Professional and College Basketball Forums banner

1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,160 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I was thinking last night about our chances of building a dynasty and thinking about just how many players around the league under the age of 25 (at the end of this year) have a chance of being one of the top five players in the league in their prime. Here is my list.

Knicks -
Nets - Jefferson
Celtics - (Pierce will be 25)
Wizards - Brown, Jeffries
Sixers -
Magic - McGrady
Heat - Butler

Bulls - JWill, Curry, Chandler
Pacers - O'Neal, Bender
Cavs - Diop, Wagner, Miles
Raptors - (Carter will be 25)
Bucks -
Hawks - (Abdur-Rahim will be 25)
Pistons - White
Hornets - Davis

Wolves - (Garnett will be 26)
Mavs - Nowitski
Rockets - Francis, Ming, Griffin
Grizzlies - Gasol, Gooden
Nuggets - Skita, Nene
Jazz - Kirilenko
Spurs - Parker (Duncan will be 26)

Lakers - Bryant
Sonics - Lewis
Clippers - Brand, Wilcox (Miller will be 26)
Blazers - Woods (probably shouldn't include him)
Kings - Bibby
Suns - Marion, Stoudemire (Marbury will be 25)
Warriors - Dunleavy, Richardson

There are 35 guys on this list, many with a much better chance than our three of making the top five (McGrady, Bryant) and many with a lower chance.

Suppose that our guys as good of a chance as the rest of the field of being the best player in their prime (probably a generous assumption), this would still give us only a 3 out of 35 or 9% chance of having the best player in the league.

Suppose that our guys have twice as good of a chance as the rest of the field of being in the top five in their prime (another generous assumption), then each of our 3 players would have a 5 out of 35 or 14% chance of being in the top five players in this fairly narrow age range. The chances of us having two such players is only about 6%, even under these fairly generous assumptions.

Since we probably need to have the top player or two of the top five in this fairly narrow age range in order to have a dynasty, even under fairly generous assumptions, we probably have at best a 15% shot at a dynasty, about a one in seven chance.

And again I think these are likely to be very generous assumptions, since there probably is a 50 percent chance that Bryant or McGrady will be the best player among this group and almost surely will be 2 of the best 5.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,837 Posts
Like I said in a ignored thread---the Clips have built with the same formula, only slightly less athletic, so their progress will be a good indicator of how far we can go.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,160 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Actually, I would argue that the Clippers are using a very different formula than we are. They really have no one who has a good shot being the best player in the league and probably not much of a chance of having anyone crack the top 5.

It appears that they are working on the Dallas/Sacramento/Portland model of putting together a group of stars. That is a terribly expensive proposition, which makes the strategy very curious for Sterling. He now has three players asking for MAX extensions next summer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,733 Posts
Brilliant work.

I'll have to add in comments later, but at a glance, I agree that we may be wearing our Bulls red colored glasses too often.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,837 Posts
Originally posted by NCBullsFan
Actually, I would argue that the Clippers are using a very different formula than we are. They really have no one who has a good shot being the best player in the league and probably not much of a chance of having anyone crack the top 5.
And we have what unstoppable offensive dynamo?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,909 Posts
Actually, wouldn't our chances be amplified since we have multiple players who can become a superstar?

I'd say those who are flying solo on their team, although they could be a top 5, are much less likely to be part of a dynasty then our group, or Cleveland or the Clippers.

I'm a firm believer that you need at least two top tier players, if not 3 to win and win consistently in this league.
 

·
I never slice.
Joined
·
2,282 Posts
NC,

I admire the originality of your post and the thought that obviously went into it.

However, I believe 25 is too young a cutoff age. Consider that if you had conducted the same analysis in the summer of 1989, the summer after the Bulls had just won 47 games, there would have been just one player on your list for the Bulls (Scottie Pippen). MJ was 26 at the time, yet I would say he still managed to contributed a bit to 6 championships.

Another way of looking at it is to consider the recent Clips/Cavs trade. By most accounts, the Clips got the better end of the deal. Yet, in your analysis, their chances of becoming a dynasty went down because they traded an eligible player for an ineligible one.

Guys like you mentioned like Duncan, Garnett, Carter, A. Miller, Pierce, etc. still have plenty of years ahead of them where they should be factored into the equation, IMO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,160 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
Thanks to all for you comments and kind words. I'll try to respond to some of your questions.

Johnston97,

My wife complains that my glasses are always filthy. I now will just tell her that they are Bulls-colored. :D

GB,

Once Bags gets that shoulder block move down, he and Norm are sure to become an unstoppable force.

