On Saturday, the Bucks clinched a playoff spot despite losing a vital home game to the Atlanta Hawks, one of the worst teams in the Eastern Conference. On Sunday, the Chicago Bulls also clinched a playoff berth, but they did so with an impressive 24-point win in Miami against the second-seeded Heat.

The dichotomy tells you just about everything you need to know about either team's playoff chances. The Bulls aren't going far either, but at least they're peaking: the victory in Miami caps a run of 10 wins in 12 games for Chicago, a young team under head coach Scott Skiles. For the Bucks, the loss was the team's seventh in its last 12. Just one more win in that stretch (for a definably mediocre 6-6 mark) would have put Milwaukee in solid position to grab the all-important fifth seed in the East.

With two games left (pending Monday's outcome), the Bucks could still earn the fifth spot. But in reality, they shouldn't even be battling for it.

After beating the Bulls on Jan. 2, the Bucks were 17-11 and feeling good about themselves. But as the schedule stiffened with the new year, Terry Stotts' team wilted. Not including Monday's game with Detroit, the Bucks are just 22-30 since that victory over Chicago; nine of those losses were by double-digits, hardly a calling card for a playoff team. But in a watered-down Eastern Conference, that's what the Bucks are.

I've heard the argument that this season represents a marked improvement -- and a critical step forward -- over last year's 30-52 train wreck. That may be true. But it also fits into a troubling and unexceptional pattern. Prior to last season, the Bucks finished with 41, 42 and 41 wins over the previous three campaigns. You can't get any more average than that.

General Manager Larry Harris and Stotts have been defensive if not apologetic for the team's inconsistent nature, commenting that any rationale person would have jumped at the chance to earn the fifth seed in the East if offered it before the season. That's true, but midway through the season, no one would have felt the same way -- certainly not if they were told a mere 43 wins would have clinched the five spot.

The Bucks are a young but talented team. Even more than experience, though, they lack fortitude. They've blown too many games to bad teams since January, often while playing the flimsiest brand of defense. Since March 1 alone, they've lost five games while surrendering at least 114 points. Considering most teams give fans a free taco or a cup of coffee if they reach 100, that's saying something.

But because the NBA invites nearly the entire league to its postseason extravaganza, the Bucks can still call themselves a "playoff team." And despite all the frustrations, that is a positive. Players like Andrew Bogut, T.J. Ford and Bobby Simmons will get their first taste of NBA playoff action, and Michael Redd will try to wash away the memories of a difficult offensive series against Detroit in 2004.

Still, perhaps the best thing for the Bucks wouldn't be an inspiring win or two against Detroit, Miami, New Jersey or Cleveland. Maybe the best possible tonic for what ails the Bucks would be a sound whipping, a four-game sweep, an introduction to the dedication it takes to win in the playoffs -- a time when defense and effort are paramount, not talent and the periodic ability to get hot from 3-point land.

Right now, the Bucks lack the things that quality playoff teams possess. Simply qualifying for the postseason won't mean anything if the team doesn't learn about what it takes to stay for a while -- even if the education is delivered via a hasty exit.

One Other Thing: This could be a whole separate column, but it's really more of a Steve Czaban topic, so I'll keep it brief: the NBA should contract the playoffs to six teams from each league and give the first two teams a bye into the conference finals. That would set up best-of-five first-round matchups between the 3/6 and 4/5 seeds, with the highest remaining seed drawing the 1 in the semis. By reducing the teams and games (and TV/advertising dollars), it's utterly inconceivable that such an idea would ever be considered. But I would respect the NBA far more if it were so.