What's new
By:

Recent 8 seeds, and how they did the next season.

Xsy

Xsy

Well-Known Member
So one of the biggest debates all season long was whether or not Utah was going to tank and pick up another lotto pick, or make a run in the playoffs for playoff experience. Thanks to last night's game, the debate is finally over. Utah's headed to the playoffs.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm excited we're in the playoffs-- but we're gonna get creamed. Maybe one or two wins at the very best. But is it such a bad thing?

I decided to go back and look at some previous 8 seeds in recent history. How well did they do the season after they were the worst of the best? Honestly, it looks like the "playoff experience is important" crowd sort of has a point. In most cases, the 8 seed goes on to do much better the next year. With the exception of two DNQ teams, every 8 seed in recent memory jumped up to at least the 5 seed.

We're in a good place right now, and its only going to get better. If you were bummed about not getting that last pick, just be excited over the confidence and swagger these few games will give us.

Year: Eastern and Western 8 Seeds
(Previous season's eighth seed's new standing)

2007: Golden State, Orlando

2008: Denver, Atlanta
(Golden State, DNQ ; Orlando, 3)

2009: Utah, Detroit
(Denver, 2 ; Atlanta, 4)

2010: Oklahoma City, Chicago
(Utah, 5 ; Detroit DNQ)

2011: Memphis, Indiana
(Oklahoma City, 4, ; Chicago, 1)

2012: Utah(?), Philadelphia(?)
(Memphis, 5 ; Indiana, 3)
 
Interesting study...
A lot of 8th seeds did a lot better the following year...
It also appears to me that these teams did it because they had gotten high draft picks.
 
I think its pretty clear that the only direction we can go is upward given the potential and youth on this roster. Detroit had a DNQ because they traded away Billups and their entire franchise collapsed
 
Yeah the ones that just fell away were 8th seeded teams that were on a decline anyway. I'd lump us in the category with teams like OKC, Memphis, and Indy which is very encouraging.
 
Good job - but it's hard to judge. Too many variables.

Jazz were an 8 seed in 2002

Jazz were an 8 seed in 2012.

Two totally different teams going in different directions.
 
The thing is most people think Jazz is a really young team and they will all only get batter. Harris, Millsap, and Jefferson are all in their prime years now and won't likely get much better. The people around him will but I dont think we will do an Orlando Magic or Thunder type jump.
 
The Black Swordsman said:
The thing is most people think Jazz is a really young team and they will all only get batter. Harris, Millsap, and Jefferson are all in their prime years now and won't likely get much better. The people around him will but I dont think we will do an Orlando Magic or Thunder type jump.
Click to expand...

The disease is spreading.
 
to be a playoff contender, you have to learn to play playoff basketball.

you can't learn playoff basketball if you're not there.

this is a big step for a team that is on its way up... and that will be true no matter how quickly and badly we pile up 4 losses.
 
Xsy said:
So one of the biggest debates all season long was whether or not Utah was going to tank and pick up another lotto pick, or make a run in the playoffs for playoff experience. Thanks to last night's game, the debate is finally over. Utah's headed to the playoffs.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm excited we're in the playoffs-- but we're gonna get creamed. Maybe one or two wins at the very best. But is it such a bad thing?

I decided to go back and look at some previous 8 seeds in recent history. How well did they do the season after they were the worst of the best? Honestly, it looks like the "playoff experience is important" crowd sort of has a point. In most cases, the 8 seed goes on to do much better the next year. With the exception of two DNQ teams, every 8 seed in recent memory jumped up to at least the 5 seed.

We're in a good place right now, and its only going to get better. If you were bummed about not getting that last pick, just be excited over the confidence and swagger these few games will give us.

Year: Eastern and Western 8 Seeds
(Previous season's eighth seed's new standing)

2007: Golden State, Orlando

2008: Denver, Atlanta
(Golden State, DNQ ; Orlando, 3)

2009: Utah, Detroit
(Denver, 2 ; Atlanta, 4)

2010: Oklahoma City, Chicago
(Utah, 5 ; Detroit DNQ)

2011: Memphis, Indiana
(Oklahoma City, 4, ; Chicago, 1)

2012: Utah(?), Philadelphia(?)
(Memphis, 5 ; Indiana, 3)
Click to expand...

