yardbarker

NCAA Wiretap Headlines

Power Ranking

Moderators: damo[23], Devin 1L, Hilltop, Howard Mass, MagicMadness, eyriq

Post#46 Re: Power Ranking
Tue Dec 11, 2012 3:13 pm by BadMofoPimp

KingRobb02 wrote:
Make Playoffs: 32.6%


WOOT!!!! Those are better odds than playing Craps. Hell Yeah, going to the ship!!!
Image

Provin Ya'll Wrong!!!
BadMofoPimp
RealGM
User avatar
Posts: 33,486
And1: 3,635
Joined: Oct 12, 2003
Location: In the Paint
Top

Post#47 Re: Power Ranking
Tue Dec 11, 2012 3:24 pm by KingRobb02

Malik Starks wrote:
KingRobb02 wrote:
BadMofoPimp wrote:The odds are more in favor in bottom feeding teams staying at the bottom than becoming elite. We see Memphis and OKC, but also watched Charlotte, Wolves and Clippers blow for a decade before getting lucky. And, Memphis didn't just draft their players, but made effective trades and signings. So, the Draft isn't the sole reason teams become winners. Efficient roster management is. This Magic team has good youth plus a few extra draft picks then mad Free Agent money in two years.

Thus, the Magic could actually be a solid deep playoff team in 3-4 years without even being in the lottery.

The odds are also against middling teams getting to elite or even the elite teams stating elite. There are only 3 or 4 elite teams in any given season, so it would make sense that not many bad teams make it to elite. People just have short memories. The Clippers didn't blow for a decade. This decade alone, they have had the Lamar Odom/Darius Miles/Elton Brand mini-surge that got them close to the playoffs, they had the Sam Cassell/Elton Brand team that made the semis, and most recently they have the Griffin CP team. That is three times that one bottom feeder came up in the past 10 years. The Brand trade was huge in two of those rises, but that was able to happen because they had the #2 pick.

You talk about effective trades and signings, but these trades and signing happen because of draft picks. Do the clippers get Chris Paul if they don't draft Eric Gordon? Do the Knicks get the Carmelo trade without Gallo, Chandler, and Mozgov? Does Deron Williams get traded without Favors? Does Brooklyn get Dwight Howard without Broo... nevermind. The draft isn't about finding a franchise guy, it's about acquiring young guys on cheap deals that can help a team.


The Clippers didn't suck for a decade, they sucked for two (or more depending how far you wanna go back) during the 80's and the 90's the Clippers posted some of the worst records in the history of the league. They had a brief respite when Larry Brown was head coach in the early 90's but when back to sucking after that.

Since the lottery began, the longest the Clippers have gone without a playoff berth is 8 seasons. In that span there were another couple times when they won in the high 30s and were in playoff contention at the end. Yes they have had some horrible teams, but wouldn't that have to do with drafting Michael Olowakandi over Carter, Pierce, and Dirk? Or maybe it was taking Lamond Murray over Jalen Rose and Eddie Jones. How about Lorenzen Wright over Kobe, Nash, and Jermaine O'Neal? Teams rise and fall, but no team stays down for too long. Their owner being cheap (and allegedly racist) and letting talent walk away also has a lot to do with it.
KingRobb02




Analyst
User avatar
Posts: 3,642
And1: 338
Joined: Aug 7, 2007
Top

Post#48 Re: Power Ranking
Tue Dec 11, 2012 4:10 pm by Malik Starks

As to the Clippers poor draft picks, it is neither here nor there. It's very easy to cherry pick a teams draft choices a decade later. The consesus at the time were that they were solid picks or had a high ceiling. The point I think mofopimp (he can speak for himself) and I would agree with is that these draft picks devoid of any veteran leadership and a winning culture are not in a position to succeed and therefore winning as many games as REASONABLY possible is the better approach.

To your larger point regarding using draft picks as leverage, I think it's a fairly good point, and can be used in limited circumstances (which I believe the Magic are currently doing anyway). However the examples you site have a lot more to do with the those teams being in large markets than them having stockpiled young prospects.

Chris Paul wanted to go to a larger market and had a list of teams he was going to
go to (I don't recall the exact teams right now) but this was well established.

For Deron Williams, he didn't have a list of teams and hadn't specifically asked for trade, but it was understood that he had his eyes on a bigger market than Salt Lake. Brooklyn looked to acquire him because they knew their market was big enough to keep him.

Ditto for Dwight Howard..no need to rehash that.

