Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I would support ANY proposal that reduces the amount of playoff teams, and also cuts back on the playoff duration its too long at almost 2 months. Other than that you aren't really tackling any issues. The last couple years the depth of the East and West were in on par with each other- the West happened to be much more top heavy and stacked with more elite teams.
The other issue with Stars sitting out could be taken care of by rewarding let's say the Top 4 teams with byes in the first round. You get an advantage being rested at the end of the year, by playing well throughout the year.
If you want to mix East and West I'd consider this (may also have to visit regular season scheduling with this change)...
12 team format...
Top 4 get byes.
Seeds 5-12 play in a 5 game format in the first round (I'd expect highly competitive series and no margin for error). This could also shave a week off the playoffs.
I don’t agree, in the east there hasn’t been a 2nd team that could potentially win a title since Boston got old. In the west there have been anywhere from 2-5 maybe 6 teams that had the potential almost yearly.
If anything since Durant went to GSW, you’ve almost created a similar situation as the east. That said, take those 2 teams out and the West is far superior almost top to bottom.
I don’t agree, in the east there hasn’t been a 2nd team that could potentially win a title since Boston got old. In the west there have been anywhere from 2-5 maybe 6 teams that had the potential almost yearly.
If anything since Durant went to GSW, you’ve almost created a similar situation as the east. That said, take those 2 teams out and the West is far superior almost top to bottom.
If you want to seed 1-16 with no regard to conference ties you need to talk about depth.
The 15-16 season- the 5-8 seeds out west had a combined .500 record vs. not just the playoff Eastern Conference teams but all of the East Conference Teams.
Talking last season...The Clips, Jazz, Thunder, Grizzles, Blazers- no shot at title. Granted the Western Conference playoff teams faired better against all of the East Conference teams.
Getting back to making the field smaller...In almost any season it is hard to find 16 playoff caliber teams.
Right now, if the best two teams happen to be in the same conference, there is no way they can meet in the Finals. But if conferences are scrapped and seeding is 1 thru 16, those two teams will be seeded 1 and 2 and can only meet in the Finals.
That's how it should be.
Different conferences had relevance in the days when travel was more arduous, and even later on when air travel became available but when the league still wasn't awash in the cash it is now. Concentrating games among the nearest teams made sense. It was also more relevant before free agency, when more players played a career with one team (and thus one conference), and in which the All-Star Game was a competitive event. Then there was more of a conference identity with teams. That's all gone now.
This also raises the possibility of a regional rivalry Finals when two nearby teams are good enough to get there. Warriors-Lakers. Celtics-Knicks. Pistons-Bulls. Spurs-Rockets. How terrific would that be, even if but once or twice a decade?
Really, the NFL and NHL should do it, too. Only in MLB do the separate conferences (MLB likes to pretend they're 'leagues') have any real substance, and even there it's just hanging by a thread.
Like I said, no-brainer. Of course, that's why it probably won't happen. Makes way too much sense!
If you want to seed 1-16 with no regard to conference ties you need to talk about depth.
The 15-16 season- the 5-8 seeds out west had a combined .500 record vs. not just the playoff Eastern Conference teams but all of the East Conference Teams.
Talking last season...The Clips, Jazz, Thunder, Grizzles, Blazers- no shot at title. Granted the Western Conference playoff teams faired better against all of the East Conference teams.
Getting back to making the field smaller...In almost any season it is hard to find 16 playoff caliber teams.
last season, the 1-3 in the west would have won a title against any east team outside of the cavs and any of them would have made the cavs work if they didnt beat the cavs out right.
there is no other team in the east that remotely comes close.
take the cavs out of the equation and there is no team in the east last season that would have beaten potentially the top 4-5 teams in the west.
record against opposing conference is moot, and not an accurate comparison. this is why in the article the commissioner is suggesting reworking schedules to get more games against all teams. playing inter-conference only 2 games a year isnt a measuring stick.
