Last 26 years West nearly doubles East in championships

[Wingy]

I very strongly disagree with you on Miami. Signing a good, older player is exactly the opposite approach of people who promote tanking. To their credit they identified Butler was an undervalued player and decided to build around him. I respect that even if it ended ugly.

I just think building title teams is next to impossible unless you get lucky in draft or an MVP level player decides to come to your team. Given that when I see success like Miami I see them as doing a good job.

I think you’re right to question as I think I did a poor job making my point lumping them in with Chicago and Atlanta saying they were mid/treadmill.

They have a much stronger FO, and obviously coach. They are on a higher tier. What I’d say they have in common is that they chose to be satisfied, but at a much higher level than Chi and ATL.

My criticism lies back on topic. When talking about Western superiority, championships, Miami could’ve potentially helped the East’s recent history had they pushed their chips in when on the cusp vs resting on their laurels. Instead, iirc they still had 3 tradable firsts, Herro with a greater rep, and clutched on to all of them instead of trying to make that multi-Finals team even better.

[Wingy]

I would honestly love to go into one of those front office meetings and see what they're thinking. Forget winning a title. What's their plan to get to 55+ wins or getting out of the first round.

The Bulls don’t plan for those goals!

They plan to collect a luxury tax payout every year, be competitive enough to put butts in seats, and any wins beyond that are simply a huge, serendipitous bonus!

[sp6r=underrated]

I would honestly love to go into one of those front office meetings and see what they're thinking. Forget winning a title. What's their plan to get to 55+ wins or getting out of the first round.

I don't think ownership cares:

Reinsdorf is an example of where the owner's objective, guaranteed profit, really goes against fan interest.

I don't follow the Bulls closely but it seems clear that ownership:

1. Requires not paying the luxury tax.
2. Requires targeting the playoffs every year.

Given those constraints building even a 50 win team is next to impossible. And I don't think their owner cares. His objective is reliable year-to-year profit. And his approach ensures it.

A list of total luxury tax payments by team: https://www.spotrac.com/nba/cba/tax

Fairly fascinating as I've never seen it broken out. The only teams below Chicago are

Washington: always awful
Houston: genuinely surprised to see them here. They have had multiple owners in this timespan and never spend money on any of them despite a massive market. But they've been good leading me to think they may have left a title on the floor and definitely surrendered some playoff series.
Atlanta: Big market, always middle of the road.
Detroit: surprised they managed to stay below the tax in the 00s.
Charlotte:
New Orleans: they have no fans in a market too small for the NBA so I give them a pass

Big market teams dominate the top of the list which isn't surprising but **** Utah has spent almost 4x the tax Chicago.

The Bulls really are dirt cheap and run the team to cut costs. And it is really hard to win this way unless you are very which Chicago isn't or willing to tank which Chicago won't.

[jkvonny]

Since MJ's Bulls.. 1999 to 2024

West (17): 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2014, 2015, 2017, 2018, 2020, 2022, 2023

East (9) : 2004, 2006, 2008, 2012, 2013, 2016, 2019, 2021, 2024


West has more ambitious newer owners, better GMs/ Front Offices, scouting and some luck in drafts I expect this trend to continue for some time especially if Giannis heads West. When will the league address this disparity in conferences?

Edit:
It gets even worse head to head during the regular season:

West has won 55.1% of its games against the East this year https://www.basketball-reference.com/friv/east_vs_west.html

Since 1999-00 to now West has won 6,298 games in 10,844 head to head matches in the regular season.. that's over 58% of games.



At one point.. 21 out of 22 seasons West has won h2h in that span. Could've been 24 out of 26 if the West didn't fumble in the 2021-22 season by a mere 3 games. Whole careers came and left only seeing Eastern Conference winning once head to head. Talk about dominance. Yikes.

Honestly the ratio of elite teams is probably more lopsided as the East has won a few titles over that span with teams I think would have failed to have gotten through in the West.

I'm not sure why it is so lopsided. Here are the possible reasons:

1. The West has better cities.

Each conference has one of the mega-markets (NYC/LA). Both conferences have a good split of the next level cities. The East has Chicago, Atlanta, Miami and the West has Dallas, Houston and Phoenix.

2. The West has gotten luckier in the draft.

There is truth to this. The West has gotten a bit luckier in having elite players begin their career in the Western Conference but it is not a huge imbalance.

