What's new
By:

At this stage of the off-season, where do you think the Jazz finish in the West?

Where do you expect the Jazz to finish in the Western Conference standings?

  • Win the West

    Votes: 4 3.6%

  • Homecourt in the 1st round of the playoffs (2-4 seed)

    Votes: 7 6.3%

  • Playoff team (5 or 6 seed)

    Votes: 32 28.6%

  • Play-in team (7-10 seed)

    Votes: 57 50.9%

  • Bottom-5 team

    Votes: 12 10.7%
  • Total voters
    112
FrenchJazzFa said:
1. Nugs ( so impressive last year, they will remain on top)
2. Suns ( pretty good line up with the add)
3. Wolves ( i believe Rudy will com back to his level, Ant keep improving and Mike still got some on the tank, could go down if they loose KAT)
4. Kings
5. Grizz
6. Warriors (coud be higher if CP got something left in the tank)
7. Pelicans ( if Zion healthy)
8. Jazz
9. Mavs
10. LAkers

But honestly hard to predict, How the spurs will play, Clippers might be there too.... if we ended somewhere between 6 and 8 , will be delighted.
Click to expand...
Nuggets just lost the Marcus Smart of their roster to the Pacers on a massive overpay to get him to sell out the champs.
Don't be surprised if Denver is a one and done and never sniff the finals again with the Joker at the helm
 
stitches said:
Well we were about .500 before we decided to go full tank last season and started resting key players. Again... it might be a few games under .500... or a few games over .500 depending on luck.
Click to expand...
we had Mike remember? we don't have that kind of captain here
 
Lakers got way better in FA but these predictions have them around the jazz?

If the clippers are healthy they are really tough and they have a new coach and may get Harden and they are in the play in range?

Every team that has added Chris Paul has improved the following season, but yall have the warriors as the 10th seed? They had Jordan poole on the court after that sucker punch and now he is gone. Less cancer, more vets, less inefficient chucking.

We had a deeper, more veteran team last year in spite of Collins addition. Conley helped a lot but he is gone. .500 ball is optimistic unless Hardy balls out. Play in is possible but I have us in the 9 - 10 range if all teams play injury free.
 
Memphis was better in the regular season without Ja and they replaced Brooks with Smart who are virtually identical players. They aren't slipping in the regular season.
 
Wolves: 1 year to gel. Do they lose KAT? They should improve just based on ANT getting older and gelling plus Conley being the adult in the room.

Kings should be better and they were a top 3 team last year.

Pels: Zion healthy made them a top 2 team last year.
 
1. Nugs
2. Kings
3. Warriors (CP bump, addition by subtraction Poole)
4. Clippers (5th seed last year without health or Harden - they can't be less than 8th)
5. Lakers (roster issues are in the past. Not a 13th seed late in the season)
6. Suns (take a minute to gel and lack of depth has them at the 5 seed)
7. Pelicans ( if Zion healthy they were top 2 seed)
8. TWolves (Wolves gonna Wolve)
9. Grizz (Slipping a bit without Ja)

The Jazz, OKC, and Mavs really don't look better than those teams to me right now. The west is stacked.

Injuries and locker room spats can drop any team here no question, but 10 - 12 looks likely.
 
Last edited:
HermanG said:
Without Dame 45-48 wins and 5-6 seed.

With Dame 50-52 wins and 3-4 seed.
Click to expand...
you been eating that crack o ash soup again have you not smh
45 wins is very optimistic for a young roster, you are setting yourself for disap
and if you are right, there is no way in hell we are trading for Dame to win 5 more games
 
Eddie Zero said:
you been eating that crack o ash soup again have you not smh
45 wins is very optimistic for a young roster, you are setting yourself for disap
and if you are right, there is no way in hell we are trading for Dame to win 5 more games
Click to expand...
I am an optimist but Im not often disappointed. Life goes on even if I'm wrong, but being hyped up is worth it.

Maybe you fear being disappointed too much.

Besides, we would have won 40+ last year had we tried our best all the way. No reason to think we are worse now, even if Hardys style is bound to be better scouted.
 
HermanG said:
Yeah we did have a lot of close games last year so you might be right.

I was just thinking Dame vs Clarkson, and how much the difference is in either of those contributing to wins.
Click to expand...

Losing tight games was a lot about not getting enough stops. With or without Dame it comes down to rotations and how much better we take care about defense in the crunch time. As good as JC and K.O. were in offense it hurt our winning in defense. With the addition of Collins and Hendricks we will have upgraded defensive frontcourt. And if it eill come down to winning we have Dunn and ochai to slow down their ball handlers. I think one o ochai or Dunn needs to close for us in tight games.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top