RealGM

Gonna pick the Mavs, don't think Brooklyn's got a great bench. East is really weak this year though.

Misleading question.

East is weaker and the West is insanely deep 1-10.

Brooklyn should have the better record.

Trader_Joe wrote:Misleading question.

East is weaker and the West is insanely deep 1-10.

Brooklyn should have the better record.

This.

MavsManiac4Life wrote:Gonna pick the Mavs, don't think Brooklyn's got a great bench. East is really weak this year though.

It will the best bench they've had in ages (doesn't say too much) but I like it. Our Euros look great and Watson started and played a lot of minute for the team withe the best record in the NBA last year.

Watson / Taylor
Brooks / Stack
Bogans / Shengelia
Teletovic
Evans

Still two roster spots left for what will probably be d league finds.

Mavs should get between 50 and 55 wins, so the question is where the Nets can go. The Nets are still a more unpredictable team, with a team coming of a horrible season and only one key addition. So depending on their injury situation they will get between 45 and 55 wins in my estimation.

questionmark wrote:Mavs should get between 50 and 55 wins, so the question is where the Nets can go. The Nets are still a more unpredictable team, with a team coming of a horrible season and only one key addition. So depending on their injury situation they will get between 45 and 55 wins in my estimation.

The West is WAY too deep.. there is no way they get 50-55 wins.

OKC
LAL
SAS
LAC

Should be the 50+ win teams.

MEM
DAL
DEN
MIN
GSW
UTAH

Are all still very good teams that should be over .500.

50 wins will be very tough in the West. Try spreading out 1230 wins between 30 wins and you will see.

Change the thread title please.

I see the Nets having about maybe 46-49 wins. Dallas hovering around .500.

What did the Nets do aside from change address and add Joe Johnson? The Mavs improved their roster at almost every position.

I can see Dallas winning between 50 and 56 games and Brooklyn playing .500 ball at best.

Donald Kaufman wrote:What did the Nets do aside from change address and add Joe Johnson? The Mavs improved their roster at almost every position.

I can see Dallas winning between 50 and 56 games and Brooklyn playing .500 ball at best.

Donald Kaufman wrote:What did the Nets do aside from change address and add Joe Johnson? The Mavs improved their roster at almost every position.

I can see Dallas winning between 50 and 56 games and Brooklyn playing .500 ball at best.

Deron is healthy and motivated.

Added Joe Johnson.

Lopez is healthy.

Wallace is there for a full season.

Added Watson, Evans, and Teletovic to their bench.

*Most importantly*: Do not have to play Shelden Williams, Johan Petro, Jordan Williams, Deshawn Stevenson, Sundiata Gaines, or Jordan Farmar anymore, and Marshon Brooks is now a backup off the bench (which suits him very well).

DAL is younger but is 3rd in its own division. BKN has a good if not great roster and can finish between 2nd and 4th in its division.

Woodsanity wrote::lol:

Compelling argument.

Donald Kaufman wrote:What did the Nets do aside from change address and add Joe Johnson? The Mavs improved their roster at almost every position.

I can see Dallas winning between 50 and 56 games and Brooklyn playing .500 ball at best.

Do you follow the NBA?

This was the Nets most common line-up and the only players to play 40+ games last season?

D.Williams / Gaines
Brooks / Morrow
Stevenson
Humphries
Shelden W. / Petro

(Lopez - 5 games, Wallace - 16 games)

This is their projected line-up this year:

D.Williams / Watson / T.Taylor
J.Johnson / Brooks / Stackhouse
G.Wallace / Bogans / Shengelia
Humphries / Teletovic
Lopez / Evans

Trader_Joe wrote:

Donald Kaufman wrote:What did the Nets do aside from change address and add Joe Johnson? The Mavs improved their roster at almost every position.

I can see Dallas winning between 50 and 56 games and Brooklyn playing .500 ball at best.

Do you follow the NBA?

This was the Nets most common line-up and the only players to play 40+ games last season?

D.Williams / Gaines
Brooks / Morrow
Stevenson
Humphries
Shelden W. / Petro

(Lopez - 5 games, Wallace - 16 games)

This is their projected line-up this year:

D.Williams / Watson / T.Taylor
J.Johnson / Brooks / Stackhouse
G.Wallace / Bogans / Shengelia
Humphries / Teletovic
Lopez / Evans

Compelling argument.

Trader_Joe wrote:Misleading question.

East is weaker and the West is insanely deep 1-10.

Brooklyn should have the better record.

Strength of schedule is one of the variables implied in the question. Yes, the Mavs could conceivably be a stronger teams with a poorer record, but I suspect they will overcome the schedule to actually have a better record than the Nets.

wab

Nets.

I think they've got the better team overall, play in an easier conference & Mavs may suffer a little with chemistry.

Mats272-GOAT wrote:

Trader_Joe wrote:Do you follow the NBA?

This was the Nets most common line-up and the only players to play 40+ games last season?

D.Williams / Gaines
Brooks / Morrow
Stevenson
Humphries
Shelden W. / Petro

(Lopez - 5 games, Wallace - 16 games)

This is their projected line-up this year:

D.Williams / Watson / T.Taylor
J.Johnson / Brooks / Stackhouse
G.Wallace / Bogans / Shengelia
Humphries / Teletovic
Lopez / Evans

Compelling argument.

Thanks.. just trying to educate some people on here that may not be familiar with teams besides their own. Which I can understand.. the Nets had 1 game nationally televised last year on ESPN (against NY), and if he's a Dallas fan they only played twice.. including when NJ went to Dallas and won right after the all-star break with Lopez dropping 37 on them in his first full game back (no G.Wallace or JJ), despite the fact Dallas was playing very well at the time.

Nets based on 2 factors:

1. West is deeper than the East, so the wins are harder to come by.
2. Chemistry, the Mavs have a totally different first five. The Nets may also have chemistry issues at first, but most of the key players have played together last season.

WildArkieBoy65 wrote:

Trader_Joe wrote:Misleading question.

East is weaker and the West is insanely deep 1-10.

Brooklyn should have the better record.

Strength of schedule is one of the variables implied in the question. Yes, the Mavs could conceivably be a stronger teams with a poorer record, but I suspect they will overcome the schedule to actually have a better record than the Nets.

wab

The West is so much deeper than the East that I think the comparison is not fair. The East is top heavy but after the top 5 (6 with Rose back later in the year) there is a sharp drop off. 50 wins in the West may be closer to 55+ in the East.

I go to Dallas often (including tomorrow morning for the week) and I get none of this optimism from co-workers down there when I talk to them. I'm surprised to see it here.