Joined: 19 Jun 2003 Posts: 1235 Location: Los Angeles (Western & Florence)
Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2017 4:35 pm Post subject: The Hawks: Most mediocre team of the past ten years
I always think back to 2008 when they almost beat Boston as a #8 seed, taking them to seven while Boston beat us in six. I felt they had MAJOR potential, and would become a powerhouse who may even scrape the Finals.
A decade later....it seems like their streak of consistent mediocrity may be over.
ESPN is predicting that they'll have the #14th seed in the East, following ten years of making the Playoffs, while making the Eastern Finals once, and the Semis four times. They could never, ever, ever get over that hump (aka Lebron James).
If anyone paid any attention to them...what seemed to be their main issue? Was it solely because they didn't have a superstar with that killer mentality to take them past those other squads in the East? Should they have tanked earlier and gambled with a high draft pick instead of adding decent pieces who were strong role players and nothing else?
Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2017 4:40 pm Post subject: Re: The Hawks: Most mediocre team of the past ten years
R-Tistic wrote:
I always think back to 2008 when they almost beat Boston as a #8 seed, taking them to seven while Boston beat us in six. I felt they had MAJOR potential, and would become a powerhouse who may even scrape the Finals.
A decade later....it seems like their streak of consistent mediocrity may be over.
ESPN is predicting that they'll have the #14th seed in the East, following ten years of making the Playoffs, while making the Eastern Finals once, and the Semis four times. They could never, ever, ever get over that hump (aka Lebron James).
If anyone paid any attention to them...what seemed to be their main issue? Was it solely because they didn't have a superstar with that killer mentality to take them past those other squads in the East? Should they have tanked earlier and gambled with a high draft pick instead of adding decent pieces who were strong role players and nothing else?
They remind me of the Kings, they didn't lose cause of not having a superstar they lost because they ended up wasting a lot of energy on regular season wins and that made them feel the affects by playoff time.
They weren't a great team. They were just a good team with above average players. They had the one season when they won 60, but they had only one other year with 50. You can say that they lacked a superstar, which is true, but more fundamentally they just weren't an exceptional team.
Hawks haven't been a serious contender in the NBA since the 50's and early 60's. Even that one year when they got to the conference finals recently, I didn't see them advancing or being a serious threat for a title. The problem for the Hawks is that while they may have a marquee player they lack the roster depth to seriously make it deep run in the playoffs, which is why they so frequently lose in the early rounds.
Posted: Thu Aug 31, 2017 9:30 am Post subject: Re: The Hawks: Most mediocre team of the past ten years
R-Tistic wrote:
I always think back to 2008 when they almost beat Boston as a #8 seed, taking them to seven while Boston beat us in six. I felt they had MAJOR potential, and would become a powerhouse who may even scrape the Finals.
A decade later....it seems like their streak of consistent mediocrity may be over.
ESPN is predicting that they'll have the #14th seed in the East, following ten years of making the Playoffs, while making the Eastern Finals once, and the Semis four times. They could never, ever, ever get over that hump (aka Lebron James).
If anyone paid any attention to them...what seemed to be their main issue? Was it solely because they didn't have a superstar with that killer mentality to take them past those other squads in the East? Should they have tanked earlier and gambled with a high draft pick instead of adding decent pieces who were strong role players and nothing else?
They're better that mediocre. They've made the playoffs 10 straight years, the semis 4 times, and the conference finals one time.
A mediocre team would be more like Denver - 5 playoff appearances, 5 times missing the playoffs over the past decade.
That said, they've simply been a good but nothing special team -- I'd call them steady and good but unexceptional rather than mediocre.
How could the Hawks be the most mediocre team of the last decade when there's the natural disaster of Hurricane Sac, which hasn't sniffed the playoffs since 2006, let alone the eternal dumpster fire that is Minnesota, who's missed it every year since 2004? _________________ “Christ did not die to forgive sinners who go on treasuring anything above seeing and savoring God. And people who would be happy in heaven if Christ were not there, will not be there."
- John Piper
Joined: 02 May 2005 Posts: 90306 Location: Formerly Known As 24
Posted: Mon Sep 11, 2017 7:46 am Post subject:
Judah wrote:
How could the Hawks be the most mediocre team of the last decade when there's the natural disaster of Hurricane Sac, which hasn't sniffed the playoffs since 2006, let alone the eternal dumpster fire that is Minnesota, who's missed it every year since 2004?
Because of the definition of mediocre, meaning average or middling. Sacramento does not qualify for equal and opposite reasons that golden State doesnt. _________________ “We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel
then accomplishing great things becomes very difficult.
Golden State wasn't doing much under their old ownership, but things are better since the Lacob group bought the team in summer 2010. The new ownership might not be the sole reason for their turnaround, but I would consider it a positive factor.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
