Best record Atlantic Division

[ziggy]

Who will have best record in the Atlantic, and why?

[westkoast]

NJ will with the 38 and 44 record :lol:

[Skandery]

Its hard to deny the New Jersey Nets on paper.  You've got the big three, a center that I like, and what has turned out to be a decent off-season addition.  If Marc Jackson can stay healthy, McInnis can successfully spell Kidd, and they get solid play from the spare parts (Antoine Wright and Jason Collins) it shouldn't take too many wins to clinch the division.  Health is the biggest concern with this team.

Prediction: Division champs
Seed: 3
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Philadelphia has once again spent an offseason throwing millions of dollars around indiscriminately.  So what has the off-season got 'em Stephen Hunter, Lee Nailon, Sam Dalembert, and Kyle Korver.  One out of four ain't bad.  Dalembert has been on the verge of busting out since birth I'm told and with Hunter's D and Nailon's O you get one for the price of two.  Korver is intriguing and he needs to continue giving this team solid production.  Much like New Jersey, health is the biggest concern.  Can Webber play a full season, can Iverson remain healthy taking the beating he takes nightly, can Mr. Igodala transform into an all-star in just his sophomore year.  That's a lot of questions to answer but I think in the end enough things work out for Philly to claim second and a playoff berth.

Prediction: 2nd best
Seed:  6
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New York has their coach in Larry Brown and now has a scoring center in Eddy Curry.  I'm curious to see how long before Larry Brown has to check into a hospital, for mental health reasons this time.  Because the shot selection of Crawford, Richardson, and Marbury are enough to drive the most grounded individuals bananas.  LB will establish his smothering man to man help defense and lord knows these guys will find a way to make it work.  I also like the young crop of players this team has (Ariza, Lee, Frye, and Robinson) but know of Brown's distrust of rooks.  The Knicks won't be consistent enough in the end and will miss out on the last see.

Prediction:  3rd best
Seed:  miss playoffs
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Toronto, a team whose chances I sure like better than some other people.  I'm wondering how long it will be before I'll have to start saying I told you so about Charlie Villanueva.  He leads all rookies with 19 ppg and 5 rpg and has been playing some inspired basketball through the pre-season.  Joey Graham has shown flashes of brilliance and they got this guy named Bosh.  To me that is a frontline of the future.  Mo Pete and Mike James are serviceable guards.  I think this team will compete but needs to dump perennial malcontent Jalen Rose for a better fit.  I think they improve on last year but the wins will still be hard to come by.

Prediction:  4th best
Seed: miss playoffs
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So I'm predicting last years Division Champs the Boston Celtics to finish at the absolute rear of the division.  I never said I knew what I was doing.  Well, I think their team color represents my trepidation with this team:  GREEN.  As in they need more time, not Gerald who I like quite a bit but whose obviously a couple years away.  I don't think Jefferson explodes on the scene quite yet and their guards will experience growing pains.  Its not hopeless but unless injury devastates their division mates, I think Boston is in for a long year.

Prediction: The Caboose
Seed: miss playoffs  

[rickortreat]

Philadelphia will take the Atlantic.

Would you rather have Vince Carter and Jason Kidd, or Alan Iverson and Chris Webber?

Beyond that Philly has more young players with upside potential in Igoudala and Dalembert.

I don't think anyone else in the Atlantic deserves mention, with the exception of Washington.

[Reality]

New York has their coach in Larry Brown and now has a scoring center in Eddy Curry.  I'm curious to see how long before Larry Brown has to check into a hospital, for mental health reasons this time.  Because the shot selection of Crawford, Richardson, and Marbury are enough to drive the most grounded individuals bananas.  LB will establish his smothering man to man help defense and lord knows these guys will find a way to make it work.  I also like the young crop of players this team has (Ariza, Lee, Frye, and Robinson) but know of Brown's distrust of rooks.  The Knicks won't be consistent enough in the end and will miss out on the last see.