And everyone knew that Carmello was going to New York one way or another, the only question was whether he would go in Free-Agency-and take a significant pay cut, or be traded and re-sign. Dolan got nervous and gave away the store to get him but the consensus was he would have signed with them anyway.
Malik Starks
Junior
Posts: 273
And1: 33
Joined: Apr 22, 2012
Location: Orlando FL
Top

Post#49 Re: Power Ranking
Tue Dec 11, 2012 4:36 pm by OrlDave

KingRobb02 wrote:
Not saying you have to like what he says, but don't misquote him just because you don't like what he says. He gave the Celtics a D+ and the Lakers an F. The Lakers have a better record than us, and have been missing their top 2 PGs for most of the year while the Celtics have a winning record. If nothing else, this guys seems to have had different expectations than everyone else and he has been disappointed by our play. An accurate quote would be "If there was one team I could chose not to watch again this season, it would be the Orlando Magic. They are among the league leaders in mid-range jumpers taken per game despite the fact that they make just 36.9 percent of them." You can't use quotes and then say "we are horrible and he never wants to watch us again." That doesn't even make sense


Of course he gave the Lakers an F. They deserve an F. They are a title contending team. So are the Celtics. I didn't misquote him, I said it was a paraphrase, not a quote (go back and look).The fact that he's given us a D+ when we are clearly outperforming expectations, yet when he gave teams like Detroit (B) and Charlotte (A-).. teams with worse records and similar expectations vastly better grades tells you something about what he thinks of our team.
OrlDave




Veteran
User avatar
Posts: 2,611
And1: 422
Joined: May 4, 2003
Top

Post#50 Re: Power Ranking
Tue Dec 11, 2012 5:00 pm by BadMofoPimp

KingRobb02 wrote:The odds are also against middling teams getting to elite or even the elite teams stating elite. There are only 3 or 4 elite teams in any given season, so it would make sense that not many bad teams make it to elite. People just have short memories. The Clippers didn't blow for a decade. This decade alone, they have had the Lamar Odom/Darius Miles/Elton Brand mini-surge that got them close to the playoffs, they had the Sam Cassell/Elton Brand team that made the semis, and most recently they have the Griffin CP team. That is three times that one bottom feeder came up in the past 10 years. The Brand trade was huge in two of those rises, but that was able to happen because they had the #2 pick.

You talk about effective trades and signings, but these trades and signing happen because of draft picks. Do the clippers get Chris Paul if they don't draft Eric Gordon? Do the Knicks get the Carmelo trade without Gallo, Chandler, and Mozgov? Does Deron Williams get traded without Favors? Does Brooklyn get Dwight Howard without Broo... nevermind. The draft isn't about finding a franchise guy, it's about acquiring young guys on cheap deals that can help a team.


Eric Gordon drafted 8th position in draft.
Gallinari was 6th pick in draft.
Neither were even top 5 picks.

I am just saying that there is a huge chance being stuck as the Bobcats or Wolves or Clippers for a decade if you let your team wallow in a losing mentality. Heck, Harkless or Nicholson could explode in a year or two and help the Magic trade for the next Melo or Dwight. You never know. But, all I am saying is a good GM doesn't need to tank to win in the end. A team doesn't need a top 5 pick to generate success or a championship team.

The Pistons had only Tayshaun Prince drafted with the 23rd pick in the draft while Billups, Rip, Sheed and Ben were all traded for. I would rather have a solidly built team than pray for winning the lottery year after year after year . . . and end up with a greater possibility of the next Darko or Kwame than any superstar you can name. There are no guarantee's with tanking. But, a good GM can guarantee a solidly built team. Most fans want to watch teams that fight to win, not teams that tank to lose.
Image

Provin Ya'll Wrong!!!
BadMofoPimp
RealGM
User avatar
Posts: 33,486
And1: 3,635
Joined: Oct 12, 2003
Location: In the Paint
Top

Post#51 Re: Power Ranking
Tue Dec 11, 2012 5:02 pm by KingRobb02

Malik Starks wrote:As to the Clippers poor draft picks, it is neither here nor there. It's very easy to cherry pick a teams draft choices a decade later. The consesus at the time were that they were solid picks or had a high ceiling. The point I think mofopimp (he can speak for himself) and I would agree with is that these draft picks devoid of any veteran leadership and a winning culture are not in a position to succeed and therefore winning as many games as REASONABLY possible is the better approach.

