For all the talk of Western Superiority/Reseeding

[Chronz]

It's about when these guys face each other. Also, some western teams stopped going full bore awhile back because they were eliminated imo

[-Sammy-]

In my opinion, the best thing the NBA could do is emulate the divisional structure of the NFL as closely as possible. It would shake up the postseason matchups completely, and it would give the league a viable 'official' explanation for the restructuring that would allow them to save face by not having to admit outright that one conference is objectively better than the other.

[Joker]

One problem I see is that there simply aren't 16 playoff-worthy teams that the NBA can put out. For example, 6 of the 16 playoff teams this year have sub .500 away records. The quality of playoffs is especially good when road teams have a solid chance of winning.

[-Sammy-]

One problem I see is that there simply aren't 16 playoff-worthy teams that the NBA can put out. For example, 6 of the 16 playoff teams this year have sub .500 away records. The quality of playoffs is especially good when road teams have a solid chance of winning.

Total agreement. I have long thought that the NBA needs to go to an eight- or 10-team playoff. It makes no sense that more than half the teams should qualify, and it creates a mostly meaningless first round that puts additional wear-and-tear on the contenders and slights the low seeds out of a chance at a higher lottery pick, which could eventually turn them into real contenders instead of perpetuating the treadmill.

[Joker]

One problem I see is that there simply aren't 16 playoff-worthy teams that the NBA can put out. For example, 6 of the 16 playoff teams this year have sub .500 away records. The quality of playoffs is especially good when road teams have a solid chance of winning.

I have long felt like the NBA needs to go to an eight- or 10-team playoff. It makes no sense that more than half the teams should qualify, and it creates a mostly meaningless first round that puts additional wear-and-tear on the contenders and slights the low seeds out of a chance at a higher lottery pick, which could eventually turn them into real contenders instead of perpetuating the treadmill.

Definitely. I'll take quality over quantity. And typically, there are only 8-10 teams league-wide that are dangerous anyway. Not necessarily legitimate contenders, but teams that could beat anybody and it wouldn't be a total shock. Usually 2-4 east teams and 6-7 west teams.

[ishoy123]

One problem I see is that there simply aren't 16 playoff-worthy teams that the NBA can put out. For example, 6 of the 16 playoff teams this year have sub .500 away records. The quality of playoffs is especially good when road teams have a solid chance of winning.

I have long felt like the NBA needs to go to an eight- or 10-team playoff. It makes no sense that more than half the teams should qualify, and it creates a mostly meaningless first round that puts additional wear-and-tear on the contenders and slights the low seeds out of a chance at a higher lottery pick, which could eventually turn them into real contenders instead of perpetuating the treadmill.

Definitely. I'll take quality over quantity. And typically, there are only 8-10 teams league-wide that are dangerous anyway. Not necessarily legitimate contenders, but teams that could beat anybody and it wouldn't be a total shock. Usually 2-4 east teams and 6-7 west teams.

I would prefer they bring it back to best of 5 for the first round. Having only 8 teams would double the amount of teams that would want to tank, and reduce parity even more.

[Joker]

If you go 10 teams, how would the seeding/bye-rule work?

[DanTown8587]

What I said earlier somewhere on a team forum.

If we had top 16

1. Golden State vs 16. Boston
8. Portland vs 9. Chicago

5. Memphis vs 12. Washington
4. LA Clippers vs 13. New Orleans

6. San Antonio vs 11. Toronto
3. Houston vs 14. New Orleans

7. Cleveland vs 10. Dallas
2. Atlanta vs 15. Oklahoma City

IF teams want to get to the Finals (assume no upsets)

Golden State: Boston - Portland - LA Clippers (TOTAL SEEDS DEFEATED: 28)
Cleveland: Dallas - Atlanta - Houston (TOTAL SEEDS: 16)

It's clearly harder for a team like Cleveland to get to the Finals versus a team like Golden State. Golden State is appropriately given a much easier road than a team like Cleveland, who won 14 less games and wasn't the #1 overall seed.

Now let's compare their roads today to get the finals

Golden State: New Orleans - Memphis - Houston (TOTAL OVERALL SEEDS: 22)
Cleveland: Boston - Chicago - Atlanta (TOTAL OVERALL SEEDS: 27)

If you compare the two paths, Cleveland basically has to beat Boston instead of Houston in a seven game series to get to the Finals (Chicago/Dallas are similar and Atlanta obviously the same)by splitting into conferences. Golden State instead of having Boston in a series gets a tougher New Orleans team and then instead of say Portland, they get the tougher Grizzles (Rockets/Clippers have the same record).

That's insane that Golden State, who won 67 games and did so in a conference with four other 55+ win teams and eight other teams over 40, has a clearly harder road to the Finals as #1 seed than Cleveland, the #2 seed in the East who didn't even compete for their conference's overall #1 spot. (NOTE: not a shot at Cleveland, they're just the #2 seed in the East).

