ESPN Insider likes out future! The Future Power Rankings are ESPN Insider's projection of the on-court success expected for each team during the 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13 seasons. How Future Power Rating Is Determined PLAYERS (0 to 400 points): Current players and their potential for the future, factoring in expected departures MANAGEMENT (0 to 200 points): Quality and stability of front office, ownership, coaching MONEY (0 to 200 points): Projected salary-cap situation; ability and willingness to exceed cap and pay luxury tax MARKET (0 to 100 points): Appeal to future acquisitions, based on team quality, franchise reputation, city's desirability as a destination, market size, taxes, business and entertainment opportunities, arena quality, fans DRAFT (0 to 100 points): Future draft picks; draft positioning CATEGORY RANKINGS: See how each team ranked in each category Consider this a convenient way to see in what direction your favorite team is headed. Each of the NBA's 30 teams received an overall Future Power Rating of 0 to 1,000, based on how well we expected each team to perform in the three seasons following this season. To determine the Future Power Rating, we rated each team in five categories (see table at right). As you can see, we determined that the most important category was a team's current players and the future potential of those players -- that category accounted for 40 percent of each team's overall Future Power Rating. At the same time, we looked at many other factors, such as management, ownership, coaching, a team's spending habits, its cap situation, the reputation of the city and the franchise, and what kind of draft picks we expected the team to have in the future. To reach our ratings in each category, we talked to teams to get a handle on their future strategies, we looked at their contractual commitments and we carefully broke down each roster to figure out which players would improve, which would decline and which would likely depart. We expect these rankings to evolve as the season moves along, trades are made, injuries occur, strategies shift, and so on. Return from time to time as we update the rankings. Here are our current rankings, from 1 to 30: Future Power Rankings: 1-5 | 6-10 | 11-15 | 16-20 | 21-25 | 26-30 1. Portland Trail Blazers | Future Power Rating: 688 PLAYERS MANAGEMENT MONEY MARKET DRAFT 354 (2nd) 153 (3rd) 92 (17th) 53 (12th) 37 (23rd) On paper, no other team possesses as bright a future as the Portland Trail Blazers. It all starts with the players. Nobody, not even Oklahoma City, can match the stable of young talent the Blazers have built. Brandon Roy is already a superstar, and joining him are potential stars like LaMarcus Aldridge (24), Greg Oden (21, even if he looks more like 51), Nicolas Batum (20) and Martell Webster (22). That doesn't even count the other assets the Blazers have that could eventually pan out, such as talented second-year benchwarmer Jerryd Bayless and a veritable farm team in Europe that includes Joel Freeland, Petteri Koponen and Victor Claver. Portland also gets strong grades in other categories. The management under GM Kevin Pritchard has been rock-solid, with the only minor quibble being the decision to draft Oden ahead of Kevin Durant -- a decision, one should remember, that all 30 GMs were prepared to make, even if a lot of fans and analysts weren't. In terms of money, the Blazers have no cap room to speak of for the foreseeable future, but being owned by one of the world's wealthiest men in a rabid city where sellouts are the norm means the Blazers can comfortably go into luxury tax and beyond should the need arise. Portland market didn't score as highly in the market category -- witness Hedo Turkoglu's about-face -- as sad, dreary winters, the nation's highest state taxes and a relative lack of diversity for a major metropolitan area limit its attractiveness to free agents. They stay in the middle of the pack in this category largely due to Allen's largesse, with first-rate team facilities, and the fact that a lot of players grow to like the place once they've been there -- it helped bring Steve Blake back, for instance. The draft is where Portland scored poorly, but even that is a positive in a sense -- with such a bright future, it can expect to pick in the mid-to-late 20s in coming seasons.