3. The West just got lucky in the finals.

As discussed by others this is just false. The West was way deeper than the East too for most of the years.

4. The bad owners are concentrated in the East.

There is some truth here. Dolan ran the Knicks into the ground for the better part of two decades. Reinsdorf is an example of where the owner's objective, guaranteed profit, really goes against fan interest. In the West the only really bad big market owner was Sterling and he's been gone for about a decade.

These are good points. We'll said.

Also just to throw out there. During the '80s/'90s the East was the stronger , deeper conference and the ownership was better in the East back then compared to the West. Also, the East had lots of teams trying to up the level in competition and deal with the Bird Celtics, Moncrief Bucks, Isiah Pistons, Malone 76ers, Miller Pacers, Ewing Knicks, Dominique Hawks, Jordan Bulls, etc.
And The West had some bad ownership especially in some of the big markets like GSW (pre Jacob Lacob), Clippers (Sterling), Dallas Mavs (pre Mark Cuban) etc.
Obviously a lot of this changed in the last 10-20 yrs.
While many of the big markets owners in the East like Chicago, Washington, Philly, New York, etc started to slack off since then.

The West has a lot of small/mid markets but are generally well run, good ownership/front office: San Antonio, OKC, Utah, Portland, Denver, Phoenix, Memphis, etc.
The owners are savvy, rely on draft picks developing players, great/smart scouting, etc.
That's why they've been pretty luck in the draft too, but also great at player development. When in the lottery/down years.

The East doesn't have as many mid/small markets, but Indiana generally is the best run franchise in that category, as well as Miami Heat. Along with Milwaukee most years. Cleveland, Orlando at times.
While Charlotte, Detroit struggles at times.
The East some reason not great at player development at times and more draft busts. When lottery/down years.

The West only has a few big markets LA Lakers/Clippers, Dallas Mavs, Houston Rockets, GSW. Basically the big cities, metroplex in California and Texas. 5.
The rest of the other West teams are small/mid markets.

The East had tons of big markets and are more spread out , different states. NY Knicks, Brooklyn Nets, Philly 76ers, Boston Celtics, Toronto Raptors, Chicago Bulls, Atlanta Hawks, Washington (DC, DMV) Wizards , etc 8 of them.
The rest of the East teams are small/mid markets.

[Pointgod]

6 of those titles were the result of guys signing with the Lakers or Warriors to make movies or ring chase.

Shaq signed with the Lakers.
Kobe demanded that the Lakers draft him.
KD signed with the Warriors.
LeBron signed with the Lakers.
AD demanded a trade to the Lakers.

That isn't shrewd management. It's having a market advantage over other cities.

I must have missed all the championships the Clippers won…… oh wait

[Yoshun]

The Lakers and Spurs won 11 of them.

Throw in the Warriors and that's 15.

3 teams won 15 championships.

[Raps in 4]

6 of those titles were the result of guys signing with the Lakers or Warriors to make movies or ring chase.

Shaq signed with the Lakers.
Kobe demanded that the Lakers draft him.
KD signed with the Warriors.
LeBron signed with the Lakers.
AD demanded a trade to the Lakers.

That isn't shrewd management. It's having a market advantage over other cities.

I must have missed all the championships the Clippers won…… oh wait

Everyone in LA was already a Lakers fan in 1984 when the Clippers relocated there.

The Clippers were also a failed franchise when they relocated.

When the Lakers came to LA twenty five years earlier, the franchise was already the winningest team in NBA history with five titles. And now they played in a subtropical paradise.

The Lakers did **** all to attract Kareem, Shaq, Kobe, LeBron, and AD there. The team was either garbage or treadmilling when each of them went there. The Lakers have the power to attract FAs and disgruntled players/clout chasers because of market size, brand recognition, and weather. No other franchise has this combination of factors going their way.

[Deivork]

If they played equally against everyone else, rs and ps, the west teams would dominate even more

[ImmortalD24]

Another 1.. and with that West doubles the East in championships since 1999. Looks like the trend will continue next year also.

[Optms]

6 of those titles were the result of guys signing with the Lakers or Warriors to make movies or ring chase.

Shaq signed with the Lakers.
Kobe demanded that the Lakers draft him.
KD signed with the Warriors.
LeBron signed with the Lakers.
AD demanded a trade to the Lakers.

That isn't shrewd management. It's having a market advantage over other cities.

