ESPN Rankings 3-10 Are Surprisingly Not Horrible
Moderators: KingDavid, cupcakesnake, Dirk, Domejandro, ken6199, infinite11285, Clav, bwgood77, bisme37, zimpy27
ESPN Rankings 3-10 Are Surprisingly Not Horrible
-
RoxSteady
- Sixth Man
- Posts: 1,633
- And1: 5,448
- Joined: Jul 22, 2019
-
ESPN Rankings 3-10 Are Surprisingly Not Horrible
OK, so they put down the crack pipe for 8 picks. None of these are too offensive; although LeBron's probably ranked too high. Giannis (presumably #1) and Kawhi (#2) are left.
10. PG13
9. Dame
8. Embiid
7. Jokic
6. Steph
5. AD
4. Harden
3. LBJ
10. PG13
9. Dame
8. Embiid
7. Jokic
6. Steph
5. AD
4. Harden
3. LBJ
Re: Extra: ESPN Rankings 3-10 Aren't Horrible
- Dominator83
- RealGM
- Posts: 21,581
- And1: 33,091
- Joined: Jan 16, 2005
- Location: NBA Hell
Re: Extra: ESPN Rankings 3-10 Aren't Horrible
Even a broken clock is right twice a day
Fantasy Hoops/Football/Baseball fans..
For info on a forum that actually talks Fantasy sports and not spammed with soliciting leagues, PM me. The more the merrier !
For info on a forum that actually talks Fantasy sports and not spammed with soliciting leagues, PM me. The more the merrier !
Re: ESPN Rankings 3-10
- Asif16
- RealGM
- Posts: 19,473
- And1: 27,704
- Joined: Feb 03, 2013
-
Re: ESPN Rankings 3-10
Dame at 9 and Mccolum at 13.
You would think they could have at least put some sort of a fight against the Warriors with such a loaded back court.
Essentially, what I'm trying to say is that Dame probably should be 13 while Mccolum shoudl've been way lower
You would think they could have at least put some sort of a fight against the Warriors with such a loaded back court.
Essentially, what I'm trying to say is that Dame probably should be 13 while Mccolum shoudl've been way lower
Re: ESPN Rankings 3-10 Are Surprisingly Not Horrible
-
getjeffrey
- Ballboy
- Posts: 24
- And1: 20
- Joined: Aug 07, 2017
Re: ESPN Rankings 3-10 Are Surprisingly Not Horrible

Sent from my LGL84VL using Tapatalk
Re: ESPN Rankings 3-10 Are Surprisingly Not Horrible
- GeorgeMarcus
- Retired Mod

- Posts: 19,124
- And1: 24,346
- Joined: Jun 17, 2006
-
Re: ESPN Rankings 3-10 Are Surprisingly Not Horrible
“Battling illness last spring and having illness questioned, Embiid saw his production on both ends of the court decrease in the playoffs”
Unreal display of ignorance. This trumps the Winslow PG debacle in my book
Unreal display of ignorance. This trumps the Winslow PG debacle in my book
Re: ESPN Rankings 3-10
- Rockice_24
- Starter
- Posts: 2,180
- And1: 816
- Joined: Jun 15, 2011
-
Re: ESPN Rankings 3-10
Asif16 wrote:Dame at 9 and Mccolum at 13.
You would think they could have at least put some sort of a fight against the Warriors with such a loaded back court.
Essentially, what I'm trying to say is that Dame probably should be 13 while Mccolum shoudl've been way lower
Dame seems about right but yeah McCollum is way high. I would expect a 2 to be the first number I see.
Re: ESPN Rankings 3-10 Are Surprisingly Not Horrible
- Funcrusher
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 5,084
- And1: 6,569
- Joined: Apr 14, 2017
- Location: Stolen from Africa
-
Re: ESPN Rankings 3-10 Are Surprisingly Not Horrible
Nah, it's still terrible. Curry being the 6th ranked player is almost as bad as McCollum at 13.
gh123 wrote:Zion lucky if he gets 18 ppg on decent efficiency. Midget big man is a no-career in NBA. Chuck being the only wonder. Zion is the next Tractor Trailer at best.
Re: ESPN Rankings 3-10 Are Surprisingly Not Horrible
- GeorgeMarcus
- Retired Mod

- Posts: 19,124
- And1: 24,346
- Joined: Jun 17, 2006
-
Re: ESPN Rankings 3-10 Are Surprisingly Not Horrible
Funcrusher wrote:Nah, it's still terrible. Curry being the 6th ranked player is almost as bad as McCollum at 13.
Jesus. I hadn’t made it that far yet. Absolute garbage
Re: ESPN Rankings 3-10 Are Surprisingly Not Horrible
-
Duke4life831
- Forum Mod

