Tag Archive: Kobe Bryant


How Good Are The Lakers?

One of the first postings on this site was about the hoopservation that, whenever you debate which player is better between two players, you do not wind up talking about each guy’s skill or athleticism, but, instead, you wind up debating which of the two players has better teammates. Separately, there have been multiple postings about the Cavs, contending that LeBron’s teammates are better than they’re generally given credit for.

Recently, the Kobe v. LeBron conversation has started to bubble back up a little bit.  I guess it was inevitable; LeBron won his second MVP, Kobe has been showing signs of wear and tear, and the playoffs are heating up.  The consensus seems to be that there’s nothing left to discuss, LeBron is much better than Kobe.

I’m not going to argue that Kobe is better — not right now, at least — but I must say that it’s still remarkable to hear how much more credit LeBron gets for doing not-all-that-much-more than Kobe.  Listen to people talk about the two of them, and you’d think that Kobe was surrounded by guys on the Dream Team, while LeBron was surrounded by guys on an expansion team.

For example, on the Sports Reporters this morning, the guys were saying that the Cavs will not continue winning unless LeBron gets some help.  Um, Mo Williams had 20 points on 8-14 shooting yesterday.  That’s not helpful?  The Cavs held the Celtics to 44% shooting.  Unless LeBron was guarding all five dudes on the floor, that means that someone was playing some defense.

But this isn’t about the Cavs.  The point, for now, is that Kobe is not surrounded by a Dream Team.  Unless he goes Ko-ballistic, these guys ain’t beating nobody who’s left in the playoffs.

Let’s break it down for a minute:

Gasol is excellent.  Teams can win titles with him as the second-best player on the roster.  But don’t let the beard and the long hair confuse you — this isn’t Bill Walton we’re talking about.  When Gasol was the best player on the Grizzlies, the Grizzlies were, well, the Grizzlies.  They weren’t a contender to win much of anything.

Bynum is dangerous when healthy, but he isn’t always healthy.  And he isn’t healthy now.  Today, he was only good for 8 points and 0 – yes, 0 – blocks against an undersized Jazz team.  Don’t let the limp confuse you – this isn’t Willis Reed we’re talking about. (Have I used that joke already?)

Artest is solid, and relatively consistent, but he’s lost a step since his days as a dominant defender, and he was never a consistent offensive threat.  He’s good enough to start on a championship team if he has the right pieces around him, but I wouldn’t say that he consistently gives his team a dominant advantage over the guy he’s matched up with.

Then there’s Derek Fisher.  Years ago, he was a quality starter.  Now he’s a liability.  I don’t think it’s a stretch to say that he’s the worst starter playing on any of the remaining playoff teams.

Which brings us to the Lakers’ bench.  Odom is very talented, but, realistically, is not significantly better than Jamal Crawford, Anderson Varejao, Tony Parker, or a few of the other bench players whose teams are still playing.  Shannon Brown, Jordan Farmar, and Luke Walton have their moments, but, if those are the guys that supposedly make Kobe’s supporting cast significantly better than LeBron’s, well, I ain’t buyin’ it.

To be sure, if everyone on the Lakers is healthy, they are an excellent, well-balanced team.  But they are old, and, now that Bynum is hurt, their top guys are not even all healthy.  It’s still an excellent team, but a guy who calls himself the “Chosen One,” and who has a couple of All-Stars of his own for teammates should be able to take this squad down… if he deserves all of the hype, that is.

The Mavs Need to Get Better at 3-on-3

Watching the Mavericks gets confusing.  Sometimes, when I watch them, they look like the greatest team in the history of great teams.  They roll out a starting lineup of 4 guys who are regularly in the All-Star game (Dirk, Kidd, Butler, and Marion).  They have Jason Terry, who consistently competes for the Sixth Man of the Year Award.  And more.  They have this little sparkplug dude who sometimes checks in and just sets the arena on fire (Barea).  They have some rookie from France who is capable of dropping 40 on a given night (Beaubois).   I haven’t even mentioned Brendan Haywood, DeShawn Stevenson, and Eduardo Najera, each of whom has played significant minutes for competitive teams in the NBA.  When I watch the Mavs and they are clicking, I feel kind of like I’m watching the Globetrotters: part of me is amazed at what they can do, and part of me remembers that they are not as good as they seem.

