Saw this interesting chart They rank the 3 best players on every team according to their nERD score, which they say "measures the total contribution of a player throughout the course of a season, based on their efficiency. League average is 0. Comparable to win shares, this ranking gives an estimate of how many games above or below .500 a league-average team would win with that player as one of their starters." The Cavs (with LBJ, Kyrie and assumed Love) are #1, followed closely by the Thunder and the Clippers. After that, it's the Bulls at #4 and the Rockets at #5 (using Howard/Harden/Ariza). The Mavs, with Dirk/Ellis/Parsons are way back at #11. Basically, our best guy (Harden) has a better ranking than their best (Dirk), our #2 (Dwight) has a better ranking than their #2 (Ellis), and Ariza contributes more than Parsons. I'm not quite ready to say we've improved over last year, at least not until I see what our bench looks like, but I likewise don't think Dallas has improved at all. They've moved pieces out and brought pieces in, but the loss of defense from Marion to Parsons is going to hurt them badly. Dirk/Ellis/Parsons is a pretty horrible defensive trio to have as your Big 3.
Parsons and Ariza are essentially a wash with a slight edge to Ariza because of his D. But when you compared their contract the clear edge goes to Houston.
I think the Rockets are still easily a better team than the Mavs. Most of the Rockets players are going to improve, we would assume, since they are so young. That includes most of the starters. Harden, Beverley, and Jones should all improve. Dwight and Ariza are probably who they are at this point in their careers. Although Ariza was much better in his role with the Wizards, so maybe even he can improve some more with the same role in Houston. And then the bench players should improve. Motiejunas, Daniels, Canaan, etc. should all be improved players. The Mavs are mostly older players who are declining. That's not to say they are not still good players. I just don't see how they made great improvements. They added some players and lost some players.
The playoff loss has severely clouded some people's judgement of our team and what they are capable of. Combine that with how much people overrate just how much Lin and Asik contributed as well as overrate how hard it will be to replace that production and you have a recipe for the doom and gloom some people have. I just don't see it. My view is inline with the article. Doesn't surprise me at all that when you look at Vegas odds they lineup pretty well with this article as well. We have one of the best trios of any NBA team, especially compared to Dallas. Our complimentary pieces are largely unproven, but that doesn't mean they can't produce.
An under talked part of this whole Mavs off season is that they lost a reliable floor spacer and bomber from 3 point land in Calderon and replaced him with donut boy Felton. Monta have it all is the primary ball handler anyway and now they downgrade from Calderon to Felton / Harris to shoot 3's.
I wouldn't even account any of last year's success having to do with Assick. He pretty much gave up on the team and was rusty by the time he decided to contribute with what little he had in the playoffs. We shall see how much of a dropoff losing Parsons for Ariza is this year. My guess is we'll be fine since scoring wasn't this team's problem, It was defense. Assuming Harden still puts out the same type of poor effort on D, with the addition of an elite defender like riza should help alone. I'm wouldn't be too worried about any dropoffs in talent to be honest.
Seriously. The top teams in the Western Conference were all really really close. Blazers, Rockets, Clippers were in tier 2. Thunder and Spurs were a bit above in tier 1. So it's not surprising that the Blazers beat the Rockets. They are both very good teams. Both some of the best teams in the NBA. It just-so-happens that they played each other in the first round. The games were ultra competitive. Rockets are still right there in the mix in that tier 2 category.
I don't want to compare us to Dallas. We are supposed to be a better team. More concerned about how we compare to OKC, SA, LAC..etc. Dallas can suck it.
Well, one thing that was great about having Asik is that when Howard went to the bench, it was very comforting to know that there is still an elite C in the game with Asik. There was always a starting-caliber center on the floor at all times who were great rim protectors on defense. Having said that, the stats just don't show that Asik had a big impact on the game. The bigger loss was Lin, since he played a lot more minutes backing up both the PG and SG positions. And he could score. But even still, it's not like Lin was an amazing player who can't be replaced. But he was a solid contributor, so it's still to be seen if his production will be replaced.
