RealGM

Here me out on this one.

One of the worst games to watch in the NBA playoffs is game 4 when a team is up 3-0. The team down 3-0 is discouraged and the team up 3-0 is likely going to play a meh game. It's a game that should be eliminated. Plus, how awesome would the game 3s be if a team is down 2-0? It'd feel like game 7. It would also put more emphasis on the first 2 games, making each game in the series much more enjoyable.

Just to be clear, going up 3-1 would still require a 4th win.

Yes or no?

no, too much revenue to pass up

Liam_Gallagher wrote:Here me out on this one.

One of the worst games to watch in the NBA playoffs is game 4 when a team is up 3-0. The team down 3-0 is discouraged and the team up 3-0 is likely going to play a meh game. It's a game that should be eliminated. Plus, how awesome would the game 3s be if a team is down 2-0? It'd feel like game 7. It would also put more emphasis on the first 2 games, making each game in the series much more enjoyable.

Yes or no?

I don't know one of my favorite basketball memories is the 2003 WC1 series between Portland-Dallas when Portland forced a G7 and Portland actually led well into G7. It has only happened twice in my lifetime the G7 but it would be a huge deal if it happens again.

Keep it but I do like your outside the box thinking. Too often we always think about what has been done and not what could be done

I like the idea.

In a best of 5?

Some have suggested 1st round back to best of 5... maybe this could be a meat in the middle? Motivates teams to finish series earlier and adds some intensity.

Alternatively, it could mean the mental checkout comes a game earlier. And it's a big revenue loss.

I initially answered no but I think it would be good if some type of threshold might be passed to trigger it.

Like if the cumulative margin of victory in those 3 games was above 50 (or choose whatever margin you deem fit)

It's best of 7 not best of 5 lol

Jasen777 wrote:In a best of 5?

The series would still be a best-of-7 with the exception of a team clinching if they win the first 3.

No team has ever come back down 3-0. Will it ever happen? Probably. Is one instance enough to offset the hundreds of terrible game 4s where a team is down 3-0? Probably not.

might prevent injuries. but its a clear financial loss. Plus its fun watching the other team sweat with they win 3 then lose 2.

Liam_Gallagher wrote:Here me out on this one.

One of the worst games to watch in the NBA playoffs is game 4 when a team is up 3-0. The team down 3-0 is discouraged and the team up 3-0 is likely going to play a meh game. It's a game that should be eliminated. Plus, how awesome would the game 3s be if a team is down 2-0? It'd feel like game 7. It would also put more emphasis on the first 2 games, making each game in the series much more enjoyable.

Yes or no?

I get your theoretical point, but let's say:

You are the receiver of all profits of games being held at your home.
You have two teams that come to your home to play some type of game, out of 7 possible games, one each day.
Your home seats 100 people and you charge $100 for every audience member
They are ALL WILLING to pay you $100 to come see these games.

One team goes up 3-0

You really going to cancel the 4th game?

No

About 60% of 3-0 series turn into a sweep. That means about 40% of the time, the team down 3-0 wins one game or more.

The sweep is anything but automatic. Teams have to earn it. If the team leading 3-0 shows up to play a "meh game" then they have not learned how to close teams out. Therefore, they do not deserve what another team has earned.

Forgoing that sort of revenue- potentially for both teams? No way any owner agrees to that. That also doesn't mention the mystique of being the first team to ever come back from 3-0 that fans and media eat up.

Revenue, experience, and why would we shut down the possibility of a team eventually bucking those odds? That's a movie franchise when it happens, and statistically, it will happen some day. Just like a #1 seed losing to a 16 seed in the NCAA tourney.. when it happens, the internet will melt. Until then we just chase the dragon and get excited at close calls

Why? It's a seven game series, let them play until a team reaches four wins. Even though the odds are extremely against a team coming back from a 0 - 3 deficit, it is definitely a possibility (just ask the Yankees when they lost to Boston, which led to Boston finally winning after a million years of losing).
Let them play. If these guys have any sense of pride, they will still play like they want to win.

I voted yes, but probably because of the injuries Embiid suffered after going up 3-0 against TOR this year lol. I do think it's an interesting change though.

I can go with this idea. NBA won’t let it happen though. Too much money in game 4s to pass up. The quality of games again would increase similar to Play-In games. Unless you’re the Hornets then you play the same but they’rea topic for a different day.

I get the point, but teams fight to get to the spot they're in. If they are down 3-0, they still deserve a chance to fight back.
The only alternative I see here would be going back to best of 5's.
None of that will work since, as was noted already, it would lead to lost revenue.

I'm seeing a common thread in life nowadays of people trying to be too smart and avoiding the simplicity. Its a best of 7 - play to whoever wins 4 games.