I think what jem is getting at is a top contender shouldn't be that bad from the line.
Chicago is a well, lottery team. Them sucking at the FT line or anywhere else is almost expected wouldn't you agree?
Like last year finalists who were 14th (Lakers) and 30th (Magic) in the league in FT%?
Or the Celtics (18th), Nuggets (20th), Cavs (21st)
Raptors and Pacers were two of the top 3 in FT% last year; were they contenders?
Who on this squad is as horrid as a free throw shooter as Dwight Howard though? Wasn't he the worst in the entire league last year? And since we are on the subject, his missed FTs cost them a pivotal game in the finals.
And you named a bunch of EC teams but clearly there is more talent top to bottom in the WC than in the EC. Poor FTs in the WC last year was a factor in causing teams to slide in the standings (and thus who they played in the playoffs). Missed FTs in the EC was not that big of a deal as the top 3 out there had plenty of buffer over the rest.
A team like the Lakers can be middle of the pack in FT shooting because they are a very efficient offensive team. Are the Spurs that much improved and focused on offense where shooting 70% on a regular basis will not affect them?
The Spurs last year were 19th...right there with Cleveland, Boston and Denver. Along with the Lakers and Magic that lists the 6 division winners last year and only 1 was in the top half of the league in FT%. The Lakers shot .770 and the Spurs .761 from the line last year. The difference is immaterial. FT% and playoff success are not as related as you are trying to make it. The Lakers were 4th in fg% and the Spurs were 6th. It appears the fg% has more correlation with winning than FT%.
You are trying to use the FT% of one game to project for the year and make an argument that effects playoff performance and seeding. I have given stats that show there is very little relationship between FT% and winning.
I am not trying to use the FT% of one game to project the entire year. That is you taking it much farther than what I said. Nowhere did I say that I think the Spurs are going to slide down in the standings 5 months down the line because of one off night. You were blowing off being less efficient at the line as no big deal like the Spurs had a lot of offensive fire power to make up for it. That is why I asked you if you felt their offense has improved enough (Obviously Jefferson adds a solid punch) to offset being in the back of the pack FT wise. I am not going to go dig through all the Spurs stats to see how many attempts they average per game but being 10% less efficient at the line will be a few points shaven off each game. Not to mention at the end of tight games there is a lot of fouling and FT shooting down the stretch. FTs are very much apart of winning games in crunch time. Since your stats do not add a 'weight' to a FT you don't get the full story. A missed/made FT at any point in the game is the same in basketball statistics but we all know that is not the case when it comes to winning or losing a game.
Last year, in a tight playoff race in the west, all the small things counted down the stretch. Again, I never was saying that FT% is more critical than FG% (why you even brought that up, I have no flippin idea) but that doesn't mean you just shrug it off like you are doing here.
For example, the Jazz played the Lakers in the final game of the season last year. If they won they wouldn't have played the Lakers. In that game they took 47 FTs but only shot 75%. Had they shot in the mid 80% like they normally do they could have closed the gap in the 4th and put themselves in a chance to play a different opponent in the first round. Instead, they were one and done. So I didn't have to really 'make up' that argument. That one was still very fresh. Again, stats don't factor in everything.
