Adam Silver reveals that "Top 16" playoff seeding could be implemented by 2016-17 sea

[jzek]

"And he is willing to explore ideas, big and small, that will make the NBA a better game. The league experimented with a 44-minute preseason game, he approved an extended All-Star break, he's looking at ways to improve the draft lottery and he is exploring the possibility of adopting a new playoff system that takes the best teams regardless of conference (which, Silver says, won't happen until the 2016-17 season at the earliest)."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nba/2015/02/08/adam-silver-commissioner-david-stern-playoffs-future-donald-sterling/23081357/

[russwest0]

:bowdown: Silver has done right by me so far.

Just needs to clean up the officiating and we'll be good.

[MMM]

they better balance the schedules then

for example if elite east teams get higher seeding because they match up vs. inferior teams more often than i don't see how this becomes a fundamental shift. That is just one example

[oarabbus]

They really need to make it so that each division winner is guaranteed a playoff spot, though. If you just have true "top 16" then divisons don't matter. Either guarantee division winners a spot, or eliminate divisions.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Adam Silver doing work. Can't wait to see how this unfolds :rockon:

[dubnation]

:bowdown: Silver has done right by me so far.

Just needs to clean up the officiating and we'll be good.

If he does decide that officiating is a league-wide issue, what's a possible way he could change it? Seems like a tall challenge.

[Adam Silver]

:bowdown: Silver has done right by me so far.


You're welcome.

[Nuff Said]

they better balance the schedules then

for example if elite east teams get higher seeding because they match up vs. inferior teams more often than i don't see how this becomes a fundamental shift. That is just one example
Yall niqqas never satisfied. Why not just do away with the whole eastern conference while you're at it?

[DMAVS41]

they better balance the schedules then

for example if elite east teams get higher seeding because they match up vs. inferior teams more often than i don't see how this becomes a fundamental shift. That is just one example

There will always be some semblance if imbalance, but I think it's a pretty ****ing fundamental shit if we were to see the Suns, Pelicans, and Thunder all in the playoffs rather than two shitty undeserving East teams instead.

How about Hawks vs Thunder/Pelicans/Suns instead of Hawks vs Nets....LOL

Silver will get this shit done...just too unfair to make West teams play real teams all year and then have better records than teams in the East making the playoffs...yet miss the playoffs themselves

It's already a big enough advantage to play the scrubs in the East all year. You can't get a top 16 record playing in the East...you don't remotely deserve a playoff birth...it's that simple

[Legends66NBA7]

What are the chance of a different title winner from recent years ?

Does the team with the most talent, best coaching, best system, etc... still win or will there be a surprise team ?

[Rose'sACL]

:bowdown: Silver has done right by me so far.

Just needs to clean up the officiating and we'll be good.
wouldn't that be a really big problem for OKC ? are you an okc fan or not?

[MMM]

Yall niqqas never satisfied. Why not just do away with the whole eastern conference while you're at it?

would rather them keep the traditional format

[imnew09]

Lebald is lucky he got 2 rings before Adam Silver officially took over. With the new playoff Lechoke wouldnt smell the finals

[emaugust]

If you average out the league historically, I think the talent between conferences averages out. I am pretty sure the east has more chips.

Anyhow, sometimes I think fans of west coast BBall forget that the pendulum swings both ways.

a Top 16 system might be cool regardless of which conference is dominant in a given year but anyone thinking the west will be the best forever is not very wise.

[Hizack]

Good move, but not enough.

I personally want to see something like these happens:
(1)　　Scrap divisions
(2)　　Scrap conferences
(3)　　Elongate the RS and PS, shorten the summer break
(4)　　Reduce number of games in a RS from 82 to, say, 72
(5)　　Scrap back-to-backs
(6)　　For any team, schedule equal / near-equal number of games played against every other team in a RS
(7)　　Finally, get the best 16 teams into the Playoffs

[bdreason]

Drop the Conferences and keep the Divisions. Winner of each Division is guaranteed a playoff spot. The remaining 10 teams are seeded based on record.

[bdreason]

If you average out the league historically, I think the talent between conferences averages out. I am pretty sure the east has more chips.

Anyhow, sometimes I think fans of west coast BBall forget that the pendulum swings both ways.

a Top 16 system might be cool regardless of which conference is dominant in a given year but anyone thinking the west will be the best forever is not very wise.