The 2008 GSW team that didn't qualify was actually pretty good. They had the highest win total ever for amy team that didn't make it. I think it was 48 wins.
 
I think we have a lot in common with the recent ones of OKC, Memphis, Indiana, and Chicago...young teams on the rise...opposed to Detroit in 09 (which was on the decline from a mini-dynasty, if you could call it that.) I wouldn't be surprised to see us in the top 4 or 5 next season.
 
northeast said:
Interesting study...
A lot of 8th seeds did a lot better the following year...
It also appears to me that these teams did it because they had gotten high draft picks.
Click to expand...
Yes, and last I checked we have a bunch of high draft picks as well. What's your point?
 
dipship31 said:
Yeah the ones that just fell away were 8th seeded teams that were on a decline anyway. I'd lump us in the category with teams like OKC, Memphis, and Indy which is very encouraging.
Click to expand...
Agree. I think it's much more important to consider whether the teams were young and buliding or old and fading. Utah is the former and I truly believe KOC is going to make a smart acquisition or trade to help the roster. Equally important, I think he'll find a way to get rid of Bell and will certainly NOT re-sign CJ. That, right there, is addition by subtraction.
 
Utah's big lineup and Favor's progression in general combined with Harris rediscovering his passion for the game makes this Utah team much, much scarier than their seeding.

I guarantee SA would have vastly preferred playing against the Suns. Starting Kawhi makes Sap at the 3 very much a mismatch. Favors has the ability to recover to Bonner to disrupt those shots and won't have any trouble whatsoever guarding Blair. So what's left is penetration and kickouts between their guards, and the matchup of Al vs. Timmy.

Still an advantage to SA but not to the degree an 8 vs 1 seed matchup typically is.
 
GlassEater said:
I think it's much more important to consider whether the teams were young and buliding or old and fading. Utah is the former and I truly believe KOC is going to make a smart acquisition or trade to help the roster. Equally important, I think he'll find a way to get rid of Bell and will certainly NOT re-sign CJ. That, right there, is addition by subtraction.
Click to expand...
Agreed w/everything here. For example, comparing the Jazz as an 8th-seed in 2001-02 to how the did the following year (+3 wins, 7th-seed) doesn't really make alot of sense since they were an aging team hit hard with injuries but still on the decline.

I just like to go back and look at up-and-coming teams as 7th or 8th seeds (really, there isn't much difference between the two).

I keep going back to the '99 Sacramento Kings (original comparison here: https://jazzfanz.com/showthread.php?10110-Could-the-Jazz-be-like-the-1999-New-York-Knicks&p=301302#post301302) because they were also a team both initially hurt by the lockout (lack of training camp and practice time) and then helped (young legs, deep bench) but they were out of the playoff picture until they won 10 of their final 11 games to leapfrog 3 teams and jump from 10th to 7th. (For those younger fans, the Kings took the heavily favored Jazz the distance and by the time the Jazz squeaked out, they were beat up, worn down and exhausted for their 2nd-round series). The shoe is on the other foot this time around, but the experience Sacramento gained was invaluable as they eventually built themselves into a championship contender in 2002.

Not only are the Jazz in the postseason, but their young players are playing consistent minutes and are a legitimate reason behind the success of the team, and this experience could be monumental in their development.
I can't tell you how many times I've seen younger players play well in the regular season and then struggle in their first playoff game/series. Here's a few Jazz examples off the top of my head: AK was a disaster in his initial Game 1 but bounced back bigtime in Game 2. Same with Boozer against Houston in '07. Harpring had a breakout regular season with Utah in '02-03 but really struggled with his shot in the first 3 playoff games. Okur had playoff experience prior to Utah but not as the starting center - and in '07 he really struggled with the amplified physicality and it completely affected his legs on his shot through 5 games, but in Game 6 he finally found the range and had his best game in pivotal Game 7.

For all we've seen about Burks, Hayward, Favors and Kanter - how these guys perform in the postseason is both an unknown and something I'm really excited to see.
 
Sirkickyass said:
The 2008 GSW team that didn't qualify was actually pretty good. They had the highest win total ever for amy team that didn't make it. I think it was 48 wins.
Click to expand...

They did. The West was STACKED that year. The Nuggets, as the 8th seed, had 50-wins. 50 wins and an 8th seed! Crazy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top