German Athens wrote:I really think the West being considered much better than the east is overblown.
The west has a little more depth, but not in a way that I think matters a lot. I think they had 8 good to very good teams this year, and the east had 7.
Of the squads left out from the playoffs, I’d lean west, but I also don’t think sac or dal are good.
Houston was the 2 seed in the west, and Sacramento was a 2 or 3 a couple seasons ago. I think if Orlando had played Houston in the first round, as the 2-7 matchup, the 7 probably would have won again.
Indy and NY are very much in the Minny tier, who was in the conference finals last year also.
The conferences aren’t dramatically different, or at least weren’t this year, maybe the spurs make a big jump next year, and Phx returns as a competitive team, but who really knows.
The idea is that Boston is taken down a peg or two due to the injury and likely salary clearing. Cle down a notch due to having to clear salary. Thus, no great team that you have no shot against.
Generally speaking I get your point and 'trash' might be too harsh, the parity of the league is a very good thing right now (especially in our situation) so it might not be as drastic as 10ish years ago. But I'd still firmly choose the East over OKC juggernaut, Jokic, Luka/lakers, Clips were great at the end, MN with a 23 year old burgeoning possible superstar, Houston young athletes everywhere, Curry/Butler combo was on fire before injury, wemby/spurs coming
Or look at star players which is often key, after Giannis the next best players are what Hali/Mitchell/Brunson? You could probably argue Giannis is the only top 10 player in the East(for sure only top 5). Not crapping on those 3 guys as they're very good and guys I'd take, but they're likely more in the 11-20 range.
