Semi-OT: Percentage of Teams to make the Playoffs

Post #1 » by **Miklo** » Wed May 18, 2011 8:52 pm

So this is a little bit more general than just the Suns but watching the playoffs without us in them got me thinking. A little tl;dr I guess but if you dare...

All these CBA shenanigans and the potential for a lockout all revolves around money...the league claims they aren't making enough, owners say they aren't making enough and players would be in the same boat. And it's a well known fact, in any sport but especially in the NBA, that Playoffs = added revenue. Attendance is higher, more merch is sold, happier fans and more season ticket sales.

So with all that said, why hasn't the NBA considered upping the number of teams qualifying for the playoffs in proportion with the increase in NBA teams?

Historically they've done it. Since starting with 11 teams they've had to change the size and format of the playoffs numerous times. But the last change in how many teams qualify for the Playoffs was in 1984. In 1984 there were 23 teams, so about 70% of teams made the Playoffs. Today there are 30 teams, so 53% of teams make it to the postseason. Upping this just a little bit would guarantee more league revenue, give a couple more teams access to primary revenue and get more fans interested in the playoffs.

-Adding 2 teams to the Playoffs would mean 60% of teams made it. 2 would be kinda weird but it could be an inter-conference play-in game or something.

-Adding 4 would mean 67% made it.

Obviously this would require changes to the actual format of the Playoffs, but it's done all the time and like I said has happened many times in the NBA. Just a thought.

Sun Scorched · Post #2 » by **Sun Scorched** » Wed May 18, 2011 11:06 pm

Changing the format off of what they have would be tough, but what I would like to see is the 16 best regular season teams make it, as opposed to the best 8 from each conference. The Eastern conference blows.

BurningHeart · Post #3 » by **BurningHeart** » Wed May 18, 2011 11:23 pm

Can't add more teams. There are already WAY too many as is. If anything, they should cut it down to the top 4 in each conference and do away with divisions. Obviously, that'll never happen because of money, but...that's what SHOULD happen.

RunDogGun · Post #4 » by **RunDogGun** » Thu May 19, 2011 1:08 am

Well they could add two more teams to the league, and have everyone go to the post season. They could make the first two rounds be the best of five. That way all the teams will try their best, and the losers of the first round would be in the lotto. They should also make the winner of the all-star game get home court advantage for the finals, if they keep the conference thing.

Post #5 » by **Miklo** » Thu May 19, 2011 2:16 am

Sun Scorched wrote:Changing the format off of what they have would be tough, but what I would like to see is the 16 best regular season teams make it, as opposed to the best 8 from each conference. The Eastern conference blows.

That could be another way to somewhat address the issue without adding teams or doing anything crazy...making qualification for the playoffs solely based on performance would drive competitiveness in the middle tier of the league.

I know the adding teams thing is pretty far out there but just doing some offseason brainstorming.

Post #6 » by **TASTIC** » Thu May 19, 2011 5:07 am

They need to re-seed after round 1

It's stupid how these Western Conf teams win 55-60 and have to go 1-4 while the 4th West seed has a higher win total than the Eastern 2/3 etc...not fair considering they play the higher % of games AGAINST those better teams...might not have happened as much this year, but over the last couple of years it's been obvious

Post #7 » by **lilfishi22** » Thu May 19, 2011 6:26 am

I've always been an advocate for top 16 teams go through. But they won't change it because it's all about revenue. There would only be like 4-5 teams from the East competing if 11-12 teams go through in the West.

raff · Post #8 » by **raff** » Thu May 19, 2011 12:46 pm

Yeah, I'm big on the 16 teams, rather than 8 from each conference thing. Adding more teams would make the post season longer and a little more awkward in terms of seeding.

Post #9 » by **lilfishi22** » Thu May 19, 2011 2:41 pm

Yeah other than the occasional lower seed upsets, those 1 v 8 match ups (esp. in the East) are kind of a waste of time.

Post #10 » by **Qwigglez** » Thu May 19, 2011 9:23 pm

I'd like them to add another 2- 6 teams team to the league bringing the total to 32-36. Have only four divisions, not six.
I'd prefer only 16 teams make the playoffs every year.