Is the West as dominant as people imply?

[cdbleb]

In my opinion the East isnt as bad as people let on. Heres some numbers for you starting with the two best teams in the West (LA and SA):

The West has 6 teams who are sub .350 and LA has already played those teams 16x plus they have another 5 in the remainder of their schedule for a total of 21 games (Or 26% of their total schedule...1/4 of their season against terrible teams). San Antonio has already played those teams 14x with another 8 in the remainder of their schedule (Pretty much the same LA). So the two best teams in the West get to play 6 out of the 7 worst teams in the league (Based on record) one out of every 4 games on average. In the West a team is either good or terrible, whereas in the East teams are pretty evenly matched outside of the top 3. From the #4 team to the #14 team in the East there is a 13 game separation, in the West there is a 12.5 game separation between 9th and 10th.

LAs record vs the East is 17-6 or 74% (And 4 of those wins are against Boston and Cleveland so they are 13-6 against the rest of the "crappy" East dropping it to 62%), against the West they are 33-7 or 83%...San Antonio is 16-10 against the East or 62%, against the West they are 27-10 or 73%.

Even look at the worst teams from each conference...Sacramento is 14-26 (35%) against the West and 0-24 (0%) against the East. Washington is 8-15 (35%) against the West and 7-34 (17%)against the East. The two top teams in the West have a harder time with the teams in the East overall and the two worst teams in the league both have an easier time against the West overall.

Now Im not saying that the East is better Im just saying that the whole "Dominant West / Crappy East" bs is getting old. 3 of the top 4 teams in the league = East, Defending Champs = East, Longest win streak = West (Utah), Longest losing streak = West (Minn.), best home record = East (Cle), Best Road record = East (Bos), Best record against teams own conference = West (LA), Worst record against opposing Conference = West (Sac). Overall the West probably is slightly better but its not by a large margin like some people insinuate.

(All numbers current up to the morning of March 11th)

[bdreason]

The East has some good teams, but the top 8 teams in the West are better than the top 8 teams in the East, period.

[cdbleb]

period.

Nothing to back that up huh?

[amfirst]

The East only has 3 good teams: Celts, Cavs, & Magics. The rest is trash.

[cdbleb]

The East only has 3 good teams: Celts, Cavs, & Magics. The rest is trash.


Then why is LA and San Antonio (The two best teams in the West) having a harder time against the East (Especially LA when facing teams outside of Boston and Cleveland)?

[bdreason]

West

Lakers
Spurs
Rockets
Jazz
Hornets
Blazers
Nuggets
Mavericks

East

Cavs
Celtics
Magic
Hawks
Heat
Pistons
76ers
Bucks



Pick your 8. I think it's obvious. Outside of the top 3, the East leaves little to be desired... and I don't even like the Magic as a playoff team personally.

[hito da god]

Nothing to back that up huh?
all you have to look at is the current playoff seeding. no sub-.500 team is making the playoffs out west; there are two teams at or below .500 in the current playoff picture out east. the eighth seed out west would be a four seed out east. see where i'm going with this? the west's top nine teams is much deeper than that of the east's. there are better 'crappy' teams in the eastern conference, but nowhere near as much competition from the 2-9 seeds as there is in the west.

[cdbleb]

all you have to look at is the current playoff seeding. no sub-.500 team is making the playoffs out west; there are two teams at or below .500 in the current playoff picture out east. the eighth seed out west would be a four seed out east. see where i'm going with this? the west's top nine teams is much deeper that of the east. the east has better 'crappy' teams, but nowhere near as much competition from the 2-9 seeds as there is in the west.


Youre looking strictly at their records...Did you take into account that those teams that are over .500 also play the sub .350 teams 20+ times this year? The East only has one team in that category.

[hito da god]

Youre looking strictly at their records...Did you take into account that those teams that are over .500 also play the sub .350 teams 20+ times this year? The East only has one team in that category.
you're also neglecting the fact that these teams play those top nine teams a high number of times also... i'm almost positive that they play those teams MORE times than they play the sub-.350 teams, so it all evens out.

[cdbleb]

so it all evens out.

It doesnt even out though, the two best teams in the West have better win %s against the WEST.

[B-Easy]

"The top 8 in West is better than the top 8 in the East"
"The East top 3 is better than the West top 3"
"The 9th seed in the West is better than 9th in the East."

People go back and forth with this....The logical thing to do is judge from top to bottom, i would like to see an updated record of East vs. West.

[211269]

It doesnt even out though, the two best teams in the West have better win %s against the WEST.

Ummmm, thats because they play west teams more than east teams genius. You are only looking at win totals, not games played :rolleyes:

[tian820]

What are the conference OVERALL records against each other? That's basically all you need to look at. Or at least post what the top 8 teams' records against each conference. That would show more. No one really cares about the bottoms of each conference in terms of how good the conference is anyways. In the end it's all about talent and in the West what I notice every season is that there are more "All Star snubs", which doesn't mean much, but I do believe it means there's more talent in the Western Conference.

I do think the East has closed the gap at the top of the conference, but you can't tell me that the 4-8 teams in the East compare that well with the 4-8 teams in the West. If you're gonna argue the East has 3 of the top 4 teams in the NBA, arguably the next 6-7 best teams in the league are from the West

[hito da god]

It doesnt even out though, the two best teams in the West have better win %s against the WEST.
how about waiting until the end of the season before using win % as an argument?

the lakers, for example, play eight of their last 18 games against eastern conference teams [including a six game road trip]. you mean to tell me their win % won't increase by the time the season ends?

[cdbleb]

Ummmm, thats because they play west teams more than east teams genius. You are only looking at win totals, not games played :rolleyes:
So that explains why 6 of LAs 13 losses are against the East, its because they play the West more often...Wow I gotta hand it to you you really proved a point with that one...GENIUS!

[konex]

Dude 3 teams had clinched in the East as of last week. Not competitive AT ALL..

[cdbleb]

Dude 3 teams had clinched in the East as of last week. Not competitive AT ALL..

"Dude" 5 teams are out of the playoff race in the West for how long now? Playing terrible teams = No competition which in turn makes a team record inflated. 3 Teams clinched in teh East but none are considered out of the playoff race yet.

[shadow]

you ever consider that maybe the "bad teams" in the west look even worse record-wise because they have to play 50 win teams about 30-32 times in the season. (8 potential 50 win teams played 4x each).

Anyway you look at it the playoffs are a ***** out west. In the east R2 will be truly competitive for the first time this year in god knows how long. Yet it still only applies to whichever of the top 3 play each other. The third still gets a bye (of sorts).

I guess the only thin you could really argue is that making the playoffs is harder in the east because its full of mediocre teams (so there is more parity).

[shortlunatic]

all you have to look at is the current playoff seeding. no sub-.500 team is making the playoffs out west; there are two teams at or below .500 in the current playoff picture out east. the eighth seed out west would be a four seed out east. see where i'm going with this? the west's top nine teams is much deeper than that of the east's. there are better 'crappy' teams in the eastern conference, but nowhere near as much competition from the 2-9 seeds as there is in the west.

this guy said it all. The top 9 teams in the West are way better than the top 6 in the East. Once you get past 9th in the West, the teams are flat out bad. Once you get past the 6th seed in the East, the teams are just below average. They are not bad as the bottom 6 in the West, but they all share a brand of being less than medicre. I mean llok at the teams competing for the 8th spot. Nets, Bucks, Knicks, Bulls. The only team that may be good enough fot that spot is possible the Bobcats only due to their recent good play. But the other teams are trash and deserve no playoff spot. Phoenix will end up deserving that spot more than any team in the East. With all that said, the West is still a harder conference than the East

[artest 93]

"Dude" 5 teams are out of the playoff race in the West for how long now? Playing terrible teams = No competition which in turn makes a team record inflated. 3 Teams clinched in teh East but none are considered out of the playoff race yet.

Well maybe more teams in the east would be eliminated too if they had to play Lakers, Spurs, Rockets, Jazz, Hornets, Blazers, Suns, Nuggets, and Mavericks 3-4 times a season.

Would you rather go on a trip playing Cleveland, Boston, Orlando, Miami, Atlanta, Detroit, Philly, Milwaukee, Chicago, New Jersey, Charlotte and Indiana or a trip against LA, San Antonio, Houston, Utah, New Orleans, Portland, Dallas, Phoenix, and Golden State?

Anything less than 8-4 (9-3 if there are days off) against that east lineup would be a losing trip, while anything above .500 for that west trip would be a good trip.

It's hard to have a beautiful record in the West. And I don't think Charlotte would have 30 wins if they were in the West. GS > Charlotte

[shortlunatic]

It's hard to have a beautiful record in the West. And I don't think Charlotte would have 30 wins if they were in the West. GS > Charlotte

Charlotte has been playign pretty ball these past few games. From what i have seen from GS, they lack a lot of things. Today i seen them turnover the ball with an over and back call. Its hard to argue for a team that turns the ball over by making pee wee basketball mistakes. I like GS though...I think Bellinelli and Biedrins are definitely players to watch for.

and by the way, tough loss for u guys today huh?? to bad i was really rooting for you guys, i hate the Lakers lol. Von Wafer is gonna be a goon tho lol i wish i had player like him on our team

[YAWN]

yes

[stephanieg]

No one should care about the West since it's so obvious who's going to come out. Maybe if Houston gets out of the first round it could be funny. For the East it's more interesting though. Probably whoever gets HCA, but ya never know.

[Silverbullit]

This is the current ranking of the top 8 teams of each conference in the games played among each others:

http://s11.directupload.net/images/090312/2z42k4f4.jpg

[shortlunatic]

No one should care about the West since it's so obvious who's going to come out. Maybe if Houston gets out of the first round it could be funny. For the East it's more interesting though. Probably whoever gets HCA, but ya never know.

I think the West still has some hope for SAS...Gooden is a very good player to have on your team and has a lot to offer. I think he can definitely be the difference between wether SAS can get past the Lakers or not. but who knows, he needs to get healthy first

[shortlunatic]

nice find silver bullet. surprised i seen Houston as 5th...im kinda glad tho to see Denver as 8th. at least they are on the top half

[fos]

Look at the rosters of the teams in the playoffs from spots 1-8 in the West Vs East. West is more talented and deeper especially in terms of big men (who win championships). Yao, Dirk, Boozer, Pau, Okur, Bynum, Duncan, West, Odom, Scola, Aldridge, Nene... Then the East... Howard, KG... Ilgauskas, Rasheed Wallace, Al Horford, Dalembert??? This should answer your question.

[Silverbullit]

And that's the ranking of the top 8 teams of each conference in the games among the top 8 teams of the opposing conference:

http://s10b.directupload.net/images/090312/wenl6ad7.jpg

[Silverbullit]

Most surprising for me are the records of San Antonio.

No surprise: The bottom spots are earned by Eastern teams in both cases.

[lilmarcgasol]

Look at it this way-in the West, only Cleveland, Orlando and Boston are good enough to make the playoffs.

The freaking Hawks lead by goddamn 39 year old Mike Bibby are like a 4 seed in that god forsaken Eastern conference.

[DukeDelonte13]

I think the East is beating the West in overall inter-conference play; if it means anything.

[1~Gibson~1]

West = good from 1-9
Scrub = 10-15

East = good from 1-5
OK = from 6-14
Scrub = 15

[lilmarcgasol]

West-deeper more talented, Utah or San Antonio for example would be the #1 seed if they played in the East.

East-freaking Hawks are a 4 seed and garbage teams like Chicago and New Jersey are competing for playoff spots. Nuf said

[1~Gibson~1]

Look at it this way-in the West, only Cleveland, Orlando and Boston are good enough to make the playoffs.

The freaking Hawks lead by goddamn 39 year old Mike Bibby are like a 4 seed in that god forsaken Eastern conference.Joe Johnson leads the team :hammerhead:


West-deeper more talented, Utah or San Antonio for example would be the #1 seed if they played in the East.

