So you still dislike the Play-In, eh?

[wickywack]

Incredibly dumb, imagine 39-30 team (Lakers) playing one elimination game against 33-36 team (Spurs, if they beat Memphis) to make playoffs if Steph gets hot, and that's a possibility here. But it's all about $$$ these days.

Am I the only one that would love to see this?

Rivalry game, Lakers implosion possibility, Spurs returning to a big time national game, Pop vs. Lebron...

Some pretty good storylines heading into a decisive game.

Agreed - I'd find this a lot more compelling than the typical first round yawners.

I like the play-in concept, but I'd love to see them expand it. Kill the first round of the playoffs. Let the 3 division winners into the semis in each conference. Have a play-in - between 4-8 teams - for the last spot. It'd make division races compelling and give fans an exciting tournament.

[SuppaSlick]

Yeah it's dumb and make the regular season even more meaningless. And extends the playoffs for 0 reason.

Make the playoffs 6 teams from each division, 1rst round 5 game series.

So less basketball is the solution to the NBA wanting to make more money?

You can make a logically argument that this is very much the case. I made it over decade ago. When there's a level of over saturation it decreases interest. Most people are casual fans and casual fans tend to only pay attention to the marquee matchups. It hard to have create marquee match ups under the current 82 game season for various reasons.

I feel like the nba has crunched the numbers and have come to the conclusion that by lowering the amount of games, which decreases the next television contract will not make up the fact that more people will be tuning in to more important games.

If the best analysts money could buy haven't implemented decreasing games tjen then we have to assume they have info info pointing to it not making them more money in the long run

[SuppaSlick]

Yeah it's dumb and make the regular season even more meaningless. And extends the playoffs for 0 reason.

Make the playoffs 6 teams from each division, 1rst round 5 game series.

So less basketball is the solution to the NBA wanting to make more money?

If the 'problem' this was intended to solve was revenue generation then i don't think there's a case against it.

If its somehow actually about competitiveness, integrity, or even increasing meaning to games late in the season then there's a debate. The real problem is if a legitimately good 7th seed ends up missing the playoffs because they lose two games in favor of a team they had a 7 or 8 game lead on in the standings...then the regular season becomes less meaningful. Worse, if that 7th seen then wins the lottery because of flattened odds, for instance the LAL this year - just ugh.

In my opinion your not "legitimately good" as a 7 seed if you lose the play in. Let's keep it real. If you lost the play in then you never truly had a chance to compete for a championship if the play in didn't exist lol.

People like to point to the Lakers as this example. But same thing... If they lose the play in to a 9 seed or whatever then they weren't going to beat the 2 seed in round one lol

[nate33]

Yeah it's dumb and make the regular season even more meaningless. And extends the playoffs for 0 reason.

Make the playoffs 6 teams from each division, 1rst round 5 game series.

So less basketball is the solution to the NBA wanting to make more money?

If the 'problem' this was intended to solve was revenue generation then i don't think there's a case against it.

If its somehow actually about competitiveness, integrity, or even increasing meaning to games late in the season then there's a debate. The real problem is if a legitimately good 7th seed ends up missing the playoffs because they lose two games in favor of a team they had a 7 or 8 game lead on in the standings...then the regular season becomes less meaningful. Worse, if that 7th seen then wins the lottery because of flattened odds, for instance the LAL this year - just ugh.

There are no "legitimately good 7th seeds", except perhaps a good team that suffered major injuries throughout the regular season and then got their players back just before the playoffs. And for teams like that, the Play-In Tournament is just as likely to help them as hurt them. Right now, it might hurt the Lakers is they finish 7th, but what if they finished 9th? Wouldn't the Play-In Tournament then be a good thing?

The bottom line is that if a team is seeded 7th but everyone thinks they deserve to make the playoffs, all they have to do is win the damn Play-In Game. They have 2 chances. If they can't win in two chances, they don't deserve it.

[Lalouie]

if it is here to stay, strategies will evolve to accomodate or take advantage of the play ins

we don't know yet, and ultimately people complain about the game and tanking et al anyways.

no matter what format people will always take advantage, so the bottom line id if it becomes popular that's all that matters. rules have been enacted to polularize the game,,,,this is no different. basketball lost it's integrity long ago

[Edrees]

I like it so much that I think 6th seed and 5th seed should also be in the play in. Maybe even 4th seed. Heck let's do 3rd and 2nd seed also. Everyone but 1st seed has to play in.

The idea of the play in is to make things more exciting, and you cant argue it makes for more entertaining basketball so really if you're for the current play in you should be for everyone playing in besides the 1st seed (gotta give some reward for the regular season)

[Michael Bradley]

The NBA lucked out in that they'll get LeBron vs Curry in one of the games, and one of LBJ/Curry in a subsequent game. People are getting excited for that, ignoring the fact that the other games (BOS/CHA, WAS/IND, SAS/MEM) all look like snores. But the NBA will likely get huge numbers for LAL/GSW, so it will be treated as a success rather than what could be an anomaly.