Seriously, I was not arguing that we are better than the Clippers. We are far from it, with no sure-fire offensive options, except for Jalen Rose, and an even more problematic situation on defense. But we probably have a better shot (albeit a very slight one) at someday having the best player in the league than do those Clippers. But we also have a much, much better chance of having no player on our current roster ever make an All-Star team.

In my reply to Kneepad below, I will talk more about the Clippers.

Retro,

I figured the odds assuming we had three players with a chance of being the best or among the best players. So I think I have already accounted for those amplified chances. Also, teams will pair players who are slightly older (see Kneepad) or slightly younger than the players in this age range when putting together their teams.

Another thing that suggests I overestimated our odds is that I assumed we would be a dynasty if we had (a) the best player in this age range (b) two of the five best players in this age range. It is very possible that there could be two teams that meet these criteria, so there is no guarantee that we are a dynasty even in the 15% of the time we meet this criteria.

I guess you could be arguing that we could have 3 in the top 10 and that could be our ticket to a dynasty. I think it is possible to win a championship that way, but people will need to educate me on teams that have built a dynasty that way. I am not sure it has been done - 3 players in the top 10, but at most one player in the top 5 (but not the best player). I guess Detroit might be a possibility.

Kneepad,

Of course, players who are 25 and older will still be a factor when Curry, Chandler, and JWill hit their prime. So if I was trying to figure out what teams will be good 7-15 years from now, I should have included players up to probably 28 or 29. But the main purpose of my list was to figure out players in a fairly narrow age range who will complete with Curry, Chandler, and JWill for being the best players during that period. This was a way to think about just how prospects there are around the league that people have high hopes for.

I wasn't really trying to calculate every team's chances of becoming a dynasty. Otherwise, you are right, I should have included players like A Miller.

However, what the Clippers are doing almost certainly will produce a very good team (provided they sign their players), but it certainly is a noncoventional way to build a championship squad (not necessarily a criticism). I think they are very unlikely to have a player who ever makes the All-NBA team 1st team and probably even the 2nd team.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,709 Posts
I think you are exactly right...

Originally posted by NCBullsFan
Actually, I would argue that the Clippers are using a very different formula than we are. They really have no one who has a good shot being the best player in the league and probably not much of a chance of having anyone crack the top 5.

It appears that they are working on the Dallas/Sacramento/Portland model of putting together a group of stars. That is a terribly expensive proposition, which makes the strategy very curious for Sterling. He now has three players asking for MAX extensions next summer.
......and the clippers scheme of gathering all this talent WILL backfire in their faces as it has in Portland and will soon in Dallas. Sacramento, i think, was not originally aware of just how good those two europians were gonna actually be. They will know how good they are when the demands for MAX start coming in for Pedja first.

I still think, Crawford, IF, he follows the Jordan "scheme" of things, could be a force in two or three years...you know when HE is 25!!! LOL He might look skinny now, but I would ask you to look up early photos of MJ when he left NC. He was skinny too. THEN look at pictures of him in 1998. WHAT a difference! I truly believe THAT is why Jordan wanted him so badly....he saw some of himself in JC. The mental game JC will have to get for himself tho, as MJ is not around to help him with it.:grinning:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,076 Posts
Re: I think you are exactly right...

Originally posted by BamaBull


......and the clippers scheme of gathering all this talent WILL backfire in their faces as it has in Portland and will soon in Dallas. Sacramento, i think, was not originally aware of just how good those two europians were gonna actually be. They will know how good they are when the demands for MAX start coming in for Pedja first.

I still think, Crawford, IF, he follows the Jordan "scheme" of things, could be a force in two or three years...you know when HE is 25!!! LOL He might look skinny now, but I would ask you to look up early photos of MJ when he left NC. He was skinny too. THEN look at pictures of him in 1998. WHAT a difference! I truly believe THAT is why Jordan wanted him so badly....he saw some of himself in JC. The mental game JC will have to get for himself tho, as MJ is not around to help him with it.:grinning:
Bama, you're my guy but....

Can we officially put an end to any comparision between Michael Jordan and Jamal Crawford? I see very little similarity in their games early on in their careers. Period. Jordan likes Crawford, but that comparison needs to stop. A better one (if you really want to play this game) is D-Miles and MJ, another guy MJ strongly endorsed.

For the record, the Clippers are farther along in their rebuilding. Of course D.Sterling is going to mess things up but... for now the players he has assembled is quite impressive. They don't compare w/ a Dallas or Portland team b/c they are all YOUNG talent, with most of the core still playing on rookie contracts. If Sterling can shell out some money (and this is a huge IF), this team will be great in a couple seasons.