Given how good they can be, their inability to win begs the question: Why aren’t they better in the playoffs?  The easy answer is to say that they are “inconsistent,” or that they aren’t built for the playoffs, but neither of those is really an answer — those are just things people say about any team that underachieves.  Here at Hoopservations.com, we dig deeper.

I think the reason the Mavs aren’t better in the playoffs is that having the best 6th, 7th, 8th, or 9th man (or even all of the above) is not the way to win in the playoffs.  The teams that win in the playoffs have guys who marry girls who look like Eva Longoria  are the teams with the best “top 3.”  Check it out:

Bryant / Gasol / Bynum are better than Durant / Westbrook / Green.  The Lakers are up.

Nash / Amar’e / Richardson are better than Roy (especially when he’s injured) / Aldridge / Miller.  The Suns are up.

LeBron / Jamison / Williams are better than Rose / Deng / Noah.  The Cavs won.

Rondo / Allen / Pierce are better than Wade and whoever the other two best guys on the Heat are.  The Celts won.

Howard / Carter / Lewis are better than Wallace / Jackson / Felton.  The Magic won.

The only clear exception is the Hawks / Bucks series, because Johnson / Horford / Smith are better than the Bucks’ best 3 guys.  But the reason the Bucks are beating the Hawks is… um… actually, I have no friggin’ idea how the Bucks are beating the Hawks.  Whatever the reason, I don’t think it disproves the hoopservation that depth doesn’t matter all that much once the playoffs roll around.  A team is only going as far as its top 3 guys can take it.

Thumbs Up To The Knicks For Getting T-Mac

Much has been said about the Knicks trading for T-Mac. If you’re interested in reading about it, and haven’t had the chance to, you can check out some other people’s opinions here, and here.

I don’t have anything particularly interesting to say about the salary-cap ramifications of the deal that hasn’t already been said: the Knicks cleared a bunch of cap space, which will prove to be a good thing if they sign 2 superstars, and will prove to be a complete waste if they don’t. I’ve already blogged that it’s very difficult to build a championship team via free agency, and I won’t repeat myself (if the number of comments are any indication, nobody thought it was particularly worthwhile the first time). It’s a risky move to give away draft picks in exchange for freeing up cap space, but if any team can build via free agency, the New York Knicks with a whole bunch o’ cap space is as likely a team as any other to get it done.

When talking about the McGrady trade, I’m more interested in exploring the possibility that he – T-Mac – actually winds up helping the Knicks for reasons that have nothing to do with the salary cap. To be clear, I haven’t even seen McGrady move in months. For all I know, he limps around, or grimaces when he walks. Obviously, if that’s the case, he ain’t helping the Knicks on the court. I have to assume, though, that for the Knicks to give up draft picks in the trade, they had to at least see that he moves fluidly and without pain on the court. If that’s the case, then I think an under-reported aspect of this trade is that McGrady himself could be a valuable piece to a solid Knicks team in the near future.

That’s because basketball, much more so than football or baseball, is a game dominated by stars. Role players are important, if the team already has stars in place. But role players alone won’t make a bad team good.

Whatever else may be true about McGrady, he has been a star before; he’s one of the few guys in the league who has ever been the best player on a playoff team. In fact, I don’t think there are more than 30 guys in the league who can make that claim. By my quick count, the list begins with the 16 guys who were the best player on a playoff team last year:
1. LeBron
2. Pierce
3. Joe Johnson
4. Dwight Howard
5. Wade
6. Andre Iguadala
7. Derrick Rose
8. Richard Hamilton
9. Kobe
10. Carmelo
11. Duncan
12. Brandon Roy
13. Yao
14. Dirk
15. Chris Paul
16. Deron Williams

It also includes the following guys:
1. Iverson
2. Nash
3. Shaq
4. Kidd
5. Chauncey Billups
6. T-Mac
7. Ray Allen
8. KG
9. Baron Davis (remember when the Warriors were a threat?)
10. Arenas
11. Vince Carter
12. Grant Hill

There are probably 2 or 3 guys that I’m forgetting, so let’s say there are about 30 guys in the league who were, at some point, the best player on a playoff team. One team in the league has three of them (Celtics), and 6 teams have 2 of them (Cavs, Magic, Mavs, Sixers, Nuggets, and Suns). Following me? That covers 15 of the 30 guys.

