ESPN Remains Confused About Carmelo Anthony

When you read the first paragraph of Hollinger's ESPN Melo evaluation, you start to think you are wasting your time, because it doesn't make much sense. Hollinger makes it seem like Melo's game fell apart just because Iverson was on the team when he came back from the long suspension. Melo lost "4 points a game and 1/3 of his assists". Well, when you are scoring 30 plus points a game, dropping 4 a game is hardly anything to hit the panic button about, or anything to base a sarcastic paragraph on. A small forward dropping 1/3 of his assists depends on the circumstances. Allen Iverson, the ultimate combo guard, is just the circumstance where you would expect the front court to ramp up it's rebounding and post play, and to ramp down the assisting some.

Worse then this, Hollinger, who, translated, calls Melo a pathetic bitch for the near brawl at the Garden last December, reveals his real feelings about the young Team USA superstar, that he is lacking everything it takes to be a true, complete athlete. Or, in a word, Hollinger, like so many other experienced basketball analysts, is hostile toward the Nugget's star. Unfortunately for Hollinger and others who would pick on Melo for his role in the near brawl, they are using the wrong evidence to advance their near or actual hostility and their doubts. Melo ran away after the punch so that he would not be suspended for the entire remainder of the 2006-07 season. Had Melo not run away, but continued to fight the Knicks, who, let's face it, knew full well at the time that they were also rans for the season as a whole, and had almost nothing to lose by provoking the upstart Nuggets, Hollinger would not have been able to make his other incorrect criticism of Melo, the one regarding the fall-off, because Melo simply would not have played at all.

Let me give an inside word of advice to those who think Melo is never going to be a true superstar. Try going after him for being too uncritical of his coaches and his teammates or, in other words, for exhibiting no coaching potential whatsoever for a team whose coaching is suspect to say the very least.

It's no secret that Melo had long jumper problems in February and March last year. Hollinger's knee-jerk recommendation is that Melo should stop attempting so many long jumpers and 3-pointers. If this recommendation were put into effect, it would be the Nuggets raising the white flag on the battle to win the West, because without their star offensive player having a long shot dimension to his game, so that he becomes a complete star offensive player, the Nugget's chances to win the West are slim to none. Were Melo to give up on the 3-pointer and the long 2, the only way the Nuggets would have a good chance would be to get a veteran 3-pointer and defensive specialist, which is just about the only rabbit the Denver front office has not been able to pull out of the hat since they set about trying to emerge from the 44-120 record of 2001-03. The most notable still remaining foul legacy from all the bags over the heads in the stands years of massive losing in Denver is the uncompetitive 3-point shooting.

Good or excellent 3-point shooting has been a prerequisite to be competitive to win the West for at least a decade if not longer. Melo's efforts to get his long shooting squared away is absolutely necessary for both the Nuggets and for Melo's ultimate career evolution. In the Spurs series, the effort finally started to pay off, as Melo hit on 9 of 18 threes. In the FIBA Olympics qualifier tournament for Team USA, Melo made an amazing 26 of 45 threes, and tied with Michael Redd for the most number of sunk threes per game. So much for Hollinger's theory that Melo should ramp down his three-point shooting.

I don't have any other major criticisms of the evaluation. I have a minor criticism: Hollinger's sarcasm on the Melo defensive game is at least a little over the top.

In the last part of the evaluation, Hollinger, if anything, heaps too much praise on Melo, virtually saying that it is inevitable that Melo will be a superstar in the mode of Kobe Bryant before long. But what about the bitch slap? What about the inability to hit anything longer than a midrange? What about the ineptness on defense? What about the carrying, and the laziness in distributing the ball? What the hell happened to your argument, Mr. Hollinger? I'll be damned if you didn't shoot down your own grossly exaggerated criticisms of Melo at the end of the same writing in which you made them. Me thinks an NBA analyst may be a little overworked.