It's been almost 20 years now, and I don't see the pendulum swinging back any time soon.

[Spurs5Rings2014]

wouldn't that be a really big problem for OKC ? are you an okc fan or not?

Beat me to it.

:oldlol:

[bigkingsfan]

So what's the point of division then. Might as well scrap it.

[bdreason]

So what's the point of division then. Might as well scrap it.



I think regional rivalries are good for the league.

[Sarcastic]

Dumb idea. Will never go through. No point in having conferences with this format.

[kamil]

LeBron* disapproves.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Good move, but not enough.

I personally want to see something like these happens:
(1)　　Scrap divisions
(2)　　Scrap conferences
(3)　　Elongate the RS and PS, shorten the summer break
(4)　　Reduce number of games in a RS from 82 to, say, 72
(5)　　Scrap back-to-backs
(6)　　For any team, schedule equal / near-equal number of games played against every other team in a RS
(7)　　Finally, get the best 16 teams into the Playoffs

So you want to jump the shark tank? In that case, I want to **** Halle Berry.

[bigkingsfan]

I think regional rivalries are good for the league.
You can still have regional rivalries without division. Not like it's football where you play everyone twice in your division and everyone else once.

[J Shuttlesworth]

Good move, but not enough.

I personally want to see something like these happens:
(1)　　Scrap divisions
(2)　　Scrap conferences
(3)　　Elongate the RS and PS, shorten the summer break
(4)　　Reduce number of games in a RS from 82 to, say, 72
(5)　　Scrap back-to-backs
(6)　　For any team, schedule equal / near-equal number of games played against every other team in a RS
(7)　　Finally, get the best 16 teams into the Playoffs
Agree with all these ideas.

[jzek]

Dumb idea. Will never go through.

So you think it's OK for a sub-0.500 team with a LOSING RECORD to go to the playoffs instead of a team with a winning record?

[Legends66NBA7]

I don't see the NBA agreeing to reduce regular season games.

[bigkingsfan]

So you think it's OK for a sub-0.500 team with a LOSING RECORD to go to the playoffs instead of a team with a winning record?
Knicks need all the help they can.

[ArbitraryWater]

Good move, but not enough.

I personally want to see something like these happens:
(1)　　Scrap divisions
(2)　　Scrap conferences
(3)　　Elongate the RS and PS, shorten the summer break
(4)　　Reduce number of games in a RS from 82 to, say, 72
(5)　　Scrap back-to-backs
(6)　　For any team, schedule equal / near-equal number of games played against every other team in a RS
(7)　　Finally, get the best 16 teams into the Playoffs

72? What the hell? So a team plays all teams 4x except 10 teams which they play 3x? You can' have 72 and point 6) as well.

Come on man... 58 games (each team twice), agree with the rest.

[aj1987]

:bowdown: Silver has done right by me so far.

Just needs to clean up the officiating and we'll be good.
Yeah, he needs to make sure that the Stick boy (KD) and bitch boy (Haren) do not get touch fouls all game long, preventing players from actually defending them.

[bdreason]

You can still have regional rivalries without division. Not like it's football where you play everyone twice in your division and everyone else once.


I'm pretty sure you play everyone in your division 4 times a year with the current NBA schedule. I'd like to see it at 5 times a year, that way you can determine who won the H2H matchup on the season.

[oarabbus]

If you average out the league historically, I think the talent between conferences averages out. I am pretty sure the east has more chips.

Anyhow, sometimes I think fans of west coast BBall forget that the pendulum swings both ways.

a Top 16 system might be cool regardless of which conference is dominant in a given year but anyone thinking the west will be the best forever is not very wise.


Uhh... so what? First of all the pendulum's been out west a LONG time...

And even if this WERE true, why would it make this not a good idea? Hypothetically in 10 years of the West is utter shit and the East is a powerhouse... I DON'T want sub-par shitty Western under .500 teams in the playoffs. If the East is wrecking everyone, then I would absolutely prefer that 12 East teams and only 4 West teams get in the playoffs. If every east team is better than all the West teams, so be it. All the East teams get in and only 1 West team gets in. That's how it should be, I want the most competitive playoffs possible.