East-freaking Hawks are a 4 seed and garbage teams like Chicago and New Jersey are competing for playoff spots. Nuf saidthe East is deeper. West = 1-9
East = 1-14

Western C. teams have so many wins because they get to play the Queens, Grizz, Clippers, Thunder, GS, and Minny twice a year. That's 12 easy wins. Whereas, the East only have 2 easy wins (Washington [maybe 4 if you count Toronto]) because every other team puts up a fight.

[JellyBean]

Yes.

[The_Yearning]

West has been dominating the NBA ever since Jordan retired as a Bull...

[DukeDelonte13]

West-deeper more talented, Utah or San Antonio for example would be the #1 seed if they played in the East.

East-freaking Hawks are a 4 seed and garbage teams like Chicago and New Jersey are competing for playoff spots. Nuf said


You're Dumb.

[dnyk1337]

Good thread. I've been saying this for a while... The 10th seed on the west would be the before last worst team in the East... How can you go down that much?? East>West

[Silverbullit]

Overall the East has a 195-183 advantage (0.516) so far, but the gap is closing (151-127 on February, 1st).

[MMM]

i find it funny how people refuse to give the East credit all that matters is the East leads in the head-tohead play. However many of us are still not saying hte East is better only that both conferences are more balanced. The East has more balance/avg teams while the West has more good teams/Scrub teams so overall the conferences seem balanced.

[Bigsmoke]

the top 3 Eastern Confrence teams are more talented then every west team if so better than the Lakers

but its true that all the teams in the western are well above .500

[NBASTATMAN]

In my opinion the East isnt as bad as people let on. Heres some numbers for you starting with the two best teams in the West (LA and SA):

The West has 6 teams who are sub .350 and LA has already played those teams 16x plus they have another 5 in the remainder of their schedule for a total of 21 games (Or 26% of their total schedule...1/4 of their season against terrible teams). San Antonio has already played those teams 14x with another 8 in the remainder of their schedule (Pretty much the same LA). So the two best teams in the West get to play 6 out of the 7 worst teams in the league (Based on record) one out of every 4 games on average. In the West a team is either good or terrible, whereas in the East teams are pretty evenly matched outside of the top 3. From the #4 team to the #14 team in the East there is a 13 game separation, in the West there is a 12.5 game separation between 9th and 10th.

LAs record vs the East is 17-6 or 74% (And 4 of those wins are against Boston and Cleveland so they are 13-6 against the rest of the "crappy" East dropping it to 62%), against the West they are 33-7 or 83%...San Antonio is 16-10 against the East or 62%, against the West they are 27-10 or 73%.

Even look at the worst teams from each conference...Sacramento is 14-26 (35%) against the West and 0-24 (0%) against the East. Washington is 8-15 (35%) against the West and 7-34 (17%)against the East. The two top teams in the West have a harder time with the teams in the East overall and the two worst teams in the league both have an easier time against the West overall.

Now Im not saying that the East is better Im just saying that the whole "Dominant West / Crappy East" bs is getting old. 3 of the top 4 teams in the league = East, Defending Champs = East, Longest win streak = West (Utah), Longest losing streak = West (Minn.), best home record = East (Cle), Best Road record = East (Bos), Best record against teams own conference = West (LA), Worst record against opposing Conference = West (Sac). Overall the West probably is slightly better but its not by a large margin like some people insinuate.

(All numbers current up to the morning of March 11th)



No the West no longer has the best teams, besides the Lakers not one team in the west would break the top three in the east...

[NBASTATMAN]

the top 3 Eastern Confrence teams are more talented then every west team if so better than the Lakers

but its true that all the teams in the western are well above .500


THE top three teams in the east are not as talented or as good as the lakers... The Lakers have the best team alongside the Celtics.. Wait for the rematch...

[lilmarcgasol]

East doesn't have deeper, more average teams than the west. Just so many of the teams are awful, and play against eachother, that their records make them appear average.

Look at the garbage east, The Miami Dwayne Wade's are a freaking 5 seed for christs sake. Embarrassment. Even more embarrassing is the fact that the Hawks are a 4 seed.

Philadelphia, Milawaukee, Chicago, New Jersey, Charlotte, Indiana and New York are not average teams. They are awful teams with an average record due to them all playing eachother. Hell people, before their recent 6 game losing streak (:lol )the Craptors were competing for a playoff spot.

The East is not a deeper conference then the west. The disparity in quality is huge. Phoenix isn't even in a playoff spot in the West! If they were in the East they'd probably be the 4th best team. They are definately better than the Hawks and the Dwayne Wades, I don't see how anyone can argue that.

Add this to the fact that such top Eastern teams, like the Cavs, get many of their wins against the garbage east, and then choke and suck against the big Western teams.

[NBASTATMAN]

West-deeper more talented, Utah or San Antonio for example would be the #1 seed if they played in the East.

East-freaking Hawks are a 4 seed and garbage teams like Chicago and New Jersey are competing for playoff spots. Nuf said


the spurs are garbage now,, they would be a 4 seed in the east..

[lilmarcgasol]

the spurs are garbage now,, they would be a 4 seed in the east..
Utah would be a freaking one or two seed though. And if you put the Spurs in the East they would freaking win the championship every year just because Parker, Manu and Duncan would be able to rest so freaking much over the regular season playing against crappy teams like Chicago, Knicks or Toronto so many times a year. Orlando and Cleveland have overinflated records, built from beating up small crappy teams. They would not be top seeds if they played in the Western conference, I'd say at best Orlando would be a 4-5 seed and Cleveland would be a 6 seed.

[Lebron23]

Utah would be a freaking one or two seed though. And if you put the Spurs in the East they would freaking win the championship every year just because Parker, Manu and Duncan would be able to rest so freaking much over the regular season playing against crappy teams like Chicago, Knicks or Toronto so many times a year. Orlando and Cleveland have overinflated records, built from beating up small crappy teams. They would not be top seeds if they played in the Western conference, I'd say at best Orlando would be a 4-5 seed and Cleveland would be a 6 seed.


Cleveland Cavaliers are actually 20-4 againts the Western Conference Teams.

[MMM]

East doesn't have deeper, more average teams than the west. Just so many of the teams are awful, and play against eachother, that their records make them appear average.

Look at the garbage east, The Miami Dwayne Wade's are a freaking 5 seed for christs sake. Embarrassment. Even more embarrassing is the fact that the Hawks are a 4 seed.

Philadelphia, Milawaukee, Chicago, New Jersey, Charlotte, Indiana and New York are not average teams. They are awful teams with an average record due to them all playing eachother. Hell people, before their recent 6 game losing streak (:lol )the Craptors were competing for a playoff spot.

The East is not a deeper conference then the west. The disparity in quality is huge. Phoenix isn't even in a playoff spot in the West! If they were in the East they'd probably be the 4th best team. They are definately better than the Hawks and the Dwayne Wades, I don't see how anyone can argue that.

Add this to the fact that such top Eastern teams, like the Cavs, get many of their wins against the garbage east, and then choke and suck against the big Western teams.

Your argument seems backwards if the teams 6-14 beat up on each under then that explains why they each are hovering around .500. while the same effect is going on in the West avg teams like Dallas and phx records make them look better then they really are.

[TheWitness]

Cleveland Cavaliers are actually 20-4 againts the Western Conference Teams.


and besides... The Celts from east won the crown last season!

[MMM]

and besides... The Celts from east won the crown last season!

East has won 3 of the last 5 finals and have been competitive in 4 of the 5 compared that to 1999-2003 and their is a remarkable difference.

[ChuckOakley]

This is simple

EAST > WEST

There are only 2 factors that matter:

1. FACT: The East leads the interconference match up. How is this debatable or hard to understand? If the East beats the West more often than the West beats the East, the East is BETTER.

2. The favorites to win the title and defending champion Boston Celtics are in the East. The next 4 favorites are LA, Cleveland, SA and Orlando. 2 from the East 2 from the West. NO ONE other than these 5 teams (probably 3 Boston, Cleveland or LAL) will win the title, so really who cares about Portland vs. Detroit or Atlanta vs. Denver etc? None of those teams will make it to the finals or win the title.

/thread

[Silverbullit]

Your argument seems backwards if the teams 6-14 beat up on each under then that explains why they each are hovering around .500. while the same effect is going on in the West avg teams like Dallas and phx records make them look better then they really are.

Mavs have a 18-7 record against the East.

[lilmarcgasol]

Your argument seems backwards if the teams 6-14 beat up on each under then that explains why they each are hovering around .500. while the same effect is going on in the West avg teams like Dallas and phx records make them look better then they really are.
Look at Phoenix-
Shaq
J-Rich
Nash
Grant Hill
Amare(out for season though)

that is a great, experienced lineup, with good young depth off the bench as well, yeh the Suns in the East would dominate, surely they'd be seeded higher than Miami or Atlanta.

:roll: :roll: honestly Atlanta is a 4 seed in the East how can supporters of the Eastern conference not find that embarrassing?

[ChuckOakley]

Look at Phoenix-
Shaq
J-Rich
Nash
Grant Hill
Amare(out for season though)

that is a great, experienced lineup, with good young depth off the bench as well, yeh the Suns in the East would dominate, surely they'd be seeded higher than Miami or Atlanta.

:roll: :roll: honestly Atlanta is a 4 seed in the East how can supporters of the Eastern conference not find that embarrassing?

Phoenix is out the same way a team with Bosh, O'Neal/Marion, Calderon and Barganani doesn't make the playoffs, or a team with 2 -all-stars like Butler and Jamison cannot make the playoffs.

More talent does not always = better... teamwork, coaching, chemistry, etc all factor into the equation. If talent always won the Malone/Payton Lakers would have been a shoe in. But this is typical thinking, so it doesn't surprise me.

[lilmarcgasol]

the talent, depth and experience on the suns is much different from the 'talent' on the raptors and wizards.

I mean mentioning Bargnani? What the hell are you braindead, blind deaf and dumb?

[Basketball Dirk]

The West is plagued by injuries this year. That really distorts it.

Carlos Boozer, Bynum...............ad nauseum

I've never seen so many injuries to important team players as this year.

[wang4three]

I think we will begin to see the shift of powers to the East. All the years of dominating the lottery is beginning to pay off in the forms of LeBron, Wade, and Howard. Outside of Paul and Deron (possibly Roy too), there isn't that much young talent to match in the West.

[ChuckOakley]

The West is plagued by injuries this year. That really distorts it.

Carlos Boozer, Bynum...............ad nauseum

I've never seen so many injuries to important team players as this year.

Ehhh, happens every year.

Besides the same could be said for:

Washington
Miluwakee
Indiana
Philly
Toronto
Orlando
New York
etc....

[lilmarcgasol]

I think we will begin to see the shift of powers to the East. All the years of dominating the lottery is beginning to pay off in the forms of LeBron, Wade, and Howard. Outside of Paul and Deron (possibly Roy too), there isn't that much young talent to match in the West.
Are you aware of the great Kevin Durant, and the would be great if he could stay healthy Andrew Bynum and the Great Big Al Jefferson?

Al Jefferson
Andrew Bynum
Kevin Durant
CP3
Deron

not to mention Rudy Gay, Marc Gasol, OJ Mayo, second tier young talents

sadly your argument fails, the West has just as much young talent as the East

[Mdog1]

The East has more wins overall then the West so how is the West considere better? Plus the top teams in the West have their records inflated because of the poor teams at the bottom. The East overall>West. Not to mention that the Lakers play in the worst division in basketball. So top of East>top of West.

[cdbleb]

Overall the West probably is slightly better but its not by a large margin like some people insinuate.


I think a lot of people are overlooking the part when I said this...Or they just didnt read beyond the title which would support the reasons why they disagree so strongly.

[branslowski]

I think a lot of people are overlooking the part when I said this...Or they just didnt read beyond the title which would support the reasons why they disagree so strongly.

I get what your saying Cdleb, ppl need to stop reading the cover of the book, and read the inside of the book. East is really better then most think.

I like the West a little better because of the playoff matchups with possibly the Mavs facing the Lakers in the First-round, but i get what your saying cdleb.

