Steve Kerr's Western Conference Pre-Rankings

[AriesMar27]

okay... we lose divac and we're 10th, the lakers gain divac and he injures himself and they are better than us?

denver, utah and phoenix were way too high.... the lakers are fine where they are , the kings just need to be 3.... and not 10.

 

[kingskings!]

Minnesota and San Antonio are the teams to beat in the Western Conference, and there's considerable dropoff from there. As many as nine teams have a realistic chance at the third-best record in the conference, which means several very good teams won't even make the playoffs.

Not defending Kerr, but isn't he saying that he thinks 1 and 2 are solid and 3-11 are a toss up for 3rd best record? Not that I agree with ranking the Lakers (or anyone else) above the Kings. Maybe he's giving far more credence to the reported loss of chemistry on the Kings team than we do and that we won't know about until we see the team take the floor for this coming season.

Just a thought,
KK!

 

[Evenstar]

HA HA is this a joke?!?!?!?!?!?!

the lakers loose shaq, get vlade, who then injuries himself. yet they are ranked higher then us????! HUH?!?!?!?!!

the jazz made some nice moves, but i don't think their nice moves justify the 4th ranking.

the nuggets still can't play great D. even with camby being a good shot blocker, they had worse D then we did last year.

the rockettes???? COME ON! i'll believe in yao and t-mac when i see it.

man, what a load of crap from kerr. i like kerr, i luv the TNT games with marv czar and kerr, but those rankings are TOTAL CRAP!

name one team in the NBA with a better starting 5 then the kings. we have the best 6th man in the league in jackson, and a defensive prescene off the bench in tag, a very solid songalia, and a promising rookie in kevin martin. get a clue kerr!!!!!!!!

 

[Geoff]

HA HA is this a joke?!?!?!?!?!?!


the rockettes???? COME ON! i'll believe in yao and t-mac when i see it.

man, what a load of crap from kerr. i like kerr, i luv the TNT games with marv czar and kerr, but those rankings are TOTAL CRAP!

name one team in the NBA with a better starting 5 then the kings. we have the best 6th man in the league in jackson, and a defensive prescene off the bench in tag, a very solid songalia, and a promising rookie in kevin martin. get a clue kerr!!!!!!!!

Tmac +Yao equals at LEAST a #6 playoff prediction spot. It remains to see how they play with each other, but based on what we DO know I think we can err on the side of them doing good.

One team with a better starting 5? Detroit comes to mind, maybe not individually but I can't rank the champs under sactown...The Pacers can't be counted out...I have never seen Sacramento beat San Antonio in any series, playoff or regular season...Minnesota may get a nod because of KG and their victory over us last season...that's about it.

 

[Bricklayer]

Tmac +Yao equals at LEAST a #6 playoff prediction spot. It remains to see how they play with each other, but based on what we DO know I think we can err on the side of them doing good.

One team with a better starting 5? Detroit comes to mind, maybe not individually but I can't rank the champs under sactown...The Pacers can't be counted out...I have never seen Sacramento beat San Antonio in any series, playoff or regular season...Minnesota may get a nod because of KG and their victory over us last season...that's about it.

Actually we have never met San Antonio in the postseason, so who knows. But during the regular season we play them straight up -- last three seasons the series is tied 6-6. And I'm not sure Minnesota winning a Game 7 on their homecourt by 3 points over us is terribly decisive. Indiana still does not have a PG, and in two weeks this summer Detroit went from just another good team to world beaters?

Anyway, I'd be reluctant to rank us #1 just based on the way things went at the end of last year and with the injury questions. But I will not hesitate at all to say that there is nto one team in the league who can come out and say they are decisively BETTER than we are. Or rather they can say it, but would have a heck of a time trying to prove it.

 

[KingKong]

^^^^^^

I have to agree, to the extent that I would like us to face the Spurs in the Playoffs. I think the we can take them if we improve defensively and are more consistent in playing defense (we have done it before) The Spurs tend to get into tremendous scoring droughts evidenced by the last few playoffs. Barry definately helps them become more of an offensive threat but I still think we have them beat 1-6 imo. They have good chemistry on the court, but then again ours is one of the best in the league as well. Their bench is stronger than ours on paper at the moment but we still don't know what contributions we will get from our rookies.

I think we can beat Minny too, as we are quite evenly matched with them. I don't think Cassell can put up another career season and Spree is becoming more erratic and inconsistent except for those few stints against us in th playoffs. Webber should be able to defend KG better with his increased mobility (although our guys did a really good job defending KG in the playoffs except for Game 7 where he just went off.) Again they have a better bench but we have them beat too 1-6 imo.

Now this is barring all injuries ofcourse, but this is how I see it play out.

