Kaman and Blake both know how to play and will mesh well with what Stotts wants to do, both offensive and defensively. Add to that the improvement of CJ, Will & Robinson and I think that the Blazer will have a very solid second unit that won't lose big leads.

I couldn't care less about pre-season accolades. As much as is possible for a team coming off of a 54-win season, I want the Blazers to be NBA ninjas and smack the league by surprise.
 
SlyPokerDog said:
The Blazers defense was better than the Rockets defense in that series. I don't see how you can consider that being smoked. Add in the fact that the Blazers won the series it would prove that the Blazers defense wasn't smoked.
Click to expand...

I think Portland's defense did get smoked...they just scored enough to win anyway. Neither team's defense could stop the other team.

And the Rockets are ranked behind Portland, so I don't think there's any injustice there.
 
I thought the HOU series was about the only time we played good defense last season. It wasn't terrific, but it was better than nearly everything we saw in the regular season. So the main thrust of the argument is valid (we were a bad defensive team), but the example the author used to support that assertion was piss poor. Wes did an amazing job on Harden, and I thought it was a decent strategy to let Howard get his early in single-coverage and then just wear him out as the game dragged on.
 
I don't get the love affair with the Warriors. They were ranked above us going into last season too.

I also don't think Dallas is that much better. I think they got worse at point guard. They lost Vince Carter, Jose Calderon, Samuel Dalembert, and I think Shawn Marion is out the door as well.

They added Ray Felton, Tyson Chandler, and Chandler Parsons. I'm just really not that impressed. The team is still older than dirt. Extremely fragile. I would be surprised if they finish above us.
 
Natebishop3 said:
I don't get the love affair with the Warriors. They were ranked above us going into last season too.

I also don't think Dallas is that much better. I think they got worse at point guard. They lost Vince Carter, Jose Calderon, Samuel Dalembert, and I think Shawn Marion is out the door as well.

They added Ray Felton, Tyson Chandler, and Chandler Parsons. I'm just really not that impressed. The team is still older than dirt. Extremely fragile. I would be surprised if they finish above us.
Click to expand...

I like what Dallas did this summer. I agree with the short analysis that a lot has to do with Chandler's ability to stay healthy, but can't fault Dallas for fear of making moves. It's like Cuban plays his own fantasy basketball, only in real life.
 
The Warriors are volatile. With good health, they're really good. With key injuries, they're not so good. And they have guys who are injury-prone. The rankings seem to be predicated on the optimistic possibility.
 
Treaty_of_Batum said:
I like what Dallas did this summer. I agree with the short analysis that a lot has to do with Chandler's ability to stay healthy, but can't fault Dallas for fear of making moves. It's like Cuban plays his own fantasy basketball, only in real life.
Click to expand...

They somehow managed to stay older than dirt. Dallas added:

Richard Jefferson 34 years old
Tyson Chandler 31 years old
Rashard Lewis 34 years old
Chandler Parsons 25 years old
Raymond Felton 30 years old

Compared to:
Jose Calderon 32 years old
Shawn Marion 36 years old
Vince Carter 37 years old
Dajuan Blaire 25 years old
Samuel Dalembert 32 years old

The fact that they replaced Calderon, Marion, Carter, and Dalembert with Jefferson, Parsons, Felton, and Chandler doesn't really inspire a lot of hope in my eyes. Dirk is a year older. I just don't know. They were on the verge of not making the playoffs last year. At best, I think they're back in that 7th or 8th spot.
 
Last edited:
Minstrel said:
Old decent players are cheaper than young decent players. You make do with what you can get.
Click to expand...

I really think the only clear upgrade was Parsons. He was definitely a nice addition.

Chandler is such a tossup. The guy is so injury prone, and he's already been in the league 13 years. If he can stay healthy, he'll be a nice addition. I think they're going to really hurt at point guard though. Calderon wasn't a star, but the guy was significantly better than Felton or Devin Harris.
 
