RealGM

Doesn't matter if the 10th team in the West is better than the 8th team in the East.

None of that matters when it comes to winning a championship.

Speaking of 8th ranked teams, how about giving the Hawks respect. If they were so lousy and exposing Boston, the Lakers should have swept Boston. Oh but wait, the Lakers didn't even sweep the lowly Hawks in the regular season. They split the seriest with the Hawks win making them the FIRST team to beat the Lakers with Gasol.

Detroit and Boston were the best two teams in the league this year and that's all that mattered.


Speaking of those teams, other than the Heat (another Eastern Conference team) are the only teams that have won a championship outside the Lakers/Spurs dynasties.


And with Rose and Beasley both heading East alongside Lebron and Dwight Howard, and the rising Baby Hawks the East will only get stronger.

Meanwhile out west, your Spurs, Suns, and Mavs look like the window is slowly closing shut.

2 of the past 3 champions are from the East!

lol I was just about to make this thread. It seemed like every 3rd post from a fan of a Western Conference team would say "the East is a joke."

dont forget the pistons





celtics
spurs
heat
spurs
pistons

3/5 years

When it's all said and done, if the West were truly greater than people make it seem, then why are they not champions today?

I hated the argument during the regular season and I hate it today, too. -- There might be better overall teams in the West, but if that is true, why are they not standing as champions today?

/mini rant

Flash3 wrote:When it's all said and done, if the West were truly greater than people make it seem, then why are they not champions today?

I hated the argument during the regular season and I hate it today, too. -- There might be better overall teams in the West, but if that is true, why are they not standing as champions today?

/mini rant

Because the two best teams reside in the Eastern Conference.

I don't really get caught up in the whole West/East debate because, frankly, I only care about the Wizards' success (not that I don't follow every other team), but this seems like a simple answer. The East has the two best teams. The West has far greater depth.

Now, the answer to this question of who is the better conference really comes down to two ways of thinking.

Are you a person that feels that the conference that produces the NBA champion should be considered the best team?

Or are you a person that feels like the better conference is the conference with the best teams on average?

I tend to think it's the 2nd option, because when I see a team that wins 50 games and NOT make the playoffs, and I look at what conference they're in, I make my decision quite easily. I also see a team like Denver, who had a franchise high in wins, nearly miss the playoffs altogether.

You are talking about two different things.

The BEST team in the league was in the east, but as a whole the west was a much BETTER, tougher conference.

West is overrated

The difference between east and west isn't as big as people make it the record average is 12.8 East - 17.2 West of the 30 Games the different conferences played eachother . The West is better yes but not as much as people and the media make it to be.

For the most part, the West teams don't seem to be bult for the playoffs. Mostly fast paced offensive teams with mediocre or worse defense (Mavs, Suns, Nuggets. Golden State, LA for now) though you also have Houston, San Antonio and the Jazz.

Whereas the Celtics, Pistons and Cavaliers are built for a more physical style of play, which is more successful because of the fact (and lets make no mistake about it) that the officiating changes in the playoffs to favor more physical play.

If this series was called the way games are called in the regular season, Lakers would likely have +15 FT differentials every game.

Chaos Revenant wrote:For the most part, the West teams don't seem to be bult for the playoffs. Mostly fast paced offensive teams with mediocre or worse defense (Mavs, Suns, Nuggets. Golden State, LA for now) though you also have Houston, San Antonio and the Jazz.

Whereas the Celtics, Pistons and Cavaliers are built for a more physical style of play, which is more successful because of the fact (and lets make no mistake about it) that the officiating changes in the playoffs to favor more physical play.

If this series was called the way games are called in the regular season, Lakers would likely have +15 FT differentials every game.

Good point, but to an extent.

SA, Utah, and Dallas (maybe) are solid teams that are build for the post-season. SA and Utah both have a pretty good inside-out game, with good outside shooting, plus have players who have the ability to get to the hoop, and are very good defensive teams.

it's just the curse of the Spurs..if you beat us in an even year, you're gonna lose(and get embarrassed) in the finals..2004, 2006, 2008..

the West always has the best teams in the odd years ..

the West is still better for this decade anyways..Lakers have 3 and Spurs have 3 with tougher competition..the East still needs some work..

Flash3 wrote:

Chaos Revenant wrote:For the most part, the West teams don't seem to be bult for the playoffs. Mostly fast paced offensive teams with mediocre or worse defense (Mavs, Suns, Nuggets. Golden State, LA for now) though you also have Houston, San Antonio and the Jazz.

Whereas the Celtics, Pistons and Cavaliers are built for a more physical style of play, which is more successful because of the fact (and lets make no mistake about it) that the officiating changes in the playoffs to favor more physical play.

If this series was called the way games are called in the regular season, Lakers would likely have +15 FT differentials every game.

Good point, but to an extent.

SA, Utah, and Dallas (maybe) are solid teams that are build for the post-season. SA and Utah both have a pretty good inside-out game, with good outside shooting, plus have players who have the ability to get to the hoop, and are very good defensive teams.

Yet the Lakers beat both of those teams. The best team happens to reside in the East. That doesn't mean the East as a whole is better.

It would be like saying the Big East was a dominant football conference back when the Miami Hurricanes resided there and were the only "super-elite" team in it.

I don't think even average number of wins says much. Look at the Nuggets; won 50 games and were an absolute embarrassment in the playoffs, as were the Suns, Mavs and Rockets to a certain extent.

Not like it matters anyway. The only trophy awarded for interconference competition is the Larry O'Brien.

Which team do u have winning???


Battle of the 8th seeds:
Nuggets vs. Hawks

7th seeds:
Mavericks vs. 76ers

6th seeds:
Suns vs. Raptors

5th seeds:
Rockets vs. Wizards

4th seeds:
Jazz vs. Cavaliers

3rd seeds:
Spurs vs. Magics

2nd seeds:
Hornets vs. Pistons

Celtics already won.

The West is full of regular season dynasties.

I heard the talk for so long that the West was the best conference ever for a single season. No team won 60 games and they lost in the only playoff series that the East and West played against each other. It still was dominant overall, but I just don't think you can make a claim of the most dominant conference.

MilanFan wrote:

Flash3 wrote:

Chaos Revenant wrote:For the most part, the West teams don't seem to be bult for the playoffs. Mostly fast paced offensive teams with mediocre or worse defense (Mavs, Suns, Nuggets. Golden State, LA for now) though you also have Houston, San Antonio and the Jazz.

Whereas the Celtics, Pistons and Cavaliers are built for a more physical style of play, which is more successful because of the fact (and lets make no mistake about it) that the officiating changes in the playoffs to favor more physical play.

If this series was called the way games are called in the regular season, Lakers would likely have +15 FT differentials every game.

Good point, but to an extent.

SA, Utah, and Dallas (maybe) are solid teams that are build for the post-season. SA and Utah both have a pretty good inside-out game, with good outside shooting, plus have players who have the ability to get to the hoop, and are very good defensive teams.

Well, if we're basing it on a winner take all type of match-up, then why did the Lakers (western team) who you say is a better team, lose to the Celtics (east team)? -- Even though they defeated those "better" teams out west?

Celtics > Lakers --- East > West (in this example)
Yet the Lakers beat both of those teams. The best team happens to reside in the East. That doesn't mean the East as a whole is better.