77 replies to this topic

[SBTarheel]

I would have liked to see that as well, and people underestimate just how good both of those guys were this year. Lots of people consider Denver to be an up-tempo, 3 point shooting team, but Faried was a total beast inside this year and really helped them toughen up, which has been a weakness for them. I bet over points/rebounds several times this year for Faried and he usually covered. Really under-rated this year.

 

However, what I'd like to see even more is Karl with a team that had a legit chance to win. Figure out a way to get a superstar in there. They're just wasting lots of above average/good talent. It's been a shorter window for Indiana but they're doing the same thing right now. Good team, great coaching, lots of nice, good role players but literally no chance to win a championship. Dallas did that for a long time but ultimately Dirk along with an insanely hot shooting playoffs got them the ring. There isn't a Dirk walking through the door for these teams like Denver, Indiana, Atlanta, etc.

Yep, Faried and Iguodala really helped them defensively all year. Still not their strength, but they're getting better.

 

Lawson is becoming a star, and a helathy Gallo & Faried all season next year make them a threat to win the West.

[Oriole85]

First off, Flip should have never gotten fired. Secondly, the reason he likely got fired is because that Pistons team really had no where to improve, other than with the coaches. They had reached a peak, the roster didn't have much room for change, and basically, they just wanted to try a different way to win. 

 

That's not the case with Denver. They have room to improve, and Karl is a fantastic coach to help the young talent improve. 

 

And no, in the playoffs the dropoff wouldn't be that great, but there would be a dropoff in the regular season, and they wouldn't have much of a chance to do anything in the playoffs if they don't add to the team.

 

I'm just very sensitive to this being a superstar driven league. The Pistons team is the outlier and the only team in the past like 20+ years to win a championship without a bonafide, top of the league star. Even teams that lose to the finals are usually in that same boat.

 

I can't penalize Karl for not winning in a league like that. Could he have won a few first round series' as an underdog? I guess, but ultimately what would that prove? 

It would be better than routine first round exits, just making the playoffs after a decade isn't that big of achievement given all the turnaround in pro sports. Yes, short of a championship, there's always going to be criticism. Only one team is truly happy. However, when someone lasts as long as Karl, you expect them to be more competitive. It's not too typical in the current climate for someone to not get out of the first round once in a decade and keep their job.

 

So if you're Josh Kroenke, how many more chances do you give him to just show some modest improvement? Next season, two years, five years?

[You Play to Win the Game]

It would be better than routine first round exits, just making the playoffs after a decade isn't that big of achievement given all the turnaround in pro sports. Yes, short of a championship, there's always going to be criticism. Only one team is truly happy. However, when someone lasts as long as Karl, you expect them to be more competitive. It's not too typical in the current climate for someone to not get out of the first round once in a decade and keep their job.

 

So that Jerry Sloan was a slouch, eh?

[PD24]

BTW - say what you want about the Pistons team but just the starting lineup on that team combined for 16 All Star appearances in their respective careers, and the great majority of them were within a 3 year window of that championship. They're really the only example of 5 legitimate "very good" players started for a team. I guess you can argue Prince but I'd argue that he was very good that year. 

 

For example, Mario Chalmers isn't a very good player. Jason Kidd with Dallas wasn't still a "very good" player. Thabo and Perkins weren't very good players last year. Fisher, Artest, Ariza, Fox, Horry, McDyess, etc weren't very good players. 

 

So, while it's true they didn't have a legit superstar, they had a better starting 5 than probably any team when you consider all 5 guys (obviously I'll take 3 superstars and 2 okay players over 5 very good ones...talking all 5).

[PD24]

Yep, Faried and Iguodala really helped them defensively all year. Still not their strength, but they're getting better.

 

Lawson is becoming a star, and a helathy Gallo & Faried all season next year make them a threat to win the West.

 

I just don't see how you can be a threat to win the West with just one star, who isn't a star yet and who if he is a star, it will be his first year being a star.

Gallo and Faried are very good players but neither is a star.

 

I don't see how that stacks up with the Thunder, who will have 2 top 5 players, and the Spurs, who will have 2 stars assuming Duncan and Parker continue playing at this level. I don't count Grififn a star so I won't put the Clips in here. Also, tough to see the Lakers struggling this much again assuming everyone comes back healthy.

 

I don't see Denver getting above a 3 seed next year, and if I was betting on it, I'd put them in the 4/5 game next year.

[Oriole85]

So that Jerry Sloan was a slouch, eh?