Prediction:  3rd best
Seed:  miss playoffs
 

In the Olympics you might not have caught the couple late medal round games, i know one in particular whereupon Marbury was in a coma, not only shooting very well but passing.  

Did that have anything to do with Larry Brown?  I would say yes.

For the Brown doubters whose only lame limp excuse is that "he has only won 1 NBA title", they just don't get it.

Where will NY end up this year?  I don't know.  I don't agree or disagree with your pick.  But I won't doubt Brown.  Clippers to the playoffs.  Twice.

[Joe Vancil]

I'd rather have Kidd and Carter.

Come on, rickortreat, this is the old "Shaq/Kobe vs. Stockton/Malone" question.  One has undeniably better talent, but the other has undeniably better chemistry.  And anyone outside of Los Angeles will tell you that better chemistry is better for the team as a whole.

Fact of the matter is that Kidd is still Kidd, which means his teammates are better on the court than they are on their own merit.  A great point guard can elevate his teammates, and right now, there's no greater one than Kidd.

Iverson can elevate a TEAM, but he can't elevate his TEAMMATES.  That's the difference.

I'm a big believer that Webber is going to have a 20/10 kind of season, and that Iguodala is going to break out, and Iverson is going to be Iverson.  But I'll take New Jersey, because Kidd+Carter+Jefferson+Krstic+Jackson+Collins+McInnis>Iverson+Webber+Iguodala+Dalembert+Korver+Hunter+Nailon.  Make no mistake - Maurice Cheeks is going to get Philadelphia on the right track.  But the fact is that even with that, Philadelphia might get a bigger boost if Cheeks were to play the point for this team.

By the way, you're going to be *VERY* disappointed with Hunter.  Or perhaps you don't remember him from his Orlando days.  The guy is a bum - plain and simple.  The only reason he looked good defensively in Phoenix is because so many of the rest of them were BAD defensively.  Put him alongside of Iguodala, Iverson, and Dalembert and you're going to see just how bad the guy is.

Korver is going to drop off a bit this year, I believe.  Iguodala's improvement is going to come at someone's expense.  My guess is that Korver pays for Iguodala's touches.

 

[Derek Bodner]

1) NJ
2) Philly
3) Boston
4) NY
5) Toronto

I see NJ and philly being separated by about 2-3 games, but NJ taking it.  Philly and NJ make the playoffs, noone else.

NY might be a force next year, after LB has dismantled that team and brought his players in.

[Joe Vancil]

Derek,

Complete agreement here with your positioning.

 

[WayOutWest]

Come on, rickortreat, this is the old "Shaq/Kobe vs. Stockton/Malone" question.  One has undeniably better talent, but the other has undeniably better chemistry.  And anyone outside of Los Angeles will tell you that better chemistry is better for the team as a whole.
 

Is it too obvious to throw in the "Banners" or "Rings" card?  

How about the "MJ/Pippen" card?

Unless I misunderstood you're position, I think it's best for you to lay off the hard sauce.

[Joe Vancil]

Unless you're arguing that Jeff Hornacek, Bryon Russell,  Greg Ostertag, Howard Eisley, Shandon Anderson, Adam Keefe, Antoine Carr, Greg Foster, Jacque Vaughn, and Chris Morris look like a championship team with Shaq and Kobe added to them, I think my position is quite clear.

Somehow, I think you're going to say that Derek Fisher, Rick Fox, Horace Grant, Robert Horry, Samaki Walker, Ron Harper, Bryan Shaw, Tyronn Lue, Mitch Richmond and Devean George look like a better team than Hornacek, Russell, Ostertag, Eisley, Carr, Morris, Vaughn, Foster, Keefe, and Anderson.

And I *KNOW* you're going to say Eddie Jones, Nick Van Exel, Rick Fox, Robert Horry, Elden Campbell, Travis Knight plus Shaq and Kobe (sorry, but I can't remember the rest of that group of also-rans that couldn't even post a division title) looks like a better team than the aforementioned with Stockton and Malone - despite the 1-8 playoff record against them.

