2019/2020 Western Conference Projected Standings

[Roy The Natural]

???

Did you mean to type something else other than Monroe?

No... I'm saying that I think that Cousins will basically be Greg Monroe, maybe slightly better. And that I would start McGee over Monroe if I was the Lakers, so it makes sense that McGee will end up the starter at the 5, if Davis doesn't wont to start at the 5.

Pretty awful comparison.

Lets compare the two.

We'll use the 2014 season for Monroe, as that was statistically one of his best years. Cousins was at 25.7MPG, Monroe at 31MPG

Points Per Game:
Greg Monroe: 15.9
DeMarcus Cousins: 16.3 PPG
Advantage: Cousins, +0.4

Field Goal Percentage:
Greg Monroe: 49.6
DeMarcus Cousins: 48.0
Advantage: Monroe, +1.6 points

Three Point Field Goal Percentage:
Greg Monroe: 0
DeMarcus Cousins: 27.4
Advantage: Cousins, +27.4 points

Rebounds Per Game:
Greg Monroe: 10.2
Demarcus Cousins: 8.2
Advantage: Monroe, +2

Assists Per Game:
Greg Monroe: 2.1
Demarcus Cousins: 3.6
Advantage: Cousins, +2.5

Blocks Per Game:
Greg Monroe: 0.5
Demarcus Cousin: 1.5
Advantage: Cousins, +1

Steals Per Game:
Greg Monroe: 1.1
Demarcus Cousins: 1.3
Advantage: Cousins, +0.2

Free Throw Percentage:
Greg Monroe: 75
Demarcus Cousins: 73.6
Advantage: Monroe, +1.4

Turnovers Per Game:
Greg Monroe: 2.2
Demarcus Cousins: 2.4
Advantage: Monroe, -0.2

Plus/Minus:
Greg Monroe: -24
Demarcus Cousins: +65
Advantage: Cousins, +89

Greg Monroe AT HIS BEST is arguably not as good as Cousins AT HIS WORST. Again, couple that with a GOOD off-season where Cousins gets to rehabilitate himself AND he reports he is currently at 100% getting stronger, you need to think of a better comparison.

It's a fine comparison. Greg Monroe isn't a shooter, and Cousins does have that advantage. But the overall issues of athleticism and ground bound plodding are spot on. It's a far more apt comparison than the idea that Cousins will be a disruptive defender and elite offensive center still.

Only time will tell. But he looked more Greg Monroe, than Nurkic to me last year. Cousins isn't going to magically not be a turnstile because he lost a few extra pounds this offseason. The guy was never the most mobile, but he was always fluid and mobile for a man his size. Now he's not. Now Cousins moves exactly like you'd expect a large man to move, slowly. He's going to be a problem for the Lakers.

[tsirigoj]

No... I'm saying that I think that Cousins will basically be Greg Monroe, maybe slightly better. And that I would start McGee over Monroe if I was the Lakers, so it makes sense that McGee will end up the starter at the 5, if Davis doesn't wont to start at the 5.

Pretty awful comparison.

Lets compare the two.

We'll use the 2014 season for Monroe, as that was statistically one of his best years. Cousins was at 25.7MPG, Monroe at 31MPG

Points Per Game:
Greg Monroe: 15.9
DeMarcus Cousins: 16.3 PPG
Advantage: Cousins, +0.4

Field Goal Percentage:
Greg Monroe: 49.6
DeMarcus Cousins: 48.0
Advantage: Monroe, +1.6 points

Three Point Field Goal Percentage:
Greg Monroe: 0
DeMarcus Cousins: 27.4
Advantage: Cousins, +27.4 points

Rebounds Per Game:
Greg Monroe: 10.2
Demarcus Cousins: 8.2
Advantage: Monroe, +2

Assists Per Game:
Greg Monroe: 2.1
Demarcus Cousins: 3.6
Advantage: Cousins, +2.5

Blocks Per Game:
Greg Monroe: 0.5
Demarcus Cousin: 1.5
Advantage: Cousins, +1

Steals Per Game:
Greg Monroe: 1.1
Demarcus Cousins: 1.3
Advantage: Cousins, +0.2

Free Throw Percentage:
Greg Monroe: 75
Demarcus Cousins: 73.6
Advantage: Monroe, +1.4

Turnovers Per Game:
Greg Monroe: 2.2
Demarcus Cousins: 2.4
Advantage: Monroe, -0.2

Plus/Minus:
Greg Monroe: -24
Demarcus Cousins: +65
Advantage: Cousins, +89

Greg Monroe AT HIS BEST is arguably not as good as Cousins AT HIS WORST. Again, couple that with a GOOD off-season where Cousins gets to rehabilitate himself AND he reports he is currently at 100% getting stronger, you need to think of a better comparison.

