ImageImageImage

The 2-3-2 Finals Format: Who does it really favor?

Moderators: bisme37, Froob, Darthlukey, Shak_Celts, Parliament10, canman1971, shackles10, snowman

The Rondo Show
Analyst
Posts: 3,588
And1: 327
Joined: Mar 16, 2006

The 2-3-2 Finals Format: Who does it really favor? 

Post#1 » by The Rondo Show » Fri May 30, 2008 6:35 am

If we are to beat Detroit, we switch to the 2 home games, 3 road games, 2 home game format.

If you take the 1st 2 at home, you take big control of the series as it's extremely difficult to take 3 games in a row against the same team. Chances are you go back home for 6-7 with a 3 games to 2 advantage and 2 shots on your homecourt at closing it out.

OTOH, if you split, the other team has the potential to close it out in 5 on their home court. And if you split, you probably go back for games 6-7 down 3-2 needing to win 2 in a row.

Which format do you prefer for the Celtics/the team with homecourt: 2-3-2 or 2-2-1-1-1?

I kind of prefer the 2-2-1-1-1 myself.

FWIW, the Lakers also haven't lost a home game this post-season.
Image
User avatar
SmoothLikeButta
Sophomore
Posts: 203
And1: 0
Joined: Nov 05, 2006

 

Post#2 » by SmoothLikeButta » Fri May 30, 2008 7:01 am

obviously the 2-2-1-1-1 is better for the HCA team... they tried to make it more even for the finals since it is essentially 1st seed vs. 1st seed
Image
freakon0mics
Analyst
Posts: 3,320
And1: 73
Joined: Oct 21, 2005
Location: Charlotte, NC
     

 

Post#3 » by freakon0mics » Fri May 30, 2008 7:16 am

Forgot that they changed the format. Obviously, if we get the 2-3-2 format, we can take an early lead but we have to win both games at home. Especially against a good home team like the Lakers. If we split one game here with them, then they will have the opportunity to close it out in 5 games. Either way, someone has to win on the road to have an advantage in the series.
"I can accept failure, but I can't accept not trying." - Michael Jordan
User avatar
IEcelticfan
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,368
And1: 0
Joined: Jun 21, 2007

 

Post#4 » by IEcelticfan » Fri May 30, 2008 7:19 am

the better team
User avatar
pfm
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,930
And1: 1,652
Joined: Jul 03, 2006
 

 

Post#5 » by pfm » Fri May 30, 2008 7:20 am

I dont think the 2-3-2 particularly helps a certain team more then the 2-2-1-1-1, but I feel the 2-2-1-1-1 is overall more balanced and fair to both teams. Like you stated in the 2-3-2, those first 2 games play a HUGE role in the series, as opposed to in the 2-2-1-1-1, where if the home team takes the first 2, then the other team gets 2 more right back to home. I just think gives more balance to the series and doesnt put such emphasis on the first 2 games.
User avatar
IEcelticfan
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,368
And1: 0
Joined: Jun 21, 2007

 

Post#6 » by IEcelticfan » Fri May 30, 2008 7:21 am

they made it a 2-3-2 series b/c of the long-aaass travel for both teams goin coast to coast. it wouldnt be smart to go 2-2-1-1-1 and hella tired/exhausting, more travel costs, etc. that's my guess ... lol
Fencer reregistered
RealGM
Posts: 40,988
And1: 27,858
Joined: Oct 25, 2006

Re: The 2-3-2 Finals Format: Who does it really favor? 

Post#7 » by Fencer reregistered » Fri May 30, 2008 10:29 am

The Rondo Show wrote:

If you take the 1st 2 at home, you take big control of the series as it's extremely difficult to take 3 games in a row against the same team. Chances are you go back home for 6-7 with a 3 games to 2 advantage and 2 shots on your homecourt at closing it out.



The Rondo Show wrote:

OTOH, if you split, the other team has the potential to close it out in 5 on their home court.


