Is the East finally better then the West?

cfan79 · Post #1 » by **cfan79** » Sun Dec 14, 2008 7:19 pm

I don't know. The West has more high quality teams, but the East's top 2 teams are much better then the West's and the horrible one's are better then the Western ones. The West has 6 teams currently with single digit wins whereas the East has 3.

Bad-Thoma · Post #2 » by **Bad-Thoma** » Sun Dec 14, 2008 7:47 pm

I still think the west is the better conference overall, though the East has the best 2 teams as you say, and the West does have it share of terrible teams. However, the conferences are probably closer than they've been in 10 years or so. The West is just deeper with Denver, Utah, Dallas, NO, Houston, San Antonio, Portland and Phoenix all being teams that you have take seriously, and throw in the Lakers at the top.

Truthiracy · Post #3 » by **Truthiracy** » Sun Dec 14, 2008 7:53 pm

The wests worst teams are putrid and worse than the easts worst teams, the west has 9 teams that should be in the playoffs, the east has 5-6 playoff deserving teams.

Overall, the west is better for now, but not for long.

Zin5 · Post #4 » by **Zin5** » Sun Dec 14, 2008 8:21 pm

No, the East has more legit contenders (2) to the West's 1, but they have more teams that I still think have a shot at the championship. After Boston and Cleveland, I just don't see anyone else out East, even Detroit, being able to stand up against a team out West in a seven game series, while the West has teams like New Orleans, Houston, San Antonio, Utah, and maybe Portland, Denver, Dallas or Pheonix (those four are at about Detroit's level, imo) that could all also get on a roll and take the championship, in addition to their legit contender in LA.

Allanon · Post #5 » by **Allanon** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 2:48 pm

The East has Celtics/Cavs, West right now it's just the Lakers so in that sense the East is better.

The East also has better scrub teams than the West, when you're bad in the West, you're really bad.

However, in the West, you have 9 quality teams whereas there are only about 5 quality teams in the East (Celtics/Cavs/Pistons/Hawks/Magic)

I also think the Clippers/Grizzlies/Warriors will be better than their Eastern seeding counterpart by the end of the season.

KyleCleric · Post #6 » by **KyleCleric** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 3:19 pm

The Eastern teams have won 64 of the 116 games between teams within the conferences for a winning percentage of 55.2%. Those 116 games are a bit over 25% of the total schedule between the conferences. Also, 8 Eastern Conference teams are over 50% against the West, 4 teams are at 50%, and just three teams are under 50% against the West, the Wizards, Raptors, and Bucks.

aboubata · Post #7 » by **aboubata** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 3:29 pm

KyleCleric wrote:The Eastern teams have won 64 of the 116 games between teams within the conferences for a winning percentage of 55.2%. Those 116 games are a bit over 25% of the total schedule between the conferences. Also, 8 Eastern Conference teams are over 50% against the West, 4 teams are at 50%, and just three teams are under 50% against the West, the Wizards, Raptors, and Bucks.

they only play 2 games across conferences, so you are either 0, 50 or 100%.

Plus these 64 of 116 don't mean anything unless you look at who is playing.

KyleCleric · Post #8 » by **KyleCleric** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 3:39 pm

aboubata wrote:
KyleCleric wrote:The Eastern teams have won 64 of the 116 games between teams within the conferences for a winning percentage of 55.2%. Those 116 games are a bit over 25% of the total schedule between the conferences. Also, 8 Eastern Conference teams are over 50% against the West, 4 teams are at 50%, and just three teams are under 50% against the West, the Wizards, Raptors, and Bucks.

they only play 2 games across conferences, so you are either 0, 50 or 100%.

Plus these 64 of 116 don't mean anything unless you look at who is playing.

teams play 30 games against the opposing conference, 450 games in all. A significant number of games like this is a significant indicator to the final outcome.

MyInsatiableOne · Post #9 » by **MyInsatiableOne** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 3:44 pm

Allanon wrote:The East has Celtics/Cavs, West right now it's just the Lakers so in that sense the East is better.

The East also has better scrub teams than the West, when you're bad in the West, you're really bad.

However, in the West, you have 9 quality teams whereas there are only about 5 quality teams in the East (Celtics/Cavs/Pistons/Hawks/Magic)

I also think the Clippers/Grizzlies/Warriors will be better than their Eastern seeding counterpart by the end of the season.

Well said!

GuyClinch · Post #10 » by **GuyClinch** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 5:06 pm

The numbers show that the East is now better. People are too quick to grant teams like Dallas "quality" status because of their past performance. Teams like Memphis, GS, Clippers, Sacramento, and OK are in fact far worse then teams like NY, Philly, Toronto, Bucks etc. Times have changed. The east is better.

MyInsatiableOne · Post #11 » by **MyInsatiableOne** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 5:28 pm

GuyClinch wrote:The numbers show that the East is now better. People are too quick to grant teams like Dallas "quality" status because of their past performance. Teams like Memphis, GS, Clippers, Sacramento, and OK are in fact far worse then teams like NY, Philly, Toronto, Bucks etc. Times have changed. The east is better.

Allanon · Post #12 » by **Allanon** » Wed Dec 17, 2008 12:48 am

GuyClinch wrote:The numbers show that the East is now better. People are too quick to grant teams like Dallas "quality" status because of their past performance.

I think #9 (West) Dallas is possibly as good as #3 Orlando, #4 Atlanta, #5 Detroit and better than #6 New Jersey, #7 Miami, #8 Chicago and #9 New York.