It's a fine comparison. Greg Monroe isn't a shooter, and Cousins does have that advantage. But the overall issues of athleticism and ground bound plodding are spot on. It's a far more apt comparison than the idea that Cousins will be a disruptive defender and elite offensive center still.

Only time will tell. But he looked more Greg Monroe, than Nurkic to me last year.

There is no measurable statistic for "looked like."

If we didn't take stats, Tim Duncan would have "looked like" an average joe NBA player. It's a terrible comparison, according to these numbers. Again, even if you want to say the numbers are comparable, this is Monroe AT HIS BEST (and, if you remember, a lot of teams wanted him at the time) versus Cousins at his ABSOLUTE worse (and, for maybe the third time, he's FINALLY going to get a proper off-season this time around).

[so_bored]

Lakers are just as stacked as the Clippers. They are a legitimate contender. Not sure how some of you are putting them at 7th or 8th seed. That's silly. They probably wont get top seed since they are going to load manage their stars, but let's get real, their starting 5:

Cousins
AD
Kuz
Green
Lebron

That's hell of a lineup. Then you have Mcgee, Rondo, Bradley, Cook, Dudley off the bench. They will be very scary, especially come playoffs.

[IgorK]

LOL @ the Lakers hate.

LeBron had a poorly constructed young team and they were in top 4 in the West before the injuries ravaged the team.

You can hate, but at least be realistic. For all the s**t Lakers fans get, the other fan bases have their own ridiculous biases.

[tsirigoj]

LOL @ the Lakers hate.

LeBron had a poorly constructed young team and they were in top 4 in the West before the injuries ravaged the team.

You can hate, but at least be realistic. For all the s**t Lakers fans get, the other fan bases have their own ridiculous biases.

I'm a pretty rational guy, and I eyeroll at the reaches Laker fans make sometimes (it's almost as bad as the Laker hate in this forum), but you are absolutely correct.

The first, say, 20 games of the season may be ugly, and the Laker haters will have a field day ("HAHAHA Laker fans! What do you have to say now?") When it starts coming together though, Lakers will be practically unbeatable when the whole squad is playing.

[Roy The Natural]

Lakers are just as stacked as the Clippers. They are a legitimate contender. Not sure how some of you are putting them at 7th or 8th seed. That's silly. They probably wont get top seed since they are going to load manage their stars, but let's get real, their starting 5:

Cousins
AD
Kuz
Green
Lebron

That's hell of a lineup. Then you have Mcgee, Rondo, Bradley, Cook, Dudley off the bench. They will be very scary, especially come playoffs.

Starting lineup is fine. That bench is pretty rough though. Dudley is basically washed. Cook is a spotty and a complete sieve on defense (at least he was when I watched him). Rondo is washed. Bradley is washed. McGee is situational good, and situational awful. Almost the entirety of the bench are bad defenders at this point.

Lakers are going to have to run the Portland scheme of always having 1 of Lebron or Davis on the court. I don't think the Lakers will be bad, and are right in the mix with teams like Portland/Utah/Clippers/Denver/Houston for those top seeds. But more than any other team on that list... ANY missed time by Lebron or Davis drops them down to the bottom half of the seeding. Out of all the top teams in the west, the Lakers are the shallowest. They don't have the horses to float around at .500 ball if they lost either Davis or Lebron for any real amount of time, IMO.

[SK21209]

LOL @ the Lakers hate.

LeBron had a poorly constructed young team and they were in top 4 in the West before the injuries ravaged the team.

You can hate, but at least be realistic. For all the s**t Lakers fans get, the other fan bases have their own ridiculous biases.

I'm a pretty rational guy, and I eyeroll at the reaches Laker fans make sometimes (it's almost as bad as the Laker hate in this forum), but you are absolutely correct.

The first, say, 20 games of the season may be ugly, and the Laker haters will have a field day ("HAHAHA Laker fans! What do you have to say now?") When it starts coming together though, Lakers will be practically unbeatable when the whole squad is playing.