All the rankings. Hard to read, sorry, just copy and pasted from their chart. RANK PLAYERS MANAGEMENT MONEY MARKET DRAFT 1 Orlando San Antonio New York LA Lakers New Jersey 2 Portland Houston Miami Miami Memphis 3 LA Lakers Portland New Jersey New York Sacramento 4 Cleveland Orlando Chicago Orlando Milwaukee 5 Utah Boston LA Clippers Phoenix Utah 6 Okla. City Detroit Okla. City Chicago LA Clippers 7 Chicago Utah Houston Boston Minnesota 8 Denver LA Lakers Minnesota Dallas Golden State 9 LA Clippers Okla. City Boston San Antonio Indiana 10 Miami Dallas Dallas Houston Okla. City 11 Philadelphia Denver Indiana LA Clippers Houston 12 Atlanta Miami San Antonio Portland Charlotte 13 New Orleans Chicago Atlanta New Jersey Philadelphia 14 San Antonio Toronto LA Lakers Detroit Miami 15 Toronto Indiana Toronto Cleveland Chicago 16 Golden State New York Phoenix Denver Detroit 17 Boston Cleveland Portland Atlanta Toronto 18 Memphis New Jersey Detroit Toronto New Orleans 19 Washington Philadelphia Utah Washington Washington 20 Detroit New Orleans Cleveland Indiana New York 21 Minnesota Washington Milwaukee Utah Atlanta 22 Indiana Sacramento Memphis Philadelphia San Antonio 23 New Jersey Atlanta Denver Okla. City Portland 24 Dallas Milwaukee Orlando Golden State Phoenix 25 Houston Phoenix Washington New Orleans Cleveland 26 Phoenix Minnesota Golden State Sacramento Boston 27 Sacramento LA Clippers Sacramento Charlotte Orlando 28 New York Charlotte Philadelphia Minnesota Denver 29 Milwaukee Memphis Charlotte Milwaukee Dallas 30 Charlotte Golden State New Orleans Memphis LA Lakers
I don't get how Orlando's players are better than ours over the next few years. Dwight is amazing, but our core is so freakishly deep, you really can't compare them.
Cleveland's high ranking is entirely dependent on whether they keep LeBron. Otherwise they are around a .500 team with little excitement and an old Shaq.
Honestly I don't think Cleveland would win 30 games without LeBron. The only reason some guys on that team are successful is that the entire gameplan of the opponent is stop LeBron. The rest of the dudes are an afterthought. This is why I believe LeBron is better then Kobe. Put LeBron on the current Laker team and it's scary. Put Kobe on the current Cavs team and he is publicly asking for a trade.
Not sure about that. I like our team very much, but our depth is a little overrated, in my opinion. When Bayless starts hitting jump shots, and Outlaw learns to do something besides shoot, and Webster can put three good games together back to back, then maybe I'll change my mind.
Deep will get you to the playoffs, but the top of your rotation and at least two superstar quality players are usually needed to make any hay in the playoffs. If Greg fully pans out and if LaMarcus takes another step forward I think you can start to call this team better than Orlando from a talent perspective, but right now, Dwight is the most dominant center in the league, Vince is still a stud, Lewis can fill it up and Nelson made the leap to all-star the year before.
You're talking about the ninth, tenth, and eleventh men on the roster (with Batum healthy). They all have demonstrated ability, if not consistency (and how consistent, really, can the ninth through eleventh guys on the roster be?), so I think that your post demonstrates the depth of the team. Ed O.
Huh? Webster has already started a couple of games, and Outlaw is often the first guy off the bench. Bayless is the only one of the three I mentioned who is not part of the regular rotation. Not to mention the fact that all 3 players are regularly cited as part of our "depth" by NBA analysts who measure these things.
I think he's saying that since we go 10 deep, and our starters are Roy/Miller/Blake/LMA/Oden, and Rudy and Przy are the next two guys off the bench (that's 7), then we're actually talking about our 8th-, 9th-, and 10th-best players. (I have Dante and Howard below them). So he's one off, but the point still stands, I think.
He's probably counting Batum, who would have started ahead of Webster had he been healthy. He's injured, but that's why our "ninth, tenth and eleventh" players are taking on the roles of eighth, ninth and tenth.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/teams/depth?team=orl http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/teams/depth?team=por Over the next three years PG - Blake << Nelson SG - Roy >> Carter SF - Batum < Lewis PF - Aldridge >>> Anderson C - Oden < Howard BPG - Miller > J. Williams BPG - Bayless >> A. Johnson BSG - Fernandez >> J.J. Redick BSF - Webster = Pietrus BSF - Cunningham << Matt Barnes BPF - Outlaw = Bass BC - Przybilla > Gortat BC - J. Howard = Foyle By my rating, we're a plus 5.
When DO the Maxiep ratings come out anyways? I could care less what Hollinger or Deep Blue think about the NBA. I want to hear it from a voice I respect and trust!