[KobeRules24]

The west top 8 teams are way better than the east top 8. i think this is clear, the west is the deepest conference.

[Wonder Bread Kid]

Most surprising for me are the records of San Antonio.

I think people tend to forget Tony and Manu being out the beginning of the season, also starting 1-4.

[brantonli]

And that's the ranking of the top 8 teams of each conference in the games among the top 8 teams of the opposing conference:

http://s10b.directupload.net/images/090312/wenl6ad7.jpg

Are the Spurs really that low? I swear they are the 2nd seed right now...

[ChuckOakley]

This is simple

EAST > WEST

There are only 2 factors that matter:

1. FACT: The East leads the interconference match up. How is this debatable or hard to understand? If the East beats the West more often than the West beats the East, the East is BETTER.

2. The favorites to win the title and defending champion Boston Celtics are in the East. The next 4 favorites are LA, Cleveland, SA and Orlando. 2 from the East 2 from the West. NO ONE other than these 5 teams (probably 3 Boston, Cleveland or LAL) will win the title, so really who cares about Portland vs. Detroit or Atlanta vs. Denver etc? None of those teams will make it to the finals or win the title.

/thread

Unless someone can refute these two points, I'm not sure there's much else to say.

[brantonli]

ChuckOakley,

I understand your point about the Conference vs record, however, isn't it a bit like saying, Look, my crap is better than your crap, I mean in the end they are still both crap, but of course the WC's crap is much worse. But if you can compare the crap, surey you can also compare the good teams of each conference as well.

And if your first argument is about all 15 teams in one conference against the other 15 teams to define which conference is better, surely it's illogical to then say the East> West because the favourites are is the ONE team from the East, and you pointed out that the other 4 are divided equally between the conferences anyway. I don't think it's, well, compatible to, in the first argument, to say that East>West on conference record, and then go to the other extreme and point out the very best.

[ChuckOakley]

ChuckOakley,

I understand your point about the Conference vs record, however, isn't it a bit like saying, Look, my crap is better than your crap, I mean in the end they are still both crap, but of course the WC's crap is much worse. But if you can compare the crap, surey you can also compare the good teams of each conference as well.

And if your first argument is about all 15 teams in one conference against the other 15 teams to define which conference is better, surely it's illogical to then say the East> West because the favourites are is the ONE team from the East, and you pointed out that the other 4 are divided equally between the conferences anyway. I don't think it's, well, compatible to, in the first argument, to say that East>West on conference record, and then go to the other extreme and point out the very best.

I don't think it's imcompatible.

There are two ways to define who's better:
Regular season success
Post season success

Since the only way to compare postseason success and crown the best team in the NBA is through the finals, one only need look at the Finals and the contenders to get to the finals.

If I had to list the only true contenders, I would list

Boston
LAL
Cleveland
San Antonio
Orlando (maybe)

No one else will win the championship, IMO.
I see 2/3 East teams and 2 West teams, but what gives the East the true edge is the fact they have the reigning champions and are the favorites to win it all IMO.

This is the less clear-cut breakdown of the two, but again it's hard to dispute the #'s that clearly say in the regular season, the East has been the better team.

In essense the regular season is a giant round-robin playoff, and the East is winning that, and I expect them to win the title as well. And yes the regular season records does compare crap to crap and good to good. I don't think there is a better way to compare.

[PoGoMon]

Youre looking strictly at their records...Did you take into account that those teams that are over .500 also play the sub .350 teams 20+ times this year? The East only has one team in that category.

Good reply! I mean look at the Pacific division !! They each play one another 4 times. Look at the Lakers being in the worst (or easiest - depends on how you view it) division in the NBA; so they can pad their win totals like crazy. Playing those other 4 teams in that division is just too nice! The bottom 3 teams in that horrible division do not have 20 wins a piece yet!!:roll:

[brantonli]

Good reply! I mean look at the Pacific division !! They each play one another 4 times. Look at the Lakers being in the worst (or easiest - depends on how you view it) division in the NBA; so they can pad their win totals like crazy. Playing those other 4 teams in that division is just too nice! The bottom 3 teams in that horrible division do not have 20 wins a piece yet!!:roll:

Try being in the Southwest div when it was at it's best, when the Mavs had their 64 win season, when the Grizz actually got their act together for about a season, and of course Spurs are going strong, and I haven't even mentioned the Hornets or the Rockets. Unfortunately, things have gotten a bit easier (relative to previous years) in the southwest.

[Allstar24]

-The 8th seed in the west would be the 4th seed in the east.
-The east has a team with a losing record making the playoffs while the west has a team with a winning record missing the playoffs.
-The team with the best winning percentage (ie the best team in the league) plays in the west.

Nothing else needs to be said.

[Scott Pippen]

No it is not, because some people talk about the West as if 1-8 are all contenders. The "toughest conference in NBA history."

But without question the West is better than the East. :applause:

[JustinJDW]

Yeah, pretty much. :pimp:

[lilo]

The myth about West superiority is perpetuated by TV commentators saying things like:

[HAzE024]

Why do people continue to cherry-pick just the top X teams in the west? We get it, you need to fudge the facts a little to cater to your own biased opinion. Bring that **** to the "Is the top X teams (not including Y or Z's away records on weekdays) in the West as dominant as people imply?" thread. This is a thread about the best basketball CONFERENCE, not the best arbitrarily-chosen (by fans of Western teams, of course) grouping of teams. And right now, taking into account ChuckOakley's facts, it looks like it is the East in a close one.

PS - I'd go out on a limb and say some of the middle tier teams in the East would have improved records if the were going up against barren teams like the Kings, Thunder, Grizzlies, Clippers (Dunleavy's fault) and the Timberwolves.

[artest 93]

Good reply! I mean look at the Pacific division !! They each play one another 4 times. Look at the Lakers being in the worst (or easiest - depends on how you view it) division in the NBA; so they can pad their win totals like crazy. Playing those other 4 teams in that division is just too nice! The bottom 3 teams in that horrible division do not have 20 wins a piece yet!!:roll:

Are you stupid? Let me ask you this and hopefully you'll be able to put one and one together. Is it harder to get 20 wins when you play the top 9 Western conference teams 3-4 times a year? Or is it easier to get 20 when you play Hawks, Heat, Jersey, Milwaukee, Chicago, etc. so-called playoff teams?

The East, outside of the top 2, maybe 3, ANYONE CAN BEAT ANYONE. The west, the top 8 DOMINATE the bottom feeders. They have barely any chance of winning.

Forget my question. I answered my own question.

[JJ81]

Is the West as dominant as people imply?

Yep

[revan]

This is simple

EAST > WEST

There are only 2 factors that matter:

1. FACT: The East leads the interconference match up. How is this debatable or hard to understand? If the East beats the West more often than the West beats the East, the East is BETTER.

/thread

The west had an onslaught of injuries early this season. San Antonio, Houston, Utah, Golden state, and the Clippers were all ravaged by it. When you throw out the intraconference head to head as one of your major supporting pillars in your argument, you must take this into account. As some posters already mentioned, QUALITY teams will be left out of the playoff picture in the west while sub 500 teams will make the playoffs in the east.

[lilo]

Is it harder to get 20 wins when you play the top 9 Western conference teams 3-4 times a year? Or is it easier to get 20 when you play Hawks, Heat, Jersey, Milwaukee, Chicago, etc. so-called playoff teams?
...
Forget my question. I answered my own question.

The answer is irrelevant because you ask the wrong question. The teams do not play only "the top 9 teams" 3-4 times a year, they play against 14 teams.

[MMM]

The west had an onslaught of injuries early this season. San Antonio, Houston, Utah, Golden state, and the Clippers were all ravaged by it. When you throw out the intraconference head to head as one of your major supporting pillars in your argument, you must take this into account. As some posters already mentioned, QUALITY teams will be left out of the playoff picture in the west while sub 500 teams will make the playoffs in the east.

only one team will be sub .500 that will make the playoffs in the East this year both Det and phil will finish a couple games above .500.

I do not see what is so hard to comprehend
East top 3>West top 3
East Bottom 6> West bottom 6
West Mid teams> East mid teams

How the hell is that sufficient enough to argue which conference is better it is as balanced as it can get?

[lilo]

As some posters already mentioned, QUALITY teams will be left out of the playoff picture in the west while sub 500 teams will make the playoffs in the east.

Here it goes again :lol I feel I have to repeat my post:

The myth about West superiority is perpetuated by TV commentators saying things like:

[shortlunatic]

East doesn't have deeper, more average teams than the west. Just so many of the teams are awful, and play against eachother, that their records make them appear average.

Look at the garbage east, The Miami Dwayne Wade's are a freaking 5 seed for christs sake. Embarrassment. Even more embarrassing is the fact that the Hawks are a 4 seed.

Philadelphia, Milawaukee, Chicago, New Jersey, Charlotte, Indiana and New York are not average teams. They are awful teams with an average record due to them all playing eachother. Hell people, before their recent 6 game losing streak (:lol )the Craptors were competing for a playoff spot.

The East is not a deeper conference then the west. The disparity in quality is huge. Phoenix isn't even in a playoff spot in the West! If they were in the East they'd probably be the 4th best team. They are definately better than the Hawks and the Dwayne Wades, I don't see how anyone can argue that.

Add this to the fact that such top Eastern teams, like the Cavs, get many of their wins against the garbage east, and then choke and suck against the big Western teams.

You make sense when you say the East has garbage teams below the 7 mark. I agree that the East just balances it itself out because over half the teams there are less than mediocre. I mean like 6 teams are competing for that playoff spot, and not one has singled themselves out as a favorite. They continue to beat and lose to each other critical games that could make all the diffrenece in their playoffs. Example is how the Knicks beat the Pistons, The Bulls lost to the Nets, The bucks lost the Knicks (or nets i cant remeber) They all suck and whoever gets that last seed is purely lucky and has nothing to do with skill. Phoenix definitel deserves that spot over any team in the east competing for it.

However, when you say Utah and SAS would be number one or 2, that is just plain stupid. You obviously havent watched the Cavs, they are great team, they would be a number 2 or at least a number 3 seed. Boston is also well deserving of ther spot. Utah is good, but u make the East sound so pathetic. Atlanta is a very good team with young talent that imrpoves each year. Joe johnson, Josh Smith, Al Horford...they are all gonna be legit starters in the NBA for quite some time and they are not a team that can be easily beaten. I think they would definitely give Utah a good run for their money in a face-off.

[tastystaci]

I think the definition of "best" is relative. To me, the best is measured by the overall wins/losses vs. each other, which would mean the East is better. Not to mention, the best team and defending champions are from the East, dominating the West's best team last year.

All of these West guys are just making their cases for the West being the "deepest" conference. There is no argument that the West is deeper, but better, that title goes to East this year. It's been a long time coming, so give the East it's just due.:cheers:

tastystaci

[revan]

only one team will be sub .500 that will make the playoffs in the East this year both Det and phil will finish a couple games above .500.

I do not see what is so hard to comprehend
East top 3>West top 3
East Bottom 6> West bottom 6
West Mid teams> East mid teams

How the hell is that sufficient enough to argue which conference is better it is as balanced as it can get?


How can you say East top 3> West top 3 when the west has only 2 top spots pretty much decided? Denver was the 3rd seat a few days ago and now they're the 7th seat. The East top 3 already have there playoffs berths clinched. East bottom 6> west bottom 6, again injuries.

[artest 93]

The answer is irrelevant because you ask the wrong question. The teams do not play only "the top 9 teams" 3-4 times a year, they play against 14 teams.

Hey stupid #2

The point was that the bottom feeders out west aren't as relatively as bad as their records indicate. My point was that even though Minnesota and Golden State, for example, only have 22 and 19 wins, they would be able to get more in the eastern conference. So the assumption that someone with the IQ level as low as yours would make is that, "hey, look, Minnesota is a 19 win team only, therefore the West is weaker." Sure they play other teams like GS and OKC, but the records of these teams are records that could also be higher if they played teams like Washington, Milwaukee, and Chicago 3-4 times a year.

