Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

You are going to love Chris Sherdan's current power rankings

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 3
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 template Next
  • #1

    You are going to love Chris Sherdan's current power rankings

    RANK TEAM THE RUNDOWN LAST
    .

    http://www.sheridanhoops.com/2013/08...ust-edition/2/


    RANK TEAM THE RUNDOWN LAST
    1 HEAT
    (66-16)    		 They really didn’t need Mike Miller, who was amnestied and fell into the lap of his original team, the Grizzlies. He was nice to have around when somebody, anybody, needed to hit a big 3-point shot in a closeout game. But that job will now fall to Rashard Lewis or Ray Allen or LeBron. They are all capable. -
    2 PACERS
    (49-32)    		 If I was a gambling man, I’d pick them to win the title — and I would get some very decent odds. The Luis Scola trade put them right up there with Brooklyn as the team that improved the most over the course of the season. Chris Copeland will be a key contributor off the bench, but what will make or break this team is the play of guards George Hill and Lance Stephenson. -
    3 NETS
    (48-33)    		 Paul Pierce will not have to be the de facto point guard, as he was after Rajon Rondo’s injury. Kevin Garnett will not have to be the de facto center, which he was for the past two seasons. Andrei Kirilenko and Andray Blatche can get them past the Pacers. Jason Kidd can be the good cop, Garnett will be the bad cop. They will be fierce. -
    4 SPURS
    (58-24)    		 In case you’ve forgotten, Gregg Popovich cost this team the title. He is not a genius anymore. Great coaches don’t do things in Game 6 of the NBA Finals the same way they do things during the regular season. They adapt to the situation. It’s called tactics. It’s called adjusting on the fly. He did neither. And he acted like a jerk during his podium time. Time to lighten up, Pop. Show some class. Show some savvy. -
    5 THUNDER(60-22) On principle, I should be ranking them beneath the Rockets (Sam Presti is no genius either, but at least he didn’t coach his team out of a championship, a la Pop.) The fact of the matter is that Kevin Durant is a more valuable player than Dwight Howard, and the same goes for Russell Westbrook when comparing him to James Harden. They’d better hope they have something in Jeremy Lamb. -
    6 GRIZZLIES
    (56-26)    		 Well, they finally found their shooter in Mike Miller. And they found a way to keep Tony Allen at an affordable price (One day, defensive stoppers will be paid like 7-footers). They also pulled off one of the best under-the-radar acquisitions by getting Kosta Koufos from the Nuggets, which will reduce the wear and tear on Marc Gasol. If they can get Nick Calathes to back up Mike Conley, they’ll compete for No. 1 seed. -
    7 CLIPPERS
    (57-25)    		 Doc Rivers? A vast improvement over Vinny Del Negro. J.J. Redick and Jared Dudley? Two glue guys that will provide what Chauncey Billups and Grant Hill were supposed to provide but never did. What will be their undoing when all is said and done? The free throw shooting of Blake Griffin and DeAndre Jordan. -
    8 KNICKS
    (54-28)    		 We should penalize them with a double-digit ranking simply for the idiocy of trading for Andrea Bargnani. But the acquisition of Metta World Peace (or Whole Foods Guacamole Dip, if that’s what he indeed changes his name to) is going to make a world of difference when it comes time to have a defensive stopper in the playoffs. The Nets made the bolder moves, but the Knicks can compete with them if Amar’e Stoudemire has a real role. -
    9 WARRIORS
    (47-35)    		 Every single team needs a defensive stopper. Personally, I’d rather have Tony Allen than Andre Iguodala, because Tony won’t be tempted to take the key shot of the game. Iggy? He’ll do it enough times to make Dubs fans shake their heads and ask why Stephen Curry or Klay Thompson didn’t get a chance. X-factor for these guys is Andrew Bogut’s health. -
    10 BULLS
    (45-37)    		 Dear Derrick Rose: That ******** you pulled last year should prompt adidas to fire you as an endorser. “Wear these shoes, but don’t play basketball in them.” Have the goods to get Pau Gasol. It’ll cost them the No. 1 pick the Bobcats owe them, plus another No. 1, plus the rights to Nikola Mirotic, plus a couple guys to make the money match. But with Gasol, they can beat anybody. -
    11 ROCKETS
    (45-37)    		 Congratulations to Daryl Morey for landing Dwight Howard and James Harden within the space of 10 months. Now, what are you going to do about Jeremy Lin? Put him on the bench again in the playoffs and let Patrick Beverly and Harden handle the playmaking chores? This team has four great starters. You need five. -
    12 WOLVES
    (31-51)    		 No question they will miss Andrei Kirilenko, but they did just fine the previous year without him with Kevin Love being a 20-20 machine. He still has that in him. Had a strong draft and made a nice signing by adding Corey Brewer (see repeated references to defensive stoppers, and how everybody needs one). -
    13 CAVALIERS
    (24-58)    		 And while we are on the subject of sleeper teams, let us not forget the East. Not only will they be one of the NBA’s most enjoyable teams to watch, they will become what Chris Paul and Blake Griffin became two years ago, with Kyrie Irving and Anthony Bennett filling those roles. Plus they get a healthy Anderson Varejao back. -
    14 PELICANS
    (27-55)    		 Three things you need to compete with the very best: An All-Star point guard (Jrue Holiday gets the check mark), an All-Star center (Anthony Davis is well on his way) and a 3-point shooting machine (Ryan Anderson is a known commodity in that department). They are the West’s sleeper team. Mark my words. -