Drop the Conferences and keep the Divisions. Winner of each Division is guaranteed a playoff spot. The remaining 10 teams are seeded based on record.

:applause:

[houston]

terrible

[Jasper]

Commish Silver was on Charlie Rose last night talked about Dolan, Sterling, about relieving the schedule of back to back games as well as new owner of Clips .. .

here is some of the take- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUH5jCMH2Oo

Unfortunately I could not get the vid part of him concentrating on the schedule and the parity that is in some ways in place and going forward.
He stated he is 100% in favor and protection of the small market teams and the players.

I think the NBA is in good hands with this guy.

[HurricaneKid]

Farewell rivalries!

[Bobcats2013]

If top 16 started today these would be the match ups

Warriors vs Pelicans
Hawks vs OKC
Suns vs Grizzlies
Raptors vs Bucks
Trailblazers vs Cavs
Rockets vs Wizards
Mavericks vs Bulls
Clippers vs Spurs

Bold = :eek:

[USABall]

I have nothing to offer to this thread except my happiness if this were to be finalized!

[Spurs5Rings2014]

I'm pretty sure you play everyone in your division 4 times a year with the current NBA schedule. I'd like to see it at 5 times a year, that way you can determine who won the H2H matchup on the season.

I don't like this 'playing teams in your division more than teams outside your division' nonsense at all. What if one division is STACKED while another has one good team? The STACKED division might have teams all better than that one team, but since they have to trade wins with each other while the one team in the garbage division gets to feast all year, that lower tier team ends up having a better record than it should.

All teams should play each other same number of times. Point. Blank. Period. It's the fairest way to do it. Having western conference teams play each other more and eastern conference teams play each other more still leaves much to be desired and continues to reward worse teams for playing in weaker conferences. Same with divisions. It's fine if they keep both, but they should just be for show and nothing more. What conference and division a team is lucky enough to be in shouldn't have any impact on how favorable their schedule ends up being for that season.

[Jud]

I already like Silvy more than I ever liked Stern

[pegasus]

If top 16 started today these would be the match ups

Warriors vs Pelicans
Hawks vs OKC
Suns vs Grizzlies
Raptors vs Bucks
Trailblazers vs Cavs
Rockets vs Wizards
Mavericks vs Bulls
Clippers vs Spurs

Bold = :eek:
Ratings would be through the roof.:eek:

[Roundball_Rock]

Ratings would be through the roof.:eek:

Not with the time differences. How many people in the east, other than hardcore fans and fans of the respective teams, are going to stay up to wait for a first round game in Portland to tip off at 10:30? The only way this could semi-work is drastically reducing the number of playoff games each night and therefore being able to start it around 9:00 ET (so people in the west are at home by then and so the game can end at a decent time for those in the east). Gone, though, would be the days of having a series of games at 7:30-8:00 and then another round at 10:00-10:30.

A plus would be this would drag out the playoffs for at least another month. :lol

[strike]

they better balance the schedules then

for example if elite east teams get higher seeding because they match up vs. inferior teams more often than i don't see how this becomes a fundamental shift. That is just one example
82 is such a stupid abritrary number. Why have 82 games??? The schedule should be balanced anyway. Everyone in the conference should have the exact same schedule. And if its gonn be top 16 then every team needs to have more or less the exact same fixtures

[Sarcastic]

So you think it's OK for a sub-0.500 team with a LOSING RECORD to go to the playoffs instead of a team with a winning record?

Yea why not? Seahawks did and won a playoff game. Is the NFL broken too?

[1987_Lakers]

The NBA should decrease the teams that get into the playoffs to 12, similar to the NFL. Let the 4 top teams record wise take the first round off and go from there. The NBA is the only sport where the best team usually wins the title, it's not like the NFL or MLB where a wild card team wins once in a while so there is no point in having a team that barley squeaked to 41-41 record into the postseason. Seriously, when was the last time a #5 seed won a title? Has it ever happened?

Of course the NBA will not do this because they will lose money.

[Roundball_Rock]

Seriously, when was the last time a #5 seed won a title? Has it ever happened.

I was curious and found this after reading your post found:


Out of the 67 NBA Finals played since 1947, here is the title distribution by regular season seeding.