By the way, Sterling's last two trades have netted:
Elton Brand and Andre Miller

for

#2 (Tyson Chandler) and D-Miles

Not too shabby if you ask me.


VD
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,919 Posts
I don't agree with some of the people in the initial post listed as having a chance to be a top 5 player (R.Jefferson, Jeffries, White, Wilcox, Kirilenko) but beyond that, it's not about what team has the most good players, it is about what team's players fit together and complement each other the best. Look at the Kings, with nobody in the top 5, and the Championship Detroit teams of the 80's (Thomas was the only one in the top 5, and he wasn't even recognized as being a top 5 player till he led his team to a title. That is where the Bulls may have an advantage over some of these other talented teams. Teams like the Blazers, Mavs, and Clippers have got lots of good players but no clear no.1 option offensively and little or no team identity and sense of direction. The Bulls have a clear no.1 option (Rose) who is an excellent 4th Qtr. performer, a clear no.2 option (Williams) who can also hit big shots and is a great athlete for his position, along with three other guys who are considered to have superstar potential (Crawford, Curry and Chandler). The only other team who I think has a similar sense of identity is Cleveland (if Wagner proves to be the leader/go-to guy that i think he will), but even they have considerably less talent than the Bulls. The other thing that sets the Bulls apart is their frontcourt. Size really matters in this league, and the only other frontcourt in the league not containing Shaq that will be able to match Bulls' Curry/Chandler/Fizer in terms of talent and athleticism is the Clips tandem of Kandi/Brand/Wilcox, and even that frontline isn't quite as big.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
38 Posts
You're not calculating in players who will enter the NBA in the next few years, like LeBron James.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,802 Posts
I'm with you on Crawford Bama. Although his game may not be similar to Jordan's, his physique is dead on exactly like MJ's was as a rookie. Thats not to say that he will turn into MJ by any means, but the similarities in their bodies are downright eerie. I'm wondering why Crawford and Hassell aren't included on this list of possible top talent. IMO, they have as good of odds as anyone else on the list.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,160 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Originally posted by ace20004u
I'm with you on Crawford Bama. Although his game may not be similar to Jordan's, his physique is dead on exactly like MJ's was as a rookie. Thats not to say that he will turn into MJ by any means, but the similarities in their bodies are downright eerie. I'm wondering why Crawford and Hassell aren't included on this list of possible top talent. IMO, they have as good of odds as anyone else on the list.
In my office, I have a life-size poster of MJ wearing his first pair of Air Jordan's - the ones he wore his rookie year. While no one will confuse the young MJ with Marcus Fizer, he is pretty big, much bigger than Crawford.

Ace, the list is for players who have a shot at being one of the top 5 players in the NBA in their prime. The list is long on rookies, because we have no idea what they will turn into - not because they are necessarily going to be better than Hassell and Crawford. Many of them won't be.

Hassell and Crawford have been around awhile, and while we don't know exactly how good they will become, I would put $10,000 down on Enron becoming a $100 stock someday before I would put $10,000 down on Crawford or Hassell becoming one of the top 5 NBA players. (Frankly, I would hold on to my $10,000 rather than making either of those bets. :D )
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,709 Posts
jUST MY 2CENTS WORTH...

Originally posted by NCBullsFan

In my office, I have a life-size poster of MJ wearing his first pair of Air Jordan's - the ones he wore his rookie year. While no one will confuse the young MJ with Marcus Fizer, he is pretty big, much bigger than Crawford.

Ace, the list is for players who have a shot at being one of the top 5 players in the NBA in their prime. The list is long on rookies, because we have no idea what they will turn into - not because they are necessarily going to be better than Hassell and Crawford. Many of them won't be.

Hassell and Crawford have been around awhile, and while we don't know exactly how good they will become, I would put $10,000 down on Enron becoming a $100 stock someday before I would put $10,000 down on Crawford or Hassell becoming one of the top 5 NBA players. (Frankly, I would hold on to my $10,000 rather than making either of those bets. :D )

I would NOT bet against Crawford being a top notch talent, either. LOL:grinning:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,837 Posts
Originally posted by <b>NCBullsFan</b>!
I was thinking last night about our chances of building a dynasty and thinking about just how many players around the league under the age of 25 (at the end of this year) have a chance of being one of the top five players in the league in their prime. Here is my list.