I don’t think anyone doubts they can be really good by the end of the season. But if the first 20 games of a season are ugly you probably aren’t finishing higher than fifth in this western conference. And having to win three straight series on the road with LeBron probably having to play 45 minutes a night to stay competitive is a TALL order

[Doug_12]

1.Clippers
2.Rockets
3.Nuggets
4.Blazers
5.Lakers
6.Jazz
7.GSW
8.Mavericks

Clippers, Rockets are top tier for me, then Nuggets, Blazers, Lakers, Jazz and GSW* is in the same tier, then the Mavs, Spurs, Kings and Pelicans will battle for the 8-11th spot. Come playoff time Lakers and GSW joining to the Clippers-Rockets tier.

*weighted w/ Klay's injury: assumed to be out till mid Feb.

[Roy The Natural]

LOL @ the Lakers hate.

LeBron had a poorly constructed young team and they were in top 4 in the West before the injuries ravaged the team.

You can hate, but at least be realistic. For all the s**t Lakers fans get, the other fan bases have their own ridiculous biases.

I'm a pretty rational guy, and I eyeroll at the reaches Laker fans make sometimes (it's almost as bad as the Laker hate in this forum), but you are absolutely correct.

The first, say, 20 games of the season may be ugly, and the Laker haters will have a field day ("HAHAHA Laker fans! What do you have to say now?") When it starts coming together though, Lakers will be practically unbeatable when the whole squad is playing.

I don’t think anyone doubts they can be really good by the end of the season. But if the first 20 games of a season are ugly you probably aren’t finishing higher than fifth in this western conference. And having to win three straight series on the road with LeBron probably having to play 45 minutes a night to stay competitive is a TALL order

The thing that makes me skeptical with the Lakers is their ability to withstand missed time from their top 2. I just don't think they have a winning team without Davis or Lebron. I think both will miss time this year, and that will drop them in the standings. They'll be dangerous as hell in the playoffs if healthy though.

I see way too much faith being put in washed up players for bench production though.

[tsirigoj]

LOL @ the Lakers hate.

LeBron had a poorly constructed young team and they were in top 4 in the West before the injuries ravaged the team.

You can hate, but at least be realistic. For all the s**t Lakers fans get, the other fan bases have their own ridiculous biases.

I'm a pretty rational guy, and I eyeroll at the reaches Laker fans make sometimes (it's almost as bad as the Laker hate in this forum), but you are absolutely correct.

The first, say, 20 games of the season may be ugly, and the Laker haters will have a field day ("HAHAHA Laker fans! What do you have to say now?") When it starts coming together though, Lakers will be practically unbeatable when the whole squad is playing.

I don’t think anyone doubts they can be really good by the end of the season. But if the first 20 games of a season are ugly you probably aren’t finishing higher than fifth in this western conference. And having to win three straight series on the road with LeBron probably having to play 45 minutes a night to stay competitive is a TALL order

Not necessarily, on both accounts.

Lakers have quite solid role players (no matter what RealGM posters think), that could probably carry the team for quite a few minutes at a time while LeBron gets a breather.

Also, as players become more veteran and experienced in this league, home-court advantage begins mattering less and less. The Lakers have a solid core of head-y veterans with playoff experience.

Also, AD.

Also, how DeMarcus Cousins shows up to game 1 of the season is a toss-up, but assuming that he is AT LEAST as good as he was last season (probably will be better as he actually has an off-season to get in shape and rehab as needed), he'll average AT LEAST 16 and 8.

[tsirigoj]

I'm a pretty rational guy, and I eyeroll at the reaches Laker fans make sometimes (it's almost as bad as the Laker hate in this forum), but you are absolutely correct.

The first, say, 20 games of the season may be ugly, and the Laker haters will have a field day ("HAHAHA Laker fans! What do you have to say now?") When it starts coming together though, Lakers will be practically unbeatable when the whole squad is playing.

I don’t think anyone doubts they can be really good by the end of the season. But if the first 20 games of a season are ugly you probably aren’t finishing higher than fifth in this western conference. And having to win three straight series on the road with LeBron probably having to play 45 minutes a night to stay competitive is a TALL order

The thing that makes me skeptical with the Lakers is their ability to withstand missed time from their top 2. I just don't think they have a winning team without Davis or Lebron. I think both will miss time this year, and that will drop them in the standings. They'll be dangerous as hell in the playoffs if healthy though.

I see way too much faith being put in washed up players for bench production though.

Defined "washed up?"

