2weekswithpay wrote:Dan Z wrote:AshyLarrysDiaper wrote:
Right, I mostly agree. The play in - or excuse me, the “postseason” - is a pathetic organizational goal.
But then you have situations like this year’s Western Conference where ten teams were legitimately gunning for the playoffs and in most years each would’ve been good enough to qualify. And now we get to see 4 of them face off in do or die games, which I find really exciting.
In truth, only two teams seem to have been content to chase the play-in as an end, and we unfortunately are one of them. I don’t consider that an indictment of the tourney — we just follow a truly garbage org.
Before the play-in 53% of the teams in the NBA made the playoff. Why allow more than that?
Shouldn't the playoffs be a goal that is something special that you earned? I'm not saying the Bulls didn't earn it, but the Raptors, Wizards, Pistons, Hornets and Nets weren't competition this year. They were done a long time ago.
The play-in does help address two issues. It reduces tanking and helps keep the NBA competitive after the ASB.
Were the following teams competitive?
Raptors, Wizards, Pistons, Hornets, Nets, Spurs, Grizzlies, Jazz and Blazers? All those teams either were terrible to start the year or tanked a long time ago. The Rockets are the only non play-in/playoff team that tried to win until the end of the season.
That's 9 teams out of 30. 30% of the league.
Without the play-in do you think the Bulls would purposely tank? I doubt it. The Hawks? Maybe, but with the roster/coach I lean towards no. The play-in teams in the west wouldn't tank even if there was no play-in.