Which is More Significant: Finishing 3rd in the West or the Playoff Sweep?

Maybe we've discussed this enough peripherally already, but I don't think that we've ever specifically looked at the two metrics that Olshey mentioned in his end of season interview. He noted that the playoff sweep showed that there were specific areas that the team needed to improve, but that it was important not to overreact to the playoff failure and to also consider the overall success of the regular season; winning 49 games and ending up 3rd in the West.

To me, the Blazers' 13 game winning streak that lead to the regular season success was impressive, but losing 4 out of 5 of their last five games and being swept by the Pelicans was thoroughly depressing. I'm still not sure what to make of it with respect to the future of the team. Olshey appears to have addressed the lack of three point shooting that he found to be a problem in the playoffs. He's counting on Collins' improvement and increased play to solve at least a significant portion of the front court woes. I'm optimistic about Zach, but not ready to believe that he's ready to push the Blazers into a competitive position. What are your thoughts?

 

My thought is that next year is the one that is most interesting for the Blazers. This year is just a stop-gap year.

Next year, ET and MyLe's contracts will be easier to move, the team will have a better idea which of the young guys (WB4, Trent, Simons) can be a contributor and what ZCo can do with an increased role. If there are no signs of breaking out from ZCo and at least one of the young guys - I have a feeling the Blazers will be more willing to break the Lillard/CJ backcourt. So, to me at least, this looks like an evaluation year, unless a deal presents itself somewhere near the trade-deadline.

 

To be honest i'm not on the "Zach Collins hype" anymore, what i saw from him on Summer League was pretty dissapointing, i expected him to be much better offensively, but his Shooting still sucks, and i know the History from our big mans the last few years. Meyers = shouldn't be on an nba court, Nurkic = was great when he came, after a Full Season he looked worse than before, Noah Vonleh = Never improved in all those years in Portland, Swanigan = doubt he will have a long Career in the NBA, to slow, undersized for a big man, can't defend guards or wings, inefficeny shooting, only nba skill is rebounding... I do not expect Collins to be a Offensive threat in the Next years, but hopefully i'm wrong and he makes a big jump

 

If you go 72-10 in the regular season. Get swept in the playoffs your record doesn't mean doesn't mean much.

 

It's important to note that all 20+ analysts on ESPN.com picked us to win our first round series. And Lillard was 4th in MVP voting. But now, because we got swept in the first round, they think we're only going to win 41 games. That doesn't make sense.

 

It sucks to lose in playoffs but that regular season would be really fun to watch.

 

Dont forget he had his nose broke, played the next day and wore a mask for the first time ever. He would be superman if that didnt affect him.

 

Because it's what is commonly referred to as "fools gold."

 

Given how tight the standings were, "3rd Seed" is not a meaningful metric.
The fact that it took an improbable 13-game winning streak to achieve knocks it from fools gold to...a rock spray-painted gold?

 

Well do you want a winning team or a fun team to watch?

 

We were never in danger of missing the playoffs but everyone below us was at some point in the last month.

 

72-10 is a lot of winning.

 

Why are we suddenly a worse regular season team because of a sweep in the first round? That doesn't make any sense.

 

One of the two would be nice - I'm not picky at this point.

 

I wouldn't say danger, but it could have happened. And we were certainly in danger of sliding down to 7th.

Im on your side King, but we gotta keep it real.

 

After the 13 game win streak, we had 4 fewer losses than the 4th seed. We lost 4 of our final 5 games and still finished 3 game ahead of the 9th seed. In other words, missing the playoffs was never close to happening.

 

1) means that we have a powerful and talented team, but not clearly better than the bulk of the West (only 3 games ahead of 9th, less injuries than some others).
2) means that we have structural flaws.

I didn't vote because both of these are the realities we have to deal with.

Some of the structural flaws were dealt with, but not all of them. Of course, there is concern that losing Davis makes us less robust.

 

What were the records of these teams around us for the last 10 games of the season? Unless they all went 8-2, 9-1, If was definitely a real possibility.

I also said not missing the playoffs, but sliding down to 7th was indeed close to happening.

 

49 wins is not some massive achievement.

Even in the crowded western conference. We've won more than 49 games 13 times in 50 years, so more than a fourth of the time in our franchise's existence, we've done better. Let's set the bar a little higher.

A sweep in the playoffs in a 7 game series when you have HCA is an embarrassment any way you slice it.

 

It wasn't. We were losing our games to Memphis and Dallas and got swept on our 4 game road trip and still finished 3rd. How would we have fallen to 7th?? We were losing and still didn't drop. Maybe if each loss counted as 2 losses? Your argument doesn't hold water.