As for us here at Nuggets 1, we will continue to bring you a balanced and carefully considered analysis of the progress of Melo toward superstar status, and of the progress of the Nuggets towards being able to mount a real challenge in the West. We will be optimistic wherever possible, but always realistic. We will definitely avoid wildly swinging from being too negative to being too positive.

Carmelo Anthony ESPN 2006-2007 Evaluation & 2007-2008 Outlook

From ESPN, here is the Carmelo Anthony 2006-07 evaluation and the 2007-08 outlook. Look for a Nuggets 1 response, probably within 24 hours.

CARMELO ANTHONY ESPN EVALUATION & OUTLOOK

2006-07 season: Opposing defenses can't stop Carmelo Anthony, but one wonders if Allen Iverson might. 'Melo mellowed after the midseason trade for The Answer, losing four points off his scoring average and a third of his assists in games after the All-Star break. Of course, it's dangerous to confuse correlation with causation. Other factors were at play here -- most notably the 15-game ban he got for his pathetic slap-and-run maneuver in a midseason brawl with the Knicks.

Additionally, he was stellar in the playoffs, averaging 26.8 points on 48 percent shooting against the league's best team. Overall, Iverson may have had little to do with Anthony's late-season struggles, but until he has another stretch like the one with which he began the year, people will keep asking the question.

For the season, Anthony's "big picture" stats were all better than the previous campaign -- he added about a point, a rebound and an assist to his 40 minute averages. But his player efficiency rating barely moved because he committed more turnovers and his true shooting percentage went down a bit.

The biggest issue is Anthony's fondness for shooting long jumpers. He's not particularly good from this range and shouldn't be taking these shots unless he's wide open. More than a quarter of his shots were long 2s, but he only made 38 percent. He also tried more than two 3-pointers a game, but made just 26.8 percent.

The left side of the floor, in particular, gave him problems. Anthony only made 31 percent on 2-point attempts from that side of the floor, one of the worst rates in the league. He hadn't shown any disparity the previous two seasons, so it's possible this was a fluke.

Scouting report: A gifted scorer with incredible instincts around the basket, Anthony is among the league's toughest covers. He's big and knows how to use his body in the post, but has the quickness and dribbling skill of a much smaller player. Too often he settles for a jab move and then a quick jumper, but when he's offensively aggressive few defenders can keep him under wraps. His other weakness is handling the ball in the open court, as he tends to carry the ball when he tries to make a crossover move.

Not surprisingly, this has led to more frequent double-teaming, but Anthony has become better at passing out of the double and finding the open man. Putting better shooters around him would undoubtedly increase his assist totals and give him more space to operate, something the Nuggets have tried to do in the offseason.

Anthony is also good in transition, though it's hard not to be when you give yourself a five-second head start on the field. His defensive effort has improved since his rookie year but it's not like it could have gotten worse, and the cherry-picking is just one sign of his tenuous commitment to that end. Also, too often he gambles instead of playing straight-up defense and forcing opponents to shoot over his 6-8 frame. He gets beaten off the ball quite a bit, too, although he holds his own on the boards.

2007-08 outlook: The projections have Anthony finishing second in per-minute scoring behind Kobe Bryant, but the addition of Iverson may change the nature of Anthony's output. It's possible he'll shoot a higher percentage on fewer shots this year, especially if the Nuggets' efforts to add shooting help bear fruit.

The upshot should be the same though -- his first All-Star appearance and another showing near the top of the league scoring leaders. If he can add some defense to that package and subtract a few contested 17-footers, we're looking at a true superstar, and since he's only 23 there's a very good chance he'll get there.

Most similar at age: Kobe Bryant

Answering Hollinger: Do the Nuggets Have Any Space Cadets?

First of all, I want to say that Hollinger is a good analyst. You would hope that a highly paid full-time ESPN would be, so there is no surprise there. He has identified most of the major factors that will determine the fate of the Nuggets this year. But being human, and being limited in how much time he could put into following the Nuggets, he missed a few factors and his analysis is a little off here and there. I am going to concentrate here on Hollinger's biggest mistake.