Knicks -
Nets - Jefferson
Celtics - (Pierce will be 25)
Wizards - Brown, Jeffries
Sixers -
Magic - McGrady
Heat - Butler

Bulls - JWill, Curry, Chandler
Pacers - O'Neal, Bender
Cavs - Diop, Wagner, Miles
Raptors - (Carter will be 25)
Bucks -
Hawks - (Abdur-Rahim will be 25)
Pistons - White
Hornets - Davis

Wolves - (Garnett will be 26)
Mavs - Nowitski
Rockets - Francis, Ming, Griffin
Grizzlies - Gasol, Gooden
Nuggets - Skita, Nene
Jazz - Kirilenko
Spurs - Parker (Duncan will be 26)

Lakers - Bryant
Sonics - Lewis
Clippers - Brand, Wilcox (Miller will be 26)
Blazers - Woods (probably shouldn't include him)
Kings - Bibby
Suns - Marion, Stoudemire (Marbury will be 25)
Warriors - Dunleavy, Richardson

There are 35 guys on this list, many with a much better chance than our three of making the top five (McGrady, Bryant) and many with a lower chance.

Suppose that our guys as good of a chance as the rest of the field of being the best player in their prime (probably a generous assumption), this would still give us only a 3 out of 35 or 9% chance of having the best player in the league.

Suppose that our guys have twice as good of a chance as the rest of the field of being in the top five in their prime (another generous assumption), then each of our 3 players would have a 5 out of 35 or 14% chance of being in the top five players in this fairly narrow age range. The chances of us having two such players is only about 6%, even under these fairly generous assumptions.

Since we probably need to have the top player or two of the top five in this fairly narrow age range in order to have a dynasty, even under fairly generous assumptions, we probably have at best a 15% shot at a dynasty, about a one in seven chance.

And again I think these are likely to be very generous assumptions, since there probably is a 50 percent chance that Bryant or McGrady will be the best player among this group and almost surely will be 2 of the best 5.
If one re-considers it now, I think us Bulls fans would have to look at Curry and Crawford (not KH yet ;)) as the only two with a chance to be among the best players in their prime.

Miami has risen, the Cavs have risen, the Grizz look promissing and the Rockets are the dark horse --the Jazz have sunk...

More important than merely having the talent is the coaching---and for that reason I like (or dislike) Houston, Cleveland, and Miami as competition going forward.

What does everyone think of Orlando?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,182 Posts
Re: I think you are exactly right...

Originally posted by <b>BamaBull</b>!


I still think, Crawford, IF, he follows the Jordan "scheme" of things, could be a force in two or three years...you know when HE is 25!!! LOL He might look skinny now, but I would ask you to look up early photos of MJ when he left NC. He was skinny too. THEN look at pictures of him in 1998. WHAT a difference! I truly believe THAT is why Jordan wanted him so badly....he saw some of himself in JC. The mental game JC will have to get for himself tho, as MJ is not around to help him with it.:grinning:
Will the real BamaBull please stand up?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
66 Posts
As far as the physical comparison goes, didn't MJ choose Crawford to be one of the body doubles of himself for last years Gatorade commercial (the one with college, young bull, and present MJ)?
I doubt he would of used him if he thought he was a physically inadequate comparison. Jordan's too proud for that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,919 Posts
What does everyone think of Orlando?
Uhh, they'll be a pretty good team in the East for years to come. but without a major F.A. acquisition, I don't really see them as having any realisitic title hopes, now or in the future.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,919 Posts
Knicks -
Nets - Jefferson
Celtics - (Pierce will be 25)
Wizards - Brown, Jeffries
Sixers -
Magic - McGrady
Heat - Butler

Bulls - JWill, Curry, Chandler
Pacers - O'Neal, Bender
Cavs - Diop, Wagner, Miles
Raptors - (Carter will be 25)
Bucks -
Hawks - (Abdur-Rahim will be 25)
Pistons - White
Hornets - Davis

Wolves - (Garnett will be 26)
Mavs - Nowitski
Rockets - Francis, Ming, Griffin
Grizzlies - Gasol, Gooden
Nuggets - Skita, Nene
Jazz - Kirilenko
Spurs - Parker (Duncan will be 26)

Lakers - Bryant
Sonics - Lewis
Clippers - Brand, Wilcox (Miller will be 26)
Blazers - Woods (probably shouldn't include him)
Kings - Bibby
Suns - Marion, Stoudemire (Marbury will be 25)
Warriors - Dunleavy, Richardson
If we're talking about players with a chance to be top 5 in the league, I'd probably remove Jefferson, Jeffries, Chandler, JWill (now that he'll probably never play again), Bender, Diop, Wagner, Miles, White, Griffin, Parker, Lewis (he's had a lot of time to prove himself to be a true elite player, and hasn't done it), Brand (see Rashard Lewis), Woods, Richardson (he's not that good) and Bibby. With the recent draft, you can definitely add LeBron, Carmelo and Darko.
 
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
Top