You really don't do 1-16 because of who gets in; you do it because you don't want to have teams in one conference beating themselves up to get to the Finals while a team in the other conference cake walks to the conference.

[Archerbro]

yea let's just ignore those western team's schedules.

it's not like it would affect anything!

[Joker]

I have long felt like the NBA needs to go to an eight- or 10-team playoff. It makes no sense that more than half the teams should qualify, and it creates a mostly meaningless first round that puts additional wear-and-tear on the contenders and slights the low seeds out of a chance at a higher lottery pick, which could eventually turn them into real contenders instead of perpetuating the treadmill.

Definitely. I'll take quality over quantity. And typically, there are only 8-10 teams league-wide that are dangerous anyway. Not necessarily legitimate contenders, but teams that could beat anybody and it wouldn't be a total shock. Usually 2-4 east teams and 6-7 west teams.

I would prefer they bring it back to best of 5 for the first round. Having only 8 teams would double the amount of teams that would want to tank, and reduce parity even more.

I'd revamp the lottery as well. Equal odds. No increased odds based on worse record. If a 40-win team gets a #1 superstar player, fine. Beats having #1 players waste away their first 4-6 years on the league's worst teams, and can elevate mediocre 40-win treadmill teams to contender status.

[Joker]

if you do the league-wide 16-seed method, I think you have to do best-of-5 first rounds, because you're lowering the parity/increasing the disparity in the first-round matchups. Best of 7 between the West's best team and the east's 7th or 8th best team is a waste.

[Nate505]

For all the talk of Western superiority/reseeding, only one playoff contender would be changed if there were league wide rather than conference seeding. OKC would replace Brooklyn, but other than that, there wouldn't be any changes.

I'm not saying that the West isn't notably better, but the playoff teams aren't as different as I would have expected for the gap. It makes going to single table playoff seeding less urgent.

Who knows where the seedings would have fell if the Western teams still in the race gave a damn at the end.

[R U Legit]

Southwest DIVISION teams with winning records: 5

Eastern CONFERENCE teams with winning records: 5

Spurs, Pels, Mavs, Rockets, Grizzlies > entire Eastern conference

[Nate505]

In all honesty I have no real problems with the way things are now. It's just frustrating how bad the East is.

Though in my world, it would still be by conference. However, if a team in one conference is below .500 but in the top 8 of their conference (in this case, both Boston and Indiana) they would be replaced by any teams above .500 in the other conference who is not in that conference's top 8 (in this case the West only has one team...OKC, but if for the sake of argument Phoenix had a .500 record or better I would have booted both Boston and Indiana out for both OKC and Phoenix. Now it would just be Indiana booted out for OKC). And if there aren't enough above .500 team in the other conference to fill out the 8 spots, then the next highest team in that conference would take up the spots (in this case, Boston would get in by virtue of being in the Eastern Conference and being the team with the best record of the remaining teams).

This way it still preserves the conference integrity, but doesn't screw teams above .500 which to me is more important than that. And I say this in spite of loving the fact that OKC is out of the playoffs this year. I guess some could complain that Phoenix should be in due to them having a better record than Indiana, but I'm not too concerned about any sub .500 team getting screwed out of a spot.

After reading all that it seems a lot clearer in my head than it does with me explaining it that way. Sheesh.

[DiscoLives4ever]

I wouldn't mind a compromise proposal of top-6 in each conference guaranteed a playoff spot with the rest going to the top 4 non-playoff teams regardless of conference. Maybe even a short single-elimination tourney for the final could of spots

[FortyDayzdone]

Going into the playoffs get rid of the Conferences, 8 teams from each and match them up accordingly based on their rankings going into the playoff

(1)GS vs (16)BK
(2)ATL vs (15)BOS
(3)HOU vs (14)MIL
(4)LAC vs (13)NO
(5)MEM vs (12)WSH
(6)SA vs (11)TO
(7)CLE vs (10)DAL
(8)POR vs (9)CHI

This would be fair to the West and make the playoffs more exciting. We could see 2 West teams in finals or at least we know for sure the best 2 teams will be in the finals.

Eye of the beholder I guess, but none of these matchups is as interesting to me as the real matchups. I know I'm in the minority but I like conference rivalries and playing for a conference championship. Cavs/celtics is interesting to me because the teams have played several times in the playoffs, including Lebron's last series in Cleveland. Cavs/Mavericks has no meaning to anyone.