Hollinger committed a big contradiction with regard to J.R. Smith. He says that the Nuggets getting him from the Bulls for a second round pick was "a steal," and he says that Smith is a deep shooter, and that his (along with Melo's) loss during the suspensions left the Nuggets "devoid of offensive punch". Later, Hollinger says Smith "has the offensive talent to be the knock-down shooter who spaces the floor for the big guns, and the quickness to be a capable defender who slows up the Ginobilis and McGradys of the West long enough for Camby to ride to the rescue."

But at the same time, Hollinger says, or at least implies, that Smith losing his minutes was automatic due to the arrival of Iverson, that Smith can be a "space cadet," and that when he is one of those, his skills are no longer available, so he should not be playing. I guess Smith should check himself out anytime he feels that space cadet thing coming on.

For the record, it is obvious that Smith losing half or more of his minutes with Iverson's arrival was not at all automatic.

Let's get one thing straight right here and now. If, as in Hollinger's world, there are players in the NBA who have some kind of mental defect where they become "space cadets" and lose most or all of their playing ability, they should be waived immediately. And whoever signed them should be fired for making such an obvious mistake. They should never have made a pro team to begin with. Fortunately, the vast majority, if not all, humans do not have space cadet episodes, whatever they are, so there are more than enough good basketball players to fill out all the leagues everywhere, without having to have a space cadet on any team anywhere.

All of the critics of Smith want to have it both ways. They sing his praises regarding his obvious skills, but then they say "but it doesn't matter, because he can be a space cadet". Or, "but it doesn't matter, because he can make a goofy shooting decision at a critical moment." The former is Hollinger and the latter is George Karl, and I am sure each would agree with the other's complaint about Smith.

To call any professional athlete a space cadet is a slur. If you think Smith is mentally ill, or that he has a physical brain defect, come out and say so and demand that he be evaluated professionally. Give him a leave of absence and help him get the care and treatment he needs. Someone who has a brain illness should not be working in a high stress occupation. Don't do a hit and run with the vague phrase "space cadet".

Unless Smith has some mental disease like epilepsy, or unless he is on drugs while he is playing, he has the same mental faculties at all times. If he makes a mistake, it's part of his normal personality and brain functioning, not some sudden illness. He has the same brain function and personality when he is hitting half a dozen straight threes as when he goes 1 for 11 on threes during a game. Instruct him to stop shooting threes in the fourth quarter if he's having one of those games, don't say he's mentally ill.

So Hollinger has made a slur on Smith, or else he has made a slur on the Nuggets organization. If Smith is in fact ill, then the Nuggets messed up giving up the second rounder to get him, or perhaps the Nuggets team doctors are negligent because they have not discovered some brain disease that Smith has. Or perhaps the Nuggets have one or more players on their team with a drug problem, and they don't detect it or root it out.

I do not at all agree. I say that both Hollinger and George Karl have cast slurs on J.R. Smith, because they refuse to accept the mistakes that come with his youth, personality, and skill set, along with the benefits. They want the good without the bad. In sports, as in life, you have to take the bad with the good, and to get the really good you must sometimes put up with the really bad. Your concern as a Coach or a fan is whether and by how much the good exceeds the bad.

We see this in nature as well as sports. In the spring and summer, trees bloom green and provide good shade (and good oxygen). In the fall in the far North, in places like Vermont and Michigan, the trees become so colorful that folks take tours to check them out. A few weeks later, the colors and the leaves are gone, and the trees look ugly on a cold and rainy winter day. And in an ice storm, branches might come down, creating a huge mess. Or the whole tree might fall on and damage your house or your car.