That leaves 23 other teams in the league and 15 other guys who have ever been the best player on a playoff team (and one of those 15 guys is Gilbert Arenas, who, um, has some issues).

Well, the Knicks just got one of those guys. I’m not saying he can lead them back to the playoffs — as I said, I don’t even know if he’s walking without a limp. I’m saying that he has breathed rarified air, and he’s only 30 years old. If he’s able to be 75% of what he once was, he’s probably good enough to be the second or third best player on a solid team.

Thumbs up, Knicks.

Weeks ago, I hoopserved that LeBron’s supporting cast is quite good, and, not long before that, hoopserved that LeBron, for whatever reason, is often not judged by the same standards that people use to judge other superstars.

Well, now LeBron’s supporting cast also includes Antawn Jamison, and I hope that anyone who had doubts about LeBron’s supporting cast before is now ready to acknowledge that his supporting cast is more than adequate enough for a superstar to win a championship with.

Check some numbers:
Here is a list of last year’s top-40 PPG leaders. The list includes 3 guys (Jamison, Shaq, and Mo Williams) ASIDE FROM LEBRON who are currently on the Cavs. It doesn’t include 3 guys aside from Kobe who are currently on the Lakers. Or 3 guys aside from D-Wade who are currently on the Heat. Or 3 guys aside from Carmelo who are currently on the Nuggets. So we know that LeBron’s supporting cast is right up there with anyone else’s when it comes to scoring.

Of course, the game involves more than scoring. True. So, check out a list of last year’s top-40 RPG leaders. It, like the scoring list, includes 3 guys currently on the Cavs who are not named LeBron (Jamison, Varejeo, and Shaq).

It’s also worth noting that, when the teams in the league are ranked by opponent’s points per game, the Cavs are second in the league. LeBron certainly ain’t guarding all 5 guys on the opposing team every night, so his teammates have to get some credit for playing good D, too.

Sounds like a pretty good squad to me. A once-in-a-generation player would certainly be able to win a championship with that squad.

Why I Don’t Like Fantasy Hoops

So, this week is the week of the semi-finals in both of my fantasy football leagues. No, my team did not make the semis in either league. Thanks for asking, though. I really appreciate it.

The point of this football reference is simply to say that I’m going to miss fantasy sports until September. I often think about scratching my itch for fantasy sports by joining a fantasy basketball league. But, I did that once, and didn’t like it.

The problem with fantasy hoops is that, due to the nature of the game, mediocre guys on sh**y teams put up great numbers. On paper, mediocre guys look a lot like stars, simply because by being on the court for extended minutes on a lousy team, they compile a bunch of stats. It’s because in basketball, losing teams generally put up 85 points, knock down a few 3‘s, and pull down about 35 rebounds. That means that a few of the scrubs that those teams dressed up in a uniform that night compiled some stats. In other words, players who don’t do anything that actually makes their team competitive wind up making their fantasy owners quite happy.

Other sports are different. In baseball, guys who just show up at the park and get some playing time don’t help their fantasy owners. But, a guy who goes 2-4 with a HR makes his real team – not just his fantasy team – more likely to win the game. In football, guys who just go through the motions don’t help their fantasy owners. But, a guy who runs for 80 yards and scores a TD makes his real team – not just his fantasy team – more likely to win the game.

An illustration of how basketball is different is the game Larry Hughes had on November 6th against Cleveland. As I already blogged about, the Knicks were never in the game. But, Hughes had a few rebounds fall into his lap, picked off a few errant passes when the Cavs were playing sloppy, and knocked down a 3 when the Cavs were too busy looking at all the celebrities in the stands. The Knicks were not competitive from the beginning of the game until the last 3 minutes, but guy I was sitting next to had Hughes on his fantasy team, and was loving what he was seeing. When the final buzzer sounded, Hughes had put up 18 points, hit a 3, pulled down 5 boards, had 4 assists, and 4 steals. On paper, those are good numbers. That’s not because Larry Hughes is good, though. It’s because he got lots of minutes on a bad team.

The other reason I don’t like fantasy hoops is that the thing which distinguishes basketball players from each other is not measured by stats. It’s an attitude. It’s the ability to come through in the fourth quarter. Other sports are generally different. Sure, football and baseball have “clutch” players, and also guys who tend to disappear in the clutch. But, if you’re comparing Larry Fitzgerald to Andre Johnson, you aren’t saying “Larry has ice running through his veins in the last two minutes of a tie game.” Yet, if you’re trying to explain what makes Kobe / Wade / LeBron extraordinary, it’s their ability to put their teams on their shoulders for the last 5 minutes of a tie game, and bring it home.

