- Joined
- Sep 2, 2015
- Messages
- 1,063
- Reaction Score
- 4,938
But as others have stated, that goal of winning was predicated on having a healthy Giannis throughout the playoffs. That went out the window early in the series and changed things. The Bucks have veterans, but of the real contenders, they are the most dependent on one player. Take him out, and the equation changes. It just does. Does it suck for the team and management. But if asked and honestly answred after the injury, they still believed they could win, but that expectation was no longer a certainty in their minds and seeding went out the window... especially in a year when there is a pretty good balance in the playoff teams. I think given he circumstances, it more of a major disappointment than a failure.I completely agree with all your examples--however, did I not say what Giannis said is viable for amateur sports? And also it is for an expansion pro team, but not for the Bucks who are a veteran NBA team who won the championship two years ago,
The Bucks and Giannis set as their goal this year to win the NBA championship--they set this as their goal, not me--so what do you call not achieving your set goal? If you don't think this is failure, then was their winning the championship a success? You can't have a success without not reaching success being called failure.
i would suggest you that pose this question to the Bucks GM or owner(s) --ask them what they consider this year's #1 seed, 4-1 loss to an 8th seed--something which has happened only 4 times in NBA history--whether this season was a failure...