Now, you could say, "those trees are really nice in the Spring, Summer, and Fall, but they are ugly in the Winter, and they might possibly come down on my house, so they should be cut down. That would be Hollinger's or Karl's view of the trees. So with either of them in charge, the yard ends up without the benefit of the trees. Or, you or I could say "Yeah, the trees are ugly and slightly risky in the winter, but I can tolerate that because they are nice the rest of the year. They are nice and beneficial for 9 months and not so nice and sometimes bad for 3 months." That's the reasonable and logical way of looking at the trees, as well as the reasonable and logical way of looking at a player like J.R. Smith. He is in the top 10% of all pro basketball shooting guards on his numerous good nights, but you have to put up with a bad game now and then, and a really stupid decision now and then. If the good outweighs the bad, and the trees, and Smith, overall contribute alot more good then bad, then why would you cut them down? Why would you refuse to play Smith?

Because you, if you are George Karl, are an unrealistic perfectionist who refuses to deal with what you have labelled a defective personality. And you think that you might be able to change a defective personality for the better, by using various carrot and stick methods. You don't want to deal with the personalities you have been dealt on your team, you only want to deal with personalities that meet your criteria. Unfortunately, personalities can not be changed much, if at all, by a series of awards and punishments. Your actions are never going to change anyone's personality to any measurable extent.

What you are supposed to do as a Coach is to make the best use of the personalities and skills you have on your team. With respect to each player, you are supposed to train that player on the skills that he is most lacking, as well as to encourage him to keep practicing his best skills, so as to keep them at the high level. In the case of J.R. Smith, for example, you try to improve his distribution skill by having him play pass only in practice squad games over and over, every practice. You try to improve his defensive skill by putting him in defensive drills over and over.

Getting back to Hollinger, you can see what Hollinger has done with his Nuggets analysis. He has cast a slur on J.R. Smith and, in fact, on the Nuggets as a whole. In effect, he is accusing the entire Nuggets organization of being in over their heads with respect to building a Championship caliber team. In Hollinger's mind, the Nuggets can not win a Championship because they have a "space cadet" on their team, and because they can not mentally figure out stuff like how to integrate Allen Iverson's game with Melo's game and with the team as a whole.

So what Hollinger is really implying is that, along with Smith, there is a space cadet or two or three in the Nugget's front office. Now why did Hollinger cast these aspersions? Because the highest paid sports analysts rarely if ever directly criticize the strategies and tactics of coaches. In my view, Mr. Karl committed many errors, and so Hollinger had to cast aspersions far and wide to avoid going after Karl, the real problem. Specifically, to avoid criticizing Karl, Hollinger had to decimate Smith, trash Iverson, and suggest that the Nugget's organization is mentally unfit to win a Championship. But if all this was actually true, then how did the Nuggets win 47 out of 82 games and dominate the Spurs in game one of the series? Something isn't right there. If all of Hollinger's claims were true, the Nuggets would not have made the playoffs last season.

Though wrong about Smith, Iverson, and the Nugget's front office, a man such as Hollinger can not completely strike out without getting at least a piece of the ball, and Hollinger in fact did get a foul tip while at bat here.

While there are no space cadets anywhere in the Nugget's organization, there is someone who holds some beliefs and attitudes that a crude person might think could only be held by a "space cadet." There is one George Karl who lives, to some extent, in a fantasy world, where personalities can be changed, and changed fairly easily too, with rewards and punishments. These theories were investigated and proven to be wrong by psychologists in the 1800's. For Coach Karl, playing minutes are the reward when a player changes their personality for the better, and bench time is the punishment when a player fails to change their personality. The trouble is, as psychologists have shown, there is no known way for someone to change their personality short of, ironically, taking psychoactive drugs. I say ironically because, if you had a player who took a drug to change his personality, you would then have a real space cadet on your hands.

John Hollinger of ESPN's Preseason Take on the Nuggets

John Hollinger's ESPN Nuggets Preview

NOTE: This is one man's opinion. Hollinger has a high rep because he is one of ESPN's top basketball analysts, and he is a statistical guru. So it's one smart man's opinion. Hollinger can not rock the boat very much without raising eyebrows at ESPN, something he doesn't want to do considering the lofty position he has at ESPN. And these views do not necessarily reflect the views of Nuggets 1. Come back soon for the Nuggets 1 response to this, which will most likely be posted within 24 hours. Bookmark Nuggets 1 now.