I'd argue it is.

Knicks have the largest market in North America
Chicago 3rd largest market
Philly 4th
Zero titles won

Dallas, the 5th largest market - only 1 title. The LA (Lakers) are the only top 5 market you can say that about. Golden State is on par with Toronto, Atlanta, Houston, Washington. Shrewd management plays more of a role than people want to admit. Otherwise the Knicks would be a powerhouse. And so would several other large markets. Yet only the Lakers and Warriors have sustained success out of all the top 10 largest markets.

[Chuck Everett]

6 of those titles were the result of guys signing with the Lakers or Warriors to make movies or ring chase.

Shaq signed with the Lakers.
Kobe demanded that the Lakers draft him.
KD signed with the Warriors.
LeBron signed with the Lakers.
AD demanded a trade to the Lakers.

That isn't shrewd management. It's having a market advantage over other cities.

I'd argue it is.

Knicks have the largest market in North America
Chicago 3rd largest market
Philly 4th
Zero titles won

Dallas, the 5th largest market - only 1 title. The LA (Lakers) are the only top 5 market you can say that about. Golden State is on par with Toronto, Atlanta, Houston, Washington. Shrewd management plays more of a role than people want to admit. Otherwise the Knicks would be a powerhouse. And so would several other large markets. Yet only the Lakers and Warriors have sustained success out of all the top 10 largest markets.

New York is a basketball town through and through, but the problem (as to why star players typically don't want to come there) is due to the media and the fanbase. They can be brutal if you're not thick-skinned. Some here might push back against that, but they know it's true. It's a very mean/angry fanbase, just like Philly.

Los Angeles, where I have lived for twenty years now, is not like that all. People typically leave the athletes alone, even if they are underperforming. There will rarely be news articles shaming your failure and what-not. Just not that type of place.

Chicago's problem is the owner doesn't care because he's already won 6 titles and would rather use the team as a cash machine.

[Raps in 4]

6 of those titles were the result of guys signing with the Lakers or Warriors to make movies or ring chase.

Shaq signed with the Lakers.
Kobe demanded that the Lakers draft him.
KD signed with the Warriors.
LeBron signed with the Lakers.
AD demanded a trade to the Lakers.

That isn't shrewd management. It's having a market advantage over other cities.

I'd argue it is.

Knicks have the largest market in North America
Chicago 3rd largest market
Philly 4th
Zero titles won

Dallas, the 5th largest market - only 1 title. The LA (Lakers) are the only top 5 market you can say that about. Golden State is on par with Toronto, Atlanta, Houston, Washington. Shrewd management plays more of a role than people want to admit. Otherwise the Knicks would be a powerhouse. And so would several other large markets. Yet only the Lakers and Warriors have sustained success out of all the top 10 largest markets.

New York is a basketball town through and through, but the problem (as to why star players typically don't want to come there) is due to the media and the fanbase. They can be brutal if you're not thick-skinned. Some here might push back against that, but they know it's true. It's a very mean/angry fanbase, just like Philly.

Los Angeles, where I have lived for twenty years now, is not like that all. People typically leave the athletes alone, even if they are underperforming. There will rarely be news articles shaming your failure and what-not. Just not that type of place.

Chicago's problem is the owner doesn't care because he's already won 6 titles and would rather use the team as a cash machine.

Chicago and New York are also cold. LA is a subtropical paradise with beautiful beaches and summer weather all year long.

And before someone says "why don't players sign with the Clippers instead?". They've started to more recently. But it boils down to, why would they if they can sign with the Lakers? The Lakers are the far more popular franchise.

[SportsGuru08]

Since MJ's Bulls.. 1999 to 2025

West (18): 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2014, 2015, 2017, 2018, 2020, 2022, 2023, 2025

East (9) : 2004, 2006, 2008, 2012, 2013, 2016, 2019, 2021, 2024


West has more ambitious newer owners, better GMs/ Front Offices, scouting and some luck in drafts I expect this trend to continue for some time especially if Giannis heads West. When will the league address this disparity in conferences?

Edit:
It gets even worse head to head during the regular season:

West has won 55.1% of its games against the East this year https://www.basketball-reference.com/friv/east_vs_west.html

Since 1999-00 to now West has won 6,298 games in 10,844 head to head matches in the regular season.. that's over 58% of games.



