Sports Illustrated's NBA Rankings for 2006-2007 Season

[air gordon]

that's pretty interesting, indy
you have the pacers ahead of the Bulls, with the Bulls defeating the nets in the 1st round

personally i don't think much of rankings. makes for good discussions i guess since the season's about to start but seldom do nba beat writers have to own up to their predictions.

[Its_asdf]

I'm never good with predictions. I just hope that the Raptors don't make the playoffs...

Maybe reverse psychology will work this year...

[Indy]

that's pretty interesting, indy
you have the pacers ahead of the Bulls, with the Bulls defeating the nets in the 1st round

No, I have the Bulls playing Cleveland in the first round.

[NBA_Bryant24]

nba_bryant, you're egging them on and further proving it...rather than saying "oh stop it for making fun of my guess" go find the preseason stats that led you to believe howard will shoot 70% FTs....(nope, not gonna happen but still, trying to help a young guy out)

tell u the truth i got the stats from the fiba world championships

[---]

flite stats dont tell the whole story. He had higher stats because he was the only option on his team, not because he was better IMO....but hey we'll wait and see in the season

Actually, they have Wally Szcerbiak who is a 2nd rate scorer at 17.5ppg and Delonte West who averaged 11.8ppg. Pierce only averages 9ppg more than Szcerbiak, whereas LeBron James averages 16ppg more than the teams second option, Larry Hughes. Dwyane Wade averages 7ppg more than the teams second option Shaq, and finally Kobe Bryant averages 21ppg more than the teams second option, Lamar Odom.

None of those guys are way past their primes, and still are far ahead statistically than their respective teams second option. Pierce is far ahead of his teams second option (yes, Wally Szerbiak at almost 18ppg IS a second option) just like LeBron, Wade and Kobe. To say Pierce is the only option on his team isnt right. When Szcerbiak was in Minnesota did you think KG was the only option? When Ricky Davis was in Boston did you think Pierce was the only option? I just don't see where you get the idea that Pierce is way past his prime, but as you said, we'll see.

i dont see wats so funny in fiba hey shot very well

Read it again....

Dwight Howard will shit 70% from free-throw line

Can you see it now?

[NBA_Bryant24]

w/e if u wanna bet we can but thts wat i think

[Laxation]

ARE YOU FUCKING RETARDED

[Andrew]

1.Phoneix Suns 72-10 they will break the nba record and Amare Nash and Marion will kick ass

72-10 will actually equal the record, not break it. In any case, I don't see them doing either. They were picked to break the record in 2005 and the Pistons were hyped as being on the road to breaking it last year. A lot of people seem to think equalling or breaking the record of 72-10 is a simple feat.

[---]

w/e if u wanna bet we can but thts wat i think

Oh my god man... LOOK AT THE BOLD WORD.........................

You said Dwight Howard would SHIT 70% from free throw

I don't know if I can make that any more clear

ARE YOU FUCKING RETARDED

Exactly my thoughts

[Oznogrd]

way to prove me way off with stats flite but hey, i'm seeing a steep decline, iv'e been wrong many times though...maybe NBA bryant can take a lesson from you

[---]

What decline?

Paul Pierce hasn't had a season this good since 2003, so if anything it was an improvement over the last couple of years. In 2003 he averaged 25.9ppg 7.3rpg 4.4apg during the regular season, and an absurd 27.1ppg 9.0rpg 6.4apg during the playoffs - pretty damn good stats if you ask me. Look at his seasons from 2003 onwards:

2003: 25.9ppg 7.3rpg 4.4apg

2004: 23.0ppg 6.5rpg 5.1apg

2005: 21.6ppg 6.6rpg 4.2apg

2006: 26.8ppg 6.7rpg 4.7apg

I would of understood if you said he was on a steep decline if we were in 2005, but we aren't. The truth (no pun intended) is we are looking at a rejuvenated Paul Pierce, only 28 years old, that has really begun chasing that ring. Imagine if he had carried that over into the playoffs, I'm sure you wouldn't be saying he is way past his prime then because people tend to forget the superstars on teams that don't make the playoffs. Look at Elton Brand, he finally makes the playoffs this year and all of a sudden he's heralded as a superstar, yet he has actually been a very good 20/10 guy for almost all of his career.

[Dro]

1.Phoneix Suns 72-10 they will break the nba record and Amare Nash and Marion will kick ass

72-10 will actually equal the record, not break it. In any case, I don't see them doing either. They were picked to break the record in 2005 and the Pistons were hyped as being on the road to breaking it last year. A lot of people seem to think equalling or breaking the record of 72-10 is a simple feat.

Yup, not gonna happen. The Suns are going to have a slooooooow first month trying to get acclaimed to each other. They've been struggling in the preseason and it's obvious that the players are having trouble getting used to Amare, and Marcus Banks hasn't learned that he needs to pass the ball. I think 58 wins is probable, maybe 62 if they gel quicker than I think.

[Oznogrd]

1. I'm not the kind of guy that forgets superstars on teams that dont make the playoffs, i actually dont like most of the playoff teams and have to pick the team i consider to be least annoying to root for at that point. I remember Brand in his bulls days and cursing the fact they let him go because he was their star
2. Good point on the rejuvenation factor, maybe i didnt watch enough last year to have any idea what thell i'm talking about. Everything i saw pierce in it wasnt the paul pierce i was used to....maybe he's scoring more without hte highflying and i'm just noticing...he just seemed off every time i watched a game last year so i guess i caught him on all bad nights

[benji]

Eastern Conference:

1. Miami Heat (57-25)
2. Cleveland Cavaliers (54-28)
3. New Jersey Nets (48-34)
4. Detroit Pistons (53-29)

Western Conference:

1. Phoenix Suns (66-16)
2. Dallas Mavericks (60-22)
3. Denver Nuggets (49-33)
4. San Antonio Spurs (58-24)

This will screw up your entire prediction Flite but...the third seed doesn't go to the other division winner anymore, so Spurs and Pistons would be third seed in your prediction.