Have you two met? :)
User avatar
Tricky Ricky
Analyst
Posts: 3,130
And1: 0
Joined: Aug 15, 2005
Location: HAVERHILL MA

 

Post#8 » by Tricky Ricky » Fri May 30, 2008 12:29 pm

The home team if they can win game 1 and 2, the away team if they can steal 1 of the first 2, its ridiculous though
Quote of the year
MyInsatiableOne wrote:Did we just seriously post Danny's personal address and phone # on the board? :o
CelticsWhat!
Pro Prospect
Posts: 884
And1: 1
Joined: May 22, 2003
Location: I'll be where I'm at!!

 

Post#9 » by CelticsWhat! » Fri May 30, 2008 12:49 pm

I don't think it's a huge difference, but I think it benefits the team with HCA, and rightfully so, because what it forces the other team (Lakers) to do is close the series out in 5 games, otherwise they will have to close it out on the road, which is no easy task either.
"If you drop a phonograph needle on Brasky's nipple, it plays the Beach Boys' 'Pet Sounds.'"
User avatar
MyInsatiableOne
General Manager
Posts: 9,319
And1: 180
Joined: Mar 25, 2005
Location: Midwest via New England
Contact:
     

 

Post#10 » by MyInsatiableOne » Fri May 30, 2008 1:14 pm

2-3-2 vastly favors the team without homecourt since they get the pivotal game 5 on their home floor...which makes no sense. Games 5 and 7 should be rewarded to the team with HCA, plain and simple.
It's still 17 to 11!!!!
User avatar
DorfonCeltics
Analyst
Posts: 3,680
And1: 215
Joined: Feb 24, 2005

 

Post#11 » by DorfonCeltics » Fri May 30, 2008 1:40 pm

SmoothLikeButta wrote:obviously the 2-2-1-1-1 is better for the HCA team... they tried to make it more even for the finals since it is essentially 1st seed vs. 1st seed


Exactly. There is no HCA in the Finals. They are leveling the playing field with the 2-3-2 format.
Celtics_Champs
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 53,596
And1: 8,074
Joined: Jan 13, 2005
Location: TD Garden
 

 

Post#12 » by Celtics_Champs » Fri May 30, 2008 2:46 pm

Oh wow. This is awful. It helps out the opposite team very much. All they need is a split in the first two and the hca team is in trouble.
User avatar
tonythewise
Veteran
Posts: 2,845
And1: 0
Joined: Jan 30, 2004
Location: parts unknown

 

Post#13 » by tonythewise » Fri May 30, 2008 2:58 pm

SmoothLikeButta wrote:obviously the 2-2-1-1-1 is better for the HCA team... they tried to make it more even for the finals since it is essentially 1st seed vs. 1st seed


I was under the impression that the rationale was more travel related. For same conference, 1-1-1 not a big deal, but for LA-Bos for example, it is a bigger deal. Of course, with the networks controlling the scheduling it is a moot point (how about the gap between game 6 and 7 of the SA/NO series- disgusting.
Rocky5000
Analyst
Posts: 3,386
And1: 0
Joined: Jan 15, 2008

 

Post#14 » by Rocky5000 » Fri May 30, 2008 3:29 pm

Just win the first 4 games and you won't be able to tell the difference.
Detlef Shrimp
Ballboy
Posts: 20
And1: 1
Joined: May 14, 2008

Re: The 2-3-2 Finals Format: Who does it really favor? 

Post#15 » by Detlef Shrimp » Fri May 30, 2008 3:49 pm

Fencer reregistered wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



Have you two met? :)










:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :clap:
Image
User avatar
tombattor
General Manager
Posts: 8,662
And1: 807
Joined: Nov 11, 2003
       

 

Post#16 » by tombattor » Fri May 30, 2008 4:15 pm

MyInsatiableOne wrote:2-3-2 vastly favors the team without homecourt since they get the pivotal game 5 on their home floor...which makes no sense. Games 5 and 7 should be rewarded to the team with HCA, plain and simple.

