If each West team moved East

TheSheriff · Post #41 » by **TheSheriff** » Mon Apr 7, 2008 2:23 am

Phoenix Rockets wrote:sonics can beat the pistons and the celtics easily.

And yet the Rocket could not beat the celtics, so are you saying the Sonics>Celtics>Rockets? :crazy:

In all seriousness, the Celtics are probably still a one seed, no matter the conference. Would they have the luxury of benching the three party all at once? Maybe not.

KyleCleric · Post #42 » by **KyleCleric** » Mon Apr 7, 2008 3:03 am

RobertGlory wrote:82 game equivalents against the other conference

boston 68-14 (!!!)
detroit 59-23
orlando 40-42 (!!!)
cleveland 46-36
washington 38-44
philadelphia 41-41
toronto 33-49
atlanta 36-46
indiana 33-49
new jersey 22-60
chicago 25-57
charlotte 34-48
milwaukee 23-59
new york 8-74 (!!!)
miami 20-62 (!!!)

as opposed to:

new orleans 60-22
san antonio 63-19
l.a. lakers 55-27
utah 57-25
phoenix 66-16
houston 60-22
dallas 49-33
denver 52-30
golden state 55-27 (!!!)
portland 41-41
sacramento 46-36 (!!!)
l.a. clippers 27-55
memphis 28-54
minnesota 19-63
seattle 22-60

If you want to estimate how a team would do in the other conference you should do the other conference percentage with 52 games and the current conference percentage with 30 games.

Albanian Damien · Post #43 » by **Albanian Damien** » Mon Apr 7, 2008 3:11 am

KyleCleric wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

If you want to estimate how a team would do in the other conference you should do the other conference percentage with 52 games and the current conference percentage with 30 games.

By that mathematics the Celtics would end up with a record around 66-68 wins.

KyleCleric · Post #44 » by **KyleCleric** » Mon Apr 7, 2008 3:19 am

Albanian Damien wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

By that mathematics the Celtics would end up with a record around 66-68 wins.

Yup. I came up with 67 and 15.

Boston, 67-15
Detroit, 59-23
Orlando, 46-36
Cleveland, 45-37
Washington, 41-41
Philadelphia, 41-41
Atlanta, 37-45
Toronto, 37-45
Indiana, 34-48
Charlotte, 32-50
New Jersey, 29-53
Chicago, 29-53
Milwaukee, 26-56
New York, 17-65
Miami, 16-66

KyleCleric · Post #45 » by **KyleCleric** » Mon Apr 7, 2008 3:28 am

And the West ...

New Orleans, 59-23
San Antonio, 59-23
Phoenix, 59-23
Houston, 57-25
Utah, 56-26
LA Lakers, 56-26
Golden State, 51-31
Denver, 51-31
Dallas, 50-32
Sacramento, 42-40
Portland, 41-41
LA Clippers, 26-56
Memphis, 25-57
Minnesota, 20-62
Seattle, 20-62

zeebneeb · Post #46 » by **zeebneeb** » Mon Apr 7, 2008 4:57 am

Phoenix Rockets wrote:Only the Celtics can make the playoffs in the West.

Sorry Magic/Pistons/Cavs.

What would make RealGM a better place, is if you just suspended people, or banned them when they just say stupid things.

It would make conversation flow alot better.

Chubby Chaser · Post #47 » by **Chubby Chaser** » Mon Apr 7, 2008 5:22 am

I'd say that the Kings and Portland are better than Cavs.

KyleCleric · Post #48 » by **KyleCleric** » Mon Apr 7, 2008 5:24 am

Chubby Chaser wrote:I'd say that the Kings and Portland are better than Cavs.

Well ... you're VERY wrong then.

Duiz · Post #49 » by **Duiz** » Mon Apr 7, 2008 5:29 am

snaquille oatmeal wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

it should also be pointed out that if the West teams had 2 more chances at the Celtics (especially after the AS break) it would not necessarily be an automatic double mirror record of the current record the Celtics have against the West.

Thank you!! That is exactly my point. Playing against the Knicks 4 times won't wear you down as much as playing against the Suns, Warriors, and Nuggets 4 times. Also teams get to know more the Celtics, and they wear them out a lot more than playing the Bucks or Hawks back to back.

I think the Celtics have a great record, but loss of focus and stress in the Western Elite allowed Boston to do things like complete the Texas triangle and other things.