I also like preserving matchups for posterity. I like that playoff matchups happen over and over from year to year that it means something. I liked the idea of the pistons needing to get by the celtics to prove their worth and, in turn, jordan needing to get by the pistons, and, in turn, the Knicks and Cavs needing to get by the bulls (which they never did). By contrast, grizzlies/wizards and spurs/raptors are just so unfamiliar and nauseatingly uninteresting that it makes my eyes hurt just to see those random matchups written.

We all have our own opinions but I think that most of these re-seeding ideas come from western fans who don't appreciate the history of the eastern conference (or the western conference for that matter). Whatever benefit would be gained by creating what you think are slightly better matchups (which I dispute anyway--- does anyone really want to die on the "Phoenix should be in the playoffs" hill?) is offset by the loss of the history and the drama that conference playoffs create. To each his own I guess-- some people don't care about that stuff.

Also, not sure where it's written that we need the best 2 teams in the finals. If that's the case, let's just get rid of the playoffs and just do a warriors/hawks or warriors/rockets 7 game series and be done with it. People who make that argument sound to me like the 90 year old codgers who still complain about how baseball should go back to the days when the pennant was decided by the regular season.

Now get off my lawn.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

I respect your opinion.

But why you mad tho?!? Hahahaha

BTW I'm not a "Western" fan, I'm RAPTORS Nation til the death of me! (Which I believe all 4 rounds RAPS In 4)

Why can't the best play the best at the end, even if thier in the same division?
You can have your rivalries in the finals.

Plus Conference Championships are overrated, who remembers those trophies?!? Lol if you want a Conference champion give it to the team with the best record.

You replied to my post with a novel, so you sir sound like the angry 90 years old codgers who complain, now you get off my grass please

[mup]

Going into the playoffs get rid of the Conferences, 8 teams from each and match them up accordingly based on their rankings going into the playoff

(1)GS vs (16)BK
(2)ATL vs (15)BOS
(3)HOU vs (14)MIL
(4)LAC vs (13)NO
(5)MEM vs (12)WSH
(6)SA vs (11)TO
(7)CLE vs (10)DAL
(8)POR vs (9)CHI

This would be fair to the West and make the playoffs more exciting. We could see 2 West teams in finals or at least we know for sure the best 2 teams will be in the finals.

Eye of the beholder I guess, but none of these matchups is as interesting to me as the real matchups. I know I'm in the minority but I like conference rivalries and playing for a conference championship. Cavs/celtics is interesting to me because the teams have played several times in the playoffs, including Lebron's last series in Cleveland. Cavs/Mavericks has no meaning to anyone.

I also like preserving matchups for posterity. I like that playoff matchups happen over and over from year to year that it means something. I liked the idea of the pistons needing to get by the celtics to prove their worth and, in turn, jordan needing to get by the pistons, and, in turn, the Knicks and Cavs needing to get by the bulls (which they never did). By contrast, grizzlies/wizards and spurs/raptors are just so unfamiliar and nauseatingly uninteresting that it makes my eyes hurt just to see those random matchups written.

We all have our own opinions but I think that most of these re-seeding ideas come from western fans who don't appreciate the history of the eastern conference (or the western conference for that matter). Whatever benefit would be gained by creating what you think are slightly better matchups (which I dispute anyway--- does anyone really want to die on the "Phoenix should be in the playoffs" hill?) is offset by the loss of the history and the drama that conference playoffs create. To each his own I guess-- some people don't care about that stuff.

Also, not sure where it's written that we need the best 2 teams in the finals. If that's the case, let's just get rid of the playoffs and just do a warriors/hawks or warriors/rockets 7 game series and be done with it. People who make that argument sound to me like the 90 year old codgers who still complain about how baseball should go back to the days when the pennant was decided by the regular season.

Now get off my lawn.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

I respect your opinion.

But why you mad tho?!? Hahahaha

BTW I'm not a "Western" fan, I'm RAPTORS Nation til the death of me! (Which I believe all 4 rounds RAPS In 4)

Why can't the best play the best at the end, even if thier in the same division?
You can have your rivalries in the finals.

Plus Conference Championships are overrated, who remembers those trophies?!? Lol if you want a Conference champion give it to the team with the best record.

You replied to my post with a novel, so you sir sound like the angry 90 years old codgers who complain, now you get off my grass please

Lol. I don't know, man. I'm always mad. I need a nap.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[Zion Wembanyama]

Nawlins to th east please, thanks.

[magicmerl]

If there were no conferences, the Eastern Conference teams would not be padding their win columns by playing each other. They'd each play half their games against Western Conference teams.

Nah, NBA travel is brutal enough as it is. You wouldn't need to change the conference games played, just the playoff qualifying criteria. Over time all of those bad eastern team missing out would get more lottery picks, and the balance would address itself.

As it is, the Thunder will get a better pick than Brooklyn this year, and that isn't right.

[Blame Rasho]

Think about this... the 6th seed in the west would have HCA vs the favored team to come out of the East...