Why playoff talk is absurd

[CBAreject]

I will now debunk some commonly held beliefs on this forum.

Here is what I'm hearing (especially after the latest flukish win)

1) We have a chance to make the playoffs

2) It will "only take 35 wins" for the 8th seed

3) If we play .500 ball the rest of the way, we can make the playoffs

All of these are false.

First, it will take at least a .500 record to make the playoffs (as I've said before and been contradicted by sooo many, esp. hawksfanatic). The current 8th seed in the East is Miami at 17-19. The 7th seed is the Pacers at 20-17. Basically, what you boobs are telling me is that Miami will play *worse* after Shaq returns.

If Miami plays just as well, they'll finish with 38-39 wins--still well more than 35. If they're better, they might win 45 games or more, sliding Indiana to the 8th seed. Indiana will finish at .500 or better.

Now, since this is true that we need a .500 record, it is clear that we have *no chance*. We'd have to go 30-18. Try that on and walk around in front of the mirror. Doesn't that look absurd? Won't happen. AND remember that .500 might not even be enough!

If we "play .500 ball from here on out" as some of you say we can and should, we'll finish at 35-47. That is the kind of record that makes me want to vomit because it reminds me of the SAR teams and all their pathetic #8 selections (that Babcock traded for douche bags like Lo and Dog). It won't be good enough for the playoffs though.

[TroyMcClure]

Very true. Facts are facts. That's why I am so unhappy with the pathetic start.

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

I will now debunk some commonly held beliefs on this forum.

Here is what I'm hearing (especially after the latest flukish win)

1) We have a chance to make the playoffs

2) It will "only take 35 wins" for the 8th seed

3) If we play .500 ball the rest of the way, we can make the playoffs

All of these are false.

First, it will take at least a .500 record to make the playoffs (as I've said before and been contradicted by sooo many, esp. hawksfanatic). The current 8th seed in the East is Miami at 17-19. The 7th seed is the Pacers at 20-17. Basically, what you boobs are telling me is that Miami will play *worse* after Shaq returns.

If Miami plays just as well, they'll finish with 38-39 wins--still well more than 35. If they're better, they might win 45 games or more, sliding Indiana to the 8th seed. Indiana will finish at .500 or better.

Now, since this is true that we need a .500 record, it is clear that we have *no chance*. We'd have to go 30-18. Try that on and walk around in front of the mirror. Doesn't that look absurd? Won't happen. AND remember that .500 might not even be enough!

If we "play .500 ball from here on out" as some of you say we can and should, we'll finish at 35-47. That is the kind of record that makes me want to vomit because it reminds me of the SAR teams and all their pathetic #8 selections (that Babcock traded for douche bags like Lo and Dog). It won't be good enough for the playoffs though.

---

...to this. They will NEVER and I mean N-E-V-E-R discuss facts about this. Their sole arguments are:

1) Player's feelings - but no one can tell me they as players wouldn't FEEL 100000000% BETTER FOR THE NEXT 10 YEARS with a franchise center behind them than ZaZa or feel 1000000000000000000000% better with legitimate title contention possibility then AT BEST mediocrity, so any argument about 3 months worth of bad feelings verses potentially a whole career worth of good ones is worthless.

2) the mere potential that tanking won't work - a bottom 3 record will result in a top 3 pick will result in a true franchise player/center for this team in this draft of all drafts is FAR MORE LIKELY AT 40-60% than any hopes the current ownership will (a) spend at all much less significantly, any GM, much less the current GM, will not just trade but (b) trade WELL, or our existing players will © "chemistry" their way out of this mess. All of which, by the way could never have the positive impact of any of the top 3 players selected in this draft! It's simply more likely for us to win the lottery than get an impact FA or make a gang-buster trade and more likely for the spoils of our winning the lottery to have a far greater impact than either would also. But who gives a d@mn about MULTIPLE FACTUAL PROBABILITIES favoring tanking when you have emotional arguments like short-term feelings and mere possibility of failure?!? Where is the big, red stupid sarcasm button? I need to press it before some poor sap says "Oh Yeah, but what about the possibility of tanking not working". My response would be...UNFORTUNATELY, YOU DON'T HAVE A CREDIBLE, BETTER IDEA, ONE MORE LIKELY TO OCCUR AND MORE LIKELY TO MAKE AS SIGNIFICANT AN IMROVEMENT TO THIS TEAM WERE IT TO OCCUR! YOU ARE JUST TALKING OUT OF YOUR ASS TO SAVE FACE!

Sometimes I get carried away of course and I would never actually say such a thing even though it is true.

CBA, your statistics are spot on. I only wish an anti-tank missile would try to somehow convince us we have a better chance of going 30-18 as we stand for the remainder of the season than earning a top 3 pick should we properly tank. I guaran-D@mn-tee you they will complain about this season's player's feelings and discuss the mere possibility of tanking failing. They have nothing else and frankly their willing to d@mn a franchise over it.