2015-16, the cavs and maybe the raptors could hang with the west, but who else realistically could in a 7 game series? the over achieving heat? the under achieving hawks?
2014-15 you had to win 45 games to make the playoffs in the west, and 50 to make the 7 seed. the 5 seed in the east would have been battling for the 7th-8th spot in the west. in a top 16 that year the 53 win cavs would have been the 7th seed
the east has been the Leastern conference for 20 years
last season, the 1-3 in the west would have won a title against any east team outside of the cavs and any of them would have made the cavs work if they didnt beat the cavs out right.
there is no other team in the east that remotely comes close.
take the cavs out of the equation and there is no team in the east last season that would have beaten potentially the top 4-5 teams in the west.
record against opposing conference is moot, and not an accurate comparison. this is why in the article the commissioner is suggesting reworking schedules to get more games against all teams. playing inter-conference only 2 games a year isnt a measuring stick.
2015-16, the cavs and maybe the raptors could hang with the west, but who else realistically could in a 7 game series? the over achieving heat? the under achieving hawks?
2014-15 you had to win 45 games to make the playoffs in the west, and 50 to make the 7 seed. the 5 seed in the east would have been battling for the 7th-8th spot in the west. in a top 16 that year the 53 win cavs would have been the 7th seed
the east has been the Leastern conference for 20 years
I'm looking at this in another way and while I see maybe this helps the competitive balance and increases playoff ratings but I don't see this helping the other big issue. If you want to balance the schedule (as should now with the seeding change) you will create more travel but everyone wants the greats to play 82 games??? I don't see how an additional West Coast or East Coast trip each year makes the stars "fresher" and able to play most if not all games, which people complain about on a regular basis.
I have less of a problem seeding the Eastern and Western Conferences together and I acknowledge that Western Conference is better. Although I don't think record against an opposing conference is moot at all. Matchups always come into play. A recent example a few years ago, maybe Atlanta didn't match up well with Cleveland but they matched up fairly well against Western Conference teams.
I love the idea of making the regular season more significant. Making the field smaller and creating an incentive for the Top 4 seeds would do that. 5-12 seeds you would have four ultra competitive 5 game series that could go either way. You wouldn't have a coasting Cavs team because they would have been a 5 seed
Location: San Diego CA>Tijuana, BC>San Antonio, TX
6,498 posts, read 7,525,332 times
Reputation: 6873
Can we do away with the divisions too. They don't mean anything any longer.
When I look at the standings I am looking at it by conference, never by division or the entire league. No one celebrates the division championships either like they used to back in the early 90's or even as is still done in baseball.
I think Adam Silver is trying to set the table for shortening the NBA regular season. Because if you seed teams 1 through 16 you then imbalanced schedules must go. For example, you can't have Minnesota play the Warriors, Spurs, Rockets, and Thunder four times each and then seed them lower than the Wizards if Washington is only better by a few games. Which then leads to shortening the schedule so teams play each other the same (or close to the same) number of times no matter the conference.
It's great they are at least talking about it. But it will take more than just reseeding.
I think Adam Silver is trying to set the table for shortening the NBA regular season. Because if you seed teams 1 through 16 you then imbalanced schedules must go. For example, you can't have Minnesota play the Warriors, Spurs, Rockets, and Thunder four times each and then seed them lower than the Wizards if Washington is only better by a few games. Which then leads to shortening the schedule so teams play each other the same (or close to the same) number of times no matter the conference.
It's great they are at least talking about it. But it will take more than just reseeding.
Well every team can almost play every other team 3x in an 82 game season. They would be 5 games shy of that anyway.
Personally I’d like to see a 62 game season instead. But leave the playoffs best of 7 in every round.
Thing is, the other 14 teams fans who miss the playoffs will lose out of games and the league loses money.
I say top 1-16 in the playoffs, and 17-30 in a separate playoffs for lotto picks
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