    15 PISTONS
    (29-53)    		 Joe Dumars did a lot better in free agency this time than he did last time (remember Charlie Villanueva and Ben Gordon?) beginning with getting Josh Smith for less than the max, then adding Brandon Jennings to address the team’s biggest weakness — point guard. The front line was already solid with Andre Drummond and Greg Monroe, and they might even win a postseason game with Mr. Big Shot back on board. -
    16 HAWKS
    (44-38)    		 Didn’t bid against themselves for Jeff Teague, and retained him at a reasonable number — which will allow Lou Williams to continue heading up the second unit. Lost Zaza Pachulia but picked up Paul Millsap and Elton Brand, which will allow Al Horford to play a lot more center than he did a year ago. -
    17 KINGS
    (28-54)    		 Pulling their offer to Andre Iguodala may have been the smartest move they made. They don’t need to clog their cap with 30-somethings. Still have the league’s No. 1 head case (DeMarcus Cousins) who could become the league’s No. 1 center if the right coach can pull the right strings (Good luck with that, Mike Malone). Made a nice value signing in getting Carl Landry. -
    18 NUGGETS
    (57-25)    		 Look no further for an example of how quickly things change in the NBA. Coach of the Year George Karl was fired. General manager Masai Ujiri left to take over the leadership of the Raptors — and was able to find a taker for Andrea Bargnani. Andre Iguodala left as a free agent. Starting center Kosta Koufos was traded. Is this still a playoff team? At this point, methinks not. I like the Kings better. -
    19 MAGIC
    (20-62)    		 We can safely anoint Rob Hennigan as the winner of the Dwight Howard sweepstakes. Nik Vucevic will be an All-Star next season, Tobias Harris was an absolute steal in the J.J. Redick dump job, Victor Oladipo is going to be the next Dwyane Wade, and they’ll be under the salary cap once Hedu Turkoglu is cut (only half his $12 million salary is guaranteed.) -
    20 CELTICS
    (41-40)    		 As much as it appears they are going to be major players in Tankapalooza, there is one problem. They still have Rajon Rondo on their team, and that guy is capable of winning 16-20 games all by himself. We fully expect him to be traded (he is probably No. 2 on the Most Likely List behind Pau Gasol), and the sooner that happens the sooner the Celtics can get into the Andrew Wiggins mix. -
    21 LAKERS
    (45-37)    		 It is August, so I will take a swig of the purple and gold Kool-Aid, put aside my skepticism and buy into the talk that Kobe will be ready for Opening Night. After all, it’s only a torn Achilles. Just like the common cold, some would have us believe. -
    22 BLAZERS
    (33-49)    		 Is Robin Lopez going to be a better center than J.J. Hickson was? Because aside from drafting C.J. McCollom, not a lot has been done here in terms of upgrading the roster in the NBA’s toughest conference. Hard to see them being better than a 35-win team. They’d be ranked ahead of Lakers if I wasn’t drinking the Kobe Kool-Aid. -
    23 JAZZ
    (43-39)    		 Three starters are gone, and they were three pretty darn good starters — Al Jefferson, Paul Millsap and Mo Williams. The front office did a nice job taking Golden State’s flotsam and getting a pair of first-round picks, and drafting Trey Burke was solid. He could be ROY if win total reaches 30. -
    24 BUCKS
    (38-44)    		 After last year’s late-season meltdown, it was time to take out the dynamite. They will get a lot more bang for the buck in the backcourt from Brandon Knight, Gary Neal and O.J. Mayo in comparison to what they were paying or would have had to pay Monta Ellis, Brandon Jennings and J.J. Redick. Can’t understand why they gave away Luc Richard Mbah a Moute. -
    25 MAVERICKS
    (41-41)    		 The summer’s biggest losers. Can’t fault Mark Cuban for going all-in cap wise when players such as Dwight Howard and Chris Paul were going to be on the market, but sometimes all-in pushes backfire. If they start 2-18 or 3-17, will Dirk want out? One would think so. -
    26 WIZARDS
    (29-53)    		 Giving John Wall a max contract extension goes down as the summer’s second-dumbest move (nobody can supplant the Knicks’ acquisition of Andrea Bargnani). There is talent here, no doubt, and the club’s surge in March and April was certainly promising. Coming out of the gate strong will be key to their season. -
    27 RAPTORS
    (34-48)    		 Nominations for executive of the year are now closed. Masai Ujiri would have traded Bargnani for a bag of basketballs, and he fleeced the Knicks for Steve Novak and a first-round pick. Does Masai have the cajones to trade Landry Fields back to the Knicks, too? -
    28 BOBCATS
    (21-61)    		 Why on Earth Al Jefferson chose this as his new home defies explanation. Can’t imagine Cody Zeller is too happy about it. Still owe a first-round pick to Chicago for the Tyrus Thomas trade. Will be paying Ben Gordon $13.2 million this season. At least they’ll be better than the Sixers. -
    29 SUNS
    (25-57)    		 They are owed three first round picks (Indiana, Lakers, Timberwolves), and they don’t have any dead money on their cap after next season. But those are the only nice things we have to say. -
    30 SIXERS
    (34-48)    		 Repeat after me, Sixers fans: “Andrew Wiggins, Andrew Wiggins, Andrew Wiggins.” Could be the worst team in NBA history.
    Last edited by Unclebuck; 08-06-2013, 02:25 PM.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: You are going to love Chris Sherdan's current power rankings

