Marty Burns writes the NBA power rankings over at SI.com. I'm sure Mr. Burns has watched much, much more NBA basketball than I have and I bet he knows alot more about it that I do. But his power rankings just confused the hell out of me. So I'm just gonna put them out here and if anyone can explain the rational, you just let me know. Thank you very much.
OK, when Marty wrote this, there was still three undefeated teams in the NBA and the Spurs had lost a nationally-televised game on their home court. Fine - the Spurs are a solid choice. After all, let's give them credit for beating an 0-3 team and the Knicks. Very impressive, right? And let's completely ignore how the Cavs handled them on their homecourt. Do we all agree to do this? Fine. Moving on...1. San Antonio Spurs (2-1)They gained a measure of revenge with that opening-night win at Dallas. Tim Duncan and Manu Ginobili look healthier this season, and Francisco Elson already adds some needed frontcourt quickness.
2. Cleveland Cavaliers (2-1) Yes, they beat the Spurs in San Antonio. But it came on the second night of a back-to-back for the Spurs, and Saturday's loss at Charlotte means they automatically forfeit any claim to the top spot in these rankings.So if two teams have the exact same record, and Team A beat Team B head to head, shouldn't team A be ranked higher than them? Are we sure Marty didn't create the BCS, too?
Finally, an undefeated team makes Marty's power rankings. Isn't the point of these rankings to show who has been most impressive so far? Wouldn't a team with no losses be more impressive than a team with one?3. New Orleans Hornets (3-0)Chris Paul and his new-look squad gave their old fan base a treat with Sunday's win over the Rockets at New Orleans Arena. It also kept them perfect after impressive road wins at Boston and Indianapolis.
And yes, I realize these things are arbitrary and stupid, but this guy writes for freakin' Sports Illustrated. Sports Illustrated. I just think...oh, who the hell cares.