UcanUwill wrote:bwgood77 wrote:Hoop Heavy wrote:
So, a team that loses two of their top three guys ... and then struggles ... and people think that's "acceptable"
IF the Pelicans were for "real" ... then they would have had two guys on the end of the bench who were as good as the two guys they lost, right?
I think it's just a dumb question. How do you answer it? How good should they be? I remember when the Suns were missing like 6 of their 9 top players this year and struggling everyone was blaming Bridges and Ayton for not carrying 3rd stringers to wins against good teams (and they even took the Nuggets to OT and played some other teams well).
It's tough to judge, but yeah, any team missing it's top 2 players is unlikely to be good unless you have super quality backups like Memphis, who can usually hang since Tyus Jones is probably the best backup PG in the league and they have solid PFs/Guards to backup JJJ or Bane.
You guys are right, maybe I just overrated their ability to do it by committee, I thought they are one of the deepest teams around, and maybe they are but its a star league. At first even without ZIon and Ingram they were looking ok, but then just fell apart. I Mean I guess that was expected, but it was still a bit disappointing to me, I really expected this team to be very good, and yeah, if ZIon plays 25 games a year, this team is nothing, but I dont know, I was going against my character and were over optimistic with this group of players.
Part of it is just how tough and deep the west is. Hasn't Herb Jones been out some too? I think also without Zion last year it was probably easier to gain chemistry without him, but then when you play with him and get used to it, and THEN have to try and play without him, it's tough because it changes everything so much since he requires so much defensive attention.