The only other comparison that comes even close is a football quarterback. Tom Brady ain’t Tom Brady because of stats. (Trust me, I had him on my fantasy team this year.) He’s Tom Brady because you want to be on his team in the fourth quarter of a close game.

This post is already quite long. Usually when I talk for this long, people have either fallen asleep or walked out of the room. So I’ll wrap up. I don’t like fantasy hoops, because too many mediocre players look like stars in fantasy hoops.

There’s No Such Thing As A “Tweener”

One of the most commonly made mistakes in pro basketball is that a guy gets underrated because he is a “tweener.” Lemme tell ya’, it should never happen.

According to Wikipedia: A tweener in basketball is a term, sometimes used derisively, for a player who is able to play two positions, but is not ideally suited to play either position exclusively, so he/she is said to be in between. A tweener has a set of skills that do not match the traditional position of his physical stature.

When teams decide to stay away from a guy because he’s a “tweener,” they could be making a huge mistake. A large part of the problem, as I blogged weeks ago, is that there is really not much of a difference between shooting guards and small forwards. (I’d go further and argue that the line between a 3 and a 4 or a 4 and a 5 is really not that clear anymore, either. A point guard is a point guard, but, as to the other positions, it’s not clear where one ends and one begins.)

Consider Antawn Jamison. He was an absolute star in college, but, because he was perceived as a tweener, was drafted after Michael Olawakandi and Raef LaFrentz. How’d that work out?

On a related point, if the word “tweener” means anything, isn’t Michael Jordan a tweener? I mean, I don’t see why you couldn’t play him at 3 if you had a star 2, or couldn’t play him at 2 if you had a star 3. But look at the trouble the Blazers got themselves into by thinking too rigidly about the five positions on a basketball team.

Bobby Knight has a classic quote about his advice to NBA GMs about Michael Jordan (full article here):
One day during at an Olympic practice before the June NBA draft, Knight remembered standing next to an NBA team executive, whom he refuses to identify.
“I was standing next to my friend as we watched us practice and I said, ‘You’re luckier than anybody could be in basketball, you have a chance to get Jordan,’ ” Knight said. “He said, ‘Yeah, Bob, he’s great, but we need a big man.’ And I told him, ‘Play Jordan at center and he’ll lead the league in scoring. He’s that good.’ ”

Speaking of classic basketball quotes, I must digress for a minute… Ron Artest has what might be the best quote of all time, when referring to a skirmish he had with Kobe Bryant. He says that he went over to Kobe and said “You’re hitting the wrong person. Don’t you know you’re hitting Ron Artest?” Video here (around 0:35).

When I want to make myself laugh, I envision a fight between Kobe Bryant and me. When Kobe makes an aggressive move towards me, I say to him “You’re hitting the wrong person. Don’t you know who you’re hitting?” The look of confusion on his face is hard to describe. His brow gets furrowed, and his eyes go crossed. In fact, his eyes get so crossed that his eyeballs actually switch eyes.

Anyway, back to the point I was making…

Nobody fails to succeed in the NBA simply because he’s a “tweener.” Lots of “tweeners” excel in the NBA (MJ, Vince, T-Mac, Dirk, Barkley, Antawn Jamison, Lamar Odom, etc., etc., etc.) For those guys, position doesn’t matter. The coach wants to put them on the floor, and let the other team worry about how to match up with him.

Bottom line: when a guy is good, his ability to play multiple positions leads to people calling him “versatile.” They only call someone a “tweener” if the guy isn’t good enough to play.

Week In Review

I just spent a few hours surfing the ‘net, and I think it’s safe to say that this is the only website on the entire internet that hasn’t mentioned Tiger Woods in the last few weeks. Welcome to the oasis.

Not too much time to put together a “week in review” today, so I’ll stick to the big picture. In the NCAA, Kentucky probably got the biggest win of the week, over North Carolina on Saturday. And it’s nice to see UNLV in the top 25, for no other reason other than that I love to be reminded that THERE IS A UNIVERSITY IN WALKING DISTANCE FROM THE LAS VEGAS STRIP. It always throws me for a loop.