    In case you’ve forgotten, Gregg Popovich cost this team the title. He is not a genius anymore. Great coaches don’t do things in Game 6 of the NBA Finals the same way they do things during the regular season. They adapt to the situation. It’s called tactics. It’s called adjusting on the fly. He did neither. And he acted like a jerk during his podium time. Time to lighten up, Pop. Show some class. Show some savvy.
    Not defending Pop, I think he enjoys being the *******, but wow the irony of telling Pop to show some class in a completely classless way.

    Enjoyed his Pacer writeup though.
    “Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: You are going to love Chris Sherdan's current power rankings

      The Pelicans icon makes me laugh...
      "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

      ----------------- Reggie Miller

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: You are going to love Chris Sherdan's current power rankings

        I think the wiz should be much higher. Depending on how Porter plays I think they are definitely a playoff team.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: You are going to love Chris Sherdan's current power rankings

          Sheridan is still a moron.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: You are going to love Chris Sherdan's current power rankings

            The top 3 teams are all from the east? The times they are a changin.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: You are going to love Chris Sherdan's current power rankings

              Originally posted by Strummer View Post
              The top 3 teams are all from the east? The times they are a changin.
              The bottom teams are from the East as well, so pundits will still figure the East sucks.

              In general, the top ranked team has been from the East more years in the last 20 than from the West (between Chicago, Boston, Cleveland, and Miami - that's not the CHAMPION, mind, that's the teams the pundits THOUGHT would be champion). But then, they have it so easy.
              BillS

              A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
              Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

              Comment

              • #8
                Sheridan's rankings are fine, but the comments that go with them are absolutely ignorant. He comes off as a complete tool.

                It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: You are going to love Chris Sherdan's current power rankings

                  Other than the top two, I disagree with every ranking he has.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: You are going to love Chris Sherdan's current power rankings

                    Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                    Sheridan's rankings are fine, but the comments that go with them are absolutely ignorant. He comes off as a complete tool.
                    I find them entertaining if not a little over-the-top.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: You are going to love Chris Sherdan's current power rankings

                      Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                      I find them entertaining if not a little over-the-top.

                      Yeah, some of them are kind of funny.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: You are going to love Chris Sherdan's current power rankings

                        Clippers logo is just awful.
                        First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: You are going to love Chris Sherdan's current power rankings

                          Originally posted by BillS View Post
                          The bottom teams are from the East as well, so pundits will still figure the East sucks.
                          Top 3 teams from East, yet he straight up says the West is better in the Blazers snippet:

                          "Is Robin Lopez going to be a better center than J.J. Hickson was? Because aside from drafting C.J. McCollom, not a lot has been done here in terms of upgrading the roster in the NBA’s toughest conference. Hard to see them being better than a 35-win team. They’d be ranked ahead of Lakers if I wasn’t drinking the Kobe Kool-Aid."

                          I guess he thinks 4-8 West is waaaay superior.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: You are going to love Chris Sherdan's current power rankings

                            Originally posted by HickeyS2000 View Post
                            Top 3 teams from East, yet he straight up says the West is better in the Blazers snippet:

                            "Is Robin Lopez going to be a better center than J.J. Hickson was? Because aside from drafting C.J. McCollom, not a lot has been done here in terms of upgrading the roster in the NBA’s toughest conference. Hard to see them being better than a 35-win team. They’d be ranked ahead of Lakers if I wasn’t drinking the Kobe Kool-Aid."

                            I guess he thinks 4-8 West is waaaay superior.
                            I would say so 4-8 is way superior? The Top 4 teams in west have to be Spurs, OKC, Clips, and Griz. 4-8 Rockets, Warriors, Pelicans (?) and Wolves/Lakers depending on health. Compared to East where after, Heat, Pacers, Bulls, Nets, it kind of fizzles out. I guess there is the Knicks, but I think they are more of a regular season team.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: You are going to love Chris Sherdan's current power rankings

                              Nets third? In what world? I'd put them below all of the Western Conference teams in the top 11. Probably above the Knicks though, but both of those teams are too high. Mavericks are also about 10 spots too low here too, but I expect almost everyone in the media to rank them based on what they could have had, and not on what they actually got.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 template Next
                              Working...
                              X