Best team without their best player?

[shawngoat23]

Which team do you think would be strongest if their best player missed extended time?

[vegajf51]

Miami heat would still make the playoffs in the east easy.

[smith2373]

The Spurs.

[OneWhoKnocks]

The Spurs without question. Forget just their best player, even without 4 of their best players they can still win games against 2/3 of the NBA teams out there.

[vegajf51]

The spurs without Parker would do nothing in the playoffs, Miami could still possibly win the east with wade+bosh, probably wouldn't but would have a shot. You guys forget how loaded Miami is, it's not just Lebron but he clearly is their best player. Wade+ Bosh deserve more respect.

[Sinant]

Interesting that the Thunder aren't there.

I mean, I think they'd be a lot worse than people think they would because just Westbrook is probably going to be pretty bad offensively, but he's still a Top 10 player.

With that said, the Spurs.

[Axel]

I think the Spurs would have the least decline in their overall level of performance, while the Heat would still be the better team. I think OKC would withstand the loss of its best player more than any of the teams listed. I think they would be the best team in the NBA, if every team lost its best player.

[vegajf51]

I think the Spurs would have the least decline in their overall level of performance, while the Heat would still be the better team. I think OKC would withstand the loss of its best player more than any of the teams listed. I think they would be the best team in the NBA, if every team lost its best player.

Without durant Westbrook would need to average 40, lol! I love Westbrook but we wouldn't be that good. We would still be a great defensive team but would struggle to score.

And I agree with spurs least decline, but the question was the better team.

[OptimusOne6]

If people think Tony Parker is the Spurs best player then I would agree, but if they think its Tim then I would disagree.

Some players are more valuable than others but that doesn't necessarily mean they are better. It is mainly because the Spurs don't have much depth up front while they have a lot of depth in the back-court.

[Ronito]

Chicago.

[KingAmmar]

Raptors play Better without their supposed best player (Bargnani).
Howcome they are not an option!!!11ONE

[Ganji]

Spurs, you can't fight the system.

[Axel]

I think the Spurs would have the least decline in their overall level of performance, while the Heat would still be the better team. I think OKC would withstand the loss of its best player more than any of the teams listed. I think they would be the best team in the NBA, if every team lost its best player.

Without durant Westbrook would need to average 40, lol! I love Westbrook but we wouldn't be that good. We would still be a great defensive team but would struggle to score.

And I agree with spurs least decline, but the question was the better team.

Really though? Westbrook is the Thunder's best creator, I think they would be OK on the offensive end. I would expect him to thrive in a system that made him the primary scorer offensively, and still create for the rest of his team. OKC without KD could beat MIA without LBJ, I think.

But I did answer who was the better team. Out of the choices listed, its clearly Miami.

[mirrornick]

Raptors play Better without their supposed best player (Bargnani).
Howcome they are not an option!!!11ONE

this

[EscapoTHB]

The knicks don't seem to miss a beat when melo is out.

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2