And OF COURSE the Lakers won championships...just as soon as they got help from the Blazers, Mavericks, and Kings...who took on the task of doing what Shaq and Kobe's Lakers were never able to do - ELIMINATE UTAH.

By the way, I really did enjoy that ring ceremony.
 

[Guest_Randy]

Come on, rickortreat, this is the old "Shaq/Kobe vs. Stockton/Malone" question. One has undeniably better talent, but the other has undeniably better chemistry. And anyone outside of Los Angeles will tell you that better chemistry is better for the team as a whole.

Talk about a NOZER comment -- let's compare the rings of Shaq/Kobe to Stockton/Malone?  Chemistry is VERY important but it doesn't negate talent.  The problem isn't just chemistry in Philly either -- it's how the players work together.  While Kobe and Shaq HAD chemistry problems -- they played VERY well together.  I don't see AI and Webber playing well together -- not unless the change the rules and allow two basketballs on the same court!

Unless you're arguing that Jeff Hornacek, Bryon Russell, Greg Ostertag, Howard Eisley, Shandon Anderson, Adam Keefe, Antoine Carr, Greg Foster, Jacque Vaughn, and Chris Morris look like a championship team with Shaq and Kobe added to them, I think my position is quite clear.

Somehow, I think you're going to say that Derek Fisher, Rick Fox, Horace Grant, Robert Horry, Samaki Walker, Ron Harper, Bryan Shaw, Tyronn Lue, Mitch Richmond and Devean George look like a better team than Hornacek, Russell, Ostertag, Eisley, Carr, Morris, Vaughn, Foster, Keefe, and Anderson.

And I *KNOW* you're going to say Eddie Jones, Nick Van Exel, Rick Fox, Robert Horry, Elden Campbell, Travis Knight plus Shaq and Kobe (sorry, but I can't remember the rest of that group of also-rans that couldn't even post a division title) looks like a better team than the aforementioned with Stockton and Malone - despite the 1-8 playoff record against them.

And OF COURSE the Lakers won championships...just as soon as they got help from the Blazers, Mavericks, and Kings...who took on the task of doing what Shaq and Kobe's Lakers were never able to do - ELIMINATE UTAH.

Joe, you are usually pretty objective so you need to look around and find where you put that objectivity!  Ask any GM in the league -- Kobe and Shaq COULD take have taken that squad to a championship -- something that Stockton/Malone never did.  

Actually, there are great pieces (role players) on BOTH of those squads -- however, with the exception of Horny and Grant/Horry -- perhaps Fox/Russell -- none of these guys are nothing more than role players benefitting from great teammates.  If you doubt that -- look at these players (from both squads) who got paid a lot more money to go elsewhere and not look nearly as good.

As for your comments about the EJ, NVE, that squad -- that squad was much more talented than any of the ones that one a championship.  However, it had a LOT more to do with some of the worst coaching that I have ever seen rather than poor chemistry.  The Lakers actually GOT along quite well that year -- but the coaching was PATHETIC!!!  

And if you think that the Lakers won their three titles simply because they never had to play the Jazz -- you are a LOT less objective than I thought you were.  You mention the ring ceremony -- okay, but notice who the rings went to -- certainly not the Jazz.  And if you go back and check their record out -- with the exception of that game, the Jazz dominance of the Lakers STOPPED!  The dominance of the Lakers during their 2nd championship run is one of the most dominant in NBA history -- and they would have rolled over the Jazz like they were a minor speedbump.

[Joe Vancil]

Randy,

Oh, there's no doubt in my mind that the 00, 01, 02 Lakers would have beaten the Jazz had they faced them.  