#1 Seed: 48 (71.6%)
#2 Seed: 10 (14.9%)
#3 Seed: 7 (10.4%)
#4 Seed: 1 (1.5%)
#6 Seed: 1 (1.5%)
#5, 7, 8 Seeds: 0


http://www.sportingcharts.com/articles/nba/importance-of-seed-in-determining-nba-champions.aspx

[FLDFSU]

Yea why not? Seahawks did and won a playoff game. Is the NFL broken too?

That and when the same teams, the same players, and the same coaches continue to win championships I want to here the next excuse. In 5 years:

"But it is not fair that my Lakers had to travel all the way across the country to play Boston in round 1. If not for this stupid top 16 crap, my team would have 3 rings by now!"

[bluechox2]

make 4 divisions in each conference with one top teams in each division guaranteed a spot while the other 8 are seeded based on conference, then record

[tpols]

Not with the time differences. How many people in the east, other than hardcore fans and fans of the respective teams, are going to stay up to wait for a first round game in Portland to tip off at 10:30? The only way this could semi-work is drastically reducing the number of playoff games each night and therefore being able to start it around 9:00 ET (so people in the west are at home by then and so the game can end at a decent time for those in the east). Gone, though, would be the days of having a series of games at 7:30-8:00 and then another round at 10:00-10:30.

A plus would be this would drag out the playoffs for at least another month. :lol

lets be real.. the only reason youre against this is because bran would be facing a team like houston or the blazers in the first round instead of what theyll probably face in todays format.. which would be like the damn bucks or wizards.

[Sarcastic]

^^^ So basically we're making a fuss over two teams in the west that will get shunned from the playoffs, but they will have had a 0% chance to win it all had they even got in. Makes sense. :facepalm

[tpols]

^^^ So basically we're making a fuss over two teams in the west that will get shunned from the playoffs, but they will have had a 0% chance to win it all had they even got in. Makes sense. :facepalm

Uh.. who cares if they most likely won't win it all. That can be said of every playoff team save maybe 2 or 3 maybe 4 year to year. Most teams go in with little chance. But I would much rather see as competitive a first round series as possible.

[gts]

Drop the Conferences and keep the Divisions. Winner of each Division is guaranteed a playoff spot. The remaining 10 teams are seeded based on record.I think this is exactly what they're thinking about other than dropping the conferences

I like the idea, the playoffs should be about the best teams and this gets it at least closer to being that...

Not sure about the 44 minute game.. coaches will just give the bench players less time and keep the starters on the floor as it is now.. doesn't really accomplish anything other than resting the guys who don't need the rest

[Sarcastic]

Uh.. who cares if they most likely won't win it all. That can be said of every playoff team save maybe 2 or 3 maybe 4 year to year. Most teams go in with little chance. But I would much rather see as competitive a first round series as possible.

The first round isn't that important, nor should it be.

I hate Bran as much as anyone, but regardless of format his team's are making it the conference finals at least.

[tpols]

The first round isn't that important, nor should it be.

I hate Bran as much as anyone, but regardless of format his team's are making it the conference finals at least.
Not necessarily true..if you do this for last year's playoffs Miami would've been the 7th seed and face Dallas in the first round.. who took the spurs to seven and looked really good while Miami looked like shit against that same team. And if the heat somehow got by Dallas they'd be facing OKC in the second round.


That is waaaay more competitive than bobcat and nets and no lock at all. It's actually probably a lock that they'd be a first or second round exit.

[FLDFSU]

^^^ So basically we're making a fuss over two teams in the west that will get shunned from the playoffs, but they will have had a 0% chance to win it all had they even got in. Makes sense. :facepalm

:applause:

[FLDFSU]

Not necessarily true..if you do this for last year's playoffs Miami would've been the 7th seed and face Dallas in the first round.. who took the spurs to seven and looked really good while Miami looked like shit against that same team. And if the heat somehow got by Dallas they'd be facing OKC in the second round.


That is waaaay more competitive than bobcat and nets and no lock at all. It's actually probably a lock that they'd be a first or second round exit.

Do you ever stop thinking about Lebron? Every single one of your post you are either talking about him or his team?

[tpols]

Do you ever stop thinking about Lebron? Every single one of your post you are either talking about him or his team?
First off that's not true at all.. a gross exaggeration.

And why the fk would you care? Aren't you a Miami fan? Or are you rootin for Cleveland now?

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

The first round isn't that important, nor should it be.

