2011 CB draft: How does my team look?/division rankings

[StartOrien]

Question: Which team (thus far assembled) is most likely to rack up 55+ regular season wins but nosedive in the playoffs?

layup

[indeedproceed]

Question: Which team (thus far assembled) is most likely to rack up 55+ regular season wins but nosedive in the playoffs?

layup

haha. I love to hate LeBron, but thre is no way a team with LeBron, Billups, and newly knighted Tyson Chandler goes quiet in the playoffs.

[StartOrien]

Couldn't resist the easy joke.

OKC is a great team, but in a 7 game series I think they're going to have some real trouble with any kind of height.

[indeedproceed]

Couldn't resist the easy joke.

OKC is a great team, but in a 7 game series I think they're going to have some real trouble with any kind of height.

I think that's got some real validation to it. That was one of the teams I was thinking of.

[celticpride07]

Couldn't resist the easy joke.

OKC is a great team, but in a 7 game series I think they're going to have some real trouble with any kind of height.

shards underrated on defense hes 6'10" and long.. dalembert and JO are solid defensively and gooodshot blockers..how many teams are going to have a kobe AND melo stopper? how are you going to outscore okc?

[indeedproceed]

Couldn't resist the easy joke.

OKC is a great team, but in a 7 game series I think they're going to have some real trouble with any kind of height.

shards underrated on defense hes 6'10" and long.. dalembert and JO are solid defensively and gooodshot blockers..how many teams are going to have a kobe AND melo stopper? how are you going to outscore okc?

The thing about OKC is that you got no inside presence on offense, and you got a guy (Dalembert) who isn't going to wow anyone. If a team has a reliable defensive monster at center, that means layups and dunks got a whole lot harder. Rashard will force guys to drift out to over him, but Dalembert isn't going to get the same consideration, and he's not dangerous enough that you have to keep a man glued to him.

EDIT: And who is saying Rashard Lewis's defense is underrated besides Roy? That one doesn't seem to hit home for me.

[indeedproceed]

Although saying Kobe is going to flop in the playoffs is a little bit bold. He's never fell out in the first round when he had another start on the team.

[celticpride07]

Couldn't resist the easy joke.

OKC is a great team, but in a 7 game series I think they're going to have some real trouble with any kind of height.

shards underrated on defense hes 6'10" and long.. dalembert and JO are solid defensively and gooodshot blockers..how many teams are going to have a kobe AND melo stopper? how are you going to outscore okc?

The thing about OKC is that you got no inside presence on offense, and you got a guy (Dalembert) who isn't going to wow anyone. If a team has a reliable defensive monster at center, that means layups and dunks got a whole lot harder. Rashard will force guys to drift out to over him, but Dalembert isn't going to get the same consideration, and he's not dangerous enough that you have to keep a man glued to him.

EDIT: And who is saying Rashard Lewis's defense is underrated besides Roy? That one doesn't seem to hit home for me.

yeah i believe it was roy.

if you double kobe or melo..shard or mo will rain threes and jumpers all game. its not like rondo being wide open when teams double the celts and he shoots bricks.

EDIT: could always start JO or hickson at pf against certain height/player matchups

[indeedproceed]

Couldn't resist the easy joke.

OKC is a great team, but in a 7 game series I think they're going to have some real trouble with any kind of height.

shards underrated on defense hes 6'10" and long.. dalembert and JO are solid defensively and gooodshot blockers..how many teams are going to have a kobe AND melo stopper? how are you going to outscore okc?

The thing about OKC is that you got no inside presence on offense, and you got a guy (Dalembert) who isn't going to wow anyone. If a team has a reliable defensive monster at center, that means layups and dunks got a whole lot harder. Rashard will force guys to drift out to over him, but Dalembert isn't going to get the same consideration, and he's not dangerous enough that you have to keep a man glued to him.