W

[TheDude]

wow, so in you guys opinion, we should just give up all hope and spend the rest of the season begging and pleading for a new coach and tanking the rest of the season even though we have no control over it and even if we did are not guaranteed to get the player we want......what a way to spend a season watching my favorite basketball team.

in past years IN THE LATER PART OF THE SEASON, i wished for us to win a higher draft pick because I KNEW there was zero chance to make the playoffs with what we have.

this year, even though we have weaknesses, nobody here can say that we don't at least have the POTENTIAL to make the playoffs...i'm going to go for my team to win...i'm not going for the tank until i know it's virtually impossible to make the playoffs.......and no, it won't be too late to tank the season at that point because if you think about it, we must have already lost quite a few games to be in that position.

i'm not saying i don't want a different coach, i'm not saying i don't want a trade to bring in some talent....i'm saying i don't wish for a tank BEFORE the allstar game when we havent seen what a whole Hawks team can do..................and i sure as hell am not going to start a thread whose sole purpose is to bash those who at least CHOOSE to have hope this year.

[Guest Walter]

....only one team in the last 20 years (I did not go back further) has made the playoffs with a mere 35 wins (Boston in 1994-1995). With 16 teams making the playoffs every year that is 1 out of 320 playoff teams had 35 wins or less. Should a team win 35 games it has a 0.3% chance of making the playoffs as an 8 seed.

Now compare roughly 50% chance of a top 3 pick if we finish bottom 3 to a 0.3% chance of making the playoffs if we somehow miraculously manage to play .500 ball the rest of the season. The actual % is 0.3125% chance. Divide 50% by 0.3125% and it is 160 times more likely that we should pick top 3 should we place bottom 3 than make the playoffs should we play .500 ball!

Anyone want to tackle the silliness of arguing that it's more likely this team plays .500 ball the rest of the way than it could maintain bottom 3 record with simple moves and personel decisions? This percentage too is NOT EVEN CLOSE to supporting an anti-tank position.

W

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

wow, so in you guys opinion, we should just give up all hope and spend the rest of the season begging and pleading for a new coach and tanking the rest of the season even though we have no control over it and even if we did are not guaranteed to get the player we want......what a way to spend a season watching my favorite basketball team.

---

Yes. Rather than giving up on the next 10 seasons, I'd rather give up on half of one.

It is foolhardy not courageous to fight a fight you can't win. It is foolishness to decide off "hope" rather than fact when the odds are AT BEST 160 times better that we pick top 3 if we finish bottom 3 than we make the playoffs if we somehow manage to play .500 ball the remainder of the season (something, btw, we haven't done for this length of time for at least 8 years).

Quote:

---

this year, even though we have weaknesses, nobody here can say that we don't at least have the POTENTIAL to make the playoffs.

---

More of the lame ass mere possibility arguement.

Only 1 in 320 teams with 35 wins has ever made the NBA playoffs. That's 0.3% of the time. We'd have to play .500 ball, something this franchise hasn't done in 8 years and, as the 4th worst team according to record demonstrates, this year's team is so far from doing it isn't even worth discussing as a possibility.

There is no "potential" here. Hope in this case gives new meaning to "a fools' errand". Might as well chase unicorns you're so in fantasy land. Join reality, then we'll talk more.

W

[TroyMcClure]

Quote:

---

i'm not saying i don't want a different coach, i'm not saying i don't want a trade to bring in some talent....i'm saying i don't wish for a tank BEFORE the allstar game when we havent seen what a whole Hawks team can do..................and i sure as hell am not going to start a thread whose sole purpose is to bash those who at least CHOOSE to have hope this year.

---

If you have hope for this year you believe in Santa Clause. It's not possible. This is the real world. These are the facts. They are irrefutable.

We needed a better start, a better coach, a better gm, smarter owners, etc.

BTW, we'll never know what a whole Hawks team can do with Woody as coach. DUH

[DJlaysitup]

The problem (as I see it)....is thet we only have three good players...and our hero is a SG who gets double-teamed constantly.

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

....only one team in the last 20 years (I did not go back further) has made the playoffs with a mere 35 wins (Boston in 1994-1995). With 16 teams making the playoffs every year that is 1 out of 320 playoff teams had 35 wins or less. Should a team win 35 games it has a 0.3% chance of making the playoffs as an 8 seed.

Now compare roughly

50% chance

of a top 3 pick if we finish bottom 3 to a

0.3%

chance of making the playoffs if we somehow miraculously manage to play .500 ball the rest of the season. The actual % is 0.3125% chance. Divide 50% by 0.3125% and it is

160 times more likely

that we should pick top 3 should we place bottom 3 than make the playoffs should we play .500 ball!

Anyone want to tackle the silliness of arguing that it's more likely this team plays .500 ball the rest of the way than it could maintain bottom 3 record with simple moves and personel decisions? This percentage too is NOT EVEN CLOSE to supporting an anti-tank position.

W

---

...will touch these odds. Thanks CBA for putting this simply and succinctly to the Bobby Sura sympathizers.

I dare'em to try.

W

[CBAreject]

Well, it's probably not quite so improbable *this* year.