But I also doubt there's a person here who would look at the Eisley/Russell/Ostertag/Carr/Morris/Vaughn/Keefe/Foster/Anderson/Hornacek combo and thinking they're Finals material - with the exception of Hornacek.  With Bryant/O'Neal, all the glory would go to those two guys.  Only when O'Neal and Bryant *DIDN'T* win championships was the problem with the "role players."  Truth of the matter is that it was great play from the role players that got LA over the hump in the first place.  The role players never got enough credit in the wins...and took too much heat in the losses.

As for the coaching of the old Laker teams?  I disagree completely.  It WASN'T coaching - it was the unwillingness of the players to LISTEN to Del Harris.  People forget that Harris took that '81 Houston team to the Finals.  And, just today, the NBA GM's voted Del Harris the top assistant coach in the league.  Harris was fine as a coach - it's just he was dealing with a few egoes that were just too big for him to handle.  It wasn't Phil Jackson's METHODS that won the Lakers those championships...it was his EGO MANAGEMENT.  And when the ego-management got to be too big of a problem, LA stopped winning.  The players thought they knew better than Del Harris.  They couldn't make that argument when Phil Jackson came in.  But as for just the X's and O's - give me Del Harris over Phil Jackson ANY DAY.  Harris isn't exciting nor inspiring - but he's extremely brilliant.  Let's see what Phil Jackson would have done with the 1995 and 1996 Laker teams.  Those were some REALLY BAD teams that turned in some REALLY IMPRESSIVE records, all things considering.

Shaq and Kobe had problems in 2000, 2001, and 2002, but it never got in the way of the end result - winning.  2003, however, it was ALL ABOUT ego.

Shaq and Kobe may have been champions together, but as teammates, they were a failure.

 

[WayOutWest]

Okay Joe, I'm convinced.

You're on CRACK!

Unless you're arguing that Jeff Hornacek, Bryon Russell,  Greg Ostertag, Howard Eisley, Shandon Anderson, Adam Keefe, Antoine Carr, Greg Foster, Jacque Vaughn, and Chris Morris look like a championship team with Shaq and Kobe added to them, I think my position is quite clear.

With Shaq/Kobe AND the Jackson coaching staff, YES, that's a championship team in the post Jordan era.  I'd even go as far to say that's a championship team durring the Jordan era.  Granted I'm not talking about the rookie Kobe or the 400lbs 2003 Shaq.

You're position is clearly OFF (in the weeds that is).

Somehow, I think you're going to say that Derek Fisher, Rick Fox, Horace Grant, Robert Horry, Samaki Walker, Ron Harper, Bryan Shaw, Tyronn Lue, Mitch Richmond and Devean George look like a better team than Hornacek, Russell, Ostertag, Eisley, Carr, Morris, Vaughn, Foster, Keefe, and Anderson.

Honestly, the Lakers didn't have a third option that was as good and as CONSISTENT as Horny.  Overall we had better "spot" players like Horry, Fox and Shaw who made their mark and tipped the scales but the Lakers didn't have a guy like Horny.  IMO Fox was Russel's equal and overall the Lakers did have more talent.

And I *KNOW* you're going to say Eddie Jones, Nick Van Exel, Rick Fox, Robert Horry, Elden Campbell, Travis Knight plus Shaq and Kobe (sorry, but I can't remember the rest of that group of also-rans that couldn't even post a division title) looks like a better team than the aforementioned with Stockton and Malone - despite the 1-8 playoff record against them.

Definately better talent but it was not mature and extreemly poorly coached.  What kind of an idiot lets a rookie take the game winning shots of a playoff series deciding game when you have a definative clutch shooter for you team.  There are many example of young talented teams comming into their own a year or two later and making there nemisis look like old grannies (i.e. Pistons/Boston, Buls/Pistons)

And OF COURSE the Lakers won championships...just as soon as they got help from the Blazers, Mavericks, and Kings...who took on the task of doing what Shaq and Kobe's Lakers were never able to do - ELIMINATE UTAH.