At one point.. 21 out of 22 seasons West has won h2h in that span. Could've been 24 out of 26 if the West didn't fumble in the 2021-22 season by a mere 3 games. Whole careers came and left only seeing Eastern Conference winning once head to head. Talk about dominance. Yikes.

And the East's advantage in 2009 was largely due to Sacramento losing 29 out of 30 interconference games.

[SportsGuru08]

However, the East was the stronger conference back in the '80s and '90s.

Its Cyclical.

OP makes a great point tho.

Minus the ring chasers coalition (Lakers/GSW) you still had a bunch of good ones come through in the West in the past 2 decades (Mavs, Spurs, Nuggets, soon to be Thunder etc).

The Lakers and Rockets were the only teams to represent the West in the Finals for the entirety of the '80s. The Lakers were there 8 times, the Rockets the other 2. And both times, the Rockets defeated the Lakers on their way to the Finals.

Going even further, the Lakers and Rockets were the only Western franchises to win any championships from 1980 to 1998.

[GeorgeMarcus]

Meh West is 41-37 in NBA Finals history. It's a little bit of the California draw but also just random variance. East dominated the league in stretches, namely the 90s Bulls and the 60s/80s Celtics

[Drakeem]

And yet, 4 of the top 6 teams this year were in the east. Balance of power has shifted.

4 of the top 6 teams by what measure?

By record, the East had only 3 of the top-5 teams and then there were 4 teams tied for 6th with 50 wins each. But records are biased because the West is tougher top-to-bottom than the East so the top West teams had a more difficult in-conference schedule. By SRS, the East had only 2 of the top-8 teams.

Moreover, the trajectory for the East going forward is not promising. Boston is entering massive decline, Cleveland has to prove it's not a paper tiger after losing in the semis to a team which won 14 fewer games, Milwaukee has been in decline for awhile and now might lose Giannis, New York is mid, Philly can't get their sh*t together and while Orlando and Detroit are promising young teams, both have yet to win a playoff series.

If New York is mid, the West outside of OKC and maybe Denver is just as mid if not worse.

Never understood the Knicks hate on this board. For all the talk about Boston, they beat them basically healthy. They have a top 10 player, a legit second option, and fantastic 3 and D role players. I’d say their offensive game plan is a bit basic and they need another bench piece or two but they’re a good team. Knicks >> Minny/Lakers/Clippers/GS

[jkvonny]

However, the East was the stronger conference back in the '80s and '90s.

Its Cyclical.

OP makes a great point tho.

Minus the ring chasers coalition (Lakers/GSW) you still had a bunch of good ones come through in the West in the past 2 decades (Mavs, Spurs, Nuggets, soon to be Thunder etc).

The Lakers and Rockets were the only teams to represent the West in the Finals for the entirety of the '80s. The Lakers were there 8 times, the Rockets the other 2. And both times, the Rockets defeated the Lakers on their way to the Finals.

Going even further, the Lakers and Rockets were the only Western franchises to win any championships from 1980 to 1998.

Good point.

[LordCovington33]

Yes, when you make the cutoff at 26 years it seems the West has really dominated in recent years. Although in NBA history it is 41 East to 36 West, but that was a long time ago and it doesn’t fit the narratives.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NBA_champions

Yep. If the focus is on recent history with emphasis on the management of teams, why 26 years? Why not the last 15 years as that would give a better indication of how present teams are run?
However, if the OP were to do that, it wouldn’t show domination - since both conferences are nearly the same.

[pepe1991]

And yet, 4 of the top 6 teams this year were in the east. Balance of power has shifted.

4 of the top 6 teams by what measure?

By record, the East had only 3 of the top-5 teams and then there were 4 teams tied for 6th with 50 wins each. But records are biased because the West is tougher top-to-bottom than the East so the top West teams had a more difficult in-conference schedule. By SRS, the East had only 2 of the top-8 teams.

Moreover, the trajectory for the East going forward is not promising. Boston is entering massive decline, Cleveland has to prove it's not a paper tiger after losing in the semis to a team which won 14 fewer games, Milwaukee has been in decline for awhile and now might lose Giannis, New York is mid, Philly can't get their sh*t together and while Orlando and Detroit are promising young teams, both have yet to win a playoff series.

If New York is mid, the West outside of OKC and maybe Denver is just as mid if not worse.

