What do you think? Was the 2010 season subpar to the 2009 season?
Did we make progress? Did we inch closer to that elusive dance? Did the team mature, and are we a step ahead of where we left off from the previous season? Or were we mired in the mud and our progress flat lined for the whole year?
No doubt about it, it was incredible to get 50 wins from an injury riddled year. There are 410 games worth of playing time and we had 311 games worth of injury. But if you’re like me, I see 50 games in the win column and my first thought is we were 4 games worse than last year.
To take this team to the Finals, we have to keep inching forward. We have to make progress.
This is what it’s all about. We have to keep growing. If we intend to take it to the next level and start winning playoff games, we have to play the good teams better. Despite all the mayhem, chaos, broken knee caps, broken feet, broken backs, tendon pops, spilt beer, and swallowed whistles, I think we in fact, did play the good teams better last year.
In my last post (Blazers Color Coded Season) something "finally" jumped off the page and hit me in the head. Despite all of the injuries, we played better against the good teams last year!
In 2009 our 82 game schedule had in it 24 games against teams with a mark of .610 or better.
In 2010 we played 33 games with an opponent that had a win mark .610 or better.
Against those teams (.610 or higher) in 2009 our win% was .416 (10 wins 14 losses)
In 2010 our win% against the same level of opponent was .455 (15 wins 18 losses)
In some respects it appears that we did have a better season in 2010.
We played 9 more games in 2010 (a significant amount) against stiff competition and came out ahead of where we were the year before.
Yes, we sprinkled in some losses against subpar teams we didn’t lose to the year before, but winning against the good teams is where it counts. This is where the rubber meets the road.
To highlight this, notice the league standings in the last 2 years. I’ve only listed the teams .500 or better.
In 2009 there were 9 teams with a record of .610 or better.
In 2010 there were 12 teams with a record of .610 or better.
The competition seems to have been stiffer in 2010.
|z - Cleveland||66||16||0.805||z - Cleveland||61||21||0.744|
|z - LA Lakers||65||17||0.793||y - Orlando||59||23||0.720|
|y - Boston||62||20||0.756||z - LA Lakers||57||25||0.695|
|y - Orlando||59||23||0.720||y - Dallas||55||27||0.671|
|y - Denver||54||28||0.659||x - Phoenix||54||28||0.659|
|y - San Antonio||54||28||0.659||y - Denver||53||29||0.646|
|x - Portland||54||28||0.659||x - Atlanta||53||29||0.646|
|x - Houston||53||29||0.646||x - Utah||53||29||0.646|
|x - Dallas||50||32||0.610||y - Boston||50||32||0.610|
|x - New Orleans||49||33||0.598||x - Portland||50||32||0.610|
|x - Utah||48||34||0.585||x - San Antonio||50||32||0.610|
|x - Atlanta||47||35||0.573||x - Oklahoma City||50||32||0.610|
|Phoenix||46||36||0.561||x - Miami||47||35||0.573|
|x - Miami||43||39||0.524||x - Milwaukee||46||36||0.561|
|x - Philadelphia||41||41||0.500||x - Charlotte||44||38||0.537|
|x - Chicago||41||41||0.500||Houston||42||40||0.512|
|x - Chicago||41||41||0.500|
I’ve expressed my thoughts above. What do you think? How significant is it that we played 9 more games (33 games in 2010, 24 games in 2009) against stiff competition and came out with a better record in 2010. Does it show progress; does it show that we developed some level of cohesion and team chemistry? I think it's noteworthy, and a platform to build on.
It’s tough to pose a question for this poll - Did we have a better season in 2010 versus 2009 in the sense that we’ve matured, team chemistry is better, and we are now better prepared to advance in the playoffs?