↓ Login/Logout ↓
Schedule/Results
↓ Roster ↓
Salaries
↓ Archives ↓
↓ About ↓

Pistons projected 10th in East by ESPN

Tom Haberstroh of ESPN projected the Eastern Conference standings, and he has the Pistons finishing 10th:

I’d be more excited about the Pistons had they addressed their spacing issues brought about by Greg Monroe and Andre Drummond, but then they exacerbated the problem by signing notorious long-2 maven Josh Smith.

No doubt, Smith will improve their score prevention on the defensive end, but I’m still not sure how this team can put up enough points to be a playoff team. Can Kentavious Caldwell-Pope rescue a dreadful backcourt?

I have a huge issue with Haberstroh’s assessment Larry Sanders and John Henson – not Greg Monroe and Andre Drummond – are the East’s best young frontcourt, and I have minor disagreements with his rankings. But his projections mostly fit my seeding tiers:

  • 1: Heat
  • 2-4: Nets, Bulls, Pacers
  • 5: Knicks
  • 6-7: Hawks, Wizards
  • 8-11 : Cavaliers, Bucks, Pistons, Raptors
  • 12-15: Magic, Celtics,* Bobcats, 76ers

*There’s probably no team I feel like I have a worse grasp on than the Celtics. Today, I have them in the 12-15 range. Tomorrow, I might push them up a notch and expand the higher tier to 8-12. Maybe I should just place Boston in a tier of its own at 12.

That’s not to say the Pistons can’t climb into to the 6-7 range, and I think they’re closer to doing that than falling below 11, but that’s basically how I have it slotted right now. Of course, within the Pistons’ tier, there’s a huge difference between 8 – making the playoffs – and 9, 10 and 11. Unfortunately, if my projections hold true (they won’t), four near-equal teams will produce only one playoff appearance among them.

135 Comments

  • Jul 25, 20134:55 pm
    by sebastian

    Reply

    What do those ESPN asshole know? Answer: Nothing!
    Also, OUR back court will need to prove the naysayers wrong.

  • Jul 25, 20135:07 pm
    by MongoSlade86

    Reply

    I think they tried to address the spacing issues by bring in Chauncey and Gigi Datome. I think it’ll be up to Cheeks to make it happen. If he is a wise coach he will only allow all 3 (Smith, moose and Dre) to play together for 20-25 mins max. Also without Smith do you still believe the hawks are a top 6 or 7 seed?

    • Jul 25, 20135:25 pm
      by BC

      Reply

      I agree, but I’d even go as far as only 15-20 min per game.

      • Jul 25, 20136:32 pm
        by Otis

        Reply

        I’m sorry, but it’s just not a proven winning formula to have your three best players share the court for fifteen minutes. All the talent in the world isn’t enough to make a winner if the pieces don’t fit. We have possibly the worst backcourt in the league, and are relying on the acquisition of a rookie, a 37 year old and a first year foreign player to improve it.
         
        So the trade-off is that you’ve concentrated almost all of your resources on three guys who could struggle mightily together and present more weakness than strength, with absolutely no above average perimeter players, so that once in a while your big lineup will have the matchup advantage (mostly against bad teams with weak front lines). It doesn’t make sense to me. This is like a homeless person who sleeps in a box but wears a Rolex.

        • Jul 25, 20137:43 pm
          by tarsier

          Reply

          “I’m sorry, but it’s just not a proven winning formula to have your three best players share the court for fifteen minutes.”

          Is it a proven losing formula? 

          • Jul 25, 20138:23 pm
            by sebastian

            Otis, I thought that LeBron, D-Wade, and Bosh were the three best players on that Heat team, who currently are the back-to-back NBA champs. (It pains me to type this fact.)

          • Jul 25, 201310:49 pm
            by tarsier

            Otis’ point was that it is a problem if your best three are only sharing the court for a few minutes each game.

            James, Wade, and Bosh spend a lot more than 15 mpg on the floor together.

          • Jul 26, 201310:14 am
            by Huddy

            I’m not sure but I would bet the Spurs come close. 

          • Jul 26, 201310:46 am
            by tarsier

            Not really. Duncan, Parker, and Leonard were on the floor together for 22.6 mpg last season.

          • Jul 26, 201312:41 pm
            by Huddy

            I was talking Ginobli and prior to this season when he was definitely the 3rd best player.  Having him off the bench really makes them strong even when their second unit is out.

          • Jul 26, 20131:26 pm
            by tarsier

            I can only look at lineup stats as far back as 07-08. But here goes.

            07-08: 16.1 mpg
            08-09: 15.4 mpg
            09-10: 11.7 mpg
            10-11: 18.1 mpg
            11-12: 10.3 mpg

            I can see where there’d be more cause for concern with the Monroe-Drummond-Smith trio just in that it is harder to put them all on the floor together if you really need to when closing out a tight game. But yeah, there is really no need for them to consistently share the floor.

          • Jul 27, 20131:04 am
            by Max

            Good job guys.  There’s proof for you.  

  • Jul 25, 20135:12 pm
    by King Ryan

    Reply

    why will  atl be better than det? I dont see it

    • Jul 25, 20136:01 pm
      by oats

      Reply

      Because they are practically the same team as last season. They replaced Josh Smith with Paul Millsap who is pretty much the same player in terms of production. He doesn’t offer the versatility of Smith because he really can’t play the 3, and his defense isn’t quite as good, but there really isn’t a significant downgrade there. If Schroeder is good for a few minutes off the bench while Teague and Horford continue steadily getting better then they should easily be able to absorb the relatively minor drop in talent from losing Smith. I really don’t see much reason to think they will be any worse than they were last year. Last year’s Atlanta was a top 6 team in the East that gave the Pacers a rather competitive playoff series. I’d say that after those top 5 they are the next most likely team to make the playoffs.

      • Jul 25, 20137:50 pm
        by tarsier

        Reply

        I think you underestimate the difference between Smith and Millsap. Millsap provides just as much ability to play SF as Smith, but he is significantly less good. I’d rather have him at $9.5M/yr than Smith at $13.5M/yr, but still.

        The Hawks also lost Pachulia and they lose some of their advantage of just having played together for a long time. 

        • Jul 25, 20138:08 pm
          by oats

          Reply

          Paul Millsap is a way more effective shooter than Smith. We’re talking TS% of .500 for Smith versus .550 for Millsap. He also doesn’t turn it over as much as Smith. He’s a significantly better offensive player, and a significantly worse defender. The end result is pretty darn close. Smith is the better player, but we aren’t talking a big difference.
           
          As for Pachulia, so what? There really is not a significant difference between him and Johan Petro. They also brought in Elton Brand, so their big man rotation is probably a little better this year even with the Smith for Millsap swap. The playing together for a long time thing likely negates that, but I just don’t see where that actually equates to a real drop off for them as a team.

