Let's show David Aldridge and Chad Ford what these should look like. More below the jump.

For reference, here's the listing of all the player movement to this point. (opens to new tab)

Here's my two criteria: Which teams got better players? and Which teams got good value? To me, what a team set out to do and what they ended up doing just don't matter, because most analysts use that as a club to beat down some franchises (the Wolves) and not others (seriously, how could Dallas be considered to have a successful offseason when they lost out on Deron Williams?).

Teams That Got Better Players and Good Value: Charlotte (MKG and the Detroit #1); Cleveland (youth); Dallas (barely); Denver (good deal they got with McGee); Detroit: (Drummond at #9); Golden State (good FA and trade value, overrated draft); L.A. Lakers (obviously); Memphis (Wroten is good value); Miami (obviously); Milwaukee (marginally better); Wolves (they replaced unproductivity with productivity); New Orleans (Davis); Portland (Lillard and Barton); Sacramento (Robinson and Johnson); San Antonio (good value on their re-signings).

Teams That Got Better Players: Boston (perimeter upgrades, one costly); Brooklyn (better players, terrible value); Toronto (Lowry); Utah (cheap additions but added on $ with Marvin Williams); Washington (Beal good, but Hornets trade is bad)

Teams That Got Good Value: Atlanta (Johnson for Lou Williams makes them worse but more capable of future moves); Houston (got worse, but have assets); Oklahoma City (only lost Mohammed, but he helped them)

Teams That Lost in Both Categories: Chicago (here's a hint: just try to sell low on Boozer instead of losing useful players); Indiana (not a big difference, but I don't see them as better); L.A. Clippers (mostly talent downgrades at a higher price); Orlando (trading Anderson instead of keeping him); New York (Lin to Felton. Lin. to. Felton.); Philadelphia (no one they brought in will replace what they lost with Brand and Williams); Phoenix (terrible Nash deal makes this one).

1. Lakers: They added an All-Star for 2 late 1sts. Maybe they're not a title contender, but they're better and their ceiling is higher.
2. Heat: Ray Allen for $3 million. Ray Allen for $3 million. The Lakers beat them because Nash will obviously play more minutes and a larger role in any improvement they make.
3. New Orleans: I don't love the other moves they made, but Davis and Anderson are huge upgrades.
4. Charlotte: They added assets cheaply (MKG and a future 1st). Haywood as an amnesty guy was good as well.
5. Wolves: We've gone over this a lot already. Injury risk, significant productivity upgrade, decent value.
6. Houston: They're not much worse, and they have a lot of assets.
7. Toronto: This is a possible playoff team. Lowry? Good, though he wasn't cheap. Fields? Umm...
8. Brooklyn: Johnson makes them a playoff team, but I'll laugh if they can't get Howard because they wasted so much $.
9. Boston: Value is terrible on Jeff Green, and they screwed themselves over with the way they handled Allen, but their perimeter depth is better, and Sullinger is a cheap upgrade.
10. Utah: They have more talent, but it's not so significant that they're guaranteed the playoffs. Each M. Williams they acquired is overrated.
11. Golden State
12. Sacramento
13. San Antonio
14. Atlanta
15. Milwaukee
16. Washington
17. Portland
18. Cleveland
19. Dallas
20. Denver
21. Detroit
22. Memphis
23. OKC
24. Indiana
25. L.A. Clippers
26. New York
27. Orlando
28. Chicago
29. Phoenix
30. Philadelphia

How would you rank them?