Sac.Kings
All-Star
Here are the power rankings from NBA.com---don't expect too much.
http://www.nba.com/features/power_rankings.html
http://www.nba.com/features/power_rankings.html
Power Rankings
- Thread starter Sac.Kings
- Start date
SacKings384
Starter
The thing I have and always will hate about Power Rankings... Is it's not who's the better overall team. It's who's hottest, who looks better than they used to. Example, Orlando... They may be better than last season, but because they were crappy Orlando and are now shaping up, they get such a high ranking. It's not who's better, it's who's hottest. Which is dumb...
R
Rome
Guest
I think the power rankings are correct. They are ranking based on how the team stands in overall talent level and offseason moves.
Gary
All-Star
Does not mean a thing, but if I had to rank the teams right now it pretty much would be the same except Utah would be top 10 (western conference), and Houston would not be in the top 10 (western conference). Utah, Denver, Sac, and LAL would be 7-8-9-10 in the West, but in no particular order as of yet.
Teams in the West that are better than the Kings imo. How many more games the other teams would win are an estimate.
1. San Antonio (much better) +10-15 games
2. Dallas (much better) +10-15 games
3. Phoenix (better) +6-10 games
4. NO/OK (better) +6-10 games
5. LAC (slightly better) +2-5 games
6. Memphis (slightly better) +2-5 games
The teams below are about the same. +/- a couple wins more than we will have.
Lakers (even) -3 to +2
Denver (even) -3 to +2
Utah (even) -3 to +2
But we are a player away from being top 5. that's how close it is.
Teams in the West that are better than the Kings imo. How many more games the other teams would win are an estimate.
1. San Antonio (much better) +10-15 games
2. Dallas (much better) +10-15 games
3. Phoenix (better) +6-10 games
4. NO/OK (better) +6-10 games
5. LAC (slightly better) +2-5 games
6. Memphis (slightly better) +2-5 games
The teams below are about the same. +/- a couple wins more than we will have.
Lakers (even) -3 to +2
Denver (even) -3 to +2
Utah (even) -3 to +2
But we are a player away from being top 5. that's how close it is.
Last edited:
hoopsfan
Starter
P
PurplePanther
Guest
Those rankings are pretty bad, but what more can you expect from something posted on NBA.com ?
VF21 is right. I'm surprised I actually clicked that link.
VF21 is right. I'm surprised I actually clicked that link.
N
NorCal510
Guest
we are really underrated
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
One does wonder why? We've gone backwards thus far this offseason.
.Too many areas of need. Coaching can only take you so far. We have no legit rebounder/shot blocker. Wells in a package for Camby would be great. Wells for Foster at least gives us a rebounder. SAR/KT/Brad not going to cut anything. Decent on offense, but thats it. Is it that hard to acquire a specialty player.........how about Dalembert, who is on the outs in Philly. He needs a change of scenery. I would take a chance even though he doesn't like the WC.
vladetomiller
Bench
Didnt they trade Tyson Chandler
LPKingsFan
All-Star
I would still put us ahead of Memphis, and definitely Utah. LAL, maybe. How I rank the West:
1. Dallas
2. SA
3. Phoenix
4. LAC
Then 5-8 is a collection of NP/OK, Denver, Kings, Lakers, Memphis, roughly in that order. Utah, maybe, but they just really don't impress me much.
And the Bulls aren't a joke. Wallace/Brown/Noconi/Gordon/Hinrich/Duhon/Deng/Thomas is a pretty darn good top 8.
1. Dallas
2. SA
3. Phoenix
4. LAC
Then 5-8 is a collection of NP/OK, Denver, Kings, Lakers, Memphis, roughly in that order. Utah, maybe, but they just really don't impress me much.
And the Bulls aren't a joke. Wallace/Brown/Noconi/Gordon/Hinrich/Duhon/Deng/Thomas is a pretty darn good top 8.
kingsfannPDX
Bench
Kev.in
Starter
How is the Lakers above us are they really better then us?
They won one more game than us last season and haven't lost any of their major pieces yet. At the least that puts them right there with us in the same tier of the power rankings. 14th or 17th, not much difference.
John Galt
Starter
Someone criticized the Bulls ranking - I'm surprised. I think the Bulls are the team I will adopt if the Kings leave town - I love what they've done and was only hoping the wouldn't ruin a good thing by picking up Peja - and they dodged that bullet.
I bet the Bulls are in the ECF next year... won't surprise me one bit.
I bet the Bulls are in the ECF next year... won't surprise me one bit.
Kingzrool
Starter
I disagree, remember since Ron came to our team, we had the 4th (or 5th?) best record last year. We lost Bonzi, but during that period Bonzi and SAR etc. had injuries and were out a lot. We definitely need another peice or two, but as of now I feel that we are better that a .500 team with no injuries.
vladetomiller
Bench
I am picking the bulls to be in the ECF next year for sure, just not decided whether it will be the cavs or the heat joining them there
R
Rome
Guest
I think the Bulls are going to be a fun team to watch next season. But they still are a perimeter shooting team. Maybe another inside scoring big will change that.
TheJoker
Bench
Bricklayer said:
Oh absolutely, NO doubt about it. it's a shame that since we signed Salmons it seems like we have no plan to do trades. atleast it seems like it right now i'm just stunned to tell you the truth there is a way we can make our off-season turn around into something special but it depends if we make a major trade.
Similar threads