LMAO!  If you think for a second that the PJ coached Lakers would have had ANY trouble with the Jazz you're kidding yourself and if you even dream of applying that belief to the 2001 Lakers squad you need to move to Philly and live amoung your kind of irrational fans.  IMO the Jazz were smart enough to have forfeited any attempt at beating the 2001 Lakers.  That would have been the smart move, and Malone/Stockton have always been smart players.

 

[Joe Vancil]

Honestly, the Lakers didn't have a third option that was as good and as CONSISTENT as Horny. Overall we had better "spot" players like Horry, Fox and Shaw who made their mark and tipped the scales but the Lakers didn't have a guy like Horny. IMO Fox was Russel's equal and overall the Lakers did have more talent.

You know, I actually agree with that statement, but more because of the high value I place on Hornacek than due to the age of Glen Rice or Ron Harper.  However, that's not the reason I checked back in on this thread.

I was thinking about what Phil Jackson would do with Hornacek.  Seems obvious to me - he'd move Hornacek to point guard, and turn him into nothing but a spot-up shooter.  And I wonder just how long what was left of Hornacek's knee would have held up if he was forced to chase Damon Stoudemire and Mike Bibby around across a playoff series.

You take the Jazz team minus Stockton and Malone, give them to Phil Jackson, Kobe, and Shaq, and other than Hornacek, that team turns into the misfits that they've shown wherever else they've went.  Eisley and Vaughn would be too small for Phil Jackson, and shipped out immediately.  Adam Keefe would have been waived in training camp or sent packing ala Travis Knight.  Antoine Carr would be nothing more than rebounding and defense.  Bryon Russell would have been Devean George, and Shandon Anderson would have been a smaller version of Devean George, and reasonably effective, and Chris Morris would have thrived in Glen Rice's role.  Ostertag would have been Ostertag in Sacramento this past season.  Hornacek would have been at point, ala John Paxson, Ron Harper, or Brian Shaw.  That team has essentially two outside shooters - Hornacek and Morris - and a rebounding core of Antoine Carr and Greg Foster.  That team is a first round-and-out team under Phil and the triangle.  Every complaint you've had about the 2003 and 2004 Lakers, you'd have had about this team.

Likewise, give Sloan JUST Shaq and Kobe, and there'd have been a major incident in practice - more than likely for him screaming obscentities at Shaq for his conditioning and Kobe for his unwillingness to stay in the offense.  And, of course, both would hear him quite well, as he'd have them sitting on the bench at the time.  The man would have been dragged away in chains, spouting out language that would make sailors blush all the while.  Sloan is probably the only coach in the league who could get away with screaming at a player because he didn't like their posture while sitting on the bench.

On the positive side, folks like Shaw (who would now be a 2-guard under Sloan), Fox (who'd have been a near All-Star ala Matt Harpring), Horry, Samaki Walker, and Devean George would have had career years...assuming Sloan didn't kill them first.

Fact of the matter is except for the elite of the elite, a player's value is largely determined by how well he fits in to his coach's system - which leads us back to the Philadelphia 76ers recent history.

Philly's a team that is going to look significantly better under Maurice Cheeks than under Jim "I've never seen a three-pointer that I didn't like or a three-point shooter with a good percentage" O'Brien.  That said, folks like Korver are going to pay the price for Philly's improvement.

[dbodner-lazy]

I actually think Webber and Iverson will work better than most people expect.  Let's not forget last year that:
a) they had very little time
B) they had a bumbling boob of an offensive coach (and one that, while his defensive system has had success, couldn't adapt to personnel).

No, Webber and Iverson may not elevate each other's offensive game too much, they don't compliment each other like that (but then again, neither of them needs their individual offensive game's elevated for the Sixers to be successful).  But I think both Iverson and Webber will elevate the supporting castes offensive games (Iguodala, Korver, Nailon).  Iverson and Webber present two very different ways for players to get open that could be hard to defend if implemented properly.