I don't think it is fair to call it absurd, it is more a product of participating in the silly, but hard to resist, excercise of limiting the rotation to 8. We are assigning likelihood that a player will be in the hypothetical rotation of 8. Notice I am betting Robinson will be in the hypothetical rotation of 8.
Flip it around, wouldn't it be more absurd for JB to line up Livers, Poole, Brooks, and Ibi and say: "after I decide which one of you is making the rotation of 8, then 3 of you will have a 0% chance to make the rotation of 8"?
Also, the percentages lose all meaning if they do not add up to 100 for 1 unlocked spot, 200 for 2 unlocked spots, or 300 for 3 unlocked spots.
Further, and this is more in opposition to the point Dylan was making, I just don't think it is airtight logic to point to Robinson's getting significant playing time in the past as necessarily indicative of what we will see in the future.
2015/2016: Tons of injuries made for tons of playing time.
2016/2017: The ninth, and tenth men--who were presumably beaten out of playing time for an 8 man rotation were Lonergan and Freshman Ibi.
Assuming Livers is in the 8, then Brooks, Poole, and Ibi > Lonergan and Freshman Ibi.
Big difference, I think.
Another way to look at is if I travelled back from the future and told you that one of the six that you have listed as 100 percent locks for an 8 man rotation was not in it which one would you guess it would be? I think most would guess Robinson....Some might guess X.....