I guess for you, it would be called critical thinking. And you are failing.

[MMM]

How can you say East top 3> West top 3 when the west has only 2 top spots pretty much decided? Denver was the 3rd seat a few days ago and now they're the 7th seat. The East top 3 already have there playoffs berths clinched. East bottom 6> west bottom 6, again injuries.

i say the top 3 east is better then the top3 west because that is true. If you want to rank the top 6 teams:

1 LA
2 Cle
3 Bos
4 Orl
5 SA
6 Hou/Uta???

Overall the East 3 are better.

As for the bottom of both conferences injures is not a good excuse for the difference as the bottom West is a complete joke and is very inferior to the bottom of the East. Also it is not like the East hasn't had its share of injuries it is completely foolish to ignore the injury trouble that teams like Milwaukee, Toronto, NY, Indy, Chi and Cha have had.

[MMM]

Hey stupid #2

The point was that the bottom feeders out west aren't as relatively as bad as their records indicate. My point was that even though Minnesota and Golden State, for example, only have 22 and 19 wins, they would be able to get more in the eastern conference. So the assumption that someone with the IQ level as low as yours would make is that, "hey, look, Minnesota is a 19 win team only, therefore the West is weaker." Sure they play other teams like GS and OKC, but the records of these teams are records that could also be higher if they played teams like Washington, Milwaukee, and Chicago 3-4 times a year.

I guess for you, it would be called critical thinking. And you are failing.

How would minny/GS have more win in the East
they would be playing better elite teams
they would also be playing better bad teams
if Minny was in the East they would be at Washington;s level same with GS

[lilo]

Hey stupid #2

The point was that the bottom feeders out west aren't as relatively as bad as their records indicate. My point was that even though Minnesota and Golden State, for example, only have 22 and 19 wins, they would be able to get more in the eastern conference. So the assumption that someone with the IQ level as low as yours would make is that, "hey, look, Minnesota is a 19 win team only, therefore the West is weaker." Sure they play other teams like GS and OKC, but the records of these teams are records that could also be higher if they played teams like Washington, Milwaukee, and Chicago 3-4 times a year.

I guess for you, it would be called critical thinking. And you are failing.

You are being too emotional. You are saying that "the records of these teams are records that could also be higher if they played teams like Washington, Milwaukee, and Chicago 3-4 times a year." This statement is already based on assumption that WESTern teams are better (and this is why Minnesota's record is so bad). You should not make such assumption or else what's there to prove?

[artest 93]

Turkeys,

You are calling the east teams (bottom feeders) better because of their record. Well, they have that record by playing other bottom feeders who just happen to have 35 wins because they are in the eastern conference. Hawks, 4th seed? Nuff said.

[lilo]

Turkeys,

You are calling the east teams (bottom feeders) better because of their record. Well, they have that record by playing other bottom feeders who just happen to have 35 wins because they are in the eastern conference. Hawks, 4th seed? Nuff said.

Did not the Hawks defeated Juzz a day ago? And Utah arguably was the best team in the WEST over the last month. As they say: "Nuff said." :lol

[artest 93]

Did not the Hawks defeated Juzz a day ago? And Utah arguably was the best team in the WEST over the last month. As they say: "Nuff said." :lol

Oh great argument! Didn't the Hawk take the Celtics to 7 game series? That means they're just good as the Celtics!!!!! OMG!!!

Jazz are a horrible team on the road.

Clippers Celtics. OHMG!!

[HAzE024]

Why do people continue to cherry-pick just the top X teams in the west? We get it, you need to fudge the facts a little to cater to your own biased opinion. Bring that **** to the "Is the top X teams (not including Y or Z's away records on weekdays) in the West as dominant as people imply?" thread. This is a thread about the best basketball CONFERENCE, not the best arbitrarily-chosen (by fans of Western teams, of course) grouping of teams. And right now, taking into account ChuckOakley's facts, it looks like it is the East in a close one.

PS - I'd go out on a limb and say some of the middle tier teams in the East would have improved records if the were going up against barren teams like the Kings, Thunder, Grizzlies, Clippers (Dunleavy's fault) and the Timberwolves.

Any thoughts, West fans?


Anyway, to say it is such a tough road to the playoffs in the West is criminally false. Assuming you have even a semi-decent team you have a 88.88% (8/9) chance to make the playoffs. You only have to do better than ONE real basketball team (and you get about 20 games of practice on the perennial lottery teams). The East has 6 teams fighting for one playoff spot.

[ChuckOakley]

The west had an onslaught of injuries early this season. San Antonio, Houston, Utah, Golden state, and the Clippers were all ravaged by it. When you throw out the intraconference head to head as one of your major supporting pillars in your argument, you must take this into account. As some posters already mentioned, QUALITY teams will be left out of the playoff picture in the west while sub 500 teams will make the playoffs in the east.


Sigh....
I've addressed your argument already....


Originally Posted by Basketball Dirk
The West is plagued by injuries this year. That really distorts it.

Carlos Boozer, Bynum...............ad nauseum

I've never seen so many injuries to important team players as this year.





Ehhh, happens every year.

Besides the same could be said for:

Washington - Arenas
Miluwakee - Redd, Bogut
Indiana - Dunleavy
Philly = Brand
Toronto - JO, Bosh, Calderon
Orlando - Nelson
New York - Marbury, Curry
etc....


As for the sub .500 in the East vs. 500+ in the West.... THAT'S BECAUSE THEY PLAY IN THE WEST... all those easy victories over bottom feeders as well as strong home court play helps inflate records.

Other proof:
Orlando, Cleveland, Atlanta, Miami, etc. are all MUCH improved playoff teams.
Meaning the East got better.

Teams that stayed the same/were expected to be better but flopped:
Detroit, Toronto, Washington all bombed this year from playing in an improved East. Last year those teams were good for 40-50 wins, but not now.

[tastystaci]

Turkeys,

You are calling the east teams (bottom feeders) better because of their record. Well, they have that record by playing other bottom feeders who just happen to have 35 wins because they are in the eastern conference. Hawks, 4th seed? Nuff said.

I'm not gonna call you names, which seems to be your M.O. , but this comment sums up your lack of an argument.

The 4th seed in the East:
Atlanta Hawks: Their record vs. the western conference(12-11)

The 4th seed in the West:
Utah Jazz: Their record vs. the Eastern Conference(13-13)

Nuff said :lol

[Mdog1]

I want to try and explain this so you people with sub 100 intlligences can understand. The Wests top teams records are inflated through playing the Wests bottom teams. If the Wests top teams played the Easts bottom teams instead then it may be a different story because the Easts worsts are better than the Wests worst are.

If the Easts best played in the West then their records would be better based on playing the worst teams in the league more times. Also if you add up all of the wins in the East it = more then all of the Wests wins. combine that with the stuff that Charles Oakley posted then it really proves all that you need to know. East > West.

[dyna]

No:no:

[cdbleb]

Something else just for the people...Chicago is currently 9th in the East (Just out of a playoff spot). They are 15-12 against the West including wins against Houston, Denver, Phoenix (2x), Utah (2x), Dallas, New Orleans. Now I know its an 82 game season and upsets happen but this is the #9 seed in the East (And a sub .500 team overall, who might miss the playoffs) who plays .556 ball against the West (.368 against the East) and has wins against 6 of the top 9 Western teams plus 2-0 against Phoenix and Utah.

Granted thats only one team and a similar argument might possibly be made for Phoenix but like Ive said before I do think overall the West is slightly better but the original question is whether or not the West is better by the margin people let on.

[diegot143]

Its funny to read the idiots posting about how the west is lucky bc they get to play Memphis. Retards, look at the division that Memphis plays in. San Antonio, HOuston, New Orleans, Dallas. How do you expect them to have a good record when the majority of their games are played against the best? IF they were in the east they probably be fighting for a playoff spot. As a Rocket fan it pisses me off to see how ppl in the East claim that East > West. Rockets have been victimised season after season loosing against the 4 or 5 team in the west who would easily be a 1 or 2 team in the east. SUck my balls east

[diegot143]

I want to try and explain this so you people with sub 100 intlligences can understand. The Wests top teams records are inflated through playing the Wests bottom teams. If the Wests top teams played the Easts bottom teams instead then it may be a different story because the Easts worsts are better than the Wests worst are.

If the Easts best played in the West then their records would be better based on playing the worst teams in the league more times. Also if you add up all of the wins in the East it = more then all of the Wests wins. combine that with the stuff that Charles Oakley posted then it really proves all that you need to know. East > West.


HEy moron. The records of the teams are so bad bc they have to play the majority of games against the best.. Look at memphis for example playing in the south west division.

[PoGoMon]

I want to try and explain this so you people with sub 100 intlligences can understand. The Wests top teams records are inflated through playing the Wests bottom teams. If the Wests top teams played the Easts bottom teams instead then it may be a different story because the Easts worsts are better than the Wests worst are.

If the Easts best played in the West then their records would be better based on playing the worst teams in the league more times. Also if you add up all of the wins in the East it = more then all of the Wests wins. combine that with the stuff that Charles Oakley posted then it really proves all that you need to know. East > West.

:applause: :applause:

[Mdog1]

HEy moron. The records of the teams are so bad bc they have to play the majority of games against the best.. Look at memphis for example playing in the south west division.
What about the teams that play in the Pacific idiot? Why does that division only have one playoff team, and a team at .500? Worst division is in the worst conference.

[HAzE024]

HEy moron. The records of the teams are so bad bc they have to play the majority of games against the best.. Look at memphis for example playing in the south west division.

Or maybe it's because their two best players are rookies, some random guy is coaching their team and their bench consists of kneeless Darius Miles and some Isreali dude.

I mean, you can't honestly believe these teams are completely devoid of talent. The Kings? First option - Kevin Martin (solid player) Second option - Andrea Nocioni??!? The Thunder? OK they have two pretty good sophs but then you surround them with an all-star cast of Nick Collison, Desmond Mason and Kyle Weaver (who?). Not this year, OKC. I cant even go on.

These are horrible teams, there is other way around it. The bottom of the West is like the 96 Bulls playing 5 on 4 in the Special Olympics.

[black spiral]

The East is bad.

[easydoesit]

I think its pretty clear that

top 3 in East > Top 3 West
4-9 East < 4-9 West
10-15 East > 10-15 West

But Everybody in the thread already knows this.
To see which conference has a statistical advantage, just look at the winning percentage.

Thus far, according to yahoo stadings, the East has played 379 games against the West and won 196 of them for a 52% win rate.

So while the East has been a bit better against the West, its harldy signifigant, indicating a high degree of parity between conferences.

[Diesel J]

I'm not gonna call you names, which seems to be your M.O. , but this comment sums up your lack of an argument.

The 4th seed in the East:
Atlanta Hawks: Their record vs. the western conference(12-11)

The 4th seed in the West:
Utah Jazz: Their record vs. the Eastern Conference(13-13)

Nuff said :lol

:oldlol: :cheers:

[Huey Freeman]

The East is bad.
Wrong.

[MMM]

I think its pretty clear that

top 3 in East > Top 3 West
4-9 East < 4-9 West
10-15 East > 10-15 West

But Everybody in the thread already knows this.
To see which conference has a statistical advantage, just look at the winning percentage.

Thus far, according to yahoo stadings, the East has played 379 games against the West and won 196 of them for a 52% win rate.

So while the East has been a bit better against the West, its harldy signifigant, indicating a high degree of parity between conferences.

Exactly but too many butt hurt Western fans can't accept that the East has finally caught up with the West. Making up excuses like injuries when the East has had its share of injuries as well. They wont accept the fact despite the East maintaining their advantage in win percentage the entire season.

[Diesel J]

East still giving it to the West:oldlol:

Utah (hottest team from the West) lost back to back to Miami and Orlando

Sac Kings still haven't won a game against the East:oldlol:

[White Chocolate]

East- two 60+ win teams, one team in the high 50s, and one team in the high 40s. Every other team is average at best.