1) Spurs
2) Kings
3) Wolves (may have a better record than us)
4) Mavs
5) Nuggets
6) Grizzlies
7) Lakers
8) Utah/Rockets- fighting for 8th seed

and then the rest

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

Just because, if I didn't do it, some people would worry:

....
















































:: wipes his @$$ with Steve Kerr's Power Rankings ::

 

[Evilmav2]

....
















































:: wipes his @$$ with Steve Kerr's Power Rankings ::

::Agrees with Mr. S£im ::

 

[piksi]

....
















































:: wipes his @$$ with Steve Kerr's Power Rankings ::

does not think that Steve Kerr's Power Rankings are soft enough for his @$$ and reconsiders.

 

[BJax24]

Steve Kerr is a biased idiot.

of course he is. he's not the only one. greg anthony is also a biased idiot the played for the spurs and gets gratification from from pointing out the kings shortcomings instead of their progression.

 

[#1sacfan]

Actually we have never met San Antonio in the postseason, so who knows. But during the regular season we play them straight up -- last three seasons the series is tied 6-6. And I'm not sure Minnesota winning a Game 7 on their homecourt by 3 points over us is terribly decisive. Indiana still does not have a PG, and in two weeks this summer Detroit went from just another good team to world beaters?

Anyway, I'd be reluctant to rank us #1 just based on the way things went at the end of last year and with the injury questions. But I will not hesitate at all to say that there is nto one team in the league who can come out and say they are decisively BETTER than we are. Or rather they can say it, but would have a heck of a time trying to prove it.

This is basically right on. If the Kings had stayed healthy over the years we may be talking about a defending 3 time champ. People bring up Minnesota beating us as a reason they should be ranked higher. I just want to ask if anyone truly believes that Minnesota would have beat us if Bobby Jackson was healthy.

If Webber comes back healthy and focuses on distributing the ball and defending, and if Stojakovic can get over what was said in the offseason and bring his A-game to the post season this team will be very tough to beat. The only team I would pick to beat us in a 7 game series as of now would be the Spurs.

 

[quick dog]

I wonder if Adelman will post this article on the King's message board?

 

[iheartBrad]

i kept reading the list thinking "where the kings?"

when i saw them as 10th....all i could do is shake my head

i mean the kings off season hasn't exactly been poppin...but tenth is EXTREMELY ridiculous...they can't go from one of the top teams in the west to tenth...especially since the team hasn't changed THAT much when you compare them to teams who had complete reconstructive surgery during the summer

 

[C Diddy]

My thoughts on Steve Kerr's power rankings...

 

[vladetomiller]

I was wondering the same as i went through the rankings as to whether he forgot the kings. But he has them at 10

Now to his defense he did say that its a tossup with the teams after 1 and 2.
(i like kerr as an analyst, he is smart and i dont think he is biased against any team other than the spurs/lakers with PJ and the bulls )

For all those who are taking exception about the kings rank ( i dont care about the rankings anyway and i know they dont matter a bit ) what was the kings record with webber in the lineup last season. What makes you think its going to be better than that with the loss of Divac and addition of Tag, loss of peeler and bufford and offcourse TMAss .

I guess as much optimistic as we can get about that he also has a right to think that they will play the same as they did finishing up the regular season with webb and all the chemistry issues.

Again i dont take the rankings seriously, but this is for you who take it seriously

 

[VF21]

You know, I needed a good laugh today...







Thanks to Steve Kerr, I got it.

 

[VF21]

I was wondering the same as i went through the rankings as to whether he forgot the kings. But he has them at 10

Now to his defense he did say that its a tossup with the teams after 1 and 2.
(i like kerr as an analyst, he is smart and i dont think he is biased against any team other than the spurs/lakers with PJ and the bulls )

For all those who are taking exception about the kings rank ( i dont care about the rankings anyway and i know they dont matter a bit ) what was the kings record with webber in the lineup last season. What makes you think its going to be better than that with the loss of Divac and addition of Tag, loss of peeler and bufford and offcourse TMAss .

I guess as much optimistic as we can get about that he also has a right to think that they will play the same as they did finishing up the regular season with webb and all the chemistry issues.

Again i dont take the rankings seriously, but this is for you who take it seriously

You know, you actually had me going until the comment about losing Peeler, Buford (check the spelling) and TMass...

Nice to see my favorite border-line troll posting again.

 

[HndsmCelt]

I still think that having a healthy and rested Webber back ON TOP of the team that racked up nearly 50 wins. I don't know I just think that ought to count for something.

 

[bibbyweb]

I was wondering the same as i went through the rankings as to whether he forgot the kings. But he has them at 10

Now to his defense he did say that its a tossup with the teams after 1 and 2.
(i like kerr as an analyst, he is smart and i dont think he is biased against any team other than the spurs/lakers with PJ and the bulls )

For all those who are taking exception about the kings rank ( i dont care about the rankings anyway and i know they dont matter a bit ) what was the kings record with webber in the lineup last season. What makes you think its going to be better than that with the loss of Divac and addition of Tag, loss of peeler and bufford and offcourse TMAss .