Natebishop3 said:
They somehow managed to stay older than dirt. Dallas added:

Richard Jefferson 34 years old
Tyson Chandler 31 years old
Rashard Lewis 34 years old
Chandler Parsons 25 years old
Raymond Felton 30 years old

Compared to:
Jose Calderon 32 years old
Shawn Marion 36 years old
Vince Carter 37 years old
Dajuan Blaire 25 years old
Samuel Dalembert 32 years old

The fact that they replaced Calderon, Marion, Carter, and Dalembert with Jefferson, Parsons, Felton, and Chandler doesn't really inspire a lot of hope in my eyes. Dirk is a year older. I just don't know. They were on the verge of not making the playoffs last year. At best, I think they're back in that 7th or 8th spot.
Click to expand...

I suppose you can just compare ages coming in and ages going out, but Mavs probably see it different. The acquisition they are relying on most to help them next season is a 25 yr old and 31 yr old. I think you have to factor in Chandler is also injury prone which Dallas is probably more concerned about than his age, but being that their top prize FA is 25 yrs old, i doubt Mavs are concerned that a couple of role players are 34 yrs old. (They got Jefferson on a minimum contract)

Also, I suspect Cuban is working with where Dirk is in his career and wanting to find players to contribute today rather than youth who will take time to develop. So signing vets makes sense.

If Tyson Chandler Parsons, do what the mavs are hoping, they have greatly improved from last yr, IMO.
 
Odd that Dallas added both Tyson Chandler and Chandler Parsons. Are there any other Chandler's in the league?
 
Treaty_of_Batum said:
I suppose you can just compare ages coming in and ages going out, but Mavs probably see it different. The acquisition they are relying on most to help them next season is a 25 yr old and 31 yr old. I think you have to factor in Chandler is also injury prone which Dallas is probably more concerned about than his age, but being that their top prize FA is 25 yrs old, i doubt Mavs are concerned that a couple of role players are 34 yrs old. (They got Jefferson on a minimum contract)

Also, I suspect Cuban is working with where Dirk is in his career and wanting to find players to contribute today rather than youth who will take time to develop. So signing vets makes sense.

If Tyson Chandler Parsons, do what the mavs are hoping, they have greatly improved from last yr, IMO.
Click to expand...

Really age isn't the best indicator. I was originally think about how long they've been in the league.

Chandler - 13 years
Jefferson - 13 years
Lewis - 16 years
Felton - 9 years

That's a lot of mileage. I actually thought Chandler, Jefferson, and Lewis were older than they are, but I forgot that Chandler and Lewis were both high schoolers. My main point though, is that I don't think the talent coming in replaces enough of the talent going out.

Carter
Marion
Calderon
Blaire
Dalembert

They all contributed last season. Obviously Parsons is a huge pickup, but is Felton going to replace Calderon's production? Will Jefferson replace Carter? Will Chandler replace Blaire and Dalembert? I'm not so sure.
 
They could see if Matthew Perry's available. He played Chandler on "Friends".
 
Warriors over rated yet again. How do they jump spots after losing their first round? What ever #underdogstatus
 
The fact were 8th is a surprise. I expected is outside of the top ten mostly because our biggest issue was D and we did nothing to really upgrade it drastically. Plus while we are a fun team to watch we are still portland and until LA/Dame become bigger names we will be written off by the media as a contender for top 3 in the west.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

e_blazer
NBA Power Rankings
Replies
19
Views
718
rasheedfan2005
rasheedfan2005
Sinobas
power rankings
Replies
13
Views
1K
magnifier661
magnifier661
magnifier661
Hollinger Power Rankings
2 3
Replies
67
Views
6K
maxiep
maxiep
MIXUM
Power Rankings... wow
Replies
16
Views
1K
HailBlazers
HailBlazers
Nate4Prez
NBA.com 1st Power Rankings
Replies
4
Views
837
Nate Dogg
Nate Dogg

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top