2006-07 RECAP

JOHN HOLLINGER SAYS:
For a team that was summarily dismissed in five games in the first round, the Nuggets had an awfully good team by the end of last season. Unfortunately their opponent in April was eventual champion San Antonio, and while the Nuggets played them as tough as anyone, they were no match for the mighty Spurs.

That series, which featured four nip-and-tuck games before the Spurs ran away with Game 5, gives the Nuggets a dash of optimism heading into this season, but there was an awful lot of drama leading up to that point.

The season began with Kenyon Martin -- whose feuding with George Karl had marred the end of the previous season -- seemingly patching things up with his coach, only to go under the knife for a second microfracture surgery. This was on the other knee, putting the career of the jumping-jack forward in jeopardy. He missed the entire season, naturally, and Denver's decision to give up three first-round picks and pay $91 million over seven years for Martin has never looked worse.

Melo was having a great season until a scuffle broke out at MSG.

Even without K-Mart, the Nuggets got off to a nice start. Carmelo Anthony was leading the league in scoring at midseason, while Nene made an unexpectedly quick recovery from the previous season's knee surgery and stabilized the power forward slot left vacant by Martin's injury. J.R. Smith, stolen from the Bulls for a second-round pick, gave the team a much-needed deep shooter.

Not to mention, oft-injured center Marcus Camby stayed on the court for 70 games, and eventually led the league in blocks and won the league's Defensive Player of the Year award.

Thanks to those events the Nuggets were 14-8 on Dec. 16, when they were in the midst of wrapping up a blowout win against the Knicks. Then their season went upside-down on them. Smith was tackled while going for a layup, a fight ensued, and Anthony improvised a foolish, cowardly slap-and-run maneuver that resulted in a 15-game suspension. Smith got 10 games for his role, leaving the Nuggets devoid of offensive punch.

The loss of Anthony accelerated Denver's timeline on another front: Trading for Allen Iverson. The Nuggets had been interested even before the suspensions, but with their meal ticket suspended they decided to pull the trigger right away on a deal that sent Andre Miller and Joe Smith to Philly for The Answer. While they were at it, Denver also figured one diminutive ball-dominating guard was plenty and sent Earl Boykins to Milwaukee for Steve Blake.

The new-look Nuggets got off to a slow start, as the suspensions and an ankle injury to Iverson left them reeling. They had some chemistry issues to work out, too, as both Iverson and Anthony were used to being the alpha dog, and as a result Denver went 3-7 in its first 10 games with the dynamic duo. The Nuggies even briefly fell under .500, at 29-31 in mid-March, before recovering with a 10-1 April.

However, perhaps a bigger story from that season-ending finish is how both Iverson and Anthony saw their numbers drop off after the trade. The big question at the time was whether there were enough shots to go around for both of them; the answer based on the end of last season is perhaps there isn't.

Of course, other problems also played into this. With Iverson taking over at shooting guard, Smith went to the bench and the Nuggets once again found themselves short of 3-point shooting. Denver led the NBA in points in the paint and was second in fast-break points, but the lack of a perimeter threat kept them from ranking in the league's elite overall. For the season, Denver ranked 28th in the league in 3-point percentage, and individually Smith and Linas Kleiza were the only ones to make more than a third of their tries.

With Iverson's arrival pushing both of those players deeper in the rotation, it allowed opponents to sag into the paint, forcing both Iverson and Anthony to drive into crowds. Thus, the dropoff in scoring from Denver's two stars might have been less a result of bad chemistry than of improper personnel surrounding them.

That said, the ending of the Spurs series had to give Nuggets fans pause as well. Iverson acted like he was back in Philadelphia, continually overdribbling and forcing shots instead of deferring to Anthony -- the one player who gives San Antonio defensive ace Bruce Bowen serious fits.