Bro what are you talking about? I don't care if it's 3-4. One team still gets 4 home games vs. 3. Every team will take 4 home games vs. 3 every time.

It's not easy to win 3 games in a row in the playoffs, even if you have all 3 of those games at home. And the road team still HAS to win one on the road. And if the series goes that far, wouldn't you rather have games 6 and 7 at home?
User avatar
celticfan42487
RealGM
Posts: 27,524
And1: 15,354
Joined: Jul 22, 2005
Location: Billerica, MA
       

 

Post#17 » by celticfan42487 » Fri May 30, 2008 4:53 pm

I think it favors the homecourt team.

If your are the better team you get your usually momentum in games 1 & 2.

And the better team should be able to win both homes games plus one at the road.

If not you get game 6 at home instead of 5. ANY advantage the opposing team has for 4 & 5 thanks to momentum is gone for game 7. They have to win 2 in a row away for 6 and 7. And the hometeam should be good enough to force a game 6.

edit: Basically, win 2 games at of 5 against a supposive weaker team, and in order for you to loss the Finals the opposing team has to close you out on YOUR COURT.

I'd rather have 6 & 7 at home then 5 & 7. Game 5 was ONLY critical because game 6 is in the opponents home.
Image
User avatar
MyInsatiableOne
General Manager
Posts: 9,319
And1: 180
Joined: Mar 25, 2005
Location: Midwest via New England
Contact:
     

 

Post#18 » by MyInsatiableOne » Fri May 30, 2008 5:12 pm

tombattor wrote:-= original quote snipped =-


Bro what are you talking about? I don't care if it's 3-4. One team still gets 4 home games vs. 3. Every team will take 4 home games vs. 3 every time.

It's not easy to win 3 games in a row in the playoffs, even if you have all 3 of those games at home. And the road team still HAS to win one on the road. And if the series goes that far, wouldn't you rather have games 6 and 7 at home?


But if teams hold serve on homecourt, then the HCA team comes back home for game 6 DOWN 3-2 with no momentum...game 5 is too important to not have at home if you earned HCA.
It's still 17 to 11!!!!
BigHands
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,544
And1: 126
Joined: Aug 16, 2003
Location: On the bow contemplating the grandeur of the iceberg

 

Post#19 » by BigHands » Fri May 30, 2008 5:23 pm

tombattor wrote:-= original quote snipped =-


Bro what are you talking about? I don't care if it's 3-4. One team still gets 4 home games vs. 3. Every team will take 4 home games vs. 3 every time.

It's not easy to win 3 games in a row in the playoffs, even if you have all 3 of those games at home. And the road team still HAS to win one on the road. And if the series goes that far, wouldn't you rather have games 6 and 7 at home?


I think quite a few posters are sleeping on this issue.

In the 37 years with a 2-2-1-1-1 format the finals went 7 games 13 times (35.1%).

In the 22 years since the format was changed the finals have gone to 7 games only 3 times (13.6%)

It is very likely there will be no 7th game thus no home court advantage for either Boston or Detroit.

Your point about 3 in a row is well taken but in a 2-2 series game 5 is usually the decision maker and that game will be in LA.

If the home team stumbles in game 1 or 2 (like in the Celtic-Piston series) the team with the best record is in deep trouble right away as there is an extended stretch of away games coming up.

Not only is it crazy to change the format for the finals, then NBA is stupid too because it cost them money (less games).
"Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on, or by imbeciles who really mean it." - Mark Twain
GreenGrizz
Analyst
Posts: 3,466
And1: 0
Joined: Feb 23, 2005
Location: Vermont

 

Post#20 » by GreenGrizz » Fri May 30, 2008 5:32 pm

I don't like the 2-3-2 format because some teams like Cleveland and Washington could have gotten away with it after the easy regular season.

Return to Boston Celtics