West- minimum 6 teams are finishing with 50+ wins, the seventh team will likely have at least 50, and there is a chance all 8 teams will have 50+ wins.


The powerhouses are in the East, but the combination of solid teams are all in the West. The West is definitely dominant overall.

[Cannonball]

East- two 60+ win teams, one team in the high 50s, and one team in the high 40s. Every other team is average at best.


West- minimum 6 teams are finishing with 50+ wins, the seventh team will likely have at least 50, and there is a chance all 8 teams will have 50+ wins.


The powerhouses are in the East, but the combination of solid teams are all in the West. The West is definitely dominant overall.
because they get to play the kings/clippers/okc 4 times!! lol. why wouldn't they have 50 wins. that's like 16 guaransheed wins!!!

[Diesel J]

East still handling their thing vs the West:applause:

Over the past week or so,

Sixers beat Portland and Lakers

Cavs beat Portland

Orlando and Heat beat Utah

[oh the horror]

East still handling their thing vs the West:applause:

Over the past week or so,

Sixers beat Portland and Lakers

Cavs beat Portland

Orlando and Heat beat Utah



So we're all making these judgements based on invididual games, and not overall records?

[jrong]

Look at the depth in the west. Only the top three teams in the east would even be guaranteed to make the playoffs in the west.

[oh the horror]

No kidding. I mean im not saying one coast is better than the other, but lets be real here...the proof is in the records...there are simply alot more quality teams in the western conference.

[Diesel J]

Anyone feel like looking up how many L's the Cavs, Lakers, Spurs, Orlando and the Celtics have against the East vs the West. Im almost positive these teams have more L's vs the East than they do against the West.

[Luigi]

There are 4 elite teams
West:
LAL

East:
Cleveland, Orlando, Boston


Then there are 9 real teams
West:
Houston
SA
Denver
NOH
Utah
Portland
Dallas
Phoenix

East:
Atlanta


Then there are a few budding/expiring teamsWest:
Golden state? (if you take Ellis' injury into account)

East:
Miami
Philli
Detroit

The rest are too far under 500 to care about. JV.
-----------------
Lets score it.
4 points elite team
2 points real team
1 point budding team

East 12+2+3 = 17
West 4+19+1? = 23 or 24

But, I will say, the bottom of the East has a lot more hope than the west. Toronto, Washington, NY, Indiana, NJ, Milwaukee, Chicago, Charlotte all have something to look forward to.
But, in the West, the bottom has much less hope. GS and OKC have something to hope for, but the rest are bottom feeders for a long time.

[gts]

I think these discussions need to wait until the final game of regular season to be settled.. obviously the East has caught up if not surpassed the west in some regards...

personally i think the west has more good teams but it's really hard to argue against overall wins (east vs west) loss records which do favor the east at this time

hey if the west tosses out sacremento's record vs the east they win the head to head..lol

edit: btw what website shows us an east vs west record?
and silver bullet that was a great chart, what site is that from

[Luigi]

But, I will say, the bottom of the East has a lot more hope than the west. Toronto, Washington, NY, Indiana, NJ, Milwaukee, Chicago, Charlotte all have something to look forward to.
But, in the West, the bottom has much less hope. GS and OKC have something to hope for, but the rest are bottom feeders for a long time.

I feel like breaking this down.

The East is full of pieces:
Toronto still has Chris Bosh to build around. They have plenty of pieces.
Washington is waiting to see Arenas return, and he is a special player.
NY is playing well with a new coach and situated for huge free agents.
Milwaukee has a real big man and a lot of players that know their role.
Chicago's core isn't as bad as we thought (but still not as good as we once thought).
Charlotte has a big man locked up and some talented pieces (diaw, bell, crash)

[Diesel J]

Elite level teams



Celtics W/L record vs East/West (18 loses)



9 L's vs West and 9 L's vs East



.
.
.
.
.
Cavs W/L record vs East/West (13 Loses)


4 L's vs West and 9 L's vs East

.
.
.
.
.
.
Lakers W/L record vs East/West (14 loses)

7 L's vs West and 7 L's vs East

.
.
.
.
.
.

Orlando W/L record vs East/West (18 Loses)


7 L's vs West and 11 L's vs East

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

Spurs W/L record vs East/West (24 Loses)

13 L's vs West and 11 L's vs East

.
.

..
.
.
.

.

.
.
.

Houston W/L record vs East/West (25 Loses)


13 L's vs West and 12 L's vs East

[Hopper15]

The Warriors won 48 games last year and didn't even make the playoffs. 48 wins is a top 5 seed in the east.

Give this East vs West crap a rest. The West is simply a deeper conference.

[Diesel J]

The Warriors won 48 games last year and didn't even make the playoffs. 48 wins is a top 5 seed in the east.




We're talking this year. Noone cares about last season

[Luigi]

We're talking this year. Noone cares about last season

OK. Phoenix is on their way to winning 48-50 games this season, and missing the playoffs. Something like a 5 seed in the East.

[Diesel J]

OK. Phoenix is on their way to winning 48-50 games this season, and missing the playoffs. Something like a 5 seed in the East.


Suns have 31 L's with 14 being to the East (15 wins / 14 loses against the East)

24 wins 17 loses vs the West

hmmm.....

[Diesel J]

Utah

14 - 15 vs the East
29 - 11 vs the West


Hornets

18 -10 vs the East
26 -15 vs the West


Portland

20 - 8 vs the East
24- 19 vs the West

Denver

18 - 11 vs the East
27 - 15 vs the West

[RainierBeachPoet]

maybe it's been posted but

unless we have each team play all the others an equal number of times like they used to do, the records will be skewed

each conference plays team in its conference 3-4 times while playing the opposite conference only twice

i know that travel is the issue here but when the best west teams have to face one another more often, and the eastern clubs do the same, the records will not reflect alevel playing field

[1~Gibson~1]

West is stacked from 1-9
East is stacked from 1-13

[JJ81]

If the Suns were in the East, they'd be seeded 5th, but instead they going to miss the playoffs. In the East the Bulls, Bucks or Bobcats might make the playoffs.

[Meticode]

The East only has 3 good teams: Celts, Cavs, & Magics. The rest is trash.

Yes, yet the East have a better record against West teams than West doe against East. :oldlol:

Fact of the matter is this. The West's playoff seating is more solid than the East. You have way more solid teams from 1-8 on the West's side compared to the East. But the East as a Conference overall is stronger than the West's.

The East has one really awful team that doesn't even have 20 wins. The Wizards. The Raptors are the next worse team with 25 wins at the 14th seed. If you look at the West they have 5 teams with 20 wins or fewer in the conference.

Long story short. The West's 1-8 are stronger than the East's. The East's 8-15 are stronger than the West's.

[HAzE024]

If the Suns were in the East, they'd be seeded 5th, but instead they going to miss the playoffs. In the East the Bulls, Bucks or Bobcats might make the playoffs.

STOP PICKING OUT ONE GODDAMN TEAM TO MAKE YOUR POINT. The East top to bottom is the better conference.

[NBASTATMAN]

The East has some good teams, but the top 8 teams in the West are better than the top 8 teams in the East, period.


I think overall the west is still better than the east but it will be harder to get out of the east for the finals. Put the Lakers in the east and they have to beat either orlando, boston or the cavs to get out to the finals.. Plus detroit who can start playing like their old selves or the Bulls who have a huge amount of talent now... The west is the spurs who are not that good anymore, the Jazz who never win a series, and the Rockets who with Yao will have problems guarding the pick and roll....

[Silverbullit]

Overall the East leads 219-203 so far.

There are 7 Eastern teams with a winning record against the West:

Cleveland (23-4)
Orlando (21-7)
Boston (20-9)
Atlanta (16-11)
Chicago (17-13)
Miami (15-13)
Philadelphia (15-14)

Charlotte has a tied record (14-14).


There are 8 Western teams with a winning record against the East:

Portland (22-8)
Lakers (18-7)
Dallas (20-8)
New Orleans (18-10)
Denver (18-11)
San Antonio (16-11)
Houston (17-12)
Phoenix (16-14)

The Jazz have a losing record (14-15).

[TheGame]

Also another thing to take into account is Playoff basketball is a completely different game. The bottom east teams will show up and when they do they hit hard and fast. Just like Philly and Atlanta did last year!

[AznTacoLover]

not taking away from the east teams. but there are only 3 top teams on the east. Cavs,Celtics,Magic I guess? :confusedshrug:
but in the west 2-8 seeds have to fight everynight to keep there seed. if they lose just 1 or 2 games bam there like in 7th seed just like that.

[PoGoMon]

In my opinion the East isnt as bad as people let on. Heres some numbers for you starting with the two best teams in the West (LA and SA):

The West has 6 teams who are sub .350 and LA has already played those teams 16x plus they have another 5 in the remainder of their schedule for a total of 21 games (Or 26% of their total schedule...1/4 of their season against terrible teams). San Antonio has already played those teams 14x with another 8 in the remainder of their schedule (Pretty much the same LA). So the two best teams in the West get to play 6 out of the 7 worst teams in the league (Based on record) one out of every 4 games on average. In the West a team is either good or terrible, whereas in the East teams are pretty evenly matched outside of the top 3. From the #4 team to the #14 team in the East there is a 13 game separation, in the West there is a 12.5 game separation between 9th and 10th.

LAs record vs the East is 17-6 or 74% (And 4 of those wins are against Boston and Cleveland so they are 13-6 against the rest of the "crappy" East dropping it to 62%), against the West they are 33-7 or 83%...San Antonio is 16-10 against the East or 62%, against the West they are 27-10 or 73%.

Even look at the worst teams from each conference...Sacramento is 14-26 (35%) against the West and 0-24 (0%) against the East. Washington is 8-15 (35%) against the West and 7-34 (17%)against the East. The two top teams in the West have a harder time with the teams in the East overall and the two worst teams in the league both have an easier time against the West overall.

Now Im not saying that the East is better Im just saying that the whole "Dominant West / Crappy East" bs is getting old. 3 of the top 4 teams in the league = East, Defending Champs = East, Longest win streak = West (Utah), Longest losing streak = West (Minn.), best home record = East (Cle), Best Road record = East (Bos), Best record against teams own conference = West (LA), Worst record against opposing Conference = West (Sac). Overall the West probably is slightly better but its not by a large margin like some people insinuate.

(All numbers current up to the morning of March 11th)

Great observation. I had noticed some of the things you stated and I agree that the difference between the 2 conferences has tightened considerably this year.:applause:

[MMM]

The East has maintain their advantage through out the season if the West is as good as people claim you would think the advantage would reverse by now.

[PoGoMon]

Overall the East leads 219-203 so far.

There are 7 Eastern teams with a winning record against the West:

Cleveland (23-4)
Orlando (21-7)
Boston (20-9)
Atlanta (16-11)
Chicago (17-13)
Miami (15-13)
Philadelphia (15-14)

Charlotte has a tied record (14-14).


There are 8 Western teams with a winning record against the East:

Portland (22-8)
Lakers (18-7)
Dallas (20-8)
New Orleans (18-10)
Denver (18-11)
San Antonio (16-11)
Houston (17-12)
Phoenix (16-14)

The Jazz have a losing record (14-15).

I love this reply!:bowdown:

It looks like the Lakers will have easy sailing thru the playoffs and the Cavs will fight like hell and that may give them the edge over the Lakers OR it may take too much out of them to have enough left in the tank to beat the Lakers, who will be well-rested by the time the Cavs make that finals series.:ohwell:

[gts]

I love this reply!:bowdown:

It looks like the Lakers will have easy sailing thru the playoffs and the Cavs will fight like hell and that may give them the edge over the Lakers OR it may take too much out of them to have enough left in the tank to beat the Lakers, who will be well-rested by the time the Cavs make that finals series.:ohwell:
?? just curious, how do you transfer his post into playoff sucess?
it's an east vs west post and you transfered that to inter conference play..

somehow...