Through it all the Nuggets managed to be a pretty good offensive team, ranking ninth in offensive efficiency, but I don't think they made the Iverson deal and chose to pay luxury tax this year to get "pretty good." Denver has given itself a slim window to win a championship before Iverson and Camby lose it, and to get there with this cast they'll need to be a top-five offensive team.

At the other end of the court, many did a quick eyeball of Denver's stats and labeled the Nuggets a poor defensive team. But that simply wasn't true. It was a failure to understand the impact of pace, mainly: The Nuggets played at the league's second-fastest clip, and thus their points allowed per game averages were high. Additionally, Denver gave up a fairly high field goal percentage, further confusing the masses: Their 46.0 percent allowed was above the league average of 45.8 percent.

Opponent Free Throw Attempts Per Field Goal Attempt: 2006-07 Leaders
TEAM OPP. FGA/FTA
Phoenix .268
San Antonio .272
Denver .274
New Orleans/OKC .280
Toronto .290
League average .327

But Denver was very good at one key element: avoiding fouls. The Nuggets permitted just .274 free throw attempts per field goal attempt, ranking a close third behind Phoenix and San Antonio in that category (see chart). As a result, the team ranked 11th in opponent true shooting percentage against, and that was good enough to help the team rank ninth overall in defensive efficiency.

That's a good enough defensive effort to win big, especially the way this roster is built. But to get there, the Nuggets will have to dial up the offense. They also might want to run some extra laps after practice -- the mile-high air and fast pace were supposed to tire their opponents, but Denver was outscored badly in the fourth quarter last season.

OFF-SEASON MOVES

JOHN HOLLINGER SAYS:
It was a very quiet offseason in the Rockies, as the Nuggets opted to see how last season's big move for Iverson plays out before attempting any further surgery. Denver also has some financial issues to consider, as it will be well over the luxury tax this year and next before Iverson's contract expires in 2009.

The Nuggets clearly knew this when they made the trade, and thus I don't expect them to pull a Phoenix and start shedding contracts left and right. Rather, it appears the plan is to pay the tax while pursuing a ring during this two-year window and re-assess in '09.

Draft day passed without a whisper, as Denver already had traded both picks -- one for Martin, the other for J.R. Smith. The Nuggets are viewing late-season pickup Von Wafer as their "draft pick" after he led the CBA in 3-point shooting, and on a team in need of some long-range help he might fill a niche.

One other financial consideration to keep in mind is that the Nuggets still have a cap exception worth nearly $3 million from the Boykins trade. That could come in handy if they go in search of backcourt help at the trade deadline.

• Signed Chucky Atkins, let Steve Blake leave
Denver let Blake cash in his solid half-season as a Nugget and went for more of a pure shooter in Atkins, a reasonable move considering the team's need for players who can spread the floor. There's some concern with playing the 5-11 Atkins next to the 6-0 Iverson in the backcourt, but with Camby guarding their backs the hope is that the Nuggets' guards won't be burned on the blocks.

• Traded Reggie Evans, Ricky Sanchez for Steven Hunter, Bobby Jones
A surplus power forward who was going to see little action, the Nuggets converted Evans into Hunter, a backup center who gives them a nice cap bonus -- Hunter's contract expires a year earlier. Hunter had his best season with a running outfit in Phoenix in 2004-05, so he should benefit from Denver's fast pace. He's also decent insurance for if, or should I say when, Camby goes on the shelf.

BIGGEST STRENGTH/WEAKNESS

JOHN HOLLINGER SAYS:
Offensively, the Nuggets can beat you two ways. First, they can run you into submission, which is their preferred style in Denver's altitude especially. But teams that cut off the break still must contend with the Nuggets in the halfcourt, and that means three separate problematic matchups.

The most vexing is Anthony, who has the size to post up smaller forwards but is also unusually quick for his size and capable of stepping outside for jumper. Anthony is at his best when he's going to the hoop, but his outstanding outside shooting for Team USA the past two summers shows he's capable of burning opponents from the perimeter, too.

