Should they change the NBA playoffs

[The Czech Republic 0]

Aw yeah. Western Conference, y'all.

 

The conference disparity in the NBA is well documented. The Golden State Warriors that are at the bottom of the West would make the playoffs, albeit in the #8 spot, over in the East. Next year Charlotte gets another try at pro basketball which ups the league to 30 and breaks things up into 6 divisions of 5, finally giving in to the realignment trend after baseball, NHL, and NFL all over-expanded through the 90s.

 

I had this crazy idea that instead of taking the top 8 in the West and the top 8 in the East, they just take all thirty teams, regardless of location, seed the six divisional champions 1-6, and the top 10 wildcard teams 10-16. The last few years, the Western Conference Championships have been seen as "the REAL finals" with Lakers-Kings, Mavericks-Spurs, and the like. With this, the "REAL finals" would in fact be that, as Sacramento, Dallas, L.A., San Antonio, and Minnesota could all meet up in some combination to decide the league's best team, and .500 teams like Utah, Portland, and Denver that are all borderline in the West wouldn't ahve to watch sub-.500 squads like the Cavaliers and Heat make the playoffs.

 

So let's say at the end of the year, we've got these teams leading their divisions:

Pacific: Sacramento

Northwest: Minnesota

Southwest: San Antonio

Central: Indiana

Atlantic: NY Nets

Southeast: Miami

If one was to rank these six teams, it'd be Pacers, Kings, T-Wolves, Nets, Spurs, Heat. So they'd get the 1-6 spots in that order. Then your next teams are #7 Pistons, #8 Lakers, #9 Grizzlies, #10 Mavericks, #11 Rockets, #12 Jazz, #13 Nuggets, #14 Trail Blazers, #15 Hornets, and #16 Bucks.

 

This takes out the Knicks and Celtics in favor of better Western teams. It also makes you realize that a division of the Heat, Magic, Wizards, Hawks, and Bobcats is going to suck some major cock next season.

 

So now you could end up with a whole slew of new combinations in the postseason.

 

Thoughts?

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

I don't see a problem with keeping the East/West format. Even if the East sucks hardcore, only one series sucks. I do think the NBA should eliminate divisions entirely, and just go with two leagues. What do divisions matter anymore? Then just take 1-8 and toss them in the mix.

[Guest Choken One]

I say do away with the 3 Month Post-season and stop having the fucking 5 day breaks between games.

 

Hockey and Basketball are annoying like that. Baseball gets in done in 3 weeks. College Basketball with 65 teams...gets it done in three weeks...

 

No...NBA and NHL takes forever.

 

Just end the divison bullshit. Send the top Six Teams each conference in there...two getting a bye (let's say The Twolves and Kings for West and Pacers and Pistons for east) and the other 4 teams from each conf...

West would be

Lakers

Mavs

Spurs

Grizzles

East would be

Nets

Heat

Hornets

Cavs.

 

there...it shortens the season and only eliminates four teams.

[The Czech Republic 0]

Geez, there's only two days between games for NHL and NBA now. It's game, travel, game, travel, and so on, now that everything is best of 7. Hockey is an exhausting sport, and you need some time to get the ice ready. You just can't play playoff-caliber games without days off: case in point Toronto and Philadelphia last year. Due to some weird scheduling with the venues, Games 6 and 7 had to be right after each other. Leafs played their hearts out in Game 6 but by Game 7 they were so burned out that they just disintegrated.

 

But hey, if you want your Stanley Cup playoffs on crappy ice with really sluggish skaters, then let them get it done in a month.

[the pinjockey 0]

That doesn't make sense to me. If the Leafs were burnt out for game 7, why weren't the Flyers? They played in the same conditions.

[The Czech Republic 0]

That doesn't make sense to me. If the Leafs were burnt out for game 7, why weren't the Flyers? They played in the same conditions.

The Leafs had to play harder to force a game 7.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

Keep the divisions and the playoff system as it is because in a few years we'll probably be all bitching at how the East is the much better conference (OK, so maybe more than a few years -- you get my point). The post-season may be a bit long, but what else is there to watch in April and May besides baseball?

 

Oh, and is the NBA going to do a best-of-seven series for Round 1 this year?...

