Posted by joec32033:
Posted by TrueBlue:
Posted by joec32033:
Posted by TrueBlue:
Sure let's compare post-season winning percentages when the playoff format for one is one and done, while the other is a best of and teams get to play more games at home. That's smart NOT!
I'm talking about having a team or the pieces to win it all, who perform well during the regular season, and then fold/choke in the post -season.
[Edited by - TrueBlue on 05-14-2008 08:59 AM]
You made the comparison. And an over .500 win % in the playoffs is not exactly bad.
I wasn't make the comparison of winning percentages.
Supposedly Good coach, high expectations, good team, good regular season, failure after failure in the post-season.
You could throw Flip Saunders in here as well.
Failure in the post season. Exactly how are you defining failure? Seems to me D'Antoni performs well in the playoffs. If your definition of failure is not winning a chip, then 15 teams "fail" every year.
My definition is being picked as a favorite to win it all, not just having a chance to win it, having the roster, coach, producing a regular season that supports the favoritism and then failing. The Suns had been the favorite to win it all for the past 3 yrs and then to top it off they lost in the first round this yr and were a Tim Thomas 3pt shot from being bounced in the first round in the past 3yrs.
Are seriously going to sit here and rationalize that if Boston doesn't win the Chip their failure is equally monumental as the Sixers and Hawks not getting a Chip? PUHLEEZE!!!!!
Sounds like I'm having a conversation with Stephon Marbury!!
[Edited by - TrueBlue on 05-14-2008 09:56 AM]