I disagree. Portlands roster is filled with a bunch of players that we are perpetually waiting for them to show their potential. Orlando's roster is filled with a ton of players who have realized theirs, and some still have upside. For example when Rashard Lewis comes back their forward rotation includes; Rashard Lewis Ryan Anderson Michael Pietrus Brandon Bass Vince Carter Matt Barnes That pretty much puts every forward they have on their team as better than all of ours not named Brandon Roy or Lamarcus Aldridge. A lot of folks will not even include Roy as a forward. Rashard Lewis is easily as good as Aldridge now. That is what I call depth. If Portland wants to show they are that deep, players need to step up and show they are truly that deep, and not just deep on potential.
They are not just taking players into consideration. More than likely the market, draft(Not sure why) is pulling that number down.
This ranking is for the 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13 seasons. Vince is old and injured now. Will he still be a "stud" (more likely a dud) in 2012-13? What about Shard? He's 30 and his production peaked 3 seasons ago. What will it be like three years in the future? Yes, Dwight is a stud. Jameer Nelson is good, but at 27 (28 in February) he's at least 2.5 years older than all but four players (Joel, Blake, Miller and Juwan Howard) on our roster. So, outside of Dwight Howard, where is all this young, future talent? Ryan Anderson, JJ Reddick Bandon Bass and Marcin Gortat? Everyone else on their roster will be past their prime by the 2012-13 season. Other than Dwight, all of their their current starters will be in their 30s (Nelson 31, Pietrus 31, Shard 33 and Vince 36). Other than Ryan Anderson and Brandon Bass, who both play the same position, they don't really have any young players that project as starters on their current roster. So, I give them a big advantage in "future talent" for Dwight. But I fail to see how Ryan Anderson (21), JJ Reddick (25), Bandon Bass (24) and Marcin Gortat (25) stack up favorably compared to Brandon Roy (25), LaMarcus Aldridge (24), Greg Oden (22), Travis Outlaw (25), Rudy Fernandez (24), Nicolas Batum (21), Jerryd Balyless (21) and Martell Webster (23). Three years from now, the entire Blazer core (Roy, Aldridge, Oden)will be in their primes, as will our other starters (likely Batum and Bayless) and most of our bench (Outlaw, Rudy, Webster, Pendergraph and Cunningham). Three years from now, Dwight Howard and a few mediocre bench players will be in their primes for Orlando. Some of our young guys may pan out to be "mediocre bench players", but we have three young potential all-stars, others who are likely future starters in this league (Batum and Rudy) and others who are proven solid bench contributors (Outlaw and Rudy). I just don't see Orlando being able to match that 2 - 3 years from now when Vince and Shard are OLD. I think the over all talent level between the two teams is very close today, but given that two of their top 4 players are already in their 30s, I think the Blazers will have the advantage 2 - 3 years from now. BNM
And many of their key players have significant downside (Vince, Shard). BTW, Vince plays the 2. If you want to leave him in, you have to also leave Roy in. I don't consider either of them as forwards. so I'd take them both out of your forwards comparison. Peitrus is nothing special and soon to be 28. Not a lot of upside. Matt Barnes is a poor man's Travis Outlaw with a pissy attitude - and three years older. Ryan Anderson has potential, but so does Nic Batum. Brandon Bass is a productive bench player, but is too much of a tweener to ever be a starter on a contending team. Their best two fowards (if you include Vince) are well past their primes. Barnes (career high PER of 14.7 four seasons ago, in the high 12s ever since) and Pietrus (career high PER = 14.2 SIX years ago, going downhill ever since, 11.8 PER last year) are currently in the "primes" age-wise and not very good, with no upside. Barnes is also on his 7th team in 7 years. He tends to wear out his welcome rather quickly. I doubt if he'll even be on the Magic roster 2 - 3 years from now, and if he is it won't matter because he'll still be a below average player - at best. Remember, FUTURE talent was the subject of this article. Shard's production peaked three seasons ago. He's now 30 and his PER over the last two years has been 16.7 amd 16.8. Compare that to Aldridge's of 18.5 and 19.1. It looks to me like Aldridge is already a more productive player - and still improving. How will their production compare 2 - 3 years from now when Shard is 32-33 and Aldridge is 26-27? BNM
