|
Post by NAUHurdler on Jun 1, 2016 23:51:27 GMT -5
What is the record for most losses?
The Office of the General Manager for the Phoenix Suns
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 2, 2016 5:23:54 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by NAUHurdler on Jun 2, 2016 19:42:23 GMT -5
So what's the answer?
The Office of the General Manager for the Phoenix Suns
|
|
|
Post by NAUHurdler on Jun 3, 2016 11:41:22 GMT -5
Well...I just hope this isn't going to be a short series. Yeah the Cavs couldn't hit a shot but the Splash Bros scoring 20 total and still winning by 15...eggghh
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Mouse on Jun 4, 2016 19:20:20 GMT -5
So what's the answer? The Office of the General Manager for the Phoenix Suns The Sixers went 9-73, opposite of the Warriors 73-9. The Bobcats have the record for worst winning % for going 7-59 in the lockout shortened season.
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Mouse on Jun 6, 2016 10:37:02 GMT -5
Question of the day:
Did the weak ass Eastern Conference adequately prepare the Cavaliers for the NBA Finals?
Is it better to be "battle tested" or "rested"?
|
|
|
Post by dunky69 on Jun 6, 2016 11:04:32 GMT -5
Obviously battle tested, but there's a happy medium in there somewhere. The east needs a bail out. Obama's last move before he leaves office.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2016 12:16:30 GMT -5
Question of the day: Did the weak ass Eastern Conference adequately prepare the Cavaliers for the NBA Finals? Is it better to be "battle tested" or "rested"? The Warriors are the having the greatest season in the history of basketball. Really nothing could prepare any team for that. I think the Thunder are/were uniquely suited to give the Warriors problems. No other team in the league really has the personnel to do what they did (though, oddly, I think the Cavs would have won the finals had OKC won that series). The East, from top to bottom, was better than the West. That's not a debate. The West was top-heavy. Still, I had Warriors in 5 before the series started (though I was hoping against hope that the Cavs would win in 6). They're just an impossibly tough match-up, not to mention they're in the midst of the greatest season ever.
|
|
|
Post by dunky69 on Jun 6, 2016 15:38:53 GMT -5
That's a tough spot to be trying to defend the east all these years. I don't have a dog in the race, but I see it slightly different. The east might've had better records but I think it's still a debate on which conference is better. The west is top heavy and the east is slightly above mediocre heavy. The shitty east teams got to play against slightly above average teams all year while the shitty west teams got beat up by the top dogs. I would wager the bottom of the east has a better record against the top 5 in the east than the bottom of the west has against the top 5 in the west. So to you that means they're the better conference. I think the top of your conference defines your conference. If the west is 5 deep compared to the east's 1 team, I'd say the west is better. I'm sure there's some math I could do to show a discrepancy in talent but I'm too lazy lol.
I honestly think a healthy clippers would beat this cavs team and por would make it a fun series.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2016 18:49:55 GMT -5
That's a tough spot to be trying to defend the east all these years. I don't have a dog in the race, but I see it slightly different. The east might've had better records but I think it's still a debate on which conference is better. The west is top heavy and the east is slightly above mediocre heavy. The shitty east teams got to play against slightly above average teams all year while the shitty west teams got beat up by the top dogs. I would wager the bottom of the east has a better record against the top 5 in the east than the bottom of the west has against the top 5 in the west. So to you that means they're the better conference. I think the top of your conference defines your conference. If the west is 5 deep compared to the east's 1 team, I'd say the west is better. I'm sure there's some math I could do to show a discrepancy in talent but I'm too lazy lol. I honestly think a healthy clippers would beat this cavs team and por would make it a fun series. No offense, but that's retarded.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2016 19:04:37 GMT -5
And can we stop with all of this "Portland was actually a really awesome team" crap? They were not a very good team. They made it to the 5th spot because the conference was mostly garbage. Let's go through the teams in reverse order:
LA - garbage PHX - young, injured garbage MIN - young NOP - injured DEN - young, injured SAC - garbage UTA - solid yet injured HOU - mentally garbage MEM - Barely a D-League team by the end of the year DAL - Really banged up
The Blazers played four games against Detroit and Atlanta and lost all 4 by an average of 13 points. They only got past the Clippers because their two best players were injured for the last three games. Speaking of which, Blake Griffin missed basically the whole year and the Clips STILL finished 9 games ahead of Portland.
People need to stop using one injury-riddled series win as some sort of evidence that Portland was this great team. They have great fans and it was awesome to see them make the second round, but if they don't make some improvements, whether from free agents or from guys on the team, they're in for a rude awakening.
And to your first point, I'm not defending the East "after all these years," I'm defending the East THIS year. And anyone who paid attention could see that the East, as a whole, was better than the West.
I don't have the time to go through the bottom 5 vs. top 5 records, but the bottom 5 in the West vs. their own conference was 81-179. The bottom 5 in the East vs. their own conference was 78-182. So the bottom 5 in the West were slightly better against their own conference than the East, but it doesn't seem very significant.
And at the end of the day, what does it really matter? The Warriors are going to go down as the best team ever, and it hardly would have mattered what conference they were in.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2016 19:45:59 GMT -5
I'm just so tired of these hot takes after every game, every series, where we try to declare something unequivocally based on the result. Haven't we learned by now that the playoffs are all about match-ups? You know who toughest match-up was for the Cavs in the East? Detroit. Does that make Detroit better than Atlanta? No. Does it make them better than Toronto? No. But they were the toughest match-up because they could throw multiple defenders at LeBron, they had a really good rim protecting center, and they had a bulldog wing defender that could annoy Kyrie (I say annoy because Kyrie still thrashed them to pieces). The Hawks didn't have any of those things. The Raptors had 1.5 of those things.
People really need to stop making sweeping conclusions and generalizations based on one game and one series.
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Mouse on Jun 6, 2016 20:39:39 GMT -5
The East, from top to bottom, was better than the West. That's not a debate. The West was top-heavy. That is laughable. Top to bottom the West's playoff teams would all be favored over their Eastern counterparts (save for probably Memphis/Indiana due to injuries). Haven't we learned by now that the playoffs are all about match-ups? You know who toughest match-up was for the Cavs in the East? Detroit. That is pretty much my point. When your "toughest match-up" is a team you swept . . . you clearly don't have very strong competition. After OKC and Portland, it doesn't seem that there is much Cleveland can do that makes the Warriors sweat.
|
|
|
Post by NAUHurdler on Jun 6, 2016 22:50:01 GMT -5
I'm ready for a Top 16 playoffs. Period. Screw East vs West.
The Office of the General Manager for the Phoenix Suns
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 7, 2016 13:55:08 GMT -5
I love the idea of top 16 as well. As a Knicks fan, Phil Jackson made a statement of how the east is weak. Which I agree with to an extent. I certainly don't think NYK is making the playoffs next season. (Even if we upgrade at SG with Evan Turner it still won't be enough)
Though I'm curious if we have the top 16 what would be the point of conferences? East and West match ups happen twice a season. I wonder if they'll condense the season in correlation with this. Also would divisions and divsion winners still be a thing?
|
|