          • Jul 25, 20139:50 pm
            by I HATE FRANK

            Josh according to snygery rates as one the best defenders in the league…. He and Milsap are not close at all … 

        • Jul 26, 201310:19 am
          by Huddy

          Reply

          It’s not as simple as Smith is better at defense and Milsap is better at offense.  Smith is a much better defender and Milsap is a more efficient shooter, but smith is a better passer, more explosive, runs the break better And has the body to play with bigger guys.

          • Jul 26, 20134:47 pm
            by oats

            There passing numbers are closer than you are suggesting. We’re talking 1 assist and 1 extra turnover for Smith a game most years. Smith is better at getting assists, but his extra turnover easily cancels that out. As for the other stuff, that is true, but it really does make him a more productive player. His running the break doesn’t translate to him contributing more points (almost identical per 36 scoring), and he is a way less efficient scorer including that extra fast break benefit. I don’t care about his better athleticism if it doesn’t actually translate to better play. It does give him a pretty big defensive advantage though.
             
            My stance is pretty simple. Smith is the better defender by a pretty wide margin. Millsap is a significantly better offensive player with a much more reliable jump shot. Smith is the better overall player, but the difference is not all that significant.

      • Jul 26, 201310:48 am
        by I HATE FRANK

        Reply

        Josh Smith and Millsap stats seem close, But impact CLEARLY goes to Josh smith

        Double-doubles – Smith 29  vs Millsap 15
        20+ Point games – Smith 26 vs Millsap15
        10+ Rebound games – Smith 31 vs 16
        5+ Assist games – Smith 31 vs 12
        and Defensively we all know Josh is a better defender, and more versatile…

        Any argument that Josh Smith and Millsap are the same is boarderline retarded, or you have seen them play…and Josh Smith moved to the 4, because the Hawks couldnt get any production out of the Center position. He played SF coming into the league…. He has defend SF and PF…. effectively

        its NOT CLOSE!

        • Jul 27, 20133:08 am
          by oats

          Reply

          First of all, you can’t just look at how often they hit certain milestones without also taking into account minutes played. Smith played more minutes than Millsap, which gives him more of an ability to hit those milestone numbers. That’s just not an effective means of identifying impact.
           
          If you look at stats, the end result is that Millsap is a way better offensive player and Smith is a much better defender. That’s actually true, but slightly exaggerated. In my opinion the stats for measuring defense are still pretty lacking. This is why I’ve maintained the entire time that Smith is in fact the better player. The argument I’m making is that Millsap’s offense makes him reasonably close, and then the type of improvement that guys like Horford and Teague usually make should make up the rest of the difference. I’m not expecting Millsap to completely replace Smith, but typical progression from young guys that are developing in a typical manner should be enough to make up that drop off. That’s why I said in the original post that I’m counting on improvement from those two guys in my projection for the team to stay more or less the same. Let’s make this abundantly clear, Smith is definitely better than Millsap. They are losing something in this exchange. They also have the pieces in hand to absorb that drop off without it adversely effecting the team all that much. That’s my point.

  • Jul 25, 20135:33 pm
    by Vic

    Reply

    If Atl had Josh Smirh, horford and Drummond the media would be pumping them as the next dynasty in the east, probably a lock for the playoffs. In Detroit, it’s always an uphill battle with the media. Even when pistons do get championships, They hardly deserve it according to national media.

    • Jul 25, 20136:04 pm
      by oats

      Reply

      Atlanta has a solid young point guard, and Horford has the shooting range to make the 3 big man lineup work. Detroit has neither. They also have Kyle Korver who is far more likely to be a 40% shooter from beyond the arc than anyone on Detroit. That Atlanta team would just be a lot better than Detroit, so they should be seen as a lock for the playoffs. That in no way changes the way Detroit should be viewed though.

    • Jul 25, 20137:39 pm
      by tarsier

      Reply

      Wait, are you claiming the Hawks are some sort of media darling? If Detroit had Smith, Horford, and Drummond, they would get a lot more media love too. You know why? Because Horford is a lot better than Monroe at this point.

      Remember Boston’s most recent championship? Throughout the season, the media was basically split on whether Boston or Detroit was the class of the East. The Pistons got plenty of respect when they were good. It’s just that they are no longer. Drop your martyr complex. 

      • Jul 25, 20137:45 pm
        by Prince Vegeta

        Reply

        Horford also played along side Smith and a good set of guards (remember Joe Smith?  he was actually pretty solid for Atlanta), I wouldn’t necessary say Horford is an upgrade over Monroe if you factor last year as an outlier (Monroe was statistically much better his first two).

        • Jul 25, 20137:52 pm
          by tarsier

          Reply

          Don’t get distracted by the stats (which still favor Horford). Horford is a very good defender. Monroe is an awful defender. That’s a very important difference, especially for a big man.

    • Jul 25, 20139:49 pm
      by Vic

      Reply

      Teams that lose their best defender don’t get better.Period. Detroit has proven that several times.

      Name a team that loses their best defender, and then got better.

      • Jul 25, 201311:52 pm
        by Dan Feldman

        Reply

        In 2007-08, the Nuggets’ best defender was Marcus Camby, who was the reigning Defensive Player of the Year. That year, Denver went 50-32 and was swept in the first round.

        In the offseason the Nuggets traded him to the Clippers.

        In 2008-09, the Nuggets went 54-28 and reached the Western Conference Finals.

        • Jul 26, 201312:08 am
          by Max

          Reply

          I’m guessing both teams lost in the first round.   Denver always wins a lot of home games during the regular season due to altitude and then craps out in the playoffs. 

          • Jul 26, 201312:10 am
            by City of Klompton

            “In 2008-09, the Nuggets went 54-28 and reached the Western Conference Finals.”

            What fine reading skills you have, Max. 

          • Jul 26, 201312:10 am
            by Dan Feldman

            I’ll try again with bolding:

            In 2007-08, the Nuggets’ best defender was Marcus Camby, who was the reigning Defensive Player of the Year. That year, Denver went 50-32 and was swept in the first round.

            In the offseason the Nuggets traded him to the Clippers.

            In 2008-09, the Nuggets went 54-28 and reached the Western Conference Finals

        • Jul 26, 201312:13 am
          by Max

          Reply

          Wow that was fast.  Impressive you guys.  My bad.   You know I’m right in general though and I should have known that one cause it was all about Chauncey Billups.   Best season the Nuggets ever had.  

          • Jul 26, 201312:30 am
            by Max

            And btw: that’s why the Nuggets improved.   They lost Camby but they got Billups who had a healthy great season and was used to getting to the conference finals every year.   

          • Jul 26, 201310:17 am
            by tarsier

            They also lost Iverson. That’s pretty huge considering that he had arguably had the best season of his career the previous year.

            The Hawks lost Smith but also gained Millsap.

            I don’t think the Hawks are any less likely to improve this season than the Nuggets were that season. But the fact that the Nuggets did in fact improve doesn’t help the odds for the Hawks any. It just shows it to be possible. 