He started in '88, a bit more patience back then. I don't think he would've been given as much rope now as he was back then. He was more successful than Karl, he got his teams out of the first round a lot more. And also, I'm putting more weight on recent play as opposed to what he did a few decades ago, in that respect, Sloan made it out of the first round in 3 of his 4 full seasons.

[SportsGuy]

But to lose to Denver in the 1st Round?

First of all, lets remember that back then, it was a 5 game series in the first round.

Obviously less games makes an upset more likely.

Dikembe was a very good player at that point and Abdul-Rauf was a good player...not like Denver had no talent.

[PD24]

It would be better than routine first round exits, just making the playoffs after a decade isn't that big of achievement given all the turnaround in pro sports. Yes, short of a championship, there's always going to be criticism. Only one team is truly happy. However, when someone lasts as long as Karl, you expect them to be more competitive. It's not too typical in the current climate for someone to not get out of the first round once in a decade and keep their job.

 

So if you're Josh Kroenke, how many more chances do you give him to just show some modest improvement? Next season, two years, five years?

 

If I'm Josh Kroenke, I tell Masai Ujiri to step it up and build a team that has a legit chance to win a championship. I don't see why you aren't getting that. This team has NO chance to win a championship, and in each and every series Karl has coached in Denver that they've lost, they've been underdogs aside from this year. 

 

Last year in game 7 vs. #3 seed LA, the Nuggets were down 1 going into the 4th at LA. Again, NBA coaches don't go around winning as underdogs very often. Their lack of playoff success has nothing to do with George Karl. 

 

The only reason the Nuggets were a higher seed than GS this year is because of George Karl. Without him, unless you're bringing in an equally good regular season coach, this team drops below LAC, Memphis, and quite possibly GS. 

 

Karl also develops a system to fit the personnel that he's given, and that system isn't conducive to winning in the playoffs, but he does what he needs to do to win with the team he's given.

 

I don't really see where you're going with this. Hiring a new coach would serve no purpose. 

[SBTarheel]

I just don't see how you can be a threat to win the West with just one star, who isn't a star yet and who if he is a star, it will be his first year being a star.

Gallo and Faried are very good players but neither is a star.

 

I don't see how that stacks up with the Thunder, who will have 2 top 5 players, and the Spurs, who will have 2 stars assuming Duncan and Parker continue playing at this level. I don't count Grififn a star so I won't put the Clips in here. Also, tough to see the Lakers struggling this much again assuming everyone comes back healthy.

 

I don't see Denver getting above a 3 seed next year, and if I was betting on it, I'd put them in the 4/5 game next year.

They were a threat to win it this year in my opinion before the injuries..

 

Memphis could make the finals with no true "superstars" this year...Indiana too (though they won't beat Miami).

[SportsGuy]

Denver needs to trade some pieces for a legit star.

[SBTarheel]

First of all, lets remember that back then, it was a 5 game series in the first round.

Obviously less games makes an upset more likely.

Dikembe was a very good player at that point and Abdul-Rauf was a good player...not like Denver had no talent.

Two Words:

 

Bryant Stith!

[SBTarheel]

Denver needs to trade some pieces for a legit star.

I think Ty Lawson could be that legit star..

 

Granted I'm a tad biased, but he's really become a legit offensive threat, and will only get better.

[PD24]

They were a threat to win it this year in my opinion before the injuries..

 

Memphis could make the finals with no true "superstars" this year...Indiana too (though they won't beat Miami).

 

Only reason Memphis has a chance is because Westbrook got hurt. They'd lose to OKC in 6 with Westbrook. And Marc Gasol is better than Lawson, while Randolph is significantly better than the #2 player on Denver. Next year, with Westbrook back and the Lakers not starting out in disfunction, they'll go back to having no chance.

 

Denver opened the playoffs 30-1 to win the championship. Obviously you only put so much into odds but that's not very good.

 

And the East, aside from Miami, is totally pathetic. This Knicks team would have lost in 6 in the first round to any West playoff team aside from the Lakers. Indiana would lose in 5 to Miami in the finals. The East shouldn't even count as a league this year. LOL.

[PD24]

I think Ty Lawson could be that legit star..

 

Granted I'm a tad biased, but he's really become a legit offensive threat, and will only get better.

 

He may become a star, but he won't be a guy that can carry a team. The 2007 Celtics really changed the landscape of the NBA. It's always been star driven, but now it's multiple-star driven and high-quality, veteran role player driven. Lawson becoming a star isn't going to change things for Denver as far as their ability to contend for a championship. It'll get them out of the first round, but when it's time to play OKC or SA (for the next year at last), they'll be huge dogs. 