Your .03% is the answer to the following question:

"If I chose at random one team from the 320 playoff qualifiers in the last 20 years, what is the probability that said team had 35 wins or fewer?"

That's relevant info, but it's not quite correct to apply that same percentage to the following question:

"What is the probability that 35 wins will be good for the playoffs in the Eastern conference this year?"

The main reason is that for a team with 35 wins to make the playoffs, a great imbalance is required both between conferences and within the worse conference. In other words, the West must be much better than the East, and there must not be parity in the East (such that intraconference wins are weighted toward the top teams). Since those conditions apply this year, it is somewhat more likely than it would be in a given year.

HOWEVER, that has been the case in the last several years of the last 10, and we have not seen a 35 win playoff team in the last decade!

The question is how likely is it for Miami or Indy to COMPLETELY fall apart AFTER Miami gets Shaq back, no less. AND in that case, how likely is it that Milwaukee doesn't get hot when Redd returns or NJ and Toronto don't both get "hot" and go slightly over .500.

The answer is hard to say, but with all those IFS it sure isn't more than 10%. I will give the "playoff push" contingent a very generous 10% that 35 wins will be good.

AND IF that 10% comes through, what are the chances that we can actually play .500 if we try? Let's be very generous and say it's 50% (it's probably closer to 5%).

So, 10% and 50% combined gives you 5%.

A 5% chance at the playoffs in my EXCEEDINGLY CONSERVATIVE AND GENEROUS ESTIMATE.

[CBAreject]

Quote:

---

wow, so in you guys opinion, we should just give up all hope

---

NO! In my opinion, we should realize where our hope lies.

Our franchise needs luck to ever contend. I'm not a fan of counting on luck, so I want to make the probability as high as possible.

What I've tried to do is show that a playoff push is *hope-less*. Why hope for something next to impossible when you can hope for something very possible (and perhaps probable).

[CBAreject]

Quote:

---

two aren't .500

---

How do you know someone is stupid? He keeps repeating the same argument after you've pointed out its obvious flaws.

You keep saying "two aren't .500", but the leader of the Atlantic doesn't count. We aren't competing with them for a spot. I keep telling you that, but you keep being to slow to understand it.

The Heat are the 8th spot at 17-19. I keep asking if you expect the Heat to actually play worse after Shaq returns. Do you? That's what it will take for them to finish below .500. The 7th spot is the Pacers at 20-17. Do you expect them to suddenly get a lot worse?

[exodus]

I think what he means is that the division winners get in the playoffs regardless of their record.

[CHORO44]

Since you decided to quote me. All I'm saying is I'd rather be in the playoffs then not. At least getting there gives you a fighting chance at winning and moving on. To constantly be in the lottery and bank on a top 3 pick that may never come doesn't work for me. I want to see the team grow together and get the kind of chemistry necessary to be competitive.

I'd rather our team fight these tough games aiming at the playoffs then get accustomed to throwing games at the chance Oden or some other unproven will come and save them. You don't need a so-called franchise center to win you need chemistry and talent. We have half that equation already.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

lol. titans start 0-5. fans talk about giving up so they can get tech wr calvin johnson, arguably the best wr since randy moss. titans win some improbable games and gain confidence. then they start to beat playoff caliber teams. in all they win 8 of last 11, but miss playoffs and the chance to take johnson. but now, the team and fan base are optimistic as ever about future. why? because you have to learn how to win first now, before becoming a champion later in life.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

it's not that the atlantic winner doesn't count, it's just that we're not competing against them for an 8th seed. the winner of the atl. gets at least a top 4 seed.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

also....there have been so many examples in sports, in which bad to mediocre teams had to go through growing pains, before they achieved greatness. the "tank crowd" has obviously never played an organized sport before. losing brings on so many hardships to the psyche of a team and an organization. the clippers are a perfect example of how high draft picks guarantees you nothing in this league. it took a 2nd round journeyman pg with championship experience, to get them where are today.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

.. and that journeyman pg also did the same thing for milwaukee and minnesota.

[VarsitySlacker]

and unfortunately could have done it to us this year, had he not decided he like LA so much.

[CBAreject]

Quote:

---

They don't count? OH, so they don't get into the playoffs.

---

Yes, the leader of the Atlantic division gets in the playoffs, but by virtue of winning the division, and not by virtue of having a playoff-worthy record. They could win 25 games and still make it because the entire division is so bad.

Exodus sees this (check out his reply). Why don't you?

Quote:

---

You really are stupid, even if they weren't in the atlantic division...THEY WOULD STILL BE IN THE PLAYOFFS.

---

No, they wouldn't. Their record would be too bad. We don't compete with the winner of that division. It doesn't matter if they win 25 games and we win 35. We still won't make the playoffs ahead of them because division winners are guaranteed spots.

You know what's worst of all? You've called me stupid twice now, yet I've shown (and exodus has affirmed) that you are the thick one. I'm am just astonished at what Clemson allows to graduate. I will have to call them about their standards.