        • Jul 26, 20136:44 am
          by Vic

          Reply

          Ok great so the Pistons got another teams best defender, AND Billups whose leadership and intelligence can get a team that lost their best defender to the conference finals….

          And Atlanta is still better?
          Wow. You guys just proved my point with extra evidence. 

          • Jul 26, 20139:09 am
            by tarsier

            I don’t think most people are claiming that the Hawks will be better than last year. But they don’t need to be to stay ahead of the Pistons. Just like the Nuggets lost Camby and Iverson and gained Billups (an apparent downgrade in talent), the Hawks lost Smith and gained MIllsap.

            I put Atlanta and Detroit in the same tier. Maybe it’s my Pistons bias. But Atlanta could get worse, Detroit better, and the Hawks still stay well above the Pistons. So your point, whether correct or not (and in general, it is correct that losing good players hurts teams), is somewhat lacking.

          • Jul 26, 201312:07 pm
            by Dan Feldman

            Nobody proved your point, because your point is wrong. Teams lose players and gain players, and sometimes that makes them worse, and sometimes that makes them better.

            You said, “Teams that lose their best defender don’t get better.Period.” I proved that wasn’t true. You set the terms of the debate, not me.

  • Jul 25, 20136:01 pm
    by tom

    Reply

    I really don’t understand the argument that the Wizards will be anywhere near the playoffs. Porter sucked in summer league and reeks of flop to me – but even if he’s not a flop he is a rookie and will need to adjust. Beal shot 41% from the floor and Wall is good but not a super star. Is there something else I’m missing?

    • Jul 25, 20136:11 pm
      by Prince Vegeta

      Reply

      Erryone in ESPN gets tipsy around 4, allows them to think that doing the Wall dance really does transform you into Isiah

      • Jul 25, 20136:20 pm
        by Prince Vegeta

        Reply

        Interesting tidbit: 
        Rodney Stuckey and Bradley Beal are nearly identical statistically, and Stuckey actually has a better career win shares (their career highs are approximately the same as well).  

        • Jul 25, 20136:27 pm
          by Prince Vegeta

          Reply

          *better win shares than Wall

        • Jul 25, 20137:20 pm
          by tarsier

          Reply

          Remember how we expected Stuckey to improve for years and years? That’s because most young players do. Beal is one of those young players who is probably about to do so.

          Heck, just look at the difference between a Beal who defenses can focus on as the main scoring threat and one who is playing with Wall. Also, it helps that Beal has a lot more range than Stuckey. 

          • Jul 26, 20131:08 am
            by Jon

            and that he actually plays shooting guard as opposed to stuckey who gets his shooting guard stats while playing point guard… another thing to add.  beal sucked for the entire first half and shooting percentages were south of 40%. i didn’t look it up, but i’m assuming that his second half numbers are better than a lot of numbers stuckey has put up

    • Jul 25, 20136:35 pm
      by oats

      Reply

      @ tom. Porter has nothing to do with why Washington should be good. It’s pretty much all Wall and Beal. That team looked completely different with Wall than without him. They were 24-25 with him, and without him they were 5-28. Keep in mind he missed most of those games in the early part of the season, so they went 24-25 when they really didn’t have anything to gain by winning. Bradley Beal hit over 46% of his 3 point attempts after Wall got healthy. He shot only a little over 32% on 3s when Wall was out. Similarly, he shot roughly 47% from the field with Wall, but only 37% without him. Wall and Beal will now have more time together as a pair, and on top of that they will be a year older and presumably better. If Wall can stay healthy then they should make the playoffs. If Wall gets hurt they probably stink.
       
      On to Porter. Summer league is a bad place for glue guys to just do their thing. Porter is the kind of guy that will look much better when he has some competent teammates to play off of. Right now he’s more of a 3rd or 4th option on offense, but he has room to grow from there. I should also note that shooting numbers in summer league are really bad at predicting how a guy will shoot in the NBA. That’s how you end up with things like Austin Daye, summer league all star. Porter could just be one of the many guys who shot terribly in summer league but will shoot it just fine once the regular season starts. I agree that he probably won’t have that big of an impact this year though, and he likely won’t even start over Ariza. Still, calling someone a bust based on summer league play is very premature.

      • Jul 25, 20137:45 pm
        by gmehl

        Reply

        Yep out of all the no-playoff teams last season it was easily the Wizards that looked the most impressive and likely to make the next step. As much as I want us to keep next seasons draft pick I think it’s a long shot that we don’t make the playoffs. Another thing we all need to remember is that come the end of next season there are going to be ALOT of teams tanking for the Wiggins/Randle/Parker sweepstakes. If we end up playing teams tanking at the back end of our schedule then we could easily pick up a lot more wins easier than we normally would. I am predicting that we claim the 7th seed and I’d be happy with that. I guess the sooner we all accept that our 2014 draft pick is gone the easier it will be. What need to worry about is what Joe spends our future cap space on (from Stuckey/CV).

        • Jul 25, 20137:49 pm
          by Prince Vegeta

          Reply

          I think Joe has the right idea by not tanking though, this way we know we have a strong core going forward and can add 1 more key player next summer.  What happens if you draft 6th next year?  Do you get an impact player?  Possibly.  Better than Josh Smith?  I’m not sure about that.  More importantly you also have no core to build around unless if you’re Boston and stock piled 10 picks in the next few drafts.  So what does that mean for us?  It means we contend as soon as the Heat start to age and our only competition is Indy and perhaps whoever gets Wiggins.

          Knowing how the pistons operate, we’ve never properly tanked.  Every season ends in some damned win streak that costs us a few draft positions.  Had we gone with Riggins for Wiggins, my guess is the Pistons would just end up another decent pick with a terrible team for the next few years.

          • Jul 25, 20137:55 pm
            by tarsier

            Have you forgotten about Chicago?

            Besides, Washington and Cleveland are rapidly improving too. And then there’s just always a ton of randomness when you try to predict the future. There will be very good teams that you can’t predict. And wherever LeBron is playing will be a title favorite until Smith is well past his prime.

          • Jul 25, 20138:53 pm
            by oats

            @ Prince Vegeta. It’s not about better than Smith. Detroit could have rolled over a significant portion of that cap space to next year and had around that same $14 million to throw at someone next season. So it’s Smith and no rookie versus the rookie and some other free agent acquired next year. Deng and Granger both look like possibilities for that price or less. Admittedly if they miss on those guys it isn’t quite as lopsided in favor of keeping the rookie, but you can’t ignore that money next year.
             
            Also, looking at the rookie versus Smith is out of context. Detroit just won’t contend before Drummond starts to approach his prime. There’s no way it happens in the next 3 years, so at best we’re looking at year 4. The goal should be to contend as long as possible in Drummond’s prime. So would you rather have Josh Smith locked up for only the first year in that time frame, or the rookie locked in for 6 of them. On top of that, by the time the team is good Smith will be in his 30s. Smith’s game is predicated on athleticism, and that suggests he could drop off pretty quickly. The rookie would have a peak that would be timed ideally with Drummond, but Smith is way off.

