So it turns out we weren’t dreaming after all. It turns out that when we turn the lights out on 2019 — and, thus, the decade of the twenty-teens — we will be leaving behind the worst sporting decade we’ve ever known in New York City.

And it isn’t particularly close.

Now, your first reaction to this news may be something along the line of, “No s–t, Sherlock,” because it probably feels like every time you go to a game the home team loses. Anecdotal evidence when it comes to this subject is pretty compelling. Our teams lose a lot, and have done that for years. Our teams don’t win championships a lot, haven’t for years.

But sometimes the data doesn’t back up the emotion. Sometimes we just think things are worse than they are. I am here to tell you: things are every bit as bad as they seem. And the data doesn’t just back that theory up, it helps tell it from the highest mountaintop.

I decided to roll my sleeves up and take a look at every decade starting with the ’50s — the first full decade of professional basketball. I didn’t include the New York Yanks, who played three years in the NFL in the early ’50s, but every other team, whether they wound up leaving (such as the Dodgers and Giants) or being added on (Mets, Jets, Nets, Islanders, Devils), they were a part of each decade’s landscape.

Here’s how the decades break down for overall winning percentage:

1. 1950s: .571

2. 2000s: .523

3. 1970s: .515

4. 1990s: .513

5. 1980s: .501

6. 2010s: .501

7. 1960s: .462

Seeing the ‘60s pull up last is hardly a surprise because as bad as our decade has been, that one featured just about every one of our teams bottoming our. There were the ’62 Mets, of course, and the ’64 and ’66 Giants, who went a combined 3-22-3. Even the Yankees managed to finish 10th in 1966 and ninth in ’67.

Still, the ’60s also featured the ’68 Jets, the ’69 Mets and the first half of the Knicks team that won the 1970 NBA title. The Yankees won five pennants to start the decade, and two championships. The Giants played in three straight NFL title games (1961, ’62 and ’63). On the big picture, you’d sign up for a decade like the ’60s. You’d sign up right now.

In our decade?

We had one champion, the 2011 Giants. We had three other teams make it to the finals of their sport: the 2011-12 Devils, the 2013-14 Rangers and 2015 Mets. And that’s it. That’s all. Let’s go back to the data and you’ll see that’s not just a forgettable decade but an almost-impossible-to-believe level of futility.

Champions by decade (all sports)

1. 1950s: 8 (Yankees 5, Dodgers 1, Baseball Giants 1, Football Giants 1)

2. 1970s: 6 (Yankees 2, Knicks 2, Nets 2

2. 1980s: 6 (Islanders 4, Mets 1, Giants 1)

2. 1990s: 6 (Yankees 3, Giants 1, Rangers 1, Devils 1)

5. 2000s: 5 (Yankees 2, Devils 2, Giants 1)

6. 1960s: 4 (Yankees 2, Jets 1, Mets 1)

7. 2010s: 1 (Giants)

Oh, but it’s worse. You might ask yourself, “Sure, a .501 winning percentage is nothing to be proud of but that does prove that, on any given day in the twenty-teens, you had a fractionally better-than-even shot to see the home team win!”

And, technically, that’s true.

But that number is skewed by two things. One of them has been the one good thing we have been able to rely on this decade, as in many past decades: the Yankees. The Yankees were 921-699 this decade (excluding playoffs). They were 223 games over .500; the rest of New York was 209 games under .500, which sounds more like it. The other is quirky: thanks to the new overtime rules in the NHL, it’s almost impossible for all but the most wretched teams to finish under .500. And this was the only full decade in which that rule applied.

The takeaway?

We know what we know and we know what we see. And what we’ve seen has been deplorable. Fare thee well, 2010s. And welcome to the new decade. As Col. Sherman T. Potter once said, “May she be a damn sight better than the last one.”

We harp so much when the people in charge of sports get stuff wrong, so let’s be clear about this: St. John’s AD Mike Cragg got it very right about Mike Anderson, no matter how twisting the path was. Right is right.

We’ve always thought that of all the athletes in town, Eli Manning would be the one you’d like to have a beer with. And now, it turns out, we weren’t just right about that, he might buy the beer for you.

The College Football Playoff would be a perfect event with eight teams.

Happy New Year. Enjoy the ages-old inner struggle between “The Odd Couple” marathon, “The Honeymooners” marathon and “The Twilight Zone” marathon.

Kevin Bryant: Two questions for the Met fan who Whacked Curt Flood and Marvin Miller for causing a hike in prices last Sunday: Would Keith Hernandez, Gary Carter, Mike Piazza — and yes, even Yoenis Cespedes — ever have been available to get them to a World Series without the prospect of free agency? And whose spending philosophy should Steve Cohen emulate: the Wilpons or the Steinbrenners? I ask these as a Yankee fan accepting higher prices in exchange for my team making the maximum effort possible to put the most competitive lineup on the field every year.

Vac: It’s not an unfair point. At all.

Elon Semaza: The Cole signing has me doing two things: dreaming of championships, and respecting CC Sabathia. The only player I can think of who signed a decade-ish mega deal and signed for another year after that was Sabathia. Ask Yankee fans: Do you take CC’s pinstripe career for Cole? I’m not greedy, one championship is plenty — sign me up.

Vac: Looks like someone got a full case of reason tucked into their Christmas stocking this year!

@Dr_Adolph_Soto: A real stocking stuffer would be Francisco Lindor under my tree!

@MikeVacc: Nolan Arenado would be like the Christmas when I was 14 and expecting a lot of clothes and got Atari instead.

Richard Siegelman: Yoenis Cespedes’ salary will jump from $6 million up to $11 million if he has just ONE active day on the Mets’ 2020 roster. Logic and math tell me that if he plays all 162 games, they should pay him 162 times as much — all $1.782 billion.

Vac: If he only had Bobby Bonilla’s agent and accountant …