To your larger point regarding using draft picks as leverage, I think it's a fairly good point, and can be used in limited circumstances (which I believe the Magic are currently doing anyway). However the examples you site have a lot more to do with the those teams being in large markets than them having stockpiled young prospects.

Chris Paul wanted to go to a larger market and had a list of teams he was going to
go to (I don't recall the exact teams right now) but this was well established.

For Deron Williams, he didn't have a list of teams and hadn't specifically asked for trade, but it was understood that he had his eyes on a bigger market than Salt Lake. Brooklyn looked to acquire him because they knew their market was big enough to keep him.

Ditto for Dwight Howard..no need to rehash that.

And everyone knew that Carmello was going to New York one way or another, the only question was whether he would go in Free-Agency-and take a significant pay cut, or be traded and re-sign. Dolan got nervous and gave away the store to get him but the consensus was he would have signed with them anyway.

"Veteran leadership" is greatly over-appreciated at times. The reason the Thunder are good isn't because of any veterans, it's because they have better players. Just to be clear, I'm not in favor of bottoming out. I just don't understand why everyone thinks you have to be in favor of tanking or strongly anti-draft.

I wasn't trying to cherry pick the Clippers picks, but let's be honest. They aren't bad because the system makes it hard for them. They have had every chance to get better, but Sterling and Elgin Baylor kept them down. I don't remember many people singing the praises of Olowakandi, but I know what you mean. This is why I think we will have an advantage. The Spurs haven't picked in the top 20 in over a decade, but they always find guys because they scout better. Hopefully we can use scouting along with some top 10 picks to build a nice cheap core.

I agree that no team should intentionally lose. I'm happy when we win even if it takes us down to the 10-13 range in the draft. But I have disagreed with BadMofoPimp in his stating that if we are close we should make a trade and go for it. Even if we are .500 at the trade deadline, I don't see how making short-term moves for a 2013 playoff run help us build a sustainable model for a contender. I would rather we play hard and barely miss the playoffs while sticking to whatever plan we came into the year with.

As for the trade situations, Chris Paul flirted with New York, but there was no way they could have afforded him. I'm sure every player wants to play in a larger market, it's just that some of them are crazy enough to say it out loud. This is from an article just before the Paul trade.

Sources told Broussard on Thursday that the Knicks and Magic are on Paul’s list of preferred destinations, but the Lakers are not. Sources told Broussard that the Portland Trail Blazers and Dallas Mavericks are also in the running if Paul were to be traded.


He did not want to be a Laker, the Clippers aren't on his list and I don't call Orlando a large market. The way things went down, the Clippers had a guy like Eric Gordon and Kaman's expiring to dangle and the Hornets/CP had to listen.

Deron got rush traded in the Jerry Sloan aftermath, but I promise you he would not have been traded for anything other than a guy with potential on a rookie deal. He still had two years on his contract. It's not like he was going to walk.

Melo screwed himself by limiting his list to one team and refusing to just wait until the summer when he could have went there via free agency. The Nuggets had the Knicks over a barrel and used the Nets for fake leverage. If young, cheap guys aren't on the table the Nuggets probably just let Carmelo walk.

Dwight is an idiot.

The thing is that having these young guys on good contracts opens up a lot of room for trade conversations. Right now, I think a healthy Anthony Davis is the biggest trade chip in the NBA. He's not better than Kevin Love, but he is 1/3 the price and that gets teams to listen.

To win in the NBA you need a franchise guy. I don't think we can get one to demand a trade here, or to even come here via free agency. Seriously, what's the last major free agent we got without overpaying? That means our top guy will have to come via panic trade or through the draft.
KingRobb02




Analyst
User avatar
Posts: 3,642
And1: 338
Joined: Aug 7, 2007
Top

Post#52 Re: Power Ranking
Tue Dec 11, 2012 5:21 pm by KingRobb02

BadMofoPimp wrote:
KingRobb02 wrote:The odds are also against middling teams getting to elite or even the elite teams stating elite. There are only 3 or 4 elite teams in any given season, so it would make sense that not many bad teams make it to elite. People just have short memories. The Clippers didn't blow for a decade. This decade alone, they have had the Lamar Odom/Darius Miles/Elton Brand mini-surge that got them close to the playoffs, they had the Sam Cassell/Elton Brand team that made the semis, and most recently they have the Griffin CP team. That is three times that one bottom feeder came up in the past 10 years. The Brand trade was huge in two of those rises, but that was able to happen because they had the #2 pick.