A 28 year old Avery Bradley?
A 28 year old DeMarcus Cousins?
Danny Green that played 80 games last season?

I'm very curious...

[Roy The Natural]

I don’t think anyone doubts they can be really good by the end of the season. But if the first 20 games of a season are ugly you probably aren’t finishing higher than fifth in this western conference. And having to win three straight series on the road with LeBron probably having to play 45 minutes a night to stay competitive is a TALL order

The thing that makes me skeptical with the Lakers is their ability to withstand missed time from their top 2. I just don't think they have a winning team without Davis or Lebron. I think both will miss time this year, and that will drop them in the standings. They'll be dangerous as hell in the playoffs if healthy though.

I see way too much faith being put in washed up players for bench production though.

Defined "washed up?"

A 28 year old Avery Bradley?
A 28 year old DeMarcus Cousins?
Danny Green that played 80 games last season?

I'm very curious...

Avery Bradley has been horrendous for 2 years now. His offense has plummeted, and his defense is all but non-existent over that same time period. He's been a negative player for 2 years now.

Dudley is washed up as hell. His only real value at this point is in pissing off 76ers.

Cousins we'll have to see. But he looked fairly washed in the playoffs last year. He looked like a complete shell of himself.

Rondo is washed.

[IgorK]

LOL @ the Lakers hate.

LeBron had a poorly constructed young team and they were in top 4 in the West before the injuries ravaged the team.

You can hate, but at least be realistic. For all the s**t Lakers fans get, the other fan bases have their own ridiculous biases.

I'm a pretty rational guy, and I eyeroll at the reaches Laker fans make sometimes (it's almost as bad as the Laker hate in this forum), but you are absolutely correct.

The first, say, 20 games of the season may be ugly, and the Laker haters will have a field day ("HAHAHA Laker fans! What do you have to say now?") When it starts coming together though, Lakers will be practically unbeatable when the whole squad is playing.

I don’t think anyone doubts they can be really good by the end of the season. But if the first 20 games of a season are ugly you probably aren’t finishing higher than fifth in this western conference. And having to win three straight series on the road with LeBron probably having to play 45 minutes a night to stay competitive is a TALL order

This thread is about projected standings, not playoffs.

[tsirigoj]

The thing that makes me skeptical with the Lakers is their ability to withstand missed time from their top 2. I just don't think they have a winning team without Davis or Lebron. I think both will miss time this year, and that will drop them in the standings. They'll be dangerous as hell in the playoffs if healthy though.

I see way too much faith being put in washed up players for bench production though.

Defined "washed up?"

A 28 year old Avery Bradley?
A 28 year old DeMarcus Cousins?
Danny Green that played 80 games last season?

I'm very curious...

Avery Bradley has been horrendous for 2 years now. His offense has plummeted, and his defense is all but non-existent over that same time period. He's been a negative player for 2 years now.

Dudley is washed up as hell. His only real value at this point is in pissing off 76ers.

Cousins we'll have to see. But he looked fairly washed in the playoffs last year. He looked like a complete shell of himself.

Rondo is washed.

Avery Bradley wasn't terrible with the Grizzlies last season. He averaged 16 points and 38% for three. Imagine what he can do if he had two superstars on the court to open him up even more, and knowing he has two rim protectors (something Clips and Grizz both sorely lacked) behind him defensively?

And what's beautiful about Rondo is he REALLY doesn't have to do a whole lot this season. 20 solid minutes a game, develop the other two young PGs, and that's all he'll really be needed for. He can handle that role and excel in it.

[IgorK]

I'm a pretty rational guy, and I eyeroll at the reaches Laker fans make sometimes (it's almost as bad as the Laker hate in this forum), but you are absolutely correct.

The first, say, 20 games of the season may be ugly, and the Laker haters will have a field day ("HAHAHA Laker fans! What do you have to say now?") When it starts coming together though, Lakers will be practically unbeatable when the whole squad is playing.

I don’t think anyone doubts they can be really good by the end of the season. But if the first 20 games of a season are ugly you probably aren’t finishing higher than fifth in this western conference. And having to win three straight series on the road with LeBron probably having to play 45 minutes a night to stay competitive is a TALL order

The thing that makes me skeptical with the Lakers is their ability to withstand missed time from their top 2. I just don't think they have a winning team without Davis or Lebron. I think both will miss time this year, and that will drop them in the standings. They'll be dangerous as hell in the playoffs if healthy though.

