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

[tombattor]

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).

When you get a minute, you should check and see how many series were won by the team with HCA. Because if the team with the better record was able to steal one of the 3 in a row on the other court, then it's much easier for that team to close out at home in game 6 than on the road in game 6.

Yes, you have an extra home game in 2-2-1-1-1 format through 5 games, but the 2-3-2 format puts a lot more pressure on the road team to have to win 3 in a row at home, if the HCA team wins the first 2 at home. If the HCA team loses one of the 2 at home, then yes, the road team can sweep the 3 games at home to close it out, but at that point, the HCA team has to win 1 on the road in either format and I think it's easier to try and steal one of the 3 in a row than trying to steal one of the 2 or game 6 on the road.

So at the end, I don't think either format really makes a huge difference to either team, but no matter what, one thing is true. The team with 4 home games has an advantage. To think otherwise is absurd.

Let's say the Celtics and the Lakers play in the finals and the NBA decided to screw the HCA team and went to 3-4 format. If you had the choice between playing the first 3 games at home or having 4 latter games at home, I know every single team, coach, player, management, etc. is choosing the latter. Extra home game, no matter the format is an advantage. A big one at that.

[MyInsatiableOne]

-= 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).

Nailed it on the head. End of discussion. Thanks for agreeing with me and backing me up!

There is NO WAY the HCA team should have to play from behind if both teams simply hold serve on their homecourts...what's the **** point of HCA, then?

[seccom]

For those Celtics and Lakers fans who are old enough:

The NBA final used to be 2-2-1-1-1. But thanks to the bad air conditioners in old Boston Garden during one of the NBA final between the Lakers and the Celtics, the temp was so hot, there were talk of game cancellation.

Next year, NBA went to 2-3-2 format so that the final can be finished earlier to avoid the heat of June and July.

[tombattor]

-= original quote snipped =-
There is NO WAY the HCA team should have to play from behind if both teams simply hold serve on their homecourts...what's the **** point of HCA, then?

That's a good point, but no matter what, more home games means advantage. I guess there is a small advantage to the road teams for 2-3-2 format over 2-2-1-1-1 format in short series, but in 2-3-2, you have to play the last 2 games on the road, which is tough.

Plus, if the Celtics had the choice, do you think there is anyone on the Celtics that would go for the 3 middle games at home at the cost of a home game? I don't think so. There is not one person in the league that will make that choice. HCA is HCA.

[kmgarnett21]

i agree, games 5 & 7 should be rewarded to the team with the best record. the 2-3-2 is bs. that basically GIVES the lower seeded team a HUGE advantage & puts MORE pressure on the team with "home court ad." they HAVE to win both the first two games. i hate the 2-3-2. it totally takes away a hard earned advantage that the better team earned throughout the entire season.

but this is all in retrospect b/c we havent even advanced to the finals

[tombattor]

God damn... You guys whine and cry about everything.

Would you rather play 3 middle games at home or have HCA? Case closed.

[MyInsatiableOne]

For those Celtics and Lakers fans who are old enough:

The NBA final used to be 2-2-1-1-1. But thanks to the bad air conditioners in old Boston Garden during one of the NBA final between the Lakers and the Celtics, the temp was so hot, there were talk of game cancellation.

Next year, NBA went to 2-3-2 format so that the final can be finished earlier to avoid the heat of June and July.

I remember the way it used to be....and I'm not that old!

[MyInsatiableOne]

God damn... You guys whine and cry about everything.

Would you rather play 3 middle games at home or have HCA? Case closed.

I'd rather have 4 home games, including games 5 and 7

[tombattor]

-= original quote snipped =-
I'd rather have 4 home games, including games 5 and 7

hahaha.

Personally, I think the finals will go at least 6 games, so I rather get the games 6 and 7 at home.

[Celtic Esquire]

I still don't have a clue why they switch series format when it's the Finals. The 2-3-2 definitely helps the team with the worse record since all they have to do is steal one of the first two games to have a sizable advantage playing 3 straight home games.

[tombattor]

I still don't have a clue why they switch series format when it's the Finals. The 2-3-2 definitely helps the team with the worse record since all they have to do is steal one of the first two games to have a sizable advantage playing 3 straight home games.

Then maybe the team with the better record should play the 3 games in the middle, since you get such a significant advantage by not having the HCA.

[MyInsatiableOne]

-= original quote snipped =-


Then maybe the team with the better record should play the 3 games in the middle, since you get such a significant advantage by not having the HCA.

touche'!!

[seccom]

I still don't have a clue why they switch series format when it's the Finals. The 2-3-2 definitely helps the team with the worse record since all they have to do is steal one of the first two games to have a sizable advantage playing 3 straight home games.

You are too young. But Celtics fan should not complain, it is Celtics's air conditioner.

For those Celtics and Lakers fans who are old enough:

The NBA final used to be 2-2-1-1-1. But thanks to the bad air conditioners in old Boston Garden during one of the NBA final between the Lakers and the Celtics, the temp was so hot, there were talk of game cancellation.

