RealGM

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=12586330

Video on ESPN with Chris Broussard talking about how the owners are going to be discussing this in the offseason.

I understand that the west has been much better for a while now, but I still think this is a bad idea. The west already has the unfair advantage of great weather/location to attract free agents. If you don't have the advantage of an easier path to the finals, you really have no reason to ever sign with teams like Indiana/Detroit/Milwaukee/Toronto etc.

That being said, I think the East has the potential to be greatly improved next year. You have 5 teams right now that are close to 50+ win teams, and they are all young enough where they should still be around for the next few years. Even if Love leaves Cleveland, I think the Cavs are still a 50 win team with LeBron and Kyrie.

After that you have Miami who if they keep Dragic should jump back up to a serious contender. They have played much better since trading for him and Getting Whiteside, and most of that has been without Bosh. Once Bosh comes back next season, with a full year of Dragic and Whiteside, that is a legit contender to win 50+ games.

Then you have Inidiana who won 56 games just last season. They got off to a terrible start this year with George Hill and David West injured early on, but have played much better the past couple of months. Then you consider they will be getting Paul George back next year and they should be back to contending in the East.

That's already 7 teams that all have the potential to win 50 games next season. Then you could see New York be greatly improved with Melo coming back, a top 3 pick, and 30+ million in cap room. Along with them Philly will be adding Embiid, a top 3 pick and have 40+ million in cap space. With the right moves either of those teams could turn into a playoff contender next year.

Meanwhile out west teams like San Antonio and Dallas are about to fall out of the picture once Duncan/Ginobili and Dirk retire. Portland and Memphis could be done too if Gasol and Aldridge leave in free agency. I think you have to keep things the way they are. There are going to be cycles all the time and it is not worth messing with the Eastern/Western tradition of the league just because the West has been better for most of the past 10-15 years now. Things could turn around quick.

No chance this happens.

It won't happen. The conference system makes sense for the travel time issue.

Re-alignment makes no sense; what if you have say, Miami playing Portland in the first round or New York/Clippers? Or think about possibly and all Eastern or Western Conference NBA Finals? That would kill ratings...

TimRobbins wrote:It won't happen. The conference system makes sense for the travel time issue.

they could well maintain conferences for regular season scheduling and just seed top 16 teams league-wide for playoffs. and they should. playoff games are so spaced out that travel is not a big issue

I also dont think East teams owners will agree with this.

dice wrote:

TimRobbins wrote:It won't happen. The conference system makes sense for the travel time issue.

they could well maintain conferences for regular season scheduling and just seed top 16 teams league-wide for playoffs. and they should. playoff games are so spaced out that travel is not a big issue

I think it's still a big issue even when you have a day between games. Think of a NY team that has to play a first round in GS, then a second round in Portland and a third round in Texas. That would be some insane travel.

I also don't see the big deal. If you re-align the playoffs by the best 16 records in the league, you'd have seeds 7-8 in the East out of the playoffs and 9-10 in the West in. I don't think the Pelicans and the Suns replacing Miami and Boston is such a big deal.

Rivalries become bigger with conferences, and this would lessen the chance of those matchups. Not a fan.

TimRobbins wrote:

dice wrote:

TimRobbins wrote:It won't happen. The conference system makes sense for the travel time issue.

they could well maintain conferences for regular season scheduling and just seed top 16 teams league-wide for playoffs. and they should. playoff games are so spaced out that travel is not a big issue

I think it's still a big issue even when you have a day between games. Think of a NY team that has to play a first round in GS, then a second round in Portland and a third round in Texas. That would be some insane travel.

I also don't see the big deal. If you re-align the playoffs by the best 16 records in the league, you'd have seeds 7-8 in the East out of the playoffs and 9-10 in the West in. I don't think the Pelicans and the Suns replacing Miami and Boston is such a big deal.

it's more the matchups than the teams squeaking in, though that's important too

i really don't see a big difference between the bulls going to NY or LA for a playoff round. time actually spent in the air of a private jet is the least of the travel hassles

frosty23 wrote:Rivalries become bigger with conferences, and this would lessen the chance of those matchups

that's a good point

Can they not?

Won't happen.

dice wrote:it's more the matchups than the teams squeaking in, though that's important too

i really don't see a big difference between the bulls going to NY or LA for a playoff round. time actually spent in the air of a private jet is the least of the travel hassles

Chicago is kind of in the Middle, but for a NY team, it's 5+ hours in the air vs. 1-2 hours and that's a very big deal. Also, as somebody above mentioned, the local rivalries are important. Those Knicks - Bulls rivalries of the 90's can never be replaced with Western conference teams.

Here is what we'd have today just in case you're curious

1. Golden State
16. Milwaukee

8. Cleveland
9. Chicago

5. LA Clippers
12. Oklahoma City

4. Houston
13. Washington

6. Portland
11. Toronto

3. Memphis
14. New Orleans

7. San Antonio
10. Dallas

2. Atlanta
15. Phoenix

I think the reason the NBA wants to push this

1. It really eliminates the desire of teams to "rest" guys and almost makes all the teams push through the regular season. Would you want to go from a 3 or 4 seed to a 6 seed just to rest a few guys?
2. If the two best teams are in the same conference (i.e 2002 WCF) then it might be better to have those teams play for the title than just a shot at the title
3. West teams are consistently playing better teams in the playoffs which makes it more likely they'll lose and more likely they'll play more/tougher games.
4. It's easier to have a superstar make the playoffs
5. It makes more sense for the draft
6. It typically will give you two or three very good rd 1 series in terms of ratings (which helps makes more money for the league)

I'm not saying they should do it, I just can see WHY they'd want it

DanTown8587 wrote:I think the reason the NBA wants to push this

1. It really eliminates the desire of teams to "rest" guys and almost makes all the teams push through the regular season. Would you want to go from a 3 or 4 seed to a 6 seed just to rest a few guys?
2. If the two best teams are in the same conference (i.e 2002 WCF) then it might be better to have those teams play for the title than just a shot at the title
3. West teams are consistently playing better teams in the playoffs which makes it more likely they'll lose and more likely they'll play more/tougher games.
4. It's easier to have a superstar make the playoffs
5. It makes more sense for the draft
6. It typically will give you two or three very good rd 1 series in terms of ratings (which helps makes more money for the league)

not to mention competitive fairness

TimRobbins wrote:

dice wrote:it's more the matchups than the teams squeaking in, though that's important too

i really don't see a big difference between the bulls going to NY or LA for a playoff round. time actually spent in the air of a private jet is the least of the travel hassles

Chicago is kind of in the Middle, but for a NY team, it's 5+ hours in the air vs. 1-2 hours and that's a very big deal.

longer nap?

What's the point of having conferences and divisions if you're going to just do top 16 teams?

I think a lot would have to change if they did something like that.

Tradition be damned. Let's give it a whirl. New rivalries would form. The travel would be figured out.

Red-Bulls83 wrote:What's the point of having conferences and divisions if you're going to just do top 16 teams?

I think a lot would have to change if they did something like that.

Probably something like each team plays each other 3 times (some would be 2 to fit in a 82 games season).