EDIT: And who is saying Rashard Lewis's defense is underrated besides Roy? That one doesn't seem to hit home for me.

yeah i believe it was roy.

if you double kobe or melo..shard or mo will rain threes and jumpers all game. its not like rondo being wide open when teams double the celts and he shoots bricks.

Yeah, that could work...but are Melo and Kobe humble enough/dedicated enough to find the open man consistently?

Because to this point in their careers, neither applies to either.

[celticpride07]

Couldn't resist the easy joke.

OKC is a great team, but in a 7 game series I think they're going to have some real trouble with any kind of height.

shards underrated on defense hes 6'10" and long.. dalembert and JO are solid defensively and gooodshot blockers..how many teams are going to have a kobe AND melo stopper? how are you going to outscore okc?

The thing about OKC is that you got no inside presence on offense, and you got a guy (Dalembert) who isn't going to wow anyone. If a team has a reliable defensive monster at center, that means layups and dunks got a whole lot harder. Rashard will force guys to drift out to over him, but Dalembert isn't going to get the same consideration, and he's not dangerous enough that you have to keep a man glued to him.

EDIT: And who is saying Rashard Lewis's defense is underrated besides Roy? That one doesn't seem to hit home for me.

yeah i believe it was roy.

if you double kobe or melo..shard or mo will rain threes and jumpers all game. its not like rondo being wide open when teams double the celts and he shoots bricks.

Yeah, that could work...but are Melo and Kobe humble enough/dedicated enough to find the open man consistently?

Because to this point in their careers, neither applies to either.

i really think kobe has changed a lot over the years. kobe has got his teamates involved so much more the past seasons and he still has the ability to take over a game as we've seen if he needs to.  also mo and shard are the types of starters that know there role and play it well..they don't need to put up huge numbers.

[PosImpos]

Atlantic Division:

1. 76ers -- Very good defensive team; would rely mostly on Wade for scoring, and would have some problems with floor spacing.  There wouldn't be much scoring from the frontcourt, which is an issue.  In fact, nobody on this team other than Wade is likely to score more than 15 pts a game.

2. Nets -- Irving should probably start; very solid lineup offensively, though Conley / Hamilton are not reliable 3 pt threats.  Might have issues defensively against certain matchups with Scola / Perkins (neither is a great defender away from the basket).

3. Celtics -- Lacking in shooting, and I'm not sure about how well that backcourt fits together.  Duncan / Monroe / Gibson could work well, but I think this team might lean a bit too heavily on Duncan to score 15-20 points a night.

4. Knicks -- Lacks passing, only 3 point threat in the starting lineup in Jameer Nelson, undersized frontcourt of West, Blair, and Horford.  I don't really see these pieces fitting together that well.



Central Division:

1. Pistons -- This team would be extremely good in a couple years.  Right now they'd at least be quite exciting, and possibly relatively competitive.  There'd be times when their shooting would really be lacking, though.

2. Pacers -- This team would be pretty good; they're basically the real-life Grizzlies only with Parker instead of Conley and Lee instead of Tony Allen.  I think I'd start Paul George, though, and I'd rather not have Ron Artest and Z-Bo on the same team for chemistry purposes.

3. Bucks -- D-Will and Monta?  I'm not seeing it, especially with T-Mac off the bench.  Too many guys want the ball.  Jamison and Brand doesn't sit well with me either.  Collison / Brown as primary backups in the frontcour tseems very iffy to me as well.

4. Bulls -- Skeptical about starting Wallace at PF, especially with Noah at C  (lacking in size against true centers).  Otherwise the lineup has a decent amount of offense, but looks to lack in defense.  I'm also not sure how well these players fit around Nash.


Southeast Division:

1. Bullets (Wizards) -- I like this team.  Looks to me like a better version of the Nuggets at the end of this past season.  Granger / Aldridge isn't a champion combo in my book, but they'd be competitive.  I like Gortat in there, too.