In the NBA, big stories include Greg Oden going down for the season, Iverson returning to the Sixers, the Knicks winning three straight games — yes, the Knicks — and the Lakers continuing their dominance. Other stories to keep an eye on are the return of Chris Paul, and the continuing inability of the Spurs to put together a winning streak. Here are Power Rankings from Sportsline.

Some highlights from the week:
Kobe hits a buzzer beater.
Kidd throws an alley-oop.
Crazy LeBron block.
Another great block.
Marcus Camby (?!) – great pass.

By the way, I’d love to post highlights from college games, but those don’t seem to be as easy to come by on YouTube. If anyone has any pointers, please share ‘em.

More on Comparing Players

As I said in my previous posting, I think that, when we compare two players to each other, we often use criteria that are too limited.

Before really getting into the discussion about how to compare players, I think it makes sense to frame the discussion.

As I see it, there are 4 tiers of players in the NBA. For lack of better descriptions, I call them:
1. The Superstars
2. The Stars
3. The Guys Who Are Above Average , and
4. The Average / Below Average Guys.

These labels, I acknowledge, are not particularly creative. But I think they do the trick.

As for the Superstars,by definition, there can only a handful in the league at a time. 10 or fewer. In today’s game, the group is Kobe, LeBron, Wade, Carmelo, and possibly Dwight Howard, Dirk, and CP3 (as of two years ago, Tim Duncan was unquestionably among the superstars).

The Stars is a larger group than the Superstars, but still very small. At any moment, it includes 10-15 guys. In today’s game, it includes, among others, KG, Pierce, Joe Johnson, Brandon Roy, Chauncey, Duncan, Parker, and Nash.

The Guys Who Are Above Average is a much larger group. It includes guys who would make an average team better by about 5-10 wins per year. This group includes some guys who are solid all-around players, but not spectacular (See: Shane Battier and, come to think of it, just about all of his teammates on the Rockets), and it includes some role players who are so good at what they do that they bring their team a few extra wins per year (See: The Birdman and Joakim Noah).

It’s very important to identify guys in this group correctly. If a team mistakes one of them for a star, it could sign one of them to be a team leader, and then wind up with a mediocre team. (See: Toronto Raptors / Hedo Turkoglu; Detroit Pistons / Ben Gordon; Golden State Warriors / Corey Maggette). But, if you wind up with one of these guys as your third or fourth best player, you could be an excellent team. (See: Los Angeles Lakers / Lamar Odom; Orlando Magic / Rashard Lewis).

Then there are the average / below average guys. These guys constitute about 50-60 percent of the guys in the league. They run the gamut from, on one hand, guys who have trouble hanging onto a roster spot, to, on the other hand, guys who can play 12-24 minutes per game for a quality team. (See: The New York Knicks, aside from David Lee, who cover the spectrum from guys who barely belong in the league to guys who shouldn’t be playing more than 24 minutes on any team that is really trying to be good.)

The next posting, coming shortly, will discuss measurements to use to determine which category a player belongs in.

Comparing Players

Have you noticed that whenever hoops fans compare two superstar players to each other, they wind up talking about the players’ teammates and championship rings without talking about the actual players? I’ve had the conversation so frequently that I can almost predict the back-and-forth.

For example, consider the debate about who is better between Kobe and LeBron. That debate has become so predictable that I can have it with myself:

Self: LeBron is better. He’s bigger, faster, and stronger. He’s a better rebounder and a better passer.
Self: No, Kobe is better. He’s a more versatile scorer, he’s clutch, and he has four rings.
Self: He only has four rings because he played with Shaq for three of those seasons, and had a stacked team for the fourth.
Self: Actually, he proved himself to be incredibly clutch even when he had Shaq. And last year he was the clear team leader. It’s true that his teammates are good, but LeBron’s aren’t bad, either. Mo Williams was an All-Star last year, and the Cavs were the best defensive team in the league.
Self: Are you being serious? You think the Cavs’ supporting cast is better than the Lakers’?

At this point, I’m 90 seconds into a conversation with myself about Kobe and LeBron, and I’m not even talking about Kobe or LeBron.

This is a problem for a few reasons. One of those reasons is that I shouldn’t talk to myself for 90 seconds. Or any seconds, actually. But I’ll look beyond that for now, and focus on the basketball-related component of the problem…

The conventional way of measuring the merits of one player versus another is too limited. Over the next few days / weeks, I’ll be sharing some thoughts about a better way to measure excellence.