          • Jul 26, 201312:11 am
            by Max

            You can’t say that Oats because with Smith or without him, the Pistons might very well have finished 9-14 next season.   Personally, I think they would finish in that range without Smith.  With Smith, they have a good chance of doing better.  

        • Jul 25, 20137:59 pm
          by CityofKlompton

          Reply

           ”If we end up playing teams tanking at the back end of our schedule then we could easily pick up a lot more wins easier than we normally would.”

          I would just like to say that if you’re going to use this argument for the Pistons, you can also use it for every other team that isn’t tanking which would render this point as moot.  Head back to the drawing board. 

          • Jul 25, 20139:34 pm
            by gmehl

            First of all I am by no means ‘arguing‘ with anybody. I was just pointing out because the next draft is loaded with talent there will more than likely be a heap of teams tanking excessively towards the end of next season. I then stated that ‘depending‘ on our schedule which hasn’t even been released yet, that ‘if‘ we were to play say 10 of those tanking teams in the last 20 games of that schedule that it could easily pad our wil column. Where this wouldn’t be moot is if we were in a dog fight for the 8th seed with say the Cavs and Wizards and we play more of those tanking teams in the last 20 games of the season. I mean we just had it happen in the weak draft gone by so you can only just imaging how bad it will be come next season. If I recall correctly for a couple of weeks there we looked like finishing with the 3rd or 4th worst record in the league and then we got five or six wins that almost put us into playoff contention right  around the time Drummond got hurt.

          • Jul 25, 20139:43 pm
            by CityofKlompton

            But again… you can still apply the argument to every other team not tanking….

          • Jul 25, 20139:46 pm
            by CityofKlompton

            I also don’t mean to insinuate you are ‘arguing’ but to make a point/what if situation that could apply to anybody seems meaningless.  

      • Jul 25, 20139:54 pm
        by I HATE FRANK

        Reply

        Its amazing that fans will argue for other team best case scenarios but trash their own team …just to make their point seem valid… 

         

        • Jul 26, 20139:13 am
          by tarsier

          Reply

          Fans will typically argue for what seems most likely to them. Rooting for a team does not necessarily mean having a skewed perspective on it. And when it does, the skew could go either way.

          Rooting for a team just means you want it to do well, not you think it will. 

          • Jul 26, 201311:05 am
            by I HATE FRANK

            has nothing to do with rooting for a team…

            its mostly the lack of common sense…

            I’ve never heard anyone Put Millsap and J.Smith on the same tier, except for clueless Pistons fan who want to argue their point….

            It gets silly at times…

          • Jul 26, 201312:20 pm
            by Dan Feldman

            Josh Smith is better than Paul Millsap. Both play their best at power forward. Is Smith at small forward better than Millsap at power forward? That’s where the debate opens a little bit.

          • Jul 26, 20133:47 pm
            by tarsier

            I’ve been having back and forths with you on how the Pistons should spend their cap space for about a year now in which I put Millsap and Smith in the same category. Smith is certainly better, but he doesn’t blow Millsap out of the water.

    • Jul 25, 20137:48 pm
      by CityofKlompton

      Reply

      With Wall and Nene in the lineup last season, Washington had the same win percentage as Brooklyn… who finished fourth in the east. Their season hinges on health.

      • Jul 25, 20137:56 pm
        by tarsier

        Reply

        beware the pitfalls of playing with the numbers too much

        • Jul 25, 20138:07 pm
          by City of Klompton

          Reply

          Beware the pitfalls of ignoring them also.

          • Jul 25, 201311:12 pm
            by tarsier

            Besides the fact that I’m the last person to i

          • Jul 25, 201311:17 pm
            by tarsier

            Ok. So I hate it when this site just cuts off most of my comment. Anyway, the full comment is here:

            “Besides the fact that I’m the last person to ignore stats (I just warned you against trying to manipulate them too much instead of taking them as a full set), you’re just straight-up, totally, 100% wrong. Where did you get your numbers? Did you just yank them out of your ass?
            In games with Wall and Nene last season, the Wizards were 22-19. The Nets last season were 49-33. That’s a lot better. “ 

          • Jul 26, 201312:21 am
            by City of Klompton

            Hey, you’re actually correct.  I failed to include three games.  Even with these three games included, their win percentage is still above sea-level at .537 which would have had them tied for sixth with the Hawks.  This puts them firmly in the 6-7 tier with a healthy Wall/Nene.  I’m not trying to say this means they will definitely finish there, but it lends a little bit more value to a perceived playoff run than a team in the Pistons who have several more questions than they do answers (still.)

          • Jul 26, 20139:18 am
            by tarsier

            You omitted a lot more than three games. You omitted all the games in which Wall and Nene didn’t play. That is what I was cautioning against. Because there is meaningful data in those games as well.

            The fact that you decided to hack off three losses from your chosen sample for no reason whatsoever is what made you flat out wrong. But trying to extrapolate too much from a half season that meets your criteria is what makes your conclusions shaky even if you don’t mess up the numbers.

          • Jul 26, 20132:23 pm
            by City of Klompton

            Jeezus man, I was just trying to add some food for thought.  It wasn’t a proclamation of prophecy, but it does have SOME value as a part of a bigger whole.  I also added that their season would depend on health (hence not leaving out the games in which Wall/Nene didn’t play.)  It was simply something to think about that when their two best players were healthy they had a winning percentage similar to that of a playoff team.  I apologize for not writing a 60 page dissertation outlining all of the potential strengths and pitfalls of the Washington Wizards upcoming 2013-2014 season.

    • Jul 25, 20138:47 pm
      by Max

      Reply

      It would basically be a bold prediction to say Wall will play more than 41 games next season.  

      • Jul 25, 20139:03 pm
        by oats

        Reply

        He played all 66 the year before last. His rookie season he played 69 of 82. Heck, he played 49 last year. Why should 42 be a bold prediction?

        • Jul 26, 201312:20 am
          by Max

          Reply

          Your right.  Nothing wrong with 42.   60 would be pushing things though.    Personally, I’m not going to take Irving or Wall seriously until they come close to playing a full season.   

          • Jul 27, 20133:39 am
            by oats

            I’d go with 60 as rather safe since he’s done that twice out of his 3 seasons. 65 is a bit questionable, but still not quite to the point of being bold. I’d say the threshold should be at least 70 to be a bold prediction.
             
            As an aside, Wall played a full season. What part of 66 out of 66 games does not equal a full season to you? If getting a full year in is all that is required, then it is past time you took him seriously.

          • Jul 27, 20133:27 pm
            by Max

            66 is not a full year in my book.   He needs to play 75 games which is not a full year but proves a player can handle a reasonably full season with big minutes.   