2. Magic -- Paul and Jennings on the same team?  Seems like overkill to me.  Wasn't Jason Terry on the Bulls?  The backcourt for this team seems like a bunch of talent put together that doesn't really mix well in my opinion.  The frontcourt would have serious defensive issues.

3. Army Ants (Hawks) -- I thought Gerald Wallace was on another team?  I'm confused.  Anyway, this team has shooting issues, but if healthy would be pretty solid defensively.  I'd start Caron and have Marcus Thornton play a Delonte West kind of role.

4. Samurai (Heat) -- Aren't these the Nets from a couple years ago, only with Klay Thompson and Kevin Love?  I wouldn't want to see this team play defense.  Plenty of floor spacing, at least, but no play makers or above average 1 on 1 defenders to be found anywhere on the roster.




Southwest Division:

1. Spurs -- You're asking for trouble relying on that frontcourt, but if healthy and locked in, this team could be pretty darn good.  But that's a pretty large if -- especially with Vince being expected to come off the bench.

2. Mavs -- Bargnani / Howard is an intriguing combination.  I don't like Glen Davis and Carl Landry on the same team, though.  I'm not sure the shooting at 1-3 is reliable enough, but it could be okay.

3. Grizzlies -- This team has potential, though I'm not sure how good it would be right now.  I think it might rely too much on Rose for scoring.

4. Cavs (Edited.  Profanity and masked profanity are against forum rules and may result in discipline.? why are these in southwest?) -- Garnett should not be starting at C every night.  This team would be pretty bad defensively, but I can appreciate the desire to see constant Rubio - Griffin alley-oops.  Otherwise I'm not seeing it.


Northwest Division:

1. Blazers -- I'm skeptical about Lowry / Allen / Delfino being productive enough offensively, but they'd defend well enough.  Amare and Bogut would be a scary good front court, assuming they both stay healthy (which is a big assumption).  I like the bench, though I think Derrick Williams should start assuming he can defend the 3.

2. Nuggets -- I'm skeptical about how well this team would defend, but I like the floor spacing.  Hill and Johnson would need to split playmaking responsibilities effectively (which I think they probably could do).


3. Thunder -- This team would be pretty awful defensively (only good defender in the lineup is Kobe, and he's old).  they wouldn't lack for scoring, though I wonder how well Kobe and Melo would really work together.  A stat stuffer like Drey Blatche would probably hate playing with Kobe.

4. Jazz -- I like this team, although I think there might be issues with floor spacing at times.  I think there's a logjam for minutes on the wing with Crawford and Jefferson both coming off the bench.  Gasol / Cousins could be a solid combo as long as they both buy into playing good defense.


Pacific Division:

1. Dino-Boxer-Bots (Kings) -- This is a very good team, although the Millsap / Diaw tandem at the 4 is a little undersized.  But really otherwise there's not much to complain about with this team, as long as Billups, Matthews, and LeBron can all shoot well enough from outside consistently (and they should).

2. Suns -- If that backcourt holds up and Bynum stays healthy, this team could be pretty good.  Better hope Marvin Williams can become a good spot up shooter from outside and defend.  If he can and all else goes right, this team is very solid.

3. Warriors -- I'd start Baron if only because he'd be useless unless motivated by a starting job.  I think Derrick Favors gets wasted here cause he wouldn't get enough minutes.  Camby should start over Deandre.

4. Conspiracy (Lakers) -- Not liking Lee at center.  I'm skeptical about this team playing good defense, and they also lack a clear #1 scorer.




Top teams:

Dino-Boxer-Bots (Kings)
76ers
Suns
Blazers
Bullets (Wizards)

[Kane3387]

I'm very eager to hear why the consensus is that definitely Portland and Denver and sometimes Okc are considered better then Utah.... Is it depth? Most playoff teams play with an eight or nine man rotation. If I stand pat then Haywood is starting. My eight man rotation is very balanced, versatile, deep, and experienced. When I look at the match ups I just see Utah having the majority of the advantages. Three seven footers, a clutch leader and scorer, a solid distributor and conductor, a good shooter, the best sixth man, and a backup wing who would start on most teams.

