Future Power Rankings: ESPN Insider

The love affair with this OKC team by is ESPN is almost as ridiculous as the one by some so-called Blazer fans on this board. Even people in OKC aren't as excited about the Thunder as Mixum - judging by their attendance.

 

The factors that make up the rankings are something like: revenue generated, drafting history, management team, young talent, and cap flexibility

 

I agree, if ESPN was so sure on our power rankings, then why are Blazer highlights when we win , are always 20 minutes into the show while other teams are within the first 5 minutes?

 

Don't be stupid next time and we're ok.

 

UH huh ...

 

Not to mention OKC lost tonight. I wonder what this means to their 2017 ranking.

(they were 16th last week)

 

Good post.

 

They did?

 

No they didn't

HTH

 

Not at this point it's not a fail.



Durant over Oden probably makes our team a bit better, but Durant over a non playing Oden makes our team a lot better.

It would be interesting to see if Durant would have had the same impact playing under Nate however.

 

Reminds me of the Blazers, when they won 13 in a row.

I guess I really do want the "Thunder" to fail, not just because they have a shitty owner who stole a team, but also because of the whole Durant love-fest. Oh, and also because I'm fed up of hearing about Presti (I guess that's how other people used to feel about Pritchard - how soon until Adrian Wojowhatsit turns on Presti?), and it beats me how they keep winning. Watching them, I think it's because they've got a very good defense (although it would be pretty much useless against quality big men) and an offense that consists of opportunistic fast-breaking and Durant.

The player I find the most perplexing, though, is Westbrook. He seems to be defying the odds and turning from pure potential tweener into a top-flight PG. Basically only Chauncey Billups has done that before, so that's pretty amazing. He's still not much of a shooter and relies a lot on athleticism, though, so it'll be interesting to see how he does in the playoffs. In fact, I predict the whole Thunder team will struggle, because they seem to be too reliant on a couple of players.

Bear in mind, also, that the "Thunder" has been far-and-away the healthiest team in the league. None of their important players has missed a single game, I think. They also have a dominant record against sub .500 teams, and a below-average record against good teams:

 

Although that would be very hard to do, this does have to come close. It's a bit like national rankings of first-grade basketball prospects. It's also inviting schadenfreude, much as critics of Jerry Krause post-Jordan experienced, and critics of the Blazers are trying to experience now. It's also odd to see the Lakers in there. I guess it is true that they've played very well without Bryant, who is just on the verge of starting to break down, but Odom and Gasol aren't exactly striplings.

And what are we supposed to take out of this? Predictions for championships? Who, the season before, predicted that Boston would win? Or, the season before the Gasol trade, that the Lakers would win? And besides which, "assets" seems to be totally subjective - practically nobody would've said the Lakers had the assets to trade for Gasol. So yes, this whole idea is stupid. And so is discussing it.

 

The proof is in the pudding - they're taking care of business against the bad teams thanks to a healthy roster, but are a below .500 team against potential playoff competition. Whereas we've been able to beat all of the Western Conference contenders (other than cursed Jerry Sloan's group).

 

Excellent post. Exactly.

Enjoy some wrepped!

 

It isn't a "straightforward forecast" unless there is a "straightforward" way to estimate future injuries, as that factor appears to be the biggest factor for determining how successful we will be.

I'm curious how they attempt to account for injuries. If they ignore them or don't try to account for them in the future, I don't see how they can rank OKC above the Blazers.

Last year, with the Blazers effective average age being younger than this year's OKC, the Blazers were a 54-win team, with the point-differential indicating we were ready to start crushing teams.

IMO, there is no way the current OKC team beats last year's Blazer team, and chances are that without all of the injuries, this year's Blazer team is better than last year's.

Even with all of our injuries, OKC is 2 games ahead of the Blazers.

 

Right, standardized testing is exactly like ESPN NBA power rankings.

Well done.