[lilo]

I keep re-posting my message that explains why the perception about the dominance of West is wrong:

The myth about West superiority is perpetuated by TV commentators saying things like:

[Terp in LA]

Playing terrible teams = No competition which in turn makes a team record inflated. 3 Teams clinched in teh East but none are considered out of the playoff race yet.

You heard it here, folks. The West plays "terrible teams," which equates to no competition.

Right. :oldlol:

[cdbleb]

You heard it here, folks. The West plays "terrible teams," which equates to no competition.

Right. :oldlol:

Youre taking my post out of context and you didnt quote my entire point which was that at the time 5 teams were already out of playoff contention in the West whereas not one was out of playoff contention in the East.

So yes the West does play terrible teams more often which in turn inflates the records of the top teams. If you would have read the original post I made to open the thread you would also notice that I said that the West is probably slightly better but my point is simply that the West isnt as dominant as people imply:


In my opinion the East isnt as bad as people let on. Heres some numbers for you starting with the two best teams in the West (LA and SA):

The West has 6 teams who are sub .350 and LA has already played those teams 16x plus they have another 5 in the remainder of their schedule for a total of 21 games (Or 26% of their total schedule...1/4 of their season against terrible teams). San Antonio has already played those teams 14x with another 8 in the remainder of their schedule (Pretty much the same LA). So the two best teams in the West get to play 6 out of the 7 worst teams in the league (Based on record) one out of every 4 games on average. In the West a team is either good or terrible, whereas in the East teams are pretty evenly matched outside of the top 3. From the #4 team to the #14 team in the East there is a 13 game separation, in the West there is a 12.5 game separation between 9th and 10th.

LAs record vs the East is 17-6 or 74% (And 4 of those wins are against Boston and Cleveland so they are 13-6 against the rest of the "crappy" East dropping it to 62%), against the West they are 33-7 or 83%...San Antonio is 16-10 against the East or 62%, against the West they are 27-10 or 73%.

Even look at the worst teams from each conference...Sacramento is 14-26 (35%) against the West and 0-24 (0%) against the East. Washington is 8-15 (35%) against the West and 7-34 (17%)against the East. The two top teams in the West have a harder time with the teams in the East overall and the two worst teams in the league both have an easier time against the West overall.

Now Im not saying that the East is better Im just saying that the whole "Dominant West / Crappy East" bs is getting old. 3 of the top 4 teams in the league = East, Defending Champs = East, Longest win streak = West (Utah), Longest losing streak = West (Minn.), best home record = East (Cle), Best Road record = East (Bos), Best record against teams own conference = West (LA), Worst record against opposing Conference = West (Sac). Overall the West probably is slightly better but its not by a large margin like some people insinuate.

(All numbers current up to the morning of March 11th)

This time read all the information in front of you so you know where Im coming from.

[Allstar24]

The west is still more dominant than the east and nothing has changed that perception. Looking at the possible first round matchups, every series in the west is going to be intriguing while the east will be a borefest.

[lilo]

The west is still more dominant than the east and nothing has changed that perception. Looking at the possible first round matchups, every series in the west is going to be intriguing while the east will be a borefest.

It's just a perception not a reality :lol Being a Laker fan obviously you watch more games played by the WEST so you know the players and teams better and that makes it more interesting for you (same is true for fans of the EAST teams). This has nothing to do with the dominance though. As I see it, there are three EAST teams that have a chance to win the championship this year and only one WEST team. EAST conference playoffs are going to be much more interesting and meaningful this year than those for the WEST.

[Luigi]

[QUOTE=lilo]I keep re-posting my message that explains why the perception about the dominance of West is wrong:

The myth about West superiority is perpetuated by TV commentators saying things like:

[shrempf_on_rice]

It's just a perception not a reality :lol Being a Laker fan obviously you watch more games played by the WEST so you know the players and teams better and that makes it more interesting for you (same is true for fans of the EAST teams). This has nothing to do with the dominance though. As I see it, there are three EAST teams that have a chance to win the championship this year and only one WEST team. EAST conference playoffs are going to be much more interesting and meaningful this year than those for the WEST.


I'd love to play a team 10 games under .500 in the first round. It's so exciting to watch.

[stephanieg]

There are so many teams in the west which have nice records but simply aren't that good. Not that the east is any better in some ways. Yeah, the Hawks and Orlando, oooh, scary.

[Luigi]

There are so many teams in the west which have nice records but simply aren't that good. Not that the east is any better in some ways. Yeah, the Hawks and Orlando, oooh, scary.

So everything sucks...:milton

[MMM]

I'd love to play a team 10 games under .500 in the first round. It's so exciting to watch.

no such team exist in the Eastern playoffs. In fact the last time it occurred was some time ago maybe 03-04 Celtics who were 36-46 but made the playoffs.

[lilo]

The only way to call one conference better than another is by talent scouting, and I'm calling it West by a country mile.


I'd argue that the actual game results are the better and the only valid metric. The talent scouting by fans is very subjective because we all watch primarily teams in our respective conferences. Here is one example, Memphis and OKC arguably have a lot of talent (just check the annoying - the longest ever - thread for O.J. Mayo fans on ISH). Are they better than EASTern teams? Yeah, they are better than Wizards and then only because of Arenas injury.

[Luigi]

I'd argue that the actual game results are the better and the only valid metric. The talent scouting by fans is very subjective because we all watch primarily teams in our respective conferences. Here is one example, Memphis and OKC arguably have a lot of talent (just check the annoying - the longest ever - thread for O.J. Mayo fans on ISH). Are they better than EASTern teams? Yeah, they are better than Wizards and then only because of Arenas injury.
You argued successfully against using records within conference, and then proposed a new mathematical measure between the two conferences. The problem is, imho, that your new mathematical measure between conferences is subject to the same attacks you levied against the first. Is it not?

[KobeRules24]

West>>>>East

[barbaroi]

East Playoff teams are 140-87 against the West.
West Playoff teams are 143-82 against the East.

The top 8 of the West are better than the top 8 of the East against the opposing conference. Therefore their superior records are not due solely to dominating the bottom feeders of the West.

Western playoff teams also hold a 5 game advantage over Eastern playoff teams in head to head matchups (62-57). Thus the Western playoff teams' superior record against the opposing conference is not due to them dominating the bottom teams of the opposing conference, and losing to the upper tier teams.

This suggests the top 8 of the West still holds a slight advantage over the top 8 of the East. The playoffs in the West are still more competitive.

[Luigi]

East Playoff teams are 140-87 against the West.
West Playoff teams are 143-82 against the East.

The top 8 of the West are better than the top 8 of the East against the opposing conference. Therefore their superior records are not due solely to dominating the bottom feeders of the West.

Western playoff teams also hold a 5 game advantage over Eastern playoff teams in head to head matchups (62-57). Thus the Western playoff teams' superior record against the opposing conference is not due to them dominating the bottom teams of the opposing conference, and losing to the upper tier teams.

This suggests the top 8 of the West still holds a slight advantage over the top 8 of the East. The playoffs in the West are still more competitive.

This is the piece of evidence that explodes lilo's argument. It was a very strong argument, but it fell to its own mathematical attack.

Everyone will agree that if there was a NIT tournament, the East would win, but when it comes to playoff teams, the West is still superior. I am glad the gap is closing though.

[lilgodfather1]

This is the piece of evidence that explodes lilo's argument. It was a very strong argument, but it fell to its own mathematical attack.

Everyone will agree that if there was a NIT tournament, the East would win, but when it comes to playoff teams, the West is still superior. I am glad the gap is closing though.
But were the argument that you and many others are saying fails is that the East is overall better. I know you said the NIT tourny thing, but that is not all that matters, 1-15 not 1-8.

[Luigi]

But were the argument that you and many others are saying fails is that the East is overall better. I know you said the NIT tourny thing, but that is not all that matters, 1-15 not 1-8.

I'm willing to give the East that award when the top 9 in the West are clearly superior. The real award is having a better top 8.

[lilgodfather1]

I'm willing to give the East that award when the top 9 in the West are clearly superior. The real award is having a better top 8.
I disagree. If the top 8 in the East had to play the bottom 7 in the West I believe the number is 4 times a year then they would have at least a 24ish wins for Cleveland/Boston/Orlando and another 20ish for the rest of the playoff teams. Then they get to play the weak teams in the opposite conference. The Wests top teams records are inflated by how bad the low teams are.

[Luigi]

I disagree. If the top 8 in the East had to play the bottom 7 in the West I believe the number is 4 times a year then they would have at least a 24ish wins for Cleveland/Boston/Orlando and another 20ish for the rest of the playoff teams. Then they get to play the weak teams in the opposite conference. The Wests top teams records are inflated by how bad the low teams are.

Again, all that scenario proves is that there is a wider divide in the West than in the East. It makes no comment on the objective quality of any team, just their conference relative class.

I can argue that the West records are inflated because of having a bad bottom rung, or I can argue that the West has a bad bottom rung because the top is so powerful. The math doesn't reveal that.

[cdbleb]

I see everyone talking about the top 8 from each conference (Which is a little off topic) so I decided to crunch a few more numbers making it a little more even. Taking the top 8 from each conference with their records as a whole includes wins over the bottom feeders from each side so I decided to take the top 8 from each conference versus the top 8 from the opposing conference and heres what I came up with:

The West leads the top 8 series by a margin of 6 games (62-56) out of 118 played for a win% of 53% (Pretty interesting considering LA has 4 wins over Boston and Cleveland but are only 9-5 overall against the Easts playoff teams...Meaning 5-5 against the rest). So I think regardless of how you look at it my original statement is proven correct:
(Quoted from my original post to start the thread)



Now Im not saying that the East is better Im just saying that the whole "Dominant West / Crappy East" bs is getting old...

...Overall the West probably is slightly better but its not by a large margin like some people insinuate.

Looking at the whole conference the East leads slightly...Looking at the top 8 the West leads slightly, since the playoffs are ultimately what matters and the West has the slight advantage with playoff teams verses Eastern playoff teams isnt it fair to say that the West is NOT dominant in comparison to the East, but only slightly better?

EDIT: Numbers current as of today, March 24th

[kNIOKAS]

in now way west should have been an all-star this year. jefferson got snubbed!

[LA_Showtime]

I think this year you could say it's a virtual tie. It's going to suck for the Lakers, Spurs, Celtics, Cavaliers, and Magic this year. 3 or 4 of them will be having very difficult opponents in the first round. I want nothing to do with Detroit if I'm in the Eastern Conference and I want nothing to do with Utah/Portland if I'm in the Western Conference. There could be a couple of upsets in the playoffs this year. Should be some exciting TV..

[bagelred]

Someone do the math, but in head to head competition, East vs. West, the East is clearly superior. That's all that matters


You guys are living in the past. East is better conference now. Someone have stat on head-to-head East vs. West this year?

And not just playoff teams. The entire conference.

[Basketball Dirk]

Once the West gets back all it's injured people, it will dominate the East like usual. I lost count how many major injuries the west had this year.

Carlos Boozer, Yao Ming, Tmac, Andrew Bynum, Kirilenko, Kaman, Baron Davis, Camby, Al Jefferson.............

[2LeTTeRS]

Overall the East leads 219-203 so far.

There are 7 Eastern teams with a winning record against the West:

Cleveland (23-4)
Orlando (21-7)
Boston (20-9)
Atlanta (16-11)
Chicago (17-13)
Miami (15-13)
Philadelphia (15-14)

Charlotte has a tied record (14-14).


There are 8 Western teams with a winning record against the East:

Portland (22-8)
Lakers (18-7)
Dallas (20-8)
New Orleans (18-10)
Denver (18-11)
San Antonio (16-11)
Houston (17-12)
Phoenix (16-14)

The Jazz have a losing record (14-15).

I've been saying for most of the year that I thought the East had closed the gap, but I didn't think they had performed this well. This is the first time in a long time that you can argue that the East > or = West and thats good for the league.

[Mamba]

Once the West gets back all it's injured people, it will dominate the East like usual. I lost count how many major injuries the west had this year.

