interesting

we are well thought of

I'm quite certain the old regime would have been near the bottom, though I do respect Chris Wallace

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/107081...e-rankings

(04-01-2014 12:40 PM)k2tigers Wrote:  interesting

we are well thought of

I'm quite certain the old regime would have been near the bottom, though I do respect Chris Wallace

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/107081...e-rankings

Very interesting, thanks for the link. I'm a bit surprised where OKC (a bit lower) and Portland (a bit higher) are compared to my impressions. But not by much.

Depending on which point in time, I would dispute that with the old regime. Overall, yes they were pretty close to the bottom, but in the last two or three years, there was noticeable improvement, essentially they proved their controversial rebuilding plan, and not only returned to the playoffs but did it with a deeper team than prior years, finally won a playoff game, and then a series, and pushed a favorite to 7, and had a promising position for the future. So I think we have to give it up to the old regime for reviving that hope. They just had a lot of track record (of their own doing) to overcome.

Toward the end, they weren't anywhere near the bottom, though. I don't think, anyway. I think without knowing whom it would be sold to, who would be the new management, it would've been ranked 15-20, with general respect from most experts for the rebuilding job and prospects for a consistently playoff-level team.