The NBA playoffs last 2 months. That's like half the NFL regular season and 33% of the MLB regular season. Making it even longer by adding more bad teams into the mix just seems like a really bad idea, which will become more evident if they do this next season and don't have LBJ or Curry involved.

[Da ThRONe]

So less basketball is the solution to the NBA wanting to make more money?

You can make a logically argument that this is very much the case. I made it over decade ago. When there's a level of over saturation it decreases interest. Most people are casual fans and casual fans tend to only pay attention to the marquee matchups. It hard to have create marquee match ups under the current 82 game season for various reasons.

I feel like the nba has crunched the numbers and have come to the conclusion that by lowering the amount of games, which decreases the next television contract will not make up the fact that more people will be tuning in to more important games.

If the best analysts money could buy haven't implemented decreasing games tjen then we have to assume they have info info pointing to it not making them more money in the long run

I don't think the decision is based on number crunching. I think it's based on fear. Most businesses tend to be slow to chang their business model. Even when it is clearly obvious for the best long term.

[DTP]

Original thought was I didnt like it, it makes the regular season more pointless but now it's actually made teams take the end of the season more seriously, so I do kinda enjoy it. I have no clue how we went from everyone complaining that 82 games is too much to adding in more games to the season lol

[LesGrossman]

The play in adds excitement. The reason we need more excitement is that with the arrival of the recent version of superteams where superstars gang up (vs. draft and development in the past), there are very few interesting matchups left (as evidenced by last years painfully boring and predictable postseason). Ironically its the fans of said superteams who complain about the Play-in's the most, but at the same time, they are the only ones who enjoy watching their team walk all over other teams so their opinion should not matter much.

[KIRAG]

Whoever thought about this idea should not get fired but get a bonus. Never have I seen fans this engaged and interested in as many games of different teams at the end of the regular season. This is clearly also NBA's attempt to address the slumping ratings.

[One Last Shot]

Who wouldn't? We are going to have 6 games of Game 7 atmosphere before the Playoffs even start. Remember the last game of Wolves-Nuggets in 2018 season? Nuggets lose in OT, miss the Playoffs while Butler-led Wolves made the Playoffs. Possibly the best game of that season and that experience made Jokic who he is now, Our MVP.

[Jarlaxle0204]

I wish they would keep this exact format going forward. 72 games but start the season earlier at their usual time so that things are a little more spread out. 3 games against every conference team and 2 games between every non conference team seems perfect to me. Easy to determine tie breakers etc.

I love the play in. Teams near the bottom have something to play for. Teams near the top have something to play for. A mini tournament before the playoffs start. I don't see what's not to like.

[danvato]

Incredibly dumb, imagine 39-30 team (Lakers) playing one elimination game against 33-36 team (Spurs, if they beat Memphis) to make playoffs if Steph gets hot, and that's a possibility here. But it's all about $$$ these days.

hope this isn't harsh or personal.

But these takes are so stupid you can't even keep straight of what you're arguing.

How exactly is risking eliminating the Lakers all about the $$$?

[danvato]

The NBA lucked out in that they'll get LeBron vs Curry in one of the games, and one of LBJ/Curry in a subsequent game. People are getting excited for that, ignoring the fact that the other games (BOS/CHA, WAS/IND, SAS/MEM) all look like snores. But the NBA will likely get huge numbers for LAL/GSW, so it will be treated as a success rather than what could be an anomaly.

The NBA playoffs last 2 months. That's like half the NFL regular season and 33% of the MLB regular season. Making it even longer by adding more bad teams into the mix just seems like a really bad idea, which will become more evident if they do this next season and don't have LBJ or Curry involved.

this explains everything.

[durden_tyler]

With what is probably the best and most interesting final day of the regular season, do you still dislike the Play-In Tourney?

[Jeffrey]

Remember when fans were up in arms about sponsors on NBA jerseys? Remember when fans were up in arms about the strict dress code on the bench? I'm glad things change or NBA will just be like MLB with 10,000 unwritten rules, and 100-year-old rules.

[Ballerhogger]

With what is probably the best and most interesting final day of the regular season, do you still dislike the Play-In Tourney?

You mean the tankthon

[RaptorPride]

this is fun

[RaptorPride]

Top heavy teams will now have to worry about injuries from now on and can't treat the regular season as practice. This might change the way GMs build teams. Instead of going in on multiple stars pushing for a more balanced team that can win with out your top dogs. Possibly can slow down super teams in the future. Especially if we see upsets in the play in this year. GMs will take notice.