Carlos Boozer, Yao Ming, Tmac, Andrew Bynum, Kirilenko, Kaman, Baron Davis, Camby, Al Jefferson.............
wait. wat?

tmac? yeh ok because he's wona finals MVP

bynum? his teams on teh same pace for wins as they were before he went out, just more responsibility on LO and gasol

Baron davis? when was he ever healthy?

yao ming? didn't he play today?

kirilenko? "hello 2004 called they said they want you back"

[lilmarcgasol]

East is a joke. Hawks are a 4 seed and Heat are a 5 seed. That is proof enough right there. Any conference where the Hawks have the 4th best record, and the Dwayne Wades have the 5th best, is a joke. Any conference where the Nets, Pacers and Bulls are competing for playoff spots is a joke.

[2LeTTeRS]

East is a joke. Hawks are a 4 seed and Heat are a 5 seed. That is proof enough right there. Any conference where the Hawks have the 4th best record, and the Dwayne Wades have the 5th best, is a joke. Any conference where the Nets, Pacers and Bulls are competing for playoff spots is a joke.

And any conference that has 6 of the 7 worse teams in the league is a joke too right? And before you say their records are bad because they play the good teams in the West 4 times a year here are their records against the East.

Sacramento - 1 - 29 .033
LA Clips - 8 - 19 .296
Memphis - 7 - 19 .269
Minnesota - 10 - 17 .370
OK City - 7 - 18 .280
Golden State - 11 - 19 .367

[ChuckOakley]

Who cares about the top 8 in each conference?

We are talking about the entire Eastern Conference vs. the entire Western conference.

So far in the regular season the East leads the West, I believe, so as far as the regular season goes the East > West.
That's simple.


Next the post-season.

The top 8 in opposing conferences do not play each other in the playoffs, rather the winner in the West plays the winner in the East, thus arguments about Atlanta vs. Utah, Houston vs. Miami etc. are all irrelevant since those teams will not face each other.

The only teams that will face off will be:

from the West: LAL or San Antonio (if Manu is healthy)
from the East: Cleveland or Boston

Given the team with the best record and player is in the East (Cleveland) and the defending champion Celtics are in the East, I would say the East is the favorite to win the title.

Assuming the East is the favorite to win the title AND they win the regular season series against the West, how could one logically argue the West is better let alone DOMINANT as the thread title asks?

[gyu]

Overall the East has a 195-183 advantage (0.516) so far, but the gap is closing (151-127 on February, 1st).
I say you should only look at teams in playoff contentions of East vs West. Unfair for west if you're looking at the conference as a whole cause the Kings only won ONE GAME against the East all season.

[cdbleb]

I say you should only look at teams in playoff contentions of East vs West. Unfair for west if you're looking at the conference as a whole cause the Kings only won ONE GAME against the East all season.

Ever heard the saying "Youre only as strong as your weakest link"?

If theyre in the West then theyre in the West, cant throw them out just because you dont like theyre numbers. Thats just like the people who try to throw out Kobes first 2 seasons or Jordans last 2 when talking about their careers...The question involves the Western Conference as a whole.

[barbaroi]

Ever heard the saying "Youre only as strong as your weakest link"?

If theyre in the West then theyre in the West, cant throw them out just because you dont like theyre numbers. Thats just like the people who try to throw out Kobes first 2 seasons or Jordans last 2 when talking about their careers...The question involves the Western Conference as a whole.
The top 8 is far more important when you start to consider playoff runs. The top 8 of the west have not only overall better records, but also better record against the opposing conference, and better records against the top 8 of the opposing conference. They are stronger teams. Let's take a hypothetical situation assuming all teams stay seeded as they are right now. Let's also assume the upper seed wins every playoff matchup within the conferences.

Cleveland faces Chicago (34-38) in the first round.
Lakers face Dallas (43-28) in the first round.

Cleveland faces Atlanta (42-30) in the 2nd round.
Lakers face Denver (46-26) in the 2nd round.

Cleveland faces Boston (54-19) in the 3rd round.
Lakers face San Antonio (47-24) in the 3rd round.

It's true that the ECF is going to be on paper more difficult than the WCF. However, the Spurs certainly aren't pushovers. Also, not only is Cleveland's 2nd round match easier than the Lakers, their 2nd round opponent has a worse record than the Lakers 1st round. Only 4 losses separate the Lakers' WCF opponents from their 1st round opponents. The playoff run for a Western team is still more difficult than for an Eastern team. This is the main reason people can still say the West is dominant over the East. I used LA and Cleveland as examples because they are the #1 seeds, but if you take a look at the hypothetical runs for the 2 3 and 4 seeds of the east and west the same situation arises. The Eastern teams have an easier run through the playoffs.

[oh the horror]

Jesus christ...some of you beat eachother to death with super detail oriented, technical stats....


You'd think some people here, didnt have the free time, to work, party, and actually get laid.

[oh the horror]

herrrrrm, well *sniffs* if you look at their PER stats, per each individual player PER each team, on the night of Dec 12th 2008, and compare it to the western conference you would clearly see.....


http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f383/MarioMillan82/nerd.jpg

[Luigi]

Who cares about the top 8 in each conference?

We are talking about the entire Eastern Conference vs. the entire Western conference.

So far in the regular season the East leads the West, I believe, so as far as the regular season goes the East > West.
That's simple.


Next the post-season.

The top 8 in opposing conferences do not play each other in the playoffs, rather the winner in the West plays the winner in the East, thus arguments about Atlanta vs. Utah, Houston vs. Miami etc. are all irrelevant since those teams will not face each other.

The only teams that will face off will be:

from the West: LAL or San Antonio (if Manu is healthy)
from the East: Cleveland or Boston

Given the team with the best record and player is in the East (Cleveland) and the defending champion Celtics are in the East, I would say the East is the favorite to win the title.

Assuming the East is the favorite to win the title AND they win the regular season series against the West, how could one logically argue the West is better let alone DOMINANT as the thread title asks?

Actually, the top 8 is all I care about. The East can win the NIT for all I care. I have already admitted that as entire conferences go, the East wins. But, for the post season, the West is still superior. Thank goodness the gap is closing.

Just because those teams won't play each other doesn't mean it is irrelevant. The road to the finals will be much more difficult in the West. That is completely relevant.

All in all, it is a great thing that the league is balancing out. There are a couple of title contenders on each side, leaning toward the East. But after that, the remaining West playoff teams are superior to the remaining East playoff teams. Then, the East lottery is stronger than the West lottery. That is the current state of affairs, and it is significantly better than it was in the past.

[Diesel J]

Lakers suffer back to back L's against the East:applause:




If the Suns were in the East, they'd be seeded 5th, but instead they going to miss the playoffs. In the East the Bulls, Bucks or Bobcats might make the playoffs.

Suns are pretty mediocre vs the East though and have a better record vs the West

[Al Thornton]

tldr

[TheWitness]

NO!

because the celts from the east are the current title holders!

[jrong]

Why does the strength of each conference's bottom-feeders matter to this discussion? The only thing that is relevant here is the playoff teams. Ask yourself this question-- which #8 seed is more likely to pull an upset in the first round, the Dallas Mavericks or the Chicago Bulls? If the Lakers sleep on the Mavs, they could easily go home in round one. On the other hand, it would take a virgin blood sacrifice and a goat for the Bulls to dismiss the Cavs.

[2LeTTeRS]

The top 8 is far more important when you start to consider playoff runs. The top 8 of the west have not only overall better records, but also better record against the opposing conference, and better records against the top 8 of the opposing conference. They are stronger teams. Let's take a hypothetical situation assuming all teams stay seeded as they are right now. Let's also assume the upper seed wins every playoff matchup within the conferences.

Cleveland faces Chicago (34-38) in the first round.
Lakers face Dallas (43-28) in the first round.

Cleveland faces Atlanta (42-30) in the 2nd round.
Lakers face Denver (46-26) in the 2nd round.

Cleveland faces Boston (54-19) in the 3rd round.
Lakers face San Antonio (47-24) in the 3rd round.

It's true that the ECF is going to be on paper more difficult than the WCF. However, the Spurs certainly aren't pushovers. Also, not only is Cleveland's 2nd round match easier than the Lakers, their 2nd round opponent has a worse record than the Lakers 1st round. Only 4 losses separate the Lakers' WCF opponents from their 1st round opponents. The playoff run for a Western team is still more difficult than for an Eastern team. This is the main reason people can still say the West is dominant over the East. I used LA and Cleveland as examples because they are the #1 seeds, but if you take a look at the hypothetical runs for the 2 3 and 4 seeds of the east and west the same situation arises. The Eastern teams have an easier run through the playoffs.

Admittedly the 1st seed may have a tougher road to climb to get to the Finals than in the East, but the 2nd, 3rd and 4th seeds would actually have a tougher road to climb out of the East because they will have to beat 2 elite teams just to get to the Finals.

Orlando
1st round - Detroit (36-38)
Eastern Conference Semis - Boston (56-19)
Eastern Conference Finals - Cleveland (61-13)

Boston
1st round - Philly (38-35)
Eastern Conference Semis - Orlando (55-18)
Eastern Conference Finals - Cleveland (61-13)

Atlanta
1st round - Miami (39-35)
Eastern Conference Semis - Cleveland (61-13)
Eastern Conference Finals - Orlando (55-18) or Boston (56-19)

[Mdog1]

Why does the strength of each conference's bottom-feeders matter to this discussion? The only thing that is relevant here is the playoff teams. Ask yourself this question-- which #8 seed is more likely to pull an upset in the first round, the Dallas Mavericks or the Chicago Bulls? If the Lakers sleep on the Mavs, they could easily go home in round one. On the other hand, it would take a virgin blood sacrifice and a goat for the Bulls to dismiss the Cavs.
The bottom feeders matter in the regular season beause they inflate the playoff teams records.

[ChuckOakley]

Wow, again why just look at the top 8?
Oh yes, because it skews the results in the West's favor.

But the question was about the ENTIRE West vs. the ENTIRE East.

I could care less about the top 8's, because again there are only two ways to compare the East vs. the West.. the regular season (which is the giant round robin which all teams play in, that the East was/is winning) and the post-season, where only 1 team from the East meets 1 team from the West.

But people want to argue that IF at the end of June:

The East leads the West in overall wins

and

The East wins the title (likely considering the defending champion plays in the East as does the best team in the league)

then

The West is better, because their 4-9seeds are better than the 4-9 seeds of the East
:ohwell:

Since the 4-9 seeds of the opposing conferences will not play each other, why not compare the 10-15 seeds of each conference in a hypopthetical playoff scenario that would never happen? The East would easily win that.


And, no let's not discount the Sacramento Kings either. Again no point in trying to skew the #'s, if anything the Sacramento Kings are a perfect example of why the East is better.

Take one team, say the Sacrmaneto Kings.
Have them play X amount of games against the West and have them play X amount of games against the East

Then compare their winning percentage against each conference.

West - 35%
East - 3%

So, the worst team in the league (the Kings) is able to beat the better Western conference 35% of the time, and weaker Eastern conference only 3% of the time?

Riighhtt.....

[tastystaci]

Wow, again why just look at the top 8?
Oh yes, because it skews the results in the West's favor.

But the question was about the ENTIRE West vs. the ENTIRE East.

I could care less about the top 8's, because again there are only two ways to compare the East vs. the West.. the regular season (which is the giant round robin which all teams play in, that the East was/is winning) and the post-season, where only 1 team from the East meets 1 team from the West.

But people want to argue that IF at the end of June:

The East leads the West in overall wins

and

The East wins the title (likely considering the defending champion plays in the East as does the best team in the league)

then

The West is better, because their 4-9seeds are better than the 4-9 seeds of the East
:ohwell:

Since the 4-9 seeds of the opposing conferences will not play each other, why not compare the 10-15 seeds of each conference in a hypopthetical playoff scenario that would never happen? The East would easily win that.


And, no let's not discount the Sacramento Kings either. Again no point in trying to skew the #'s, if anything the Sacramento Kings are a perfect example of why the East is better.