Season Predictions – Part 1 of 4

This is the first in a four-part series of posts predicting playoff seedings for the upcoming year.  Of course, predictions usually get made before the season starts, and these predictions are being posted after all teams have already played a few games.  Why?  Because I don’t watch preseason games. It doesn’t tell me enough about the teams playing to be worth my time. (If someone wants to pay me to write this blog, I’ll be happy to watch preseason games.  Until then, I ain’t watchin’ no preseason game.)  I’m not saying that the first 3 or 4 games tell me much of anything about a team, but it can’t hurt to get at least some data about how a team is actually playing.

I begin my analysis by looking at individual players; specifically, stars.  For a team to make the playoffs, it obviously must have balance, depth, and role players.  No question.  But, in general, it also must have at least 1 star.

I don’t see more than 1 or 2 NBA teams making the playoffs that do not have an All-Star on their roster.  I understand that Utah, Chicago, and Philadelphia made the playoffs last year even though they had no All-Stars, but, as a general rule, I think teams need to have All-Stars to make the playoffs.   So, when attempting to pick the playoff teams, I think it makes sense to start by trying to pick the All-Stars.

A useful starting point is last year’s All-Star rosters:

EAST

Allen Iverson (Detroit)

Dwyane Wade (Miami)

LeBron James (Cleveland)

Kevin Garnett (Boston)

Dwight Howard (Orlando)

Joe Johnson (Atlanta)

Jameer Nelson (Orlando – injured)

Ray Allen (Boston)

Danny Granger (Indiana)

Paul Pierce (Boston)

Chris Bosh (Toronto)

Mo Williams (Cleveland)

Scot Pollard (Boston)

Just kidding.  Scot Pollard was not an All-Star.  I was just looking for an excuse to link to some pictures of Scot Pollard.  Like this one:
Scott Pollard

And this one:

And, oh, most certainly, this one:

Devin Harris (New Jersey)

WEST

Kobe Bryant (LA Lakers)

Chris Paul (New Orleans)

Tim Duncan (San Antonio)

Amare Stoudemire (Phoenix)

Yao Ming (Houston)

Dirk Nowitzki (Dallas)

Shaquille O’Neal (Phoenix)

Brandon Roy (Portland)

Chauncey Billups (Denver)

Pau Gasol (LA Lakers)

David West (New Orleans)

Tony Parker (San Antonio)

I expect this year’s All-Star rosters to be very much the same as last year’s, with a few changes.  I see Derrick Rose making the All-Star team in the East, and probably Gilbert Arenas and Elton Brand, as well, assuming they are healthy.  If that’s right, the roster will be:

Derrick Rose (Chicago)

Dwyane Wade (Miami)

LeBron James (Cleveland)

Kevin Garnett (Boston)

Dwight Howard (Orlando)

Joe Johnson (Atlanta)

Gilbert Arenas (Washington)

Ray Allen (Boston)

Danny Granger (Indiana)

Paul Pierce (Boston)

Chris Bosh (Toronto)

Elton Brand (Philadelphia)

Next 3:  Devin Harris, Michael Redd, Hedo Turkoglu

Sleepers:  Raymond Felton, Jermaine O’Neal

The Western Conference All-Star team will also be very much the same as last year’s, with a few changes.  Shaq has moved to the East, and Yao is out.  I expect Carmelo Anthony to make the All-Star team, and expect Kevin to make a run at it (Blake Griffin, too, if he returns soon).  I also expect Derron Williams to make the team, and, if Tracy McGrady is healthy, he needs to be considered as well.  I will believe that McGrady is back to 100% when I see it, so I’m predicting this All-Star roster:

Kobe Bryant (LA Lakers)

Chris Paul (New Orleans)

Tim Duncan (San Antonio)

Amare Stoudemire (Phoenix)

Dirk Nowitzki (Dallas)

LaMarcus Aldridge (Portland)

Kevin Durant (OK City)

Brandon Roy (Portland)

Carmelo Anthony (Denver)

Pau Gasol (LA Lakers)

David West (New Orleans)

Derron Williams (Utah)

Next 3:  Tony Parker, Al Jefferson, Chauncey Billups

Sleepers: Jeff Green, Jason Kidd, Marcus Camby

Part 2 of my 4 part series predicting the playoff teams will be posted tomorrow.