Dtown84 · Post #50 » by **Dtown84** » Mon Apr 7, 2008 3:43 pm

How come no one ever mentions that the Celtics and Pistons would get to face the T-wolves, Sonics, and Grizzlies four times a year too?

Alex_De_Large · Post #51 » by **Alex_De_Large** » Mon Apr 7, 2008 4:51 pm

play 4 times vs bulls, bucks, knicks, heat, cats, pacers, raptors, cavs or nets is better than play 4 times vs sonics, grizz, and wolves. i mean, 3 crap teams vs 11 or 12 crap teams.

philly262 · Post #52 » by **philly262** » Mon Apr 7, 2008 6:08 pm

There are more CRAP team in the West than there are in the east.

The problem with the East is there are a only a few elite teams, and a bunch of mediorce teams. Teams that can come up and surpise a team any given night, like the Knicks, Nets, Bulls, Pacers, Sixers, Hawks and such.

The East really only has one crap team and that's the Heat.

The West has about 4 crap teams with Memphis, Seattle, Minny and LAC.

Alot of the teams out west get to play those teams 3-4 times a year, giving them about an extra 5-10 wins. That's why there's such a great disparity in the records now.

It's because the bottom on the West is so bad.

Gant · Post #53 » by **Gant** » Mon Apr 7, 2008 6:24 pm

What is the West vs. East overall record?

pr0wler · Post #54 » by **pr0wler** » Mon Apr 7, 2008 6:45 pm

philly262 wrote:There are more CRAP team in the West than there are in the east.

The problem with the East is there are a only a few elite teams, and a bunch of mediorce teams. Teams that can come up and surpise a team any given night, like the Knicks, Nets, Bulls, Pacers, Sixers, Hawks and such.

The East really only has one crap team and that's the Heat.

The West has about 4 crap teams with Memphis, Seattle, Minny and LAC.

Alot of the teams out west get to play those teams 3-4 times a year, giving them about an extra 5-10 wins. That's why there's such a great disparity in the records now.

It's because the bottom on the West is so bad.

lol @ not calling the Knicks a crap team, presumably grouping them in the mediocre category.

philly262 · Post #55 » by **philly262** » Mon Apr 7, 2008 7:00 pm

The Knicks suck but they've been able to surpise a couple teams with their play.

The Sonics, Wolves, Clippers and Memphis have been terrible all year.

And the Heat have been obviously tanking and that's why their record is so bad recently.

Alex_De_Large · Post #56 » by **Alex_De_Large** » Mon Apr 7, 2008 7:04 pm

philly262 wrote:There are more CRAP team in the West than there are in the east.

The problem with the East is there are a only a few elite teams, and a bunch of mediorce teams. Teams that can come up and surpise a team any given night, like the Knicks, Nets, Bulls, Pacers, Sixers, Hawks and such.

The East really only has one crap team and that's the Heat.

The West has about 4 crap teams with Memphis, Seattle, Minny and LAC.

Alot of the teams out west get to play those teams 3-4 times a year, giving them about an extra 5-10 wins. That's why there's such a great disparity in the records now.

It's because the bottom on the West is so bad.

No, the worst teams in the NBA are Heat and Knicks.

Sonics and Wolves are rebuilding, same with Grizz now. Clippers are a good team of 42-46 wins if Brand is healthy.

philly262 · Post #57 » by **philly262** » Mon Apr 7, 2008 7:17 pm

And the Heat are a good team if Wade and Marion/Shaq is healthy.

I would disagree and say that the Sonics and the Wolves are the worst teams in the NBA.

Aragorn · Post #58 » by **Aragorn** » Mon Apr 7, 2008 7:37 pm

Gant wrote:What is the West vs. East overall record?

The East is 190-255 against the West this year (0.427).

Currently, only the Celtics (25-5), Pistons (21-8 ), Cavs (17-13), and 76ers (15-15) have .500 or above records against the West. In the West, only Seattle (8-22), Memphis (10-19), Minnesota (6-20), and the Clippers (10-20) have records below .500 against the East.

Aragorn · Post #59 » by **Aragorn** » Mon Apr 7, 2008 7:48 pm

The funny thing about the Knicks' three West wins is that they started 2-0 against that conference. But, they haven't won an East-West matchup since November.

wigglestrue · Post #60 » by **wigglestrue** » Mon Apr 7, 2008 7:50 pm

This thread is hilarious.