You talk about effective trades and signings, but these trades and signing happen because of draft picks. Do the clippers get Chris Paul if they don't draft Eric Gordon? Do the Knicks get the Carmelo trade without Gallo, Chandler, and Mozgov? Does Deron Williams get traded without Favors? Does Brooklyn get Dwight Howard without Broo... nevermind. The draft isn't about finding a franchise guy, it's about acquiring young guys on cheap deals that can help a team.


Eric Gordon drafted 8th position in draft.
Gallinari was 6th pick in draft.

I am just saying that there is a huge chance being stuck as the Bobcats or Wolves or Clippers for a decade if you let your team wallow in a losing mentality. Heck, Harkless or Nicholson could explode in a year or two and help the Magic trade for the next Melo or Dwight. You never know. But, all I am saying is a good GM doesn't need to tank to win in the end. A team doesn't need a top 5 pick to generate success or a championship team.

The Pistons had only Tayshaun Prince drafted with the 23rd pick in the draft while Billups, Rip, Sheed and Ben were all traded for. I would rather have a solidly built team than pray for winning the lottery year after year after year . . . and end up with a greater possibility of the next Darko or Kwame than any superstar you can name. There are no guarantee's with tanking. But, a good GM can guarantee a solidly built team. Most fans want to watch teams that fight to win, not teams that tank to lose.

Only responding because I don't want you to think I disagree. Winning in the NBA isn't about high draft picks or having a huge market. There is a lot of money that is spent on bad players every year, and our job is to find good players. My hope is that we have a competitive advantage in the talent evaluation department. Instead of getting into bidding wars over the Derrick Rose's of the league we need to find ways to get the Jo Noah's for less than they are worth.

I just don't think it's fair to say that teams wallow at the bottom of the league, when the league has been fairly dynamic. Like I said, every team has made the playoff at least once in the past 10 years. The problem is convincing the idiots in charge to keep the team afloat.
KingRobb02




Analyst
User avatar
Posts: 3,642
And1: 338
Joined: Aug 7, 2007
Top

Post#53 Re: Power Ranking
Tue Dec 11, 2012 5:36 pm by BadMofoPimp

KingRobb02 wrote:Only responding because I don't want you to think I disagree. Winning in the NBA isn't about high draft picks or having a huge market. There is a lot of money that is spent on bad players every year, and our job is to find good players. My hope is that we have a competitive advantage in the talent evaluation department. Instead of getting into bidding wars over the Derrick Rose's of the league we need to find ways to get the Jo Noah's for less than they are worth.

I just don't think it's fair to say that teams wallow at the bottom of the league, when the league has been fairly dynamic. Like I said, every team has made the playoff at least once in the past 10 years. The problem is convincing the idiots in charge to keep the team afloat.


Solid retort.

Now, the difference is that some people think they have to tank to have a better chance of winning a championship. I think the Memphis model is just as solid as the OKC model, just not as flashy. Remember when the Clips had all those flashy high 1st round picks and still got no-where. No guarantees either way, so I will always root to win now no matter what and hope my teams management makes the right trades and draft decisions. Nicholson has been superb for a late round pick. Definitely, outplaying Thomas Robinson who was supposedly an NBA ready player.
Image

Provin Ya'll Wrong!!!
BadMofoPimp
RealGM
User avatar
Posts: 33,486
And1: 3,635
Joined: Oct 12, 2003
Location: In the Paint
Top

Post#54 Re: Power Ranking
Tue Dec 11, 2012 7:06 pm by drsd

Malik Starks wrote:The Clippers didn't suck for a decade, they sucked for two.


This thread is rapidly getting off point; but perhaps to a more relevant point.

To your point, I go back to my previous post: the CBA has so radically changed that the new path to elite is WAY beyond our fan understanding. All I can do as a Magic fan is trust GM Hennigan in this process.

..
drsd



RealGM
User avatar
Posts: 19,698
And1: 311
Joined: Mar 15, 2003
Top

Post#55 Re: Power Ranking
Tue Dec 11, 2012 8:15 pm by Malik Starks

@KingRobb02

Then I misunderstood your point, we don't exactly disagree. No one dispute that tanking works-eventually-the only question is how long it will take. I do think there is great value in veteran leadership and creating of winning (or at least trying to). Plus I've seen my share of weak drafts and this one looks like a weak one from what I understand.
Malik Starks
Junior
Posts: 273
And1: 33
Joined: Apr 22, 2012
Location: Orlando FL
Top

Post#56 Re: Power Ranking
Wed Dec 12, 2012 4:30 am by drsd

Malik Starks wrote:No one dispute that tanking works-eventually.