  • Jul 25, 20137:16 pm
    by tarsier

    Reply

    Dan, what makes you elevate the Hawks and Wiz above the 8-11 tier?

    • Jul 25, 201310:56 pm
      by Dan Feldman

      Reply

      The Wizards were really good last season when healthy, and everyone is back. (Wrote more about it here.) Otto Porter can only help.

      Similar to the Wizards, the Hawks have a bunch of fitting pieces. I think they’ll be as good as they’re going to get from the season opener, and I think that matters a good deal. While other teams like the Pistons are figuring out how their players work best (and theoretically losing in the process), the Hawks would be getting wins. Even if other newly formed teams, like the Pistons for example, are playing better than Atlanta by season’s end, those early games still count toward the overall record.

      Also, I think Al Horford and Paul Millsap are really good, and Kyle Korver makes them better. 

      • Jul 26, 20131:41 am
        by gtg2013

        Reply

        I agree with your tiers, and your assessment of the Wiz and Hawks.
         
        IMHO the wild card is the Knicks. They may plummet. They’re fragile, physically and mentally.
         

      • Jul 26, 201310:38 am
        by I HATE FRANK

        Reply

        But Dan,

        JOSH SMITH made offense easier for Horford..Horford just had his best season after 7 years in the league, and you can already Argue that right now Greg in his 3 years, was equal or better than Horford.

        And we love to talk about what Knight cant do or what he struggles with But he defends the PG position at an a way Above Average Level, Much better defender than Teague, and he is much better 3 point shooter than Teague…

        Josh Smith and Millsap stats seem close, But impact CLEARLY goes to Josh smith
        Double-doubles – Smith 29  vs Millsap 15
        20+ Point games – Smith 26 vs Millsap15
        10+ Rebound games – Smith 31 vs 16
        5+ Assist games – Smith 31 vs 12

        and Defensively we all know Josh is a better defender, and more versatile 

        OH!!! and They Dont have Anything CLOSE TO DRUMMOND!!!!

        • Jul 26, 201311:00 am
          by tarsier

          Reply

          “you can already Argue that right now Greg in his 3 years, was equal or better than Horford”

          Not even close. Horford is a fantastic two-way player. Monroe is almost as good on O but offers next to nothing on D. 

          “he (Knight) is much better 3 point shooter than Teague…” 

          Last season Knight shot 36.7% from beyond the arc. Teague shot 35.9%. 

          “Josh Smith and Millsap stats seem close, But impact CLEARLY goes to Josh smith
          Double-doubles – Smith 29  vs Millsap 15
          20+ Point games – Smith 26 vs Millsap15
          10+ Rebound games – Smith 31 vs 16
          5+ Assist games – Smith 31 vs 12″ 

           How are crossing arbitrary threshholds relevant? I may as well point out that Millsap had 41 games to Smith’s 33 of hitting half his shots, 40 games to Smith’s 17 of hitting at least three quarters of his FTs, and 23 games to Smith’s 6 of hitting half his shots AND hitting at least 75% from the line.

          But overall numbers a re a lot more meaningful than how often a player hit certain levels. Smith is clearly the better player, but I don’t understand your argument at all.

          The funny thing is that I think Smith is the better fit in Atlanta but Millsap would be the better fit in Detroit (because he can shoot).

          • Jul 26, 201311:24 am
            by I HATE FRANK

            “”Not even close. Horford is a fantastic two-way player. Monroe is almost as good on O but offers next to nothing on D. ”"
            1. Horford is a solid defender, not great and once again he is in his 7th year and Greg is in his 3rd year.  Also, greg go his numbers with worse players around him, Horford has always had option.

            “he (Knight) is much better 3 point shooter than Teague…” Last season Knight shot 36.7% from beyond the arc. Teague shot 35.9%. 

            2. Knight made 120 3′s (and he missed games and played through injuries) vs Teague 89 3′s …Knight is MUCH BETTER 3 Point shooter… something are not even debateable.
            “Josh Smith and Millsap stats seem close, But impact CLEARLY goes to Josh smith
            Double-doubles – Smith 29  vs Millsap 15
            20+ Point games – Smith 26 vs Millsap15
            10+ Rebound games – Smith 31 vs 16
            5+ Assist games – Smith 31 vs 12? 
            How are crossing arbitrary threshholds relevant? I may as well point out that Millsap had 41 games to Smith’s 33 of hitting half his shots, 40 games to Smith’s 17 of hitting at least three quarters of his FTs, and 23 games to Smith’s 6 of hitting half his shots AND hitting at least 75% from the line.
            3. you can if you want… Still not gonna change that Smith impacts games more than Millsap…. And its NOT CLOSE!

            “”But overall numbers a re a lot more meaningful than how often a player hit certain levels. Smith is clearly the better player, but I don’t understand your argument at all.”"”

            4.  its not a arguement, its a point that its silly to believe you can downgrade in talent, and think a team is going to be better or just as good. but the team that upgrades in talent is going to struggle. Its not reasonable.
            “”The funny thing is that I think Smith is the better fit in Atlanta but Millsap would be the better fit in Detroit (because he can shoot).”"

            5. I disagree, when people was talking about Milsap they were talking about bring him off the bench, not starting … that says something right there

          • Jul 26, 201312:17 pm
            by Dan Feldman

            Unfortunately, the standings don’t care what year Monroe or Horford are in. If Horford is better because he’s more experienced, he’s still better.

            Teague was better than Knight last season overall. Sure, Knight is better at certain things, but he’s also worse at certain things.

          • Jul 26, 20131:33 pm
            by tarsier

            “Also, greg go his numbers with worse players around him, Horford has always had option.”

            You do realize, don’t you, that players tend to put up bigger stats when they have worse players around them. They’re often less efficient, but the totals are usually higher. So Horford putting up comparable scoring and rebounding totals with superior talent around him is actually another case for him over Monroe. It may take away from how much you read into his greater efficiency, but that’s still not a knock on him because you’d expect him to be more efficient and he was.

            As for the fit thing, this may just be a personal opinion, but with Smith or Millsap in Detroit, I wouldn’t start that FA with Monroe and Drummond. I would bring one of the three off the bench either way. 

          • Jul 26, 20133:58 pm
            by I HATE FRANK

            @Dan…..Teague isnt special or unique….

            He’s a underzised PG that doesnt defend… who uses the pick and roll for most of his offense…and he is just developing somewhat of a 3 ball…

            I wish I could find out where most of his assist came from, but I bet most came from pick and pop with Horford and Josh smith..or transition kicking it too Kyle Kover…

            Im not gonna call him overrated, because this is the only place I where he being talked about with such high regard, even the hawks were ready to move on with Dennis Schroeder

          • Jul 26, 20134:35 pm
            by tarsier

            Find me someone who is claiming that Teague is amazing. Nobody is. He was just the best FA PG. And he would be a step up from Knight.