Sincerely would like to know why my team can't get it done in multiple seven game series.

Thoughts?

Thanks.

[indeedproceed]

I've got me over Utah in 4 of the 5 matchups, significantly so a 3 of those. I also like my depth better. That doesn't make your team bad, or lottery bound, but I have mine as better (big surprise, right?

[Kane3387]

4. Jazz -- I like this team, although I think there might be issues with floor spacing at times.  I think there's a logjam for minutes on the wing with Crawford and Jefferson both coming off the bench.  Gasol / Cousins could be a solid combo as long as they both buy into playing good defense.

Young shot 39% from three, and pierce has become a very good three point shooter. Miller has a good mid-range game as does gasol. Haywood will start and cousins the big off the bench but their minutes will similar. Cousins will be off the bench since he can guard both the 4 and 5. Crawford will be the main backup guard period much like in Atlanta. Whenever he is in I want him being aggressive and looking to score. He is also a big shot taker and maker.

I just don't see who the leader is on Denver. Bosh and Johnson aren't cut out for that role. I don't see what Portland can do about pierce, and I think Utah matches up well with them at every other position.

As for OKC, the plan is to let Kobe try and get his which will likely be inefficient. And then feast on Lewis in the paint.

[PosImpos]

I'm very eager to hear why the consensus is that definitely Portland and Denver and sometimes Okc are considered better then Utah.... Is it depth? Most playoff teams play with an eight or nine man rotation. If I stand pat then Haywood is starting. My eight man rotation is very balanced, versatile, deep, and experienced. When I look at the match ups I just see Utah having the majority of the advantages. Three seven footers, a clutch leader and scorer, a solid distributor and conductor, a good shooter, the best sixth man, and a backup wing who would start on most teams.

Sincerely would like to know why my team can't get it done in multiple seven game series.

Thoughts?

Thanks.

Alright, let's do a comparison.



Jazz:

PG - Andre Miller
SG - Nick Young / Jamal Crawford
SF - Paul Pierce / Richard Jefferson
PF - Pau Gasol
C - DeMarcus Cousins / Brendan Haywood


You've got a couple guys you can rely on for scoring there, though nobody on the team is a truly transcendent scorer anymore.  You also lack any truly great defensive players, though as a whole the team shouldn't be too bad as long as DMC and Pau are locked in.  I'm not sure how reliable a backcourt of Miller / Young / Crawford is as far as spacing goes.

Overall I think your team is solid but it doesn't have anything that really wows me.  It looks like a lower seed playoff team at best, unless DMC turns into a 20-10 guy.


As for the Blazers, they have the combo of Amare / Bogut in the front court, which is a very good two way combo.  Tough to deal with.  The rest of the team is less intimidating, though Derrick Williams could perhaps be quite good, and Lowry has shown the ability to be a very solid all around point guard capable of running a team (provided it's up-tempo).  The roster doesn't look to have any real defensive deficiencies, either, other than Amare.

I don't like the Thunder very much; I think they'd be awful defensively and I don't see how they'd share the ball.  Still, Kobe and Melo would be dangerous enough that I think they'd be a tough team for many to deal with.  I think your team would defeat them easily in the playoffs, though, simply because you have a lot more size and inside scoring.

The Nuggets, on the other hand, have acceptable defense and balanced scoring up and down the lineup.  Everybody in the starting lineup can hit a deep mid-range shot with very good consistency, and they have a couple top scorers in Joe Johnson and Bosh, though neither is a clear #1.  They'd really need Bosh and Nene to focus on the boards, since both have a tendency to stray from the basket and not grab a ton of boards, but I think they'd be okay.  Honestly, I think the Nuggets would run the Jazz out of the building, and they are also better defensively.