Next year, NBA went to 2-3-2 format so that the final can be finished earlier to avoid the heat of June and July.

[BigHands]

For those Celtics and Lakers fans who are old enough:

The NBA final used to be 2-2-1-1-1. But thanks to the bad air conditioners in old Boston Garden during one of the NBA final between the Lakers and the Celtics, the temp was so hot, there were talk of game cancellation.

Next year, NBA went to 2-3-2 format so that the final can be finished earlier to avoid the heat of June and July.

The switch was made for the 85 finals which started on May 27, 1985.....Celtics lost game 5 in LA of a 2-2 series after struggling to get even in game 4. The Lakers smelled blood and took them out in game 6 in Boston.

The 1984 series, the last of the 2-2-1-1-1 setup, also on May 27 in 1984 (although it was a leap year so maybe it was hotter a day later )

Game 5 was a scorcher that year and Kareem did not handle the heat well but Boston was the older team....besides AC had nothing to do with it....Red had the heater on and water off

Trust me on this gang....if we get to the finals we are going to be very upset come game 5.....just wait and see.

[BigHands]

[quote="tombattor"][/quote]

In 90, 98 and 01 the teams in the finals had the same record.

Finals losers with Home Court advantage:

85 Celtics lost to Lakers 4-2
93 Suns lost to Bulls 4-2
95 Magic lost to Rockets 4-0
04 Lakers lost to Piston 4-1
06 Mavs lost to the Heat 4-2

IMO, neither us nor the Pistons are likely to see a game 7 so there will be no HCA during the finals.

[tombattor]

In 90, 98 and 01 the teams in the finals had the same record.

Finals losers with Home Court advantage:

85 Celtics lost to Lakers 4-2
93 Suns lost to Bulls 4-2
95 Magic lost to Rockets 4-0
04 Lakers lost to Piston 4-1
06 Mavs lost to the Heat 4-2

IMO, neither us nor the Pistons are likely to see a game 7 so there will be no HCA during the finals.

So since 1985, there have been 23 finals and only 5 teams without HCA won the series. So the other 18 went to the team with HCA. Even if we eliminate the 3 seasons when the 2 teams had the same record, although one team would have gotten the HCA, that's still 15:3 in favor of the team with HCA.

I'd say, 2-3-2 or 2-2-1-1-1, it's better to have HCA.

[Athanacropolis]

-= original quote snipped =-


So since 1985, there have been 23 finals and only 5 teams without HCA won the series. So the other 18 went to the team with HCA. Even if we eliminate the 3 seasons when the 2 teams had the same record, although one team would have gotten the HCA, that's still 15:3 in favor of the team with HCA.

I'd say, 2-3-2 or 2-2-1-1-1, it's better to have HCA.

Correct. You could have it 1-1-1-1-1-1-1, 3-4, 2-1-2-1-1, or any permutation, and it'd be better to have HCA. End of thread.

[DEEP3CL]

they made it a 2-3-2 series b/c of the long-aaass travel for both teams goin coast to coast. it wouldn't be smart to go 2-2-1-1-1 and hella tired/exhausting, more travel costs, etc. that's my guess ... lol

Your exactly right, cause most of the post I see here from some of your fans show they clearly don't understand the reason it was adopted anyway. And by the looks of it most here wasn't born or either justs babies when the league went to that format.

[BigHands]

-= original quote snipped =-


So since 1985, there have been 23 finals and only 5 teams without HCA won the series. So the other 18 went to the team with HCA. Even if we eliminate the 3 seasons when the 2 teams had the same record, although one team would have gotten the HCA, that's still 15:3 in favor of the team with HCA.

I'd say, 2-3-2 or 2-2-1-1-1, it's better to have HCA.

Only 3 series went 7 games however.

Since all but 3 series were decided without the extra game the HCA provides, I would argue that the HCA has been largely negated by the 2-3-2 format.

Obviously in a number of years the team with the best record is significantly better....Spurs and Cavs last year and several Michael Jordan teams.

But when the teams are close in overall level (like this year I suspect), the 2-3-2 is a problem for the team with the better record because the series is less likely to go 7 and it is quite easy to be down 3-2 with 3 road games after have played 5.

The virtual negation of the HCA by the format is my beef....not that the better record is an actual disadvantage.

[BigHands]

-= original quote snipped =-

Your exactly right, cause most of the post I see here from some of your fans show they clearly don't understand the reason it was adopted anyway. And by the looks of it most here wasn't born or either justs babies when the league went to that format.

Right...been watching since 1959.

The travel argument, which was the justification when it was done, was and is nonsense.

Teams spend the whole year heating the planet with air trips....and now the league is talking Europe, with and eye on China.

And we should buy travel nonsense?

Why not make all the series 2-3-2 if the little fellows are so tired? Or gasp...stop qualifying 16 teams for the playoffs and make the regular season mean something.