          • Jul 27, 20131:14 am
            by Max

            I do think Smith is better than Millsap but everybody seems to be forgetting that Millsap has been playing with more of a logjam of bigs in Utah than the Pistons will have this year and that surely impacted his numbers.  

        • Jul 26, 20133:39 pm
          by I HATE FRANK

          Reply

          so much I wanted to reply to, but i feel its point less..

          i read soo many articles about how Josh Smith was the 3rd best player in the market, and how he is worth 4 years 50+ mils, how he is such a unique talent, and he is a high level player…. but he comes to Detroit…

          All of sudden, Millsap would have been a better option???

          Seriously, I read ESPN, Bleacher, Sportillustrated, CBSSports and just random sites, not one site said Millsap is a better player than Josh Smith, and not one site said Josh Smith isnt worth the money. But some how he comes to Detroit its doomsday day…

          All im going to say is we’ll see…just want everyone to remember their comments…

          • Jul 27, 20133:56 am
            by oats

            Josh Smith is a better player than Millsap. Josh Smith is worth $50+ million to someone. Millsap is cheaper and probably a better fit in Detroit due to his jump shot taking pressure off Monroe/Drummond. Millsap is also less capable of defending the 3, so he doesn’t fill that positional need quite as well. Millsap is also on a deal that is shorter than Smith’s deal. Let’s assume the team keeps Monroe and gives him a deal at least as much as Hibbert is making. Then let’s throw in Drummond getting a max deal when it’s time to extend him. In that last year of Smith’s deal the team will be paying their front court well over $45 million and possibly as high as $50 million. That’s a lot to spend for 3 guys that common basketball wisdom suggests might struggle to play together. I really don’t think it’s smart to put the team in a situation where they might feel pressured to move Monroe for financial reasons. A guy as productive and young as him should only be traded if it makes basketball sense. That’s my reason for preferring Millsap. Smith is better, but not by enough to justify the lack of a jump shot, the extra cost, and the extra years. That’s my stance and the one I definitely will remember taking.

      • Jul 26, 20131:44 pm
        by tarsier

        Reply

        With Wall in the lineup, the Wizards were good, but I don’t know about really good. They were basically a .500 team that outscored opponents by about 1 ppg. I don’t know what other injuries you are referring to apart from Wall’s as holding them back. Nene’s almost perfectly overlapped. Who else was giving them trouble?

        Also, most teams are above average when healthy. Because injuries hit everyone every year. I don’t get the impression that the Wizards were hit particularly harder than most last season. 

          • Jul 26, 20133:42 pm
            by tarsier

            Fair. But I wouldn’t expect missing a rookie to make a huge dent in how much a team wins. Besides, “when healthy” is a laughable proposition when you are relying on Nene.

          • Jul 27, 20135:49 pm
            by Dan Feldman

            Agree that any team that chooses to depend on Nene must assume the injury risk, too. I also think the Wizards were fairly careful with him last season, not rushing him back as long as Wall was out, so that could bode well for Nene this year.

            The injuries to Wall and Beal were more bad luck. If the Wizards have average injury luck next season — and I mean average relative to the players they have and their injury history — they’ll be in good shape for the playoffs. 

      • Jul 26, 20133:42 pm
        by I HATE FRANK

        Reply

        Porter is sooo overrated! he wont even start…or he’ll lose his starting spot….

        Now 2-3 years from now…who knows but next season,,,,he will hardly be a factor

        • Jul 26, 20134:43 pm
          by tarsier

          Reply

          Let’s just hold off on whether he is over or under rated until he starts playing some games. It made sense to talk about in the lead up to the draft. But that’s over now. So we may as well wait and see.

          But I would have no qualms giving you 2-to-1 odds that he’ll be better than your boy Bazz. 

        • Jul 27, 20133:58 am
          by oats

          Reply

          I agree with tarsier, but I bet Porter doesn’t start this year. They have Ariza and Webster, two solid veterans that will allow them to incorporate Porter slowly. I think he comes off the bench, but out of design and not incompetence.

  • Jul 25, 20138:12 pm
    by gon

    Reply

    LOL LOL LOL LOL….
    Hawks better than Cavs and Pistons? THAT Hawks??? LOL..
    forget about top 5… the last 3 will be ‘Cavs – Pistons – Wizards’

  • Jul 25, 20138:45 pm
    by nick

    Reply

    Dear Dan Feldman,
     Your consistent use of poor grammar and spelling mistakes make your articles brutally tough to read. If I was reading your Piston articles in a high school newspaper I could probably turn a blind eye, but you sir, are a “professional” writer. The only reason I come back is because I love my Pistons. Please do all of us readers a favor, and write like a PROFESSIONAL should. 

    • Jul 25, 201310:59 pm
      by Dan Feldman

      Reply

      Dear Nick,
      Your short comment comment contains three grammatical errors.
      Sincerely,
      Dan 

  • Jul 25, 20138:47 pm
    by King Ryan

    Reply

    Fair enough oats but I agree with tarsier that zaza is a big loss and personally, I take josh over paul if I have the option… Maybe I’m overly optimistic but I think the backcourt could be ok. We may not have good dribble penetration but we have savvy, size, quickness, slashers, three shooting. Up to moe to find the advantage each night.

  • Jul 25, 20138:48 pm
    by Max

    Reply

    Zaza is a huge loss for the Hawks.   He’s a good player and allowed Horford to play some PF–he hates playing center.  

    • Jul 25, 20139:09 pm
      by oats

      Reply

      Johan Petro did that in playoffs and was easily as good as Zaza. They could up Petro’s minutes and get the same thing. Also, who cares if Horford hate playing center? It’s not like he’s actually better at PF. The team also added Elton Brand who just happens to be a better player than Zaza or Petro. I should also add that Brand actually did play center next to Dirk last year, and I suspect Atlanta will throw him at opposing centers fairly often. I just don’t see how Zaza is this huge loss.

      • Jul 25, 20139:52 pm
        by CityofKlompton

        Reply

        Are we talking about the same Zaza here? If that guy is the cog holding your playoff team together then you’re probably not a playoff team.

      • Jul 26, 201312:23 am
        by Max

        Reply

        Well, Horford has injury problems and hasn’t held up great in recent years.  Playing centers takes its toll physically and mentally when you are undersized.  

        • Jul 26, 201312:24 am
          by Max

          Reply

          And Zaza is much better than Petro and Brand at this point of Brand’s career.  

          • Jul 26, 201312:51 am
            by City of Klompton

            Based on last season’s stats, I’d say that maybe Zaza was only slightly better statistically (and by slightly, I mean very slightly) with a lower PER than Brand.  I think Petro could be a better rebounder and defender than Zaza, but Zaza has a better all around game than Petro does.  Either way, I’d say the replacements upgrade/downgrade to Zaza is negligible.

          • Jul 26, 20131:10 am
            by Max

            Do you watch these guys play or do you just look at numbers?  