I see way too much faith being put in washed up players for bench production though.

Health is a legitimate concern. But I think people are just as overtly choosing to forget that Kuzma and Cousins are quite serviceable bucket getters - with the former seeming primed to take another leap this year. Green was a key role player on more than one championship squad. Same with Rondo (I know, people think he's washed up, but his stats last year weren't bad at all). McGee was a legitimate DPOY contender last year until that freaky pneumonia bout.

Lakers are not as thin as other teams' fans want to see them.

[LightTheBeam]

Avery Bradley has been a negative defender since 2015 - http://www.espn.com/nba/statistics/rpm/_/year/2016/sort/DRPM/position/2

Not sure why everyone believes otherwise.

I do however expect DMC to rebound this year. He will be the Lakers 3rd best player.

Danny Green is a decent player if hes your 6th-7th guy like in Toronto, not sure how he fits in as the 4th best player.

All comes down to health. A lot of question marks with Lebron, AD, and Cousins.

[bstein14]

I think 1 thru 8 will be between 57 to 50 wins. Going to be a blood bath.

[Roy The Natural]

Defined "washed up?"

A 28 year old Avery Bradley?
A 28 year old DeMarcus Cousins?
Danny Green that played 80 games last season?

I'm very curious...

Avery Bradley has been horrendous for 2 years now. His offense has plummeted, and his defense is all but non-existent over that same time period. He's been a negative player for 2 years now.

Dudley is washed up as hell. His only real value at this point is in pissing off 76ers.

Cousins we'll have to see. But he looked fairly washed in the playoffs last year. He looked like a complete shell of himself.

Rondo is washed.

Avery Bradley wasn't terrible with the Grizzlies last season. He averaged 16 points and 38% for three. Imagine what he can do if he had two superstars on the court to open him up even more, and knowing he has two rim protectors (something Clips and Grizz both sorely lacked) behind him defensively?

And what's beautiful about Rondo is he REALLY doesn't have to do a whole lot this season. 20 solid minutes a game, develop the other two young PGs, and that's all he'll really be needed for. He can handle that role and excel in it.

Bradley played 14 games with the Grizzlies. I'll take the 100 game sample size prior to that of him not being a good player anymore.

[nomansland]

Lakers are just as stacked as the Clippers. They are a legitimate contender. Not sure how some of you are putting them at 7th or 8th seed. That's silly. They probably wont get top seed since they are going to load manage their stars, but let's get real, their starting 5:

Cousins
AD
Kuz
Green
Lebron

That's hell of a lineup. Then you have Mcgee, Rondo, Bradley, Cook, Dudley off the bench. They will be very scary, especially come playoffs.

I think Cousins will surprise a lot of people (as in, being surprisingly effective) but that bench is garbage.

[tsirigoj]

Avery Bradley has been horrendous for 2 years now. His offense has plummeted, and his defense is all but non-existent over that same time period. He's been a negative player for 2 years now.

Dudley is washed up as hell. His only real value at this point is in pissing off 76ers.

Cousins we'll have to see. But he looked fairly washed in the playoffs last year. He looked like a complete shell of himself.

Rondo is washed.

Avery Bradley wasn't terrible with the Grizzlies last season. He averaged 16 points and 38% for three. Imagine what he can do if he had two superstars on the court to open him up even more, and knowing he has two rim protectors (something Clips and Grizz both sorely lacked) behind him defensively?

And what's beautiful about Rondo is he REALLY doesn't have to do a whole lot this season. 20 solid minutes a game, develop the other two young PGs, and that's all he'll really be needed for. He can handle that role and excel in it.

Bradley played 14 games with the Grizzlies. I'll take the 100 game sample size prior to that of him not being a good player anymore.

Sure!

He played with the Grizz for 14 games, averaged 16 points, 38 3P FG%.
He played with Clips over the 2017-18 season for 54 games, averaging about 9 points and about 30 3P FG%. Not great.

But you want past 100 games? Sure!

In 2017 he also played with the Pistons. He averaged 15 PPG with 38 3P FG%, MUCH similar to how he played most recently with the Grizzlies. He did this for 40 games.

I would hazard to guess that GIVEN in his most recent games he is LOOKING like he used to numbers-wise on a team that had nobody noteworthy that he'll do AT LEAST just as good next season on a team where he won't be required to start, but gets to play with two superstar players.

I'm comfortable with putting him down for 14-18 and around 40% 3P FG%.