Then there's Iverson, who at 32 remains as quick as any player in basketball. Teams often have to guard him with their own little quick guys, most of whom aren't used to chasing big-time scorers through off-ball screens or defending against isolations on the wing. As an added plus, he added more of a passing element to his game in Denver -- at least until the Spurs series -- and should continue to embrace that aspect. Denver was 11-0 when he had double-figure assists last season.

Finally, don't sleep on Nene. The Brazilian big man gave the Nuggets a solid post presence, especially in the second half of last season when his knee started feeling better. At 6-11, 268 pounds, he demands a big defender -- if not a double-team. After the break last season, he averaged 13.0 points per game and shot 62.4 percent.

Biggest Weakness: Starter No. 5
The Nuggets have four-fifths of an awesome team. If they can complete the quintet they'll be as good as any team in basketball, but that's where the questions start. Atkins should be an improvement on Blake, even though he's coming off a Fluke Rule season, but he's 33 and short so the pairing with Iverson is a bit troubling from the defensive end.

Other candidates offer possibilities too. Smith has mad talent but can't keep his head on straight, exemplified by some loopy plays in the Spurs series that ended with Karl publicly removing him from the rotation. Smith's shooting is the perfect antidote to the Nuggets' problems, but his presence forces Iverson to play the point. Additionally, his defense needs serious work, as he'd be the one who has to guard the Kobes and Wades of the league.

Another possibility is Kleiza, who had a strong finish to last season, but at 6-8 he's much more comfortable at a forward spot. Wafer is the newest flavor and has the size and athleticism to defend shooting guards, but he's still a bit raw, not to mention completely unproven. Finally, lurking deep on the roster is Yakhouba Diawara, who is the best defender of the bunch but might be the worst offensive player in the state of Colorado.

If you aren't impressed by these choices, join the club. One senses the Nuggets have one more deal left in them between now and the trade deadline before they have the roster in place that can make a run at a championship.

OUTLOOK

JOHN HOLLINGER SAYS:
Denver will be good, of course -- with players like Anthony, Iverson, Nene and Camby it's tough not to be. And in the East, that might be enough. But in this conference, it takes 60-win talent just to get in the conversation. The Nuggets won 45 last season, and while they're better than that final won-loss record showed, it still feels like they're a player away from rivaling the Texas trio.

Two important players to watch are Iverson and Camby. Iverson's numbers dropped off alarmingly last season, and if that's more than an adjustment period from the trade the Nuggets need to be worried. Small, quick guards tend to fare very poorly in their 30s; Iverson had defied that trend until last season and seems just as fast as ever, but if he isn't providing All-Star caliber play at one of the guard spots then they're not getting anywhere near the title.

Similarly, Camby's injuries are always a concern. Denver can live with it if he's hurt in January, but if he's MIA in May that pretty much sinks its hopes.

But perhaps the biggest wild card is Smith. He has the offensive talent to be the knock-down shooter who spaces the floor for the big guns, and the quickness to be a capable defender who slows up the Ginobilis and McGradys of the West long enough for Camby to ride to the rescue. That only works if he's engaged mentally, though, and the 21-year-old had enough space cadet moments in his first three pro seasons to call that premise into question.

So while the upside for this group is high, they look more like bridesmaids in this conference. Look for Anthony to push for the scoring title while Iverson boosts his assists and takes on a secondary scoring role, and look for the Nuggets to edge out Utah for the division crown. But they're unlikely to make a run beyond that without further tweaking to the roster.

Prediction: 53-29, 1st place in Northwest Division, 5th in Western Conference (4th playoff seed)

The above preseason commentary on the Nuggets is by John Hollinger of ESPN and does NOT necessarily reflect the views of Nuggets 1. Come back soon for the Nuggets 1 response to this, which will most likely be posted here within 24 hours. Bookmark Nuggets 1 now.