I am disputing this. The Clippers are an exampke of a team that were high lottery year in and out, and nothing came until they contributed to the free agent market and resigned their players.

The Golden State Warriors are another team that was bad year after year. And the WIzards. And the Vancouver Grizzlies.

Being in the high lottery a couple years in a row has not been a path towards elitness. What has is one A+ pick, and then, solid managment around said player.

Look at Howard. Nelson was traded for. Then Lewis was way over-paid, but a critical asset. Turkoglu was pulled out of another team's trash pile and shinnied up to an nice luster. These sorts of trade and free-agent moves took the A+ pick to whee it needed to be. If any of the SG gambles had paid off, Orlando would have been awesome. But, oh well.

..
drsd



RealGM
User avatar
Posts: 19,698
And1: 311
Joined: Mar 15, 2003
Top

Post#57 Re: Power Ranking
Wed Dec 12, 2012 7:30 am by IGotDaMagicInMe

BadMofoPimp wrote:
KingRobb02 wrote:
Make Playoffs: 32.6%


WOOT!!!! Those are better odds than playing Craps. Hell Yeah, going to the ship!!!


NBA title odds: 0.0% :(

Magic gonna prove y'all wrong!!! :lol:
Image
IGotDaMagicInMe



Sixth Man
User avatar
Posts: 1,780
And1: 131
Joined: Jun 24, 2011
Top

Post#58 Re: Power Ranking
Wed Dec 12, 2012 10:10 am by KingRobb02

drsd wrote:
Malik Starks wrote:No one dispute that tanking works-eventually.


I am disputing this. The Clippers are an exampke of a team that were high lottery year in and out, and nothing came until they contributed to the free agent market and resigned their players.

The Golden State Warriors are another team that was bad year after year. And the WIzards. And the Vancouver Grizzlies.

Being in the high lottery a couple years in a row has not been a path towards elitness. What has is one A+ pick, and then, solid managment around said player.

Look at Howard. Nelson was traded for. Then Lewis was way over-paid, but a critical asset. Turkoglu was pulled out of another team's trash pile and shinnied up to an nice luster. These sorts of trade and free-agent moves took the A+ pick to whee it needed to be. If any of the SG gambles had paid off, Orlando would have been awesome. But, oh well.

..

Blake Griffin? Eric Gordon + Aminu for Chris Paul? They still haven't got any major free agents (aside from the failed Baron Davis thing, but that led to them low balling Elton Brand) or paid big money to re-sign anyone? What are you talking about?

The Warriors were just in the second round a few years ago. Do you not remember the We Believe team? That was just five years ago. 4 of that teams top 5 in minutes played were all drafted by the Warriors.

The Wizards are a weird case. They've only been in the lottery for 4 years now. They had a 45 win team that had a core they were happy with, but then Gil got hurt (Year 1), then Gil brought a gun to work (Year 2), then they had to blow it up (Magic trade Year 3, rebuilding year last year). Losing happens when you don't have your best player.

The Grizzlies are also a bad example because they were a 50 win team by Pau Gasol's 3rd season. I guess you could argue that rookie Gasol didn't solve everything, but that would be a weird argument to stand on.

I don't know why people keep arguing about the path to "eliteness". There is not path. The Thunder are where they are because of a lot of luck. No one should emulate that. The Heat are where they are because they have Lebron. There is only one of him so we can't emulate that. The Celtics got good by using McHale to trade a bunch of lottery picks for an all-time great. We don't have anyone who is that loyal to us. The Bulls are good because they kept drafting in the top 7 for years and then got lucky and picked #1 in the Derrick Rose year. The Spurs are good because they won the lottery, picked an all-time great and then could afford to be patient with late round guys and second round internationals. The Mavs are good because they drafted an all-time great and have an owner who just doesn't mind throwing money around. There is no set path. The only thing that is definite is that we need a great player first, and there aren't many ways for us to acquire one outside of the draft.
KingRobb02




Analyst
User avatar
Posts: 3,642
And1: 338
Joined: Aug 7, 2007
Top

Post#59 Re: Power Ranking
Wed Dec 12, 2012 10:34 am by BadMofoPimp

Well said King Rob. May I add:

Dirk Nowitzki was a draft day trade where Dallas traded for Milwaukee's draft pick to draft Dirk.