Never understood the Knicks hate on this board. For all the talk about Boston, they beat them basically healthy. They have a top 10 player, a legit second option, and fantastic 3 and D role players. I’d say their offensive game plan is a bit basic and they need another bench piece or two but they’re a good team. Knicks >> Minny/Lakers/Clippers/GS

We can play little bit with numbers.

Knicks had 56% win rate vs West, 65% win rate vs East.

Let's assume Knicks are on West.

52 games vs West on 56% win rate = 30-22
30 games vs East on 65% win rate = 19-11

That's fringe playoff- play in team on West.

Not a single team among : Bucks, Magic, Pistons, Heat would sniff near playoffs on West.

Just to paint picture, Blazers, 36 wins team on West, had 17-13 record vs East.

In their case, by changing conference and doing nothing else, assuming they would keep win percentage, they would go from 36-46 to exact same record as Knicks had


There are even more notorious examples, Grizzlies went 22-10 vs East. If they kept that W% and are on East, that's 38-14 vs East and 16-14 vs West = 54 wins & 3# spot in playoffs, playing first round vs Pistons. Instead they had play in and OKC.

East had more wins than West in 3 times in past 28 years. ( head to head match ups )

1990- 2025, East gave 16/36 champions, sounds close. But 9 out of 16 Eastern champions either had Lebron or Jordan. Jordan/Bulls alone having 40% of all Eastern conference titles in that time frame.


Knicks are solid team. But their "contending" status only exists because, like Cavs, they have so little competition to break through. Where on West you never know who can come out and there are so many good to great teams that can pass to finals.

[Drakeem]

4 of the top 6 teams by what measure?

By record, the East had only 3 of the top-5 teams and then there were 4 teams tied for 6th with 50 wins each. But records are biased because the West is tougher top-to-bottom than the East so the top West teams had a more difficult in-conference schedule. By SRS, the East had only 2 of the top-8 teams.

Moreover, the trajectory for the East going forward is not promising. Boston is entering massive decline, Cleveland has to prove it's not a paper tiger after losing in the semis to a team which won 14 fewer games, Milwaukee has been in decline for awhile and now might lose Giannis, New York is mid, Philly can't get their sh*t together and while Orlando and Detroit are promising young teams, both have yet to win a playoff series.

If New York is mid, the West outside of OKC and maybe Denver is just as mid if not worse.

Never understood the Knicks hate on this board. For all the talk about Boston, they beat them basically healthy. They have a top 10 player, a legit second option, and fantastic 3 and D role players. I’d say their offensive game plan is a bit basic and they need another bench piece or two but they’re a good team. Knicks >> Minny/Lakers/Clippers/GS

We can play little bit with numbers.

Knicks had 56% win rate vs West, 65% win rate vs East.

Let's assume Knicks are on West.

52 games vs West on 56% win rate = 30-22
30 games vs East on 65% win rate = 19-11

That's fringe playoff- play in team on West.

Not a single team among : Bucks, Magic, Pistons, Heat would sniff near playoffs on West.

Just to paint picture, Blazers, 36 wins team on West, had 17-13 record vs East.

In their case, by changing conference and doing nothing else, assuming they would keep win percentage, they would go from 36-46 to exact same record as Knicks had


There are even more notorious examples, Grizzlies went 22-10 vs East. If they kept that W% and are on East, that's 38-14 vs East and 16-14 vs West = 54 wins & 3# spot in playoffs, playing first round vs Pistons. Instead they had play in and OKC.

East had more wins than West in 3 times in past 28 years. ( head to head match ups )

1990- 2025, East gave 16/36 champions, sounds close. But 9 out of 16 Eastern champions either had Lebron or Jordan. Jordan/Bulls alone having 40% of all Eastern conference titles in that time frame.


Knicks are solid team. But their "contending" status only exists because, like Cavs, they have so little competition to break through. Where on West you never know who can come out and there are so many good to great teams that can pass to finals.

But that math assumes that everything stays the same when conferences are switched. Maybe Thibs on purpose focused more on beating the bad teams and tried out a few new things against the better teams (which the West has more of at a mid level).

Boston was 4-0 against NYC in the regular season and lost to them in the playoffs fair and square (Tatum injury was already fairly late into that game). Considering that the Pacers pushed OKC to 7 (something only Denver did, Minny looked LOST in comparison) and that New York had a shot to beat them + beat Boston, I'm not so sure that they're nearly as weak as they're being made out to be.
'