Teams without top player?

[Majingir]

Just something I randomly thought of today which I figured I'd make into a thread....

Where do people think every NBA team would be if we played a full season right now,should you take away the top player off of every teams roster(by top player,I mean that teams top player,even if you don't consider the best player from a specific team to be "top player worthy").

Meaning Lebrons gone from Cleveland,Durants gone from OKC,Carmelos gone from NY, and even smaller ones like Jefferson gone from Charlotte,Knight gone from Milwaukee and so on. Those players just don't play for the entire season(meaning it's not like they leave and go to another NBA team).

What might standings be like in the NBA? Who'd win the NBA championship? Who might win MVP award? Which team would be most/least impacted(not just from their subtraction,but other teams subtractions too) and so on?

I'd say Chicago could probably be candidate for one of the best teams out of this seeing how they've already done good without Rose(at least if you consider Rose their top player in this scenario as the guy you'd remove from their team,and not Noah).

[MattUM]

Re: Teams without top player?

I think the Spurs would have an even easier time winning the chip because of how team-based they are, relying on a system and not one player in particular. Their best players already play the lowest minutes in the league and combined with their depth, they would make teams look silly.

[vtcha]

Re: Teams without top player?

What if we take out Pop :P

But yeah Spurs/Bulls would easily be the favorites of their respective conferences.

[Majingir]

Re: Teams without top player?

I think the Spurs would have an even easier time winning the chip because of how team-based they are, relying on a system and not one player in particular. Their best players already play the lowest minutes in the league and combined with their depth, they would make teams look silly.

But even with Spurs having depth and all,what if it's a domino like effect where you remove Duncan or something,and things just fall apart. Or even more like jenga lol. Remove one piece and the depth might be enough to hold still,or it all comes falling down. Even though the depth is still there,they lose that big chemistry/leadership on the team.

I'd still think Spurs are probably best off in the west in the "remove 1 top player" scenario,but still think things could go south easier than it might seem.

And in the Bulls scenario,does Noah get removed? Cause removing Rose sounds like the "easy pick" since he might be better when healthy,but Noah for 70-80 games is obviously better than if you had Rose for like 30-40. So removing Noah would hurt way more than Rose.

[MattUM]

Re: Teams without top player?

But even with Spurs having depth and all,what if it's a domino like effect where you remove Duncan or something,and things just fall apart. Or even more like jenga lol. Remove one piece and the depth might be enough to hold still,or it all comes falling down. Even though the depth is still there,they lose that big chemistry/leadership on the team.

I'd still think Spurs are probably best off in the west in the "remove 1 top player" scenario,but still think things could go south easier than it might seem.

And in the Bulls scenario,does Noah get removed? Cause removing Rose sounds like the "easy pick" since he might be better when healthy,but Noah for 70-80 games is obviously better than if you had Rose for like 30-40. So removing Noah would hurt way more than Rose.

I don't think there would be any more domino effect for the Spurs than any other team losing their best player. Take CP3/Blake off the Clippers, KD off the Thunder, Dirk off the Mavs... who is going to beat them in the West? They still have the best coach, depth, and no-name guys who play like all stars lol.

Noah was first team All-NBA, DPOY, led the team in rebounds, assists, and blocks. You can't call DRose the best player on that team in 2014 with a straight face. Though if Rose is healthy this year and they lost Noah but had a starting front court of Pau and Taj, they'd still be a great team.

One team that would be good is the Suns. Since they added IT, losing either Bledsoe or Dragic wouldn't hurt as bad and they already got good depth.

[ojandpizza]

Re: Teams without top player?

Ohh funny you mention.. Take CP3 off the Clippers and they are still damn good, they already showed that during stretches last season.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Superman2341]

Re: Teams without top player?

Sixers would still be terrible...maybe single digit wins

[seanhazz1]

Re: Teams without top player?

Maybe -0- wins for SIXERS!

[skidsboroff]

Re: Teams without top player?

O is For Oakland

[CaseIH]

Re: Teams without top player?

Sadly were going to find out what the Pacers are like without there best player this yr, actually their 2 best players since Lance is gone to the Hornets.

Obviously the Spurs manage to win no matter who they throw in the mix, just because Pops is 1 of the greatest coaches ever and the organization as a whole is the best in the business.

Bulls have managed to make the playoffs the past 2 years without their best player, which says a lot about how great Coach Tibbs is. Thats very painfull for me to say cause I hate the Bulls with a passion, almost as much as I hate the Cubs in baseball,lol.