Hence, Dirk had nothing to do with draft position.
Image

Provin Ya'll Wrong!!!
BadMofoPimp
RealGM
User avatar
Posts: 33,486
And1: 3,635
Joined: Oct 12, 2003
Location: In the Paint
Top

Post#60 Re: Power Ranking
Fri Dec 14, 2012 7:27 am by Rccanes2311

drsd wrote:
Rccanes2311 wrote:.... winning is the worst thing for this franchise.


These comments make my stomach turn. Bad teams stay bad for more than a decade. The new CBA will cause an intrinsic change on how to build a roster; none of us fans understand that fully. We must have heart in GM Hennigan's vision.

..

No thanks, I'm not trusting any franchise's front office that continues to show how piss poor and incompetent they are year in and year out. Poorly run organizations don't get that kind of benfit if doubt I don't give a damn who's supposedly calling the shots. He lost that benefit of doubt when he did (Apparently you can't say Retart3d on this board which is disgusting, George Carlin would be ashamed. What a bunch of PC BS) trade with LA. Now he needs to prove himself and the best way to do that is bottom this team out and make some damn good draft picks in the top 5. Mediocre teams don't improve in the NBA unless it's a big market team that's handed great players on a silver platter (LA, Boston, Miami) that kind of stuff doesn't happen for a franchise like the Magic so building through the draft is a must.
Rccanes2311
Rookie
Posts: 1,071
And1: 0
Joined: May 14, 2008
Top

Post#61 Re: Power Ranking
Fri Dec 14, 2012 2:42 pm by BadMofoPimp

Basically, the Lakers would have to finish the season 41-18 to reach 50 victories. Hence, they have to win 67% of their remaining games. Doubt that happens. It is statistically possible that the Lakers could miss the playoffs.
Image

Provin Ya'll Wrong!!!
BadMofoPimp
RealGM
User avatar
Posts: 33,486
And1: 3,635
Joined: Oct 12, 2003
Location: In the Paint
Top

Post#62 Re: Power Ranking
Mon Dec 17, 2012 11:41 pm by OrlDave

Power Rankings for 12/10-12/17 (12/11-12/18)

Monday Releases:

ESPN: Stein (Magic Rank 19, previously 21)

http://espn.go.com/nba/powerrankings/_/year/2013/week/7

NBA.com: Schuhmann (Magic Rank 19, previous 21)

http://www.nba.com/powerrankings/?ls=iref:nbahpt6b

NBCsports/Probasketballtalk: Helin: (Magic Rank 22, Previous 22)

probasketballtalk,nbcsports.com

Bleacher Report: Strauss (Magic Rank 21, Previous 23)

bleacherreport.com

SBNation.com: Rosenthal (Magic Rank 21, Previous 21)

sbnation.com

Tuesday Releases:

Foxsports: Amico (Magic Rank 21, Previous 22)

http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/powerRankings

Cbssports.com: Moore (Magic Rank 19, Previous Rank 24)

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/powerrankings

Sports.Yahoo.com: Spears (Magic Rank 21, Previous 22)

sports.yahoo.com

Best rank in bold, worst in Italics.

Favorite line of the week.... "Jacque Vaughn could make a robot out of Popsicle sticks."
OrlDave




Veteran
User avatar
Posts: 2,611
And1: 422
Joined: May 4, 2003
Top

Post#63 Re: Power Ranking
Tue Dec 18, 2012 3:38 pm by OrlDave

Added Tuesday's. Last weeks range was 21-24.. this week is 19 to 22.

Hollinger has us at 17.

http://espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/powerrankings/_/page/2
OrlDave




Veteran
User avatar
Posts: 2,611
And1: 422
Joined: May 4, 2003
Top

Post#64 Re: Power Ranking
Tue Dec 18, 2012 5:06 pm by Mad Guru

It would be cool to see a graph based on the averages, or even one with a line for each publication.
Mad Guru
Rookie
User avatar
Posts: 1,242
And1: 99
Joined: Jan 4, 2011
Top

Post#65 Re: Power Ranking
Tue Dec 18, 2012 6:43 pm by OrlDave

Mad Guru wrote:It would be cool to see a graph based on the averages, or even one with a line for each publication.


Decent thought. I'll see what I can whip up before next week.
OrlDave




Veteran
User avatar
Posts: 2,611
And1: 422
Joined: May 4, 2003
Top

PreviousNext

Return to Orlando Magic


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: axl_c_cool, cb1115, Kytu, LiftedHigher33, orlando1214, Raider_MXD, sportsrock37, T-DOT KEEZY, Zmill