          • Jul 26, 20131:18 am
            by City of Klompton

            Do you watch Zaza play?  He is not a “huge” loss that will send this team spiraling down the Eastern conference ladder.  Were you also a huge Austin Croshere fan in the early 2000s?  (The Austin Croshere thing is sarcasm…. for the record…)

      • Jul 26, 20139:34 am
        by tarsier

        Reply

        Look, Zaza’s not a huge deal. Just another minor loss for them so I thought I’d mention it.

        I think my main problem with the Hawks is that it felt like they overachieved last year and got the 6th seed. This year, they are almost certainly worse and I’m assuming they won’t overachieve again.

        It’s kinda like how it wouldn’t shock me if the Lakers did better than last year even though they obviously have a lot less talent on the roster. They just underachieved so badly last season that there is room for improvement anyway. 

        • Jul 26, 201310:30 am
          by Huddy

          Reply

          Even if the Hawks are about the same as last year the teams below them have been making a
          lot of changes and improvements so I think ATL will have a tough time next season (especially adjusting to roster changes). 

          • Jul 26, 201311:03 am
            by tarsier

            Well their average opponent, like last year, will be pretty close to a ,500 team. The Wizards, Pistons, Cavs, and Nets may be better. But the Celtics, Sixers, Knicks, and Heat will probably be worse.

          • Jul 26, 20131:07 pm
            by Huddy

            The Heat may be worse, but not worse than ATL by a long shot so that doesn’t really matter so much.  Id say same goes for the Knicks…they didn’t change that much really so I don’t anticipate a big ddrop off.  I see what you are saying but I think more teams are rising to their level than are dropping below so like you said overachieving will be hard to replicate.

            i think Milsap will have a tough time in a more prominent role.   Utah was deep in the Front court, which is not the case in ATL.  I think you were right earlier he would have fit well on the Pistons Even though he isn’t the better player 

          • Jul 26, 20132:34 pm
            by tarsier

            Of course the Heat won’t be worse than Atlanta. They’re still the favorite to be the best of the East. My pint is that the average Atlanta opponent will be about as good next year as it was last year. So any decline they make will be purely a result of being worse, not of playing tougher teams.

        • Jul 27, 20134:05 am
          by oats

          Reply

          @tarsier. I agree that the Hawks overachieved some. I think their talent is more or less the same, assuming that their young guys take another step forward to make up for the Smith to Millsap swap. I just think that even with them overachieving last year, reverting towards the mean still likely keeps them as the 6th seed. Boston got significantly worse. Milwaukee may or may not have gotten worse, it’s kind of hard to read them. Other teams like the Pistons got better, I just don’t think they caught them. I’d set the tiers up differently than Dan. I’d lump all of 6-12 in the same tier, and yes that means I’m including Boston. Out of those teams, I’d say that Atlanta is the one most likely to make the playoffs, so that puts them in that 6th seed for me. I think they are much closer to Milwaukee than the Knicks even, but that doesn’t change the fact that I see them as better than Detroit.

  • Jul 25, 20139:11 pm
    by Al

    Reply

    I don’t see how anyone could argue with this:
    1: heat
    2-4: Pacers, Nets, Bulls
    5: Nets
    6: Wizards
    7-10 Pistons, Hawks, Cavs, Raptors
    11+ Everyone else 

    Bucks really?  They lost there most dynamic (albeit inefficient) player.  Not one player on that team can command a double team or consistently create a shot. 

    • Jul 25, 20139:25 pm
      by Tom

      Reply

      I’ll start off by arguing that there is no way that the Nets are better than the Nets; those guys suck!

      I think the Pacers belong in the tier with the Knicks.

      I think the Wizards belong down a tier and I think the Cavs might belong down a tier too. 

    • Jul 25, 201310:09 pm
      by Al

      Reply

      OK.  5 is supposed to be Knicks, of course.

    • Jul 25, 201310:13 pm
      by Al

      Reply

      Here’s another thing I don’t get.  Why are folks still high on the Hawks?  They lose their starting center to a ridiculous offer from the Bucks.  One of their two best players goes to the Pistons, replaced by a dude who has better shot selection, but far less ability.  And they are changing coaches.  How is that not a step back, given that they overachieved last year?

      • Jul 26, 201312:26 am
        by Max

        Reply

        I think Atlanta took at least a little step back but what the predictions really don’t give Detroit credit for is taking a step forward.  Personally, I think Drummond in his second year versus his first year is a bigger addition in its way that Smith even is.   

  • Jul 25, 20139:16 pm
    by Reaction

    Reply

    Greg Monroe is beasting hard core on defense in the USA game. 4 Nice defensive plays with blocks etc

  • Jul 25, 201310:12 pm
    by gmehl

    Reply

    Seeming everyone is giving there opinion on what tier teams should be in here is mine:

    Tier 1 – Heat (Clearly the best team in the east).

    Tier 2 – Pacers, Bulls, Nets, Knicks (Realistically the only teams that can challenge the Heat…barring NY).

    Tier 3 – Wizards, Cavs, Pistons, Hawks, Raptors, Bucks (Teams that will be fighting for seeds 6 thru 8).

    Tier 4 – Sixers, Celtics, Magic, Hornets (Say no more). 

  • Jul 25, 201310:38 pm
    by RP

    Reply

    The Bucks lost JJ Reddick and Monta Ellis… They are relying on the extremely volatile Brandon Jennings and LARRY SANDERS! as there core, and hoping that John Henson makes major progress this year (I don’t know why everyone assumes he will make a huge jump this year. Sure, he had some monster games, but he only averaged 13 minutes a game last year.)

    • Jul 27, 20134:11 am
      by oats

      Reply

      They got OJ Mayo. He’s not that big of a drop off from Ellis. Plus, Redick sucked in Milwaukee. He shot 40% from the field and 32% from 3 in Milwaukee. I can buy an argument that internal improvement from Jennings and Sanders coupled with more reliable 3 point shooting from Mayo could actually improve them. They seem like a long shot to make the playoffs, but with some luck on their side and bad luck for the teams ahead of them and they could slide into that 8 seed again.
       

  • Jul 26, 201312:05 am
    by David

    Reply

    As a realistic fan I don’t think Detroit will win the east next season, but I do think they will make the playoffs probably at 7-8 seed. I will also say that look at the division Indiana doesn’t have a great back court and they were the second best team in the East, Cleveland or Milwaulkee I don’t think isn’t better than Detroit. I think after Miami, Chicago , Indiana & Brooklyn those spots are up for grabs at that point nobody scared to play the Knicks as well

    • Jul 26, 201312:27 am
      by Max

      Reply

      Good point about Indiana’s finish with a poor backcourt.   

    • Jul 26, 201312:28 am
      by City of Klompton

      Reply

      Considering the other teams in Indiana’s division (Detroit, Chicago, Cleveland and Milwaukee) and their respective back courts (no D-Rose for Chicago), I think the quality of the the rest of Indiana’s roster did enough beasting that their back court didn’t have to be spectacular.  It may be a different story this season with a healthy D-Rose, improved Detroit and Cleveland rosters, and the continued development of Irving. 