Take one team, say the Sacrmaneto Kings.
Have them play X amount of games against the West and have them play X amount of games against the East

Then compare their winning percentage against each conference.

West - 35%
East - 3%

So, the worst team in the league (the Kings) is able to beat the better Western conference 35% of the time, and weaker Eastern conference only 3% of the time?

Riighhtt.....

Couldn't agree more. All of the stats are smacking these morons in the face but they still want to question it. It hasn't happened much in the last decade, but the fact is: THE EAST IS HANDS DOWN BETTER THAN THE WEST. Shut up and deal with it you homers. Now let me go hammer on 'em.

:hammertime: :hammertime: :hammertime:

[Diesel J]

Wow, again why just look at the top 8?
Oh yes, because it skews the results in the West's favor.

But the question was about the ENTIRE West vs. the ENTIRE East.

I could care less about the top 8's, because again there are only two ways to compare the East vs. the West.. the regular season (which is the giant round robin which all teams play in, that the East was/is winning) and the post-season, where only 1 team from the East meets 1 team from the West.

But people want to argue that IF at the end of June:

The East leads the West in overall wins

and

The East wins the title (likely considering the defending champion plays in the East as does the best team in the league)

then

The West is better, because their 4-9seeds are better than the 4-9 seeds of the East
:ohwell:

Since the 4-9 seeds of the opposing conferences will not play each other, why not compare the 10-15 seeds of each conference in a hypopthetical playoff scenario that would never happen? The East would easily win that.


And, no let's not discount the Sacramento Kings either. Again no point in trying to skew the #'s, if anything the Sacramento Kings are a perfect example of why the East is better.

Take one team, say the Sacrmaneto Kings.
Have them play X amount of games against the West and have them play X amount of games against the East

Then compare their winning percentage against each conference.

West - 35%
East - 3%

So, the worst team in the league (the Kings) is able to beat the better Western conference 35% of the time, and weaker Eastern conference only 3% of the time?

Riighhtt.....

:rockon: :applause:

[tedloc]

simply... yes

[Diesel J]

West has 6 teams below .380 win%

East has 1 team below .380 win%

[Allstar24]

I think I answered already but anyway, yes the west is as dominant (if not more) as people imply. Just look at the playoff picture and it'll tell you the whole story.

The East has 3 teams with a winning percentage of .600 or more.
The West has 8 teams with a winning percentage of .600 or more.

Pretty obvious which conference is more competitive, there shouldn't even be a debate.

[DukeDelonte13]

I think I answered already but anyway, yes the west is as dominant (if not more) as people imply. Just look at the playoff picture and it'll tell you the whole story.

The East has 3 teams with a winning percentage of .600 or more.
The West has 8 teams with a winning percentage of .600 or more.

Pretty obvious which conference is more competitive, there shouldn't even be a debate.


Then why is the east leading the west in inter-conference play? :hammerhead:

[5150]

It's simple fact. The Suns would be in the Playoffs fighting for home court in the east.

[Diesel J]

I think I answered already but anyway, yes the west is as dominant (if not more) as people imply. Just look at the playoff picture and it'll tell you the whole story.

The East has 3 teams with a winning percentage of .600 or more.
The West has 8 teams with a winning percentage of .600 or more.

Pretty obvious which conference is more competitive, there shouldn't even be a debate.


The West has 6 team under a .380 win %

WORST TEAM IN THE LEAGUE, the Sacramento Kings

16-61 overall but 1-29 vs the EAST and 15-32 vs the WEST

How can a team so wack win so many games against the "great" West but not against the East?

[Allstar24]

Keep repeating yourself man. Bottom line is that when we compare the playoff contending teams in the West to those in the East, its not even close. Nobody cares about the worst teams in the league. When you judge which conference is more competitive...you want to look at the top teams, not the bottom-feeders.

-The East has 3 teams with a winning percentage of .600 or more.
-The West has 8 teams with a winning percentage of .600 or more.
-Phoenix Suns with a 43-35 record would be the 4th seed in the east.

Those are facts and show the huge disparity between the 2 conferences. I don't even see a discussion here...west > east, period.

[DukeDelonte13]

It's simple fact. The Suns would be in the Playoffs fighting for home court in the east.


If phoenix played in the east they would have a much worse record. Don't forget, suns play kings, clips, and GS 4x.

[DukeDelonte13]

Keep repeating yourself man. Bottom line is that when we compare the playoff contending teams in the West to those in the East, its not even close. Nobody cares about the worst teams in the league. When you judge which conference is more competitive...you want to look at the top teams, not the bottom-feeders.

-The East has 3 teams with a winning percentage of .600 or more.
-The West has 8 teams with a winning percentage of .600 or more.
-Phoenix Suns with a 43-35 record would be the 4th seed in the east.

Those are facts and show the huge disparity between the 2 conferences. I don't even see a discussion here...west > east, period.

inter-conference play?

[LA_Showtime]

If phoenix played in the east they would have a much worse record. Don't forget, suns play kings, clips, and GS 4x.

Didn't the Suns lose to Golden State once and Sacramento twice or something

[DukeDelonte13]

Didn't the Suns lose to Golden State once and Sacramento twice or something


You are aware that the suns win % against the east is lower than against the west, right?

[Allstar24]

inter-conference play?
Weak argument. All you have to do is look at the 8 playoff teams in each conference and that will tell you the story :confusedshrug:

[Showtime]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/standings

Every western playoff team has a chance at 50 wins, and have a positive diff rating. And the East, well...doesn't.

Overall, the east has many more teams in the 30-40 win area and the west has very good teams and very bad teams.

The west is better, period. They have better teams, and the east, while having relatively more consistent teams, those teams are in the mid to bottom range of wins, again, at 30-40.

[DukeDelonte13]

Weak argument. All you have to do is look at the 8 playoff teams in each conference and that will tell you the story :confusedshrug:


so when teams from the east win more against teams against the west its a weak argument that the east is stronger :wtf:

[LA_Showtime]

so when teams from the east win more against teams against the west its a weak argument that the east is stronger :wtf:

You're absolutely right. Cleveland is in the Eastern Conference and they have the toughest road to the championship. The West pales in comparison to how good the East is. If the Cavs make it to the Finals, they are the best team ever. Is that what you want to hear?

The West 1-8 is better than the East 1-8. The East has 3 of the top 4 teams, but when you can insert Phoenix into the Eastern Conference and have them as a fifth seed that gives you a good indication which conference is better.

[Automajic23]

so when teams from the east win more against teams against the west its a weak argument that the east is stronger :wtf:

Allstar24 doesnt like looking at the other facts in the argument, just his own side. IMHO it was said that the East has a lot of decent teams and the top 3 teams; the west has a more solid top 8 overall but the rest of the conference is much worse than the rest of the easts.

It seems that the better WEST teams get their Ws mostly from the west and the marginal WEST teams are losing a good amount to both the east and the west, so in short the west all together is struggling to beat EAST teams, but the WEST will have more games in the WEST, so the better teams will make the worse teams look even worse. Hence this concludes why there are solid records like: Lakers, Blazers, Rockets, Nuggets. But there are horrible teams like clippers, warriors, kings.

[A.M.G.]

The East has 3 good teams, the West has 9 good teams. However, of the top 3 teams in the NBA, 2 are in the East, and Orlando is pretty damn solid too. Also, the West has 5 teams that are worse than any team in the East (which ironically means that every year several lottery picks go to the West to languish on perennially terrible teams, instead of helping to put Eastern teams over the top, ie. D-Will and CP3 going West, Oden and Durant both going West).

Overall the West is still better though. There are a lot of mediocre to bad teams in the Eastern playoff hunt.

[DukeDelonte13]

You're absolutely right. Cleveland is in the Eastern Conference and they have the toughest road to the championship. The West pales in comparison to how good the East is. If the Cavs make it to the Finals, they are the best team ever. Is that what you want to hear?

The West 1-8 is better than the East 1-8. The East has 3 of the top 4 teams, but when you can insert Phoenix into the Eastern Conference and have them as a fifth seed that gives you a good indication which conference is better.


Maybe there seems to be a miscommunication. If you are just talking about record, yeah the suns would be fifth. But the suns loose more when they play against the east, like most western teams do, hence the disparity in inter-conference play. So if for some reason, the suns moved to milwaukee, they would not have the record that they would of had if they were in the west. See what i'm saying?

The Lakers are the only elite team in the west. Spurs, Jazz, Rockets, Nuggs, aren't on the same level. Im not saying these teams suck by any means but the Hawks, Heat, Pistons, 76rs aren't really that far from them at all.

And i never said anything that would imply im somehow asking for you to acknowledge anything about the cavs. If you ask me, only homers don't understand what it means when one conference wins more against the other.

[Automajic23]

Maybe there seems to be a miscommunication. If you are just talking about record, yeah the suns would be fifth. But the suns loose more when they play against the east, like most western teams do, hence the disparity in inter-conference play. So if for some reason, the suns moved to milwaukee, they would not have the record that they would of had if they were in the west. See what i'm saying?

The Lakers are the only elite team in the west. Spurs, Jazz, Rockets, Nuggs, aren't on the same level. Im not saying these teams suck by any means but the Hawks, Heat, Pistons, 76rs aren't really that far from them at all.

And i never said anything that would imply im somehow asking for you to acknowledge anything about the cavs. If you ask me, only homers don't understand what it means when one conference wins more against the other.

This makes sense, however predictions like this are flawed because if the suns played more games vs the east, then they would have more familiarity with east players and their struggles with the east might not be so. IF the suns were 0-2 vs the Sixers this year, and they were to play 2 more games, the suns may be better prepared for the sixers in games 3n4 resulting in 2-2 instead of 0-2. OR the sixers could make them look worse. But just because a team loses 2 games to another team over the course of 1 year does not mean they cannot get even. Think of it as playing 1 on 1 with your friend. Sure he's better than you and you can't seem to beat him. But if you play him more and more you will start to figure him out, and if you're any good at all you will take away his strengths and exploit his weaknesses.

[GiveItToBurrito]

The East is a lot more balanced, with only one team (the Wizards) being truly horrible and a doormat night in and night out (even though that'll change next year once Arenas and Haywood are back and healthy), as well as three truly elite teams that could easily win the title this year. The West has a lot more paper tigers like New Orleans and Dallas who can win 50+ games but have no real shot at a title and only an outside shot at the finals, while they also have four or five atrocious teams like the Kings and Clippers who fans forget about because, really, would you even want to remember that the Clippers exist?

Overall, the East is better because they have three teams that could win a championship and the West only has one, and because everyone in the East except Washington is respectable if not great. The fifth seed out West could probably beat the fifth seed in the East, but who cares since neither will make it past the second round.

[Automajic23]

The East is a lot more balanced, with only one team (the Wizards) being truly horrible and a doormat night in and night out (even though that'll change next year once Arenas and Haywood are back and healthy), as well as three truly elite teams that could easily win the title this year. The West has a lot more paper tigers like New Orleans and Dallas who can win 50+ games but have no real shot at a title and only an outside shot at the finals, while they also have four or five atrocious teams like the Kings and Clippers who fans forget about because, really, would you even want to remember that the Clippers exist?

Overall, the East is better because they have three teams that could win a championship and the West only has one, and because everyone in the East except Washington is respectable if not great. The fifth seed out West could probably beat the fifth seed in the East, but who cares since neither will make it past the second round.

For the most part yeah, who cares. But I will be singing a different tune if one of those teams are the reason the Cavs arent #1 overall in the League :cry:

[madmax]

haha, some of you guys are funny:oldlol: Since we are comparing conferences, which is the best criteria to determine the better one? Yeah, I guess so - inter conference record, which East is leading. We are not comparing just PLAYOFF teams, because their record is flawed by playing these western bottom feeders constantly. East has much more depth and competitiveness, even the worst eastern team Washington beat the best NBA team Cavs TWO friggin times...that tells you everything you need to know - East > West:rockon: