View Full Version : NBA.com poll: Which Western Conference team has improved the most?

10-24-2003, 09:04 AM
Here are the results (so far) from an NBA.com poll.

Which Western Conference team has improved the most?

L.A. Lakers 43%

Minnesota 24%

Dallas 21%

San Antonio 5%

Sacramento 4%

Other 3%

Why do fans nationwide perceive that the Lakers have improved more by adding two All-Star players who are in their mid-to-late 30s than the Mavericks have by adding two All-Star players who are in their mid-20s?

I think I know.

Thoughts, comments anyone?

Total Responses: 136505

10-24-2003, 09:06 AM
I would definatley say LA, they got two future hall-of-famers. Minnesota improved a lot too though, not to mention us.

10-24-2003, 09:07 AM
definitely the lakers (for this year)

They have to be the favorite be a decent margin to win the title this year.

Psychedelic Fuzz
10-24-2003, 09:10 AM
I'd call it about even between the mavs and lakers. I'd say the lakers but shaq's money dispute and the kobe trial could end up causing issues.

10-24-2003, 09:22 AM
For the next year or two? the Lakers. For the next seven years? The Mavericks

10-24-2003, 09:52 AM
I give the slight edge to the Lakers. The talent upgrades are comparable, but they addressed their two biggest need positions while we only addressed one.

10-24-2003, 10:00 AM
I give the edge to the Mavs, although the Lakers may have the overall talent advantage.

10-24-2003, 10:11 AM
I have to go with the Lakers. They've been able to get it done with just Shaq/Kobe along with role players. They've now added two all-stars/future hall of famers to the mix to help take the load off and to give some consistency.

The Mavs are second and could be first by season's end. I think their adjustment is going to be the most difficult. And if they can't make it come together, then they have made no strides.

10-24-2003, 10:25 AM
Originally posted by: dirno2000
I give the slight edge to the Lakers. The talent upgrades are comparable, but they addressed their two biggest need positions while we only addressed one.

Bingo. Ladies and gentlemen, I think we have a winner.

Lakers definitely improved crucial needs at two positions, with players whose skills and strengths will complement O'Neal and Bryant. The Lakers should be able to build on the strengths of a team that has won 3 championships in the last 4 years.

Accepting for argument's sake that the Mavericks got comparable talent upgrades in Jamison/Walker to the Lakers' upgrades of Payton/Malone, the Mavericks are playing fruitbasket turnover with their lineup and appear to be throwing out the schemes they've used for the past 2+ years. They will not be able to draw on the continuity, familiarity, and stability of the last two years, which Nellie and Cuban used to justify standing pat last year.

I can allow that the Mavs may have to take some steps backward before they can move forward, but are they looking at a handful of rough games? A few months' worth? Seasons' worth? Are they right back where they started a couple of years ago?

Could be interesting to watch, disappointing to find out.

10-24-2003, 10:46 AM
I disagree the lakers probably could win the title if Shaq is dominate so any real impact that malone and GP has will be minor. So if the players you acquired aren't going to really put you over the top. Then they can't really be the best acquistions. I mean GP is over the hill, as well is 40 something Karl Malone. They did after all win 3 of the last 4 NBA Titles and came with in a Robert Horry three pointer in game 6 of doing it. Key Losses one of the most clutch playoff performers for LA Robert Horry. You could argue that the Lakers really needed a strong rebounder kind of like Rodman or Horace Grant not an 18 foot perimeter shooter Karl Malone.

Meanwhile the mavericks transformed nick and Raef into Antwan squared. To have the most dynamic lineup in the league. One that has three guys that can post up consistently. Even if we addressed our center need with who? Who the hell can stop Shaq and Tim Duncan no one can? So that argument that we didn't address our biggest need is flawed. We added three guys that can avg over 7 rebounds a game. We added a post player in Jamison that can give us consistent shots when the jumpshots aren't falling.

The kings well they lost so much depth for just brad miller. Keon Clark and Jimmy Jackson were all big contributors on last years team they will be missed.

The spurs didn't really get that much better but they have more dynamic small forwards with hedo and Mercer.

10-24-2003, 10:51 AM
I mean GP is over the hill
Since when has GP been over the hill?

10-24-2003, 11:02 AM

10-24-2003, 11:26 AM
I am sorry. I didn't spend 20 minutes editing. I know I don't posses the best gramar skills. Like I said I write how I talk.
And what ever no need to result to insults.