by Andrew on Sun Sep 28, 2003 3:20 pm
Teams that had terrible (or at least reasonably bad/unproductive) offseasons:
Golden State
Lost Arenas to Washington, then decided to start again. That meant dealing Jamison for NVE. While Jamison has gained a reputation for being putting up good numbers on a bad team, he was still their best player. In NVE, they have a player who doesn't want to be there and who may be gone if the Knicks make an offer the Warriors can't (or at least won't) refuse.
Utah
Lost two future Hall of Famers, failed to sign any of the high profile free agents, and their biggest offseason addition was Keon Clark. It could be worse - they still have Kirilenko, Harpring and...well, they have Kirilenko and Harpring. In the Western Conference, you can miss the playoffs even if you have a .500 record or greater. The Jazz will have a tough time coming close to making the postseason.
Indiana
Lost Brad Miller, upset their players (notably their best player) by firing Isiah Thomas. Larry Bird's tough "like it or we'll be happy to trade you" approach to issues such as these is, in my opinion, foolish - how long before he develops a Krause-like reputation and free agents are alienated?
Los Angeles Clippers
Not as bad as it could have been, but could have been better had Dre Miller and Odom not left town without some compensation. Even a couple of draft picks is better than nothing.
Atlanta
I think it's safe to say, they're re-re-rebuilding. Trading Glenn Robinson and picking up Brandon's contract will give them some cap relief, but these days cap space isn't enough to lure free agents. Apart from that, not much has been happening with the Hawks. If they're going anywhere in 2003/2004, it's down.
New York
With this offseason's changes, they won't fall to the bottom of the league, but they probably won't do any better than last year either.