- Posts: 37,323
- And1: 68,349
- Joined: Jun 16, 2015
-
Re: ESPN Rankings 3-10 Are Surprisingly Not Horrible
AD over Curry seems off to me
Re: ESPN Rankings 3-10 Are Surprisingly Not Horrible
- Lunartic
- Head Coach
- Posts: 6,176
- And1: 9,864
- Joined: Nov 28, 2015
Re: ESPN Rankings 3-10 Are Surprisingly Not Horrible
Not a big Curry fan but he should be above Harden/AD
LeBron should be above Giannis at #2
LeBron should be above Giannis at #2
Re: ESPN Rankings 3-10 Are Surprisingly Not Horrible
-
kuclas
- General Manager
- Posts: 7,771
- And1: 3,983
- Joined: Nov 08, 2016
-
Re: ESPN Rankings 3-10 Are Surprisingly Not Horrible
AD is the only one who’s probably a little too high at 5. The top 10 are pretty spot on. Can move a players 1-2 slots up and down based on reputation.
Re: ESPN Rankings 3-10 Are Surprisingly Not Horrible
-
XxIronChainzxX
- RealGM
- Posts: 14,457
- And1: 7,665
- Joined: Oct 22, 2004
-
Re: ESPN Rankings 3-10 Are Surprisingly Not Horrible
RoxSteady wrote:OK, so they put down the crack pipe for 8 picks. None of these are too offensive; although LeBron's probably ranked too high. Giannis (presumably #1) and Kawhi (#2) are left.
10. PG13
9. Dame
8. Embiid
7. Jokic
6. Steph
5. AD
4. Harden
3. LBJ
I assume Kawhi is #1. But in any case, it's not that hard to name the 10 best players in the NBA out of order.
Re: ESPN Rankings 3-10 Are Surprisingly Not Horrible
- Hindenburg
- Head Coach
- Posts: 7,426
- And1: 13,855
- Joined: Feb 10, 2015
-
Re: ESPN Rankings 3-10 Are Surprisingly Not Horrible
Davis should be at the end of top 10. What exactly did he accomplish last year to move up a spot?
Curry should be in top 3-4.
LeBron should be in #5 spot or lower.
Curry should be in top 3-4.
LeBron should be in #5 spot or lower.
Re: ESPN Rankings 3-10
-
BNM
- Analyst
- Posts: 3,566
- And1: 4,306
- Joined: Jun 28, 2016
Re: ESPN Rankings 3-10
Asif16 wrote:Dame at 9 and Mccolum at 13.
You would think they could have at least put some sort of a fight against the Warriors with such a loaded back court.
Essentially, what I'm trying to say is that Dame probably should be 13 while Mccolum shoudl've been way lower
All the ranking's I've seen, have Dame at 9 or 10. I agree C.J. is WAY too high (should be around 30, where they had him last year).
They did put up a fight against the Warriors. They had double digit 3rd quarter leads in 3 of the 4 games, and they did it with these other 3 starters:
An injured Enes "Can't Play" Kanter
Al-Farouq Aminu
Moe Harkless
The fact that Dame and C.J. were able to drag that mess to the WESTERN Conference Finals speaks well for how good they are. Yes, C.J. is rated WAY too high by ESPN, but overall Dame and C.J. aren't Portland's problem. It is the players they've been surrounded with that are.
Re: ESPN Rankings 3-10 Are Surprisingly Not Horrible
-
OfficialRef
- Starter
- Posts: 2,183
- And1: 2,585
- Joined: May 05, 2014
Re: ESPN Rankings 3-10 Are Surprisingly Not Horrible
i'm not so sure lillard is a better player than PG...
Re: ESPN Rankings 3-10 Are Surprisingly Not Horrible
-
Pennebaker
- Head Coach
- Posts: 7,027
- And1: 5,587
- Joined: Nov 02, 2013
Re: ESPN Rankings 3-10 Are Surprisingly Not Horrible
RoxSteady wrote:OK, so they put down the crack pipe for 8 picks. None of these are too offensive; although LeBron's probably ranked too high. Giannis (presumably #1) and Kawhi (#2) are left.
10. PG13
9. Dame
8. Embiid
7. Jokic
6. Steph
5. AD
4. Harden
3. LBJ
The biggest issue is that LeBron is better than both Giannis and Kawhi and Paul George is not a top 10 player.

Re: ESPN Rankings 3-10 Are Surprisingly Not Horrible
-
IgorK
- Veteran
- Posts: 2,735
- And1: 4,788
- Joined: Mar 06, 2016
- Location: Los Angeles
- Contact:
-
Re: ESPN Rankings 3-10 Are Surprisingly Not Horrible
I was hoping they'd put LeBron even lower. The amount of crow to be eaten in the United States at the end of the season may land the corvus specimen on the Protected Species list.
"You want me to own a team and deal with these rich, spoiled stubborn athletes, and try to get them to perform? No thank you." - Kobe
AMG
AMG
Re: ESPN Rankings 3-10 Are Surprisingly Not Horrible
-
WarriorGM
- General Manager
- Posts: 9,035
- And1: 4,274
- Joined: Aug 19, 2017
Re: ESPN Rankings 3-10 Are Surprisingly Not Horrible
Only redeeming thing about this list is that it is proof if anyone ever needed it of how biased the media is against Curry.
Re: ESPN Rankings 3-10 Are Surprisingly Not Horrible
-
TheNewEra
- RealGM
- Posts: 28,980
- And1: 10,716
- Joined: Aug 28, 2008
- Location: Lob City
-
Re: ESPN Rankings 3-10 Are Surprisingly Not Horrible
Anthony Davis my goodness you put that man over Curry?
Re: ESPN Rankings 3-10 Are Surprisingly Not Horrible
-
TheNewEra
- RealGM
- Posts: 28,980
- And1: 10,716
- Joined: Aug 28, 2008
- Location: Lob City
-
Re: ESPN Rankings 3-10 Are Surprisingly Not Horrible
OfficialRef wrote:i'm not so sure lillard is a better player than PG...
Believe most teams would take PG over Dame. It’s close though