[Kurt Angle Mark 0]

I had this crazy idea that instead of taking the top 8 in the West and the top 8 in the East, they just take all thirty teams, regardless of location, seed the six divisional champions 1-6, and the top 10 wildcard teams 10-16. The last few years, the Western Conference Championships have been seen as "the REAL finals" with Lakers-Kings, Mavericks-Spurs, and the like. With this, the "REAL finals" would in fact be that, as Sacramento, Dallas, L.A., San Antonio, and Minnesota could all meet up in some combination to decide the league's best team, and .500 teams like Utah, Portland, and Denver that are all borderline in the West wouldn't ahve to watch sub-.500 squads like the Cavaliers and Heat make the playoffs.

 

So let's say at the end of the year, we've got these teams leading their divisions:

Pacific: Sacramento

Northwest: Minnesota

Southwest: San Antonio

Central: Indiana

Atlantic: NY Nets

Southeast: Miami

If one was to rank these six teams, it'd be Pacers, Kings, T-Wolves, Nets, Spurs, Heat. So they'd get the 1-6 spots in that order. Then your next teams are #7 Pistons, #8 Lakers, #9 Grizzlies, #10 Mavericks, #11 Rockets, #12 Jazz, #13 Nuggets, #14 Trail Blazers, #15 Hornets, and #16 Bucks.

 

This takes out the Knicks and Celtics in favor of better Western teams. It also makes you realize that a division of the Heat, Magic, Wizards, Hawks, and Bobcats is going to suck some major cock next season.

 

So now you could end up with a whole slew of new combinations in the postseason.

 

Thoughts?

I came up with the same idea when I found out about the re-alignment.

IMO it makes perfect sense and there is a better chance of getting the best 16 teams in the playoffs, which is what the playoffs should be about. And it also would allow for the best teams to meet when they are supposed to meet which is the semi's and the Finals.

[nl5xsk1 0]

For a while I was a proponent of making the postseason 1-16, regardless of a team's status in the East or West, but the more I thought about it, the less I liked the idea.

 

One of the things that makes the postseason so great is the rivalries. Teams like Toronto & Ottawa matching up every year in the playoffs made every series that much more intense (I guess Sacramento-LAL would be the NBA equivalent). Plus, these teams play 5 or 6 times during the year. To make it 1-16 would make it that much less likely to have repeat matchups, and thus detract from some rivalries. If a team like Detroit matched up with a team like Dallas, there's limited history of in-season matchups and no history of posteason matchups, so the rival wouldn't be there.

[CanadianChris 0]

I say do away with the 3 Month Post-season and stop having the fucking 5 day breaks between games.

 

Hockey and Basketball are annoying like that. Baseball gets in done in 3 weeks. College Basketball with 65 teams...gets it done in three weeks...

 

No...NBA and NHL takes forever.

Have some apples with your oranges.

 

Baseball gets done in a month because teams can play games on two or three consecutive days, and has only eight teams. College basketball finishes in three weeks because they play one-and-done. If they played every matchup best-of-7, the season would be never-ending.

 

Basketball and hockey are fine just the way they are (taking TWO months, not three). The Stanley Cup playoffs, in particular, are the most exciting playoffs around. No need to change anything there.

[Ripper 0]

Basketball was better a few years back when there was a day between games, 2 between change of city. Now they have 2-4 days between everygame. That is fucking ridiculous.

[nl5xsk1 0]

Basketball has it worse than hockey, because basketball is actually effected by TV ratings, and thus the wants of the networks. Hockey draws shitty ratings regardless of what night it's on, so the networks and the league doesn't have to juggle the line-up to get certain games on Saturdays, Sundays or Wednesdays.

 

Plus, they now switched it so it's 2-2-1-1-1 instead of 2-3-2. It's better for the home team (keeps home ice or home court advantage) but it means extra travel days.

[Richard 0]

Fun fact: The NFC won 13 consecutive super bowls from 1984-97. Before that, the conference only won 6 of 18 super bowls. Afterwards, they've won 2 of the last 7 super bowls.

[The Czech Republic 0]

Oh, and is the NBA going to do a best-of-seven series for Round 1 this year?...

Yep, it's all best of 7 now. Thanks, Davey Stern. More Mavericks = more fun.

 

And as for bitching about hockey's postseason being too long. Come on. For a lot of us, those months ARE the season. They're playing like they actually care, they teams in there are the 16 good teams, and you're getting four games a night in the first round, and all four games DON'T involve the Detroit Red Wings. Seeing as I hradly watch hockey during the regular season, I have NO qualms about two months for the Stanley Cup. Me and Barry Melrose and Gary Thorne, we become a family of sorts after all those nights.