Team in that West that surprises me and that I think will eventually fall and be replaced in the top 8 with IP's Phoenix team is Memphis. Right now they are riding the hot starts of Brook Lopez, Andrea Bargnani, Louis Amundson, and Omar Casspri. When the stats for those guys cool off, Memphis will fall fast.
Or is it possible that the Memphis GM is an above average judge of talent and ability and thus made good decisions that others questioned throughout the draft? I mean, there's got to be some way to prove that... Oh wait, Didn't Wes Matthews drop 12 points in 17 minutes against the Spurs last night?
No idea about the other three, but I don't expect Lopez's numbers to decline. He's the real deal.
I voted Memphis into the playoffs, but I think the issue for those that didn't was that the pieces wouldn't mesh very well.
I think Amundson is benefitting from how fast the Suns are playing so I don't expect those numbers are gonna drop. Bargs' numbers are for real, they are slightly better then they were the second half of last year. Casspi I have high hopes for, he'll either join the starting line up now that KMart is out or he'll hit a massive Rookie Wall.
If these numbers were any reasoning to be tooting one's horn KC believe me I would, as the Boxers from the numbers look to be an obvious playoff team and even have those numbers while having a slow start from Stephen Jackson and having Ramon Sessions being squeezed out of a starting job in Minny by Johnny Flyn.
But I don't think they are. I think they are just another measuring stick to judge. My argument was always that the Boxers were based on rebounding and defense and built to stop wing strength teams. I think we were disregarded in a lot of circles because the team is a more chemistry team without the superstars, ala some teams. But I think the real Rockets last year showed a great defensive oriented team, with great chemistry and without superstars can go far and the numbers show that the Boxers can rebound like crazy and can play defense. I said don't disregard Wright, Morrow and Hill as they would be significant offensive factors off the bench and the numbers show they've been doing very well.
But again, I don't think that proves my point. I just think it one of many ways and matrices to look at to see how your team was constructed.
So, if you have a superstar heavy team relying on superstars having great years and good role players but the stats show that your superstars are not producing like they were or that your role players aren't even good enough to be getting playing time in real life, then maybe that team wasn't as well constructed as thought.
If you have a team full of young players and players who aren't great but are on bad teams and everyone could look at that team and know there was no way it would succeed in the real NBA but that team is putting up big numbers because the young players are producing, though maybe not efficiently, and those other players are putting up big numbers because, well because they are getting unwarranted playing time because their team sucks, then these numbers might make that team look a ton better than it really is.
I'm not saying what category your team fits in or that it fits in any of those categories. All I'm saying is this is just another way to look at things and with a small sample size and young season and with the various ways one can interpret data, I wouldn't hang your hat as your team being any better or worse than their actual placing in the vote solely on these numbers.
I know I'm not and thus far the numbers are making the Boxers look better than a bunch of people thought. But a couple of months from now we will see. Long seasons and injuries can do strange things to numbers.
Topic: 2009 CB NBA Draft as a fantasy basketball league. (Read 22838 times)