[SBTarheel]

Only reason Memphis has a chance is because Westbrook got hurt. They'd lose to OKC in 6 with Westbrook. And Marc Gasol is better than Lawson, while Randolph is significantly better than the #2 player on Denver. Next year, with Westbrook back and the Lakers not starting out in disfunction, they'll go back to having no chance.

 

Denver opened the playoffs 30-1 to win the championship. Obviously you only put so much into odds but that's not very good.

 

And the East, aside from Miami, is totally pathetic. This Knicks team would have lost in 6 in the first round to any West playoff team aside from the Lakers. Indiana would lose in 5 to Miami in the finals. The East shouldn't even count as a league this year. LOL.

I guess, though i really like the grizzlies in general, but that's a fair statement.

 

We'll have to remember this conversation next year come playoff time. I'm high on Denver next year..

 

No question, the East is embarrassingly bad. Miami should roll over Indiana in the East finals, assuming they get past the Knicks (which I think they will).

[PD24]

I guess, though i really like the grizzlies in general, but that's a fair statement.

 

We'll have to remember this conversation next year come playoff time. I'm high on Denver next year..

 

No question, the East is embarrassingly bad. Miami should roll over Indiana in the East finals, assuming they get past the Knicks (which I think they will).

 

I'm high on Denver too. I love the way they play and are coached. Also respect the heck out of Memphis. Old school team. Hollins is a guy I failed to mention in the OP but he's done a tremendous job with this Grizz team over the past 3 years. They play together and they maximize their individual talents. 

 

Sucks that the NBA isn't more competitive, but thank Danny Ainge and Pat Riley for that. 

[BSLMikeLowe]

First of all, lets remember that back then, it was a 5 game series in the first round.

Obviously less games makes an upset more likely.

Dikembe was a very good player at that point and Abdul-Rauf was a good player...not like Denver had no talent.

And Seattle was 21-games better than them in the regular season and was up 2-0 in the series. That, along with Dallas in 2007, goes down as two of the biggest playoff chokes I've ever seen in the NBA.

 

 

And let me be clear, I like George Karl as a coach. In fact, if you check the preseason predictions thread, you'll see I picked him for COY. And I think Denver should keep him as long as he wants to be there. That said, there clearly is a perception that his teams do not perform up to expectations in the playoffs. I won't harp on that Sonics team anymore, but Karl's playoff history since then, which consists of more one-and-dones than not, only fuels that perception.

[SBTarheel]

He may become a star, but he won't be a guy that can carry a team. The 2007 Celtics really changed the landscape of the NBA. It's always been star driven, but now it's multiple-star driven and high-quality, veteran role player driven. Lawson becoming a star isn't going to change things for Denver as far as their ability to contend for a championship. It'll get them out of the first round, but when it's time to play OKC or SA (for the next year at last), they'll be huge dogs. 

But with a healthy Gallo, Lawson will have another scorer to complement. Against Golden State, they didn't have anyone else to shoot threes (besides Andre Miller in that inexplicable Game 1), which they would've with Gallo healthy..

 

How much loner can the Spurs do this...truly remarkable.

[PD24]

And Seattle was 21-games better than them in the regular season and was up 2-0 in the series. That, along with Dallas in 2007, goes down as two of the biggest playoff chokes I've ever seen in the NBA.

 

 

And let me be clear, I like George Karl as a coach. In fact, if you check the preseason predictions thread, you'll see I picked him for COY. And I think Denver should keep him as long as he wants to be there. That said, there clearly is a perception that his teams do not perform up to expectations in the playoffs. I won't harp on that Sonics team anymore, but Karl's playoff history since then, which consists of more one-and-dones than not, only fuels that perception.

 

I hear what you're saying. But again, how can we hold it against a guy to not get out of the first round if he hasn't been a favorite? How is that his faul? 

 

If Buck Showalter doesn't get out of the first full round the next 5 years with the O's if they make it as a WC all 5 years, is that his fault? Is it an indictment on him? Or is it good on him to get a team without the normal playoff talent to the playoffs 5 years in a row? 

[PD24]

But with a healthy Gallo, Lawson will have another scorer to complement. Against Golden State, they didn't have anyone else to shoot threes (besides Andre Miller in that inexplicable Game 1), which they would've with Gallo healthy..

 

How much loner can the Spurs do this...truly remarkable.

 

Yeah, with a healthy Gallo, they beat GS this year IMO. But not SA.

 

And yeah, it's amazing. They're so fun to watch. Watching Pop's plays out of timeouts is just totally hilarious they're so good. I thought Duncan was pretty much done about 3 years ago, but he's come back now and is playing literally as well as he did in his prime. If he can keep that up one more year, they aren't going anywhere.