Detroit couldnt go anywhere in the playoffs with Ben Wallace, and have a much better starting 4 than Chicago...
Whoopdy dee, they got more defence ... they also now have PJ Brown and Ben Wallace as their low post options

Yeah, but apparently Ben Wallace is worth a ten point swing a game...

[Abctest123]

Milwaukee Bucks (7)- Charlie will come close to 20 and 10.

Having watched Charlie V for one full season, and reading up on his preseason stats, I'd say that CV is still too inconsistent to post close to 20 and 10. Maybe 15-16.5 and 7 rebounds. Until he can prove to be consistent, 20 and 10 will not happen for him YET.

[---]

This will screw up your entire prediction Flite but...the third seed doesn't go to the other division winner anymore, so Spurs and Pistons would be third seed in your prediction.

Ah well, I screwed it up later in my predictions by pitching the wron seeds against each other in the second round, so il do an updated one when I get my computer back from the shop. Could you explain how the seeding goes now? Does it go:

1. Best record division winner
2. 2nd best record division winner
3. 3rd best record (could be a division winner or a 2nd place division finisher)
4. 4th best record (could be a division winner or a 2nd place division finisher)
5. 5th best record
6. 6th best record
7. 7th best record
8. 8th best record

Also, when did these changes come into effect because even though I'm a Melo fan I'm sick of seeing the Nuggets getting a higher seed than the far more elite Mavericks. Good decision if it was changed going into this season.

[benji]

Yes, it is effective this season. The division winners can finish no lower than fourth, but the order of the top four is determined by record.

[---]

Ah, I see now. Thanks for clearing that up and good job on the NBA for fixing up the seeding.

[Jugs]

Is it just me or have the Bulls gone from one of the most under-rated teams to the most over-rated?

[---]

After thinking about it for a long time, taking more thought into my rankings and trying to place teams better, I have come up with predictions that when I look back at, I completely see why I chose certain aspects to come out how they are. I forgot how good San Antonio are, even without a C. I forgot how Chicago only added Ben Wallace (who couldn't help the Pistons past Miami) two promising rookies and some veteran presence, and I thought I overrated them. I also now think Cleveland hasn't gotten as good as everyone is predicting, despite the rising LeBron.

So, heres my predictions, I fixed the W/L records so everything evens out (as many wins as losses throughout the league), fixed the seeding, and fixed the playoff format as I had the wrong 2nd round set up the first time. Here goes:

Regular Season Prediction

Eastern Conference:

1. Miami Heat (54-28)
2. Detroit Pistons (52-30)
3. Cleveland Cavaliers (49-33)
4. New Jersey Nets (47-35)
5. Chicago Bulls (48-34)
6. Washington Wizards (44-38)
7. Indiana Pacers (43-39)
8. Boston Celtics (40-42)
---------------------------------------------------
9. Orlando Magic (39-43)
10. Milwaukee Bucks (38-44)
11. Toronto Raptors (35-47)
12. Atlanta Hawks (33-49)
13. New York Knicks (30-52)
14. Charlotte Bobcats (30-52)
15. Philadelphia 76ers (22-60)

Western Conference:

1. Phoenix Suns (62-20)
2. San Antonio Spurs (57-25)
3. Dallas Mavericks (55-27)
4. Denver Nuggets (44-38)
5. Houston Rockets (49-33)
6. Los Angeles Clippers (45-37)
7. New Orleans Hornets (44-38)
8. Seattle Supersonics (42-40)
---------------------------------------------------
9. Los Angeles Lakers (41-41)
10. Sacramento Kings (40-42)
11. Memphis Grizzlies (37-45)
12. Utah Jazz (32-50)
13. Golden State Warriors (27-55)
14. Portland Trailblazers (26-56)
15. Minnesota Timberwolves (25-57)

Playoff Prediction

Playoffs:
Eastern Conference

Round 1

(1) Miami Heat def. (8) Boston Celtics: 4-2

(5) Chicago Bulls def. (4) New Jersey Nets: 4-2

(3) Cleveland Cavaliers def. (6) Washington Wizards: 4-3

(2) Detroit Pistons def. (7) Indiana Pacers: 4-3

Round 2

(1) Miami Heat def. (5) Chicago Bulls: 4-3

(2) Detroit Pistons def. (3) Cleveland Cavaliers: 4-3

Conference Finals

(1) Miami Heat def. (2) Detroit Pistons: 4-2

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Playoffs:
Western Conference

Round 1

(1) Phoenix Suns def. (8) Seattle Supersonics: 4-3

(5) Houston Rockets def. (4) Denver Nuggets: 4-1

(3) Dallas Mavericks def. (6) Los Angeles Clippers: 4-2

(2) San Antonio Spurs def. (8) New Orleans Hornets: 4-0

Round 2

(1) Phoenix Suns def. (5) Houston Rockets: 4-3

(2) San Antonio Spurs def. (3) Dallas Mavericks: 4-3

Conference Finals

(2) San Antonio Spurs def. (1) Phoenix Suns: 4-2

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NBA Finals

(1) Miami Heat def. (2) San Antonio Spurs: 4-3

[Jugs]

To be honest, I think Wolves have more of a chance than the Sonics to make the play-offs. But I'd give that spot to the Lakers.

I agree with all the other standings.

[[Q]]

I got my article pubished in the school newspaper. Check it out here online:

http://www.newu.uci.edu/showArticle.php?id=5049

It's a preview on the upcoming NBA season. I wrote the second half on the Eastern Conference.