  • Jul 26, 20133:15 am
    by DetroitP

    Reply

    My roommates from Washington, I watched a lot of their games (45ish)  They are a complete different team when Wall is on the court.  Nene and Okafor are soft as well, and their bench is terrible.  I truly believe we will be better than them, however, would not be shocked if they did better.  All of these thoughts are pointless, until we watch these three guys play together.  We can speculate and speculate but until we start playing no one knows.  

  • Jul 26, 20133:18 am
    by DetroitP

    Reply

    OOOO I forgot about Jan Vesley hes something special (complete joke) he takes more you know what than rachel starr

  • Jul 26, 20139:03 am
    by jamesjones_det

    Reply

    The Pacers will be first in the east.  The heat are getting older and have already started to look like young legs can hurt them.
     
    I’m not saying the Heat won’t win a championship again, but I don’t think they will finish first in the east this year.

    • Jul 26, 20139:43 am
      by tarsier

      Reply

      I wouldn’t be surprised if the Heat didn’t have the first seed. but I would be pretty surprised if the Pacers did. The Bulls or Nets seem much better bets to overtake the Heat.

      The Pacers are at a point that aging doesn’t really help them. George may still be improving, but West and Granger are declining if anything. They didn’t really add anything this offseason. And their playoff run is less representative of how good they are than their regular season (seeing as how it was just 19 games compared to 81). If they had fallen in the second round, there is no way you would pick a 49-32 team to be the top seed this year given tat their only addition is the presumptive return of Granger.

  • Jul 26, 20132:00 pm
    by ToddM

    Reply

    The more changes you have in your organization, the more difficult it is to accurately predict the future.  Obviously.  The teams in the East that aren’t completely tanking (here’s looking at you, Boston!) that had the most change this off-season are the Pistons and the Nets, followed by the Hawks and Bucks.  Those last two probably got worse, the first two probably got better.

    I’ll do it this way, a range for regular season finish and a general order:
     
    Heat:  1st-3rd (but still the likely champ — they may take it easy more in the regular season)
    Bulls:  1st-3rd (healthy D-Rose is huge; a legit chance to dethrone Miami if things come together)
    Nets:  1st-5th (volatile ranking due to chemistry and age; anything from legit threat to .500ish)
    Pacers:  3rd-5th (this team is getting over-hyped for the regular season, but is playoff-constructed)Knicks:  3rd-7th (messy squad of talent that could shine for a while but is a playoff patsy)
    Cavs:  4th-OUT (healthy Irving and Bynum isn’t likely, but possible; wide range of possibilities)
    Pistons:  5th-OUT (a lot of talent that might not fit well, but should be very entertaining)
    Wizards:  6th-OUT (a half a healthy season isn’t enough to inspire absolute confidence)
    Hawks:  6th-OUT (some very solid players, but this looks like an extremely boring team)
    Bucks:  7th-OUT (could be a good front line, but tanking makes more sense)
    Raps:  7th-OUT (again, tanking makes more sense, but there’s a lot of badly organized talent here)
      
    The Celtics, Sixers, Magic, and Hornets collectively have maybe a 25% chance of landing a single playoff spot if some crazy stuff happens.

    Record-wise, I’ll go with:  Bulls, Heat, Nets, Pacers, Knicks, Pistons, Cavs, Wizards… but I’m still a homer at heart.  A first-round loss to the experienced Nets wouldn’t be such a bad thing for the year.  Drummond could at least dunk all over Lopez a few times.   
      

    • Jul 26, 20133:36 pm
      by tarsier

      Reply

      How are the Pistons among the teams with the most change? Besides the draft (which everyone had), they brought in Smith and Billups and lost Maxiell, Maggette, and English. That’s one significant change and a couple really, really minor ones. Charlotte had just as much change. Atlanta definitely had more (they lost and brought in someone significant). New Jersey had way more. Milwaukee had more.

      • Jul 26, 20134:04 pm
        by ToddM

        Reply

        From my point of view, it’s not about numbers, but about minutes.  They brought in the #3 free agent, while 1-2-4 all went to the West.  He’s going to play 36 minutes at the 3 and 4.  Because of the weakness in the backcourt, they drafted a guy that could play 20 minutes and signed a vet that could play another 20.  They signed an international player that, due to a lack of shooting, could carve out another 10-15 minutes playing the 3.  If not from Datome, some of those minutes could go to Mitchell aswell.

        That’s new players potentially 90 minutes out of 240.  That’s a lot of turnover.

        The Nets have two new starters, but I mentioned them as the other big turnover team.  The Hawks switched one starter and will change their minutes at center, but that looks like less than 90 to me.  Milwaukee did have a lot of backcourt change at the 2 and maybe 3, but not more than the Pistons, I don’t think.

        Charlotte I didn’t bother with, I’ll admit, because they stink.    

        • Jul 26, 20134:45 pm
          by tarsier

          Reply

          But the Hawks lost him (so that is obviously just as big a change as getting him) AND they got Millsap.

        • Jul 26, 20136:30 pm
          by ToddM

          Reply

          And?  Is there a point I’m missing here?  They changed from Smith to Millsap, we changed from “cast of characters” to Smith.  Yeah, sure, that’s even in terms of sheer change.  We also picked up a new guard that (at least wants to) play significant minutes and another backup wing that figures to play because he fills a need.

          The Pistons roster turnover isn’t  much different than a lot of teams, true, but the minutes for the players looks like it’ll change drastically.  We have a bunch of guys still with the team (Bynum, Singler, Stuckey in particular) that don’t figure to play as much this year.  

          • Jul 27, 20131:49 am
            by Max

            I don’t want to argue about which teams had the most roster turnover but just say it seems pretty conceivable that the Pistons will start three different players than last season with the two holdovers starting at different spots than they did after the Calderon trade of last season.   This means the Pistons might have a different player starting at every single position than they did after the Calderon trade last year.    That would be a pretty big change.  

  • Jul 27, 201311:16 am
    by Domnick

    Reply

    i think we are better than Hawks…
     
    Wizards CAVS Raptors will tough competition but i believe we got tools to get there

  • Jan 24, 201410:31 pm
    by www iherb promo code

    Reply

    When I initially commented I clicked the “Notify me when new comments are added” checkbox and now each time
    a comment is added I get several emails with the same comment.
    Is there any way you can remove me from that service?

    Bless you!

  • Feb 5, 20149:18 pm
    by emusic youtube

    Reply

    Thanks for a marvelous posting! I quite enjoyed reading it, you can be a great author.
    I will always bookmark your blog and will eventually come back sometime soon.
    I want to encourage one to continue your great posts,
    have a nice weekend!

  • Leave a Reply

    Your Ad Here