I guess as much optimistic as we can get about that he also has a right to think that they will play the same as they did finishing up the regular season with webb and all the chemistry issues.

Again i dont take the rankings seriously, but this is for you who take it seriously

If Steve Kerr was a good analyst, then he has made one of the worst analysis ever. We did well in the playoffs even if we were not able to beat the TWolves with the team that we had the last season. And the losses that you just mentioned, I don't think that they are really great losses. I would rather say that we are better off than the last year. O-Tag is better than Vlade given the condition that Vlade is in right now(even without considering the injury). As for Peeler didn't do much in the playoffs. So his loss doesn't hurt that much either. And Buford played just 6.4 minutes a game.

And about Webber will be better than he was last season after resting and training. Considering all this I think that there is no way that we could be ranked that low. And how does no one talk abt Cassell's back at his age. If they are ranked 2nd I think the Kings need to be closeby.

I can hardly believe that anyone could agree with that halucinating zombie.

 

[vladetomiller]

First of, i know that rankings mean nothing in preseason, except for the #1 team's fans, who get some satisfaction with it.

Last year i saw so much optimism from posters about peeler/buford and tmass and this year their loss is not that big a deal. What happened to veteran presence, leadership and not to mention timely 3 pointers . But you have to admit that you are replacing them with rookies and it could go either way, as a kings fan i could be optimistic about minard and martin but kerr need not be a kings fan. You have to admit that the bench is thinner than years before.

About webber, what makes you think that he will be in a better shape now than what he was last year when he came back. I suppose he had that 6 month rest/rehab between the surgery/injury and the comeback and i do think that he will be better this year because of nba games and preseason games, but i dont expect him to be like the 2002 webber.

What makes you think that the chemistry issues are gone, if the rockets are going to take time about that and the lakers are going to take time with that, its going to take lot more time to mend relations than to create a new one.

On paper the kings are formidable with webb/bibby/peja and miller. However the same team finished last season very bad and i guess kerr does have the right to look at it from that view also

 

[VF21]

So the bench is thinner. We had the best bench in the league and what did it get us?

Hmmmmmmmmmmmm?

I think this year's team has a great blend of veterans, rookies and in-between. That just might be the right mix.

 

[Kingsgurl]

Last year i saw so much optimism from posters about peeler/buford and tmass and this year their loss is not that big a deal.

Wow. You did? I honestly can't ever remember being excited about Buford. TMass was going to be a good addition, I thought. Bring some interior toughness (like I am hoping Tag will do this year) Unfortunately, we found out, upon closer inspection, that his 'toughness' consisted of reaching because he was out of position and running his mouth when no one asked him. Peeler was productive in the regular season, but, from the get go, people worried about his prediliction of falling off in the post season, a rep he more than lived up to. Sure, this year is a little different. We are banking quite a bit on the unknown with the rookies, but I am a little tired of recycling retreads from other teams anyway. The beauty of the rooks is they don't have a history, good or bad.

 

[Alacron]

About webber, what makes you think that he will be in a better shape now than what he was last year when he came back. I suppose he had that 6 month rest/rehab between the surgery/injury and the comeback and i do think that he will be better this year because of nba games and preseason games

Ummm..... did you just affirmatively answer your own question which you didn't agree with?
~~

 

[Mad D]

Ummm..... did you just affirmatively answer your own question which you didn't agree with?
~~

: old lol icon with the laughing smiley :

 

[vladetomiller]

Ummm..... did you just affirmatively answer your own question which you didn't agree with?
~~

Wow cut and paste parts of it and it makes you look a lot smarter i guess.

Anyhow the question is about the webber of 2002 and whether we will get him back.

 

[Bricklayer]

Anyhow the question is about the webber of 2002 and whether we will get him back.

Actually no its not if we are talking about sinking to the 10th spot in the West.

The question that needs to be asked for THAT to happen is are we getting back the Webber of LAST year with NO improvements, AND will Bobby be gone all year AND will Brad be hurt and hampered all year AND will Ostertag come in and play like an 80 yr old (which Vlade did for the final two months) AND will we play 2/3 of our games on the road against playoff teams all season long, AND will we have a cancerous role player eating away at the locker room AND will the team somehow be no more cohesive than it was down the stretch last year despite a full training camp and all of the major pieces being in place from the start of the season.

You put all of those ANDS together, and then we can talk about the 10th spot, as Kerr does. Which is to say out of his *** with all of the analytical acumen of a tape worm.

Getting back the Webber of 2002 may be the difference between a serious championship run and a mere division title, it is NOT the difference between 1st and 10th.

 

[CWebb's HOT!]

Like this hasn't been said enough...but is Steve Kerr INSANE?!?!

 

[C4]

Man....this is just plain ridiculous.

Utah, Houston, Memphis, Lakers, Mavs, Suns, all above us in ranking?

What's worse than a bad joke is a bad joker delivering it himself! :roll: