Hollinger/Broussard Team Rankings: Bucks 13th

[Wise1]

....and Kevin Durant over Paul as well.

[El Duderino]

I'd take Deron Williams over Paul.

If Paul is completely healthy again, i'd take him over Williams and i wouldn't need a half of a second to think about it. The only thing Williams has over Paul is a few inches of height and he's not trying to force a trade.

[REDDzone]

I notice that Williams tends to outplay Paul head to head, but I don't think he's as good as Paul over the course of any entire season if both are healthy.

The issue is Paul's health.

[Sigra]

I'd take LeBron, Wade, Howard, Durant and Nowitzki over Paul. I am not sure about Kobe. Both Kobe and Paul could miss playoffs if their suporting cast is not good enough. I can't say that for LeBron, Wade, Howard, Durant and Nowitzki.

[Sigra]

13. Bucks

So they have 4 eastern conference teams better than Bucks and 8 western conference teams better than Bucks.

First of all, if everybody healty, the Bucks should be better than Bulls for sure. Considering how Boston save their veterans for playoffs the Bucks should have better record than Boston in regular season too. I really see Bucks at #3 in east after regular season if everybody healthy.

Now about western conference. I really can't see ALL 8 playoff teams from west being better than Bucks who should be elite themself. I can't see more than 6 west team being better than Bucks.

In conclusion I would put Bucks at #9 in NBA (if everybody healthy)

1. Miami
2. Lakers
3. Orlando
4. Dallas
5. Denver
6. Oklahoma
7. Portland
8. Utah
9. Milwaukee
10. Houston
11. Atlanta
12. Chicago
13. Boston
14. San Antonio
15. Hornets
16. Phoenix
17. Bobcats
18. Knicks
19. Memphis
20. Sixers
21. Pistons
22. Warriors
23. Kings
24. Clippers
25. Cavs
26. Pacers
27. Raptors
28. Wizards
29. Nets
30. Wolves

[worthlessBucks]

I think we're slotted pretty accurately in the list. I do feel the Bucks are better than the Hornets, I'm not impressed with their offseason moves.

[Sigra]

I think we're slotted pretty accurately in the list. I do feel the Bucks are better than the Hornets, I'm not impressed with their offseason moves.

They have Phoenix, Spurs, Bulls and Boston in front of us. I don't know.

Suns looks like mess with all that SFs (Hill, Hedo, Childress) and no inside scorer (well they do have Warrick I guess). Nash is one year older just like Hill. They will run and gun as always but I think they will miss guy like Amare inside.

Spurs are on their way down and I don't think they did anything to stop that free fall. They will be good team especially in playoffs but the Bucks should win more regular season games.

I made many posts about why should we be better than Bulls. In short, we were last year and we improved just as much IMO.

Boston will save energy in regular season and we will have better regular season record IMO.

[GHOSTofSIKMA]

pheonix being in front of us is atrocious. i didnt notice that before. they are not in front of us please. only a ratard would suggest it.

[speedingtime]

pheonix being in front of us is atrocious. i didnt notice that before. they are not in front of us please. only a ratard would suggest it.

How is that so ridiculous? IMO as long as Nash is around they have a chance to be good.

[LUKE23]

5th in the East is where I have us slotted personally. In terms of 8 WC teams ahead of us, I think it will be pretty close. We're not definitively ahead of any of:

Lakers
Spurs
Mavs
Nuggets
Jazz
Thunder
Blazers

You can argue the Suns for sure (but it's not "ridiculous") with losing Amare and replacing him with nothing (and Nash getting a year older), but I don't have a problem with any of the above 7 teams ahead of us, and I don't have an issue with Chicago ahead of us. I think we can get as high as 3 seed and as low as 6 seed in the East, so 5 is fine.

[emunney]

I feel like the Suns could be scary bad defensively. They'll need Robin Lopez to become a big time defender. He could do it, but we'll see.

[GHOSTofSIKMA]

the suns will be .500 or below this year. they have arguably the worst frontcourt in the entire western conference and oldman nash is now their goto scorer.

no size, no defense... its the nash dribble show. they will be one cut above the warriors.

[LUKE23]

They aren't a top level WC team anymore, but they will be over .500.

[europa]

Nash is still a superstar but he's 36. Unless one expects him to continue playing at a high level for the next 4-5 years I'm not sure how the Suns' future can be viewed as a bright one. He's pretty much all they have. They have some decent role players but Nash is the only standout player or potential standout players that I see. I wouldn't put Robin Lopez in that category. Not yet anyway.

As far as Paul, the guy is being seriously undervalued here in my opinion. He's only 25, has proven to be an MVP-caliber talent and plays arguably the most important position on the court. I'd give serious consideration to taking him over Wade to be honest due to Wade's durability concerns. The only players I'd absolutely positively take over Paul are Kobe and LeBron. I'd probably take Wade too but it would be a difficult decision.

[emunney]

With Yao and Paul coming back, the Suns are going to have a hard time making the playoffs. Throw in a wildcard like the Clippers coming together (probably won't happen) and it's conceivable that the Suns won't be a top 10 team in the West.

[trwi7]

with losing Amare and replacing him with nothing

Hakim Warwick is nothing?!?!?

[GHOSTofSIKMA]

They aren't a top level WC team anymore, but they will be over .500.

i dont buy it. i think they'll be weaksauce, and i think dealing nash to a contender will be the talk of the league when their floundering around .500 in early february.....5-6 games out of the 8seed. 50-50 they finish around .500, and 50-50 thats overrating them.

[Ayt]

Nash is still a superstar but he's 36. Unless one expects him to continue playing at a high level for the next 4-5 years I'm not sure how the Suns' future can be viewed as a bright one. He's pretty much all they have. They have some decent role players but Nash is the only standout player or potential standout players that I see. I wouldn't put Robin Lopez in that category. Not yet anyway.

As far as Paul, the guy is being seriously undervalued here in my opinion. He's only 25, has proven to be an MVP-caliber talent and plays arguably the most important position on the court. I'd give serious consideration to taking him over Wade to be honest due to Wade's durability concerns. The only players I'd absolutely positively take over Paul are Kobe and LeBron. I'd probably take Wade too but it would be a difficult decision.

I agree with what you are saying, but I'd honestly take Kobe out of the discussion at this point considering the effects age has had on him. I'd only take LeBron or a guaranteed healthy Wade over Paul at this point, because the guy is hugely disruptive on both ends of the court. I think he's more dangerous than Howard as an individual player because of the disruption he can cause on both ends, despite Howard being an excellent defender. Any roster with Paul running the offense is going to be very good, and he's also very good on the ball and off the ball in terms of D.

I almost hope he does end up forcing his way out of NO just so people can appreciate just how good he is, much like KG moving to Boston, though Paul would be doing so when he's still in his prime. He is absurdly talented and it would be fun to watch him play with some other All-Star caliber players. Swap him for Chauncey for example and I think Denver would have enough to get all the way to the Finals past the Lakers. With Chauncey, they just don't have the dynamism Paul brings, despite Billups still being an excellent player.

I'm all for Paul, Carmelo, and Amare in NYK at some point.

[europa]

I understand the age concerns Ayt but I still think Kobe is no worse than the second-best player in the league. I don't see any signs of significant regression in his game and barring injury I'm not sure we'll see any in the next few years. I also think he's the most mentally tough player in the league. It's the one area where I think a comparison with Jordan is legitimate. I think Kobe has reached the point where, like Jordan at his best, the only thing that matters to him is winning. He doesn't care if he's the biggest a**hole on or off the court or if his teammates like him or anything else. He has a single-minded obsession with winning, much like Jordan had. I don't think LeBron comes anywhere near Kobe in that regard which is one of the reasons why I believe the Cavs never won a title with him. So put that all together and that's why I'd take Kobe over any other player in his game.

[LUKE23]

i dont buy it. i think they'll be weaksauce, and i think dealing nash to a contender will be the talk of the league when their floundering around .500 in early february.....5-6 games out of the 8seed. 50-50 they finish around .500, and 50-50 thats overrating them.

Considering they just took on significant salary in the Turkoglu trade and the Childress, Frye, and Warrick signings, I doubt they are going to look to dump Nash. Regarding the Suns, they will be horrific defensively but still very good offensively, primarily because of the system they run. As much as I hate Turkoglu's game and contract, he's a nice fit there. Nash with Richardson, Turkoglu, and Childress is enough to be good enough offensively to be over .500. I'd have them probably low to mid 40's wins.