I hate Bran as much as anyone, but regardless of format his team's are making it the conference finals at least.

Of course it's important. Just because you say it's not doesn't make it true, dickhead.

Keep the conferences, divisions, and just get the Top 16 teams to duel in the postseason

[bballnoob1192]

if it's gonna be top 16. i hope it's not 1-16, 2-15, 3-14, etc format. cuz that could lead to some really shitty series in the first round.

[Spurs5Rings2014]

Not necessarily true..if you do this for last year's playoffs Miami would've been the 7th seed and face Dallas in the first round.. who took the spurs to seven and looked really good while Miami looked like shit against that same team. And if the heat somehow got by Dallas they'd be facing OKC in the second round.


That is waaaay more competitive than bobcat and nets and no lock at all. It's actually probably a lock that they'd be a first or second round exit.

:applause:

[navy]

Not necessarily true..if you do this for last year's playoffs Miami would've been the 7th seed and face Dallas in the first round.. who took the spurs to seven and looked really good while Miami looked like shit against that same team. And if the heat somehow got by Dallas they'd be facing OKC in the second round.


That is waaaay more competitive than bobcat and nets and no lock at all. It's actually probably a lock that they'd be a first or second round exit.
Give Lebron a better Finals record. :confusedshrug:

[Magic 32]

Waiting just long enough to let Lebron get away with it.

:banghead:

This should be implemented RIGHT NOW!

[Megabox!]

Waiting just long enough to let Lebron get away with it.

:banghead:

This should be implemented RIGHT NOW!
I swear it seems like most of you clowns care more about Lebron losing than your own team winning. And how the hell did he even get brought up in this thread anyways? But back to the topic at hand I actually like it, soo many great matchups right out of the gate

[tpols]

Give Lebron a better Finals record. :confusedshrug:
Well I don't want to make brackets for every year of his career.. but he'd probably have less rings as well. Probably wouldn't have made the finals in 2007.. might've lost in 2013 as well.. roads would've been a lot tougher is whole career since the east has been weaker than the west considerably since like 99.

[navy]

Well I don't want to make brackets for every year of his career.. but he'd probably have less rings as well. Probably wouldn't have made the finals in 2007.. might've lost in 2013 as well.. roads would've been a lot tougher is whole career since the east has been weaker than the west considerably since like 99.
Hypothetical are just that. Hypothetical. he might have more rings as well as you never know what could have happened in the matchups for all the teams not just Lebrons.

[Magic 32]

Hypothetical are just that. Hypothetical. he might have more rings as well as you never know what could have happened in the matchups for all the teams not just Lebrons.

Lebron fans are the only fans who holds on to what they have and never dream of hypotheticals.

They know how lucky this SOB has been.

It could and should have been so much worse for him.

[navy]

Lebron fans are the only fans who holds on to what they have and never dream of hypotheticals.

They know how lucky this SOB has been.

It could and should have been so much worse for him.
lol. Kobe stans.

Imagine if your boy spent his whole career playing for the Hornets

No Phil Jackson, No Shaq. :lol

[Hizack]

Good move, but not enough.

I personally want to see something like these happens:
(1)　　Scrap divisions
(2)　　Scrap conferences
(3)　　Elongate the RS and PS, shorten the summer break
(4)　　Reduce number of games in a RS from 82 to, say, 72
(5)　　Scrap back-to-backs
(6)　　For any team, schedule equal / near-equal number of games played against every other team in a RS
(7)　　Finally, get the best 16 teams into the Playoffs72? What the hell? So a team plays all teams 4x except 10 teams which they play 3x? You can' have 72 and point 6) as well.

Come on man... 58 games (each team twice), agree with the rest.
72 is just an arbitrary number. I agree with the 58-game one too. In fact it is the perfect number........It is just too impossible for the league to reduce that much of revenue.......

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

lol. Kobe stans.

Imagine if your boy spent his whole career playing for the Hornets

No Phil Jackson, No Shaq. :lol

Not even remotely the same. Bad example, in my opinion.

[Magic 32]

lol. Kobe stans.

Imagine if your boy spent his whole career playing for the Hornets

No Phil Jackson, No Shaq. :lol

No Shaq?

I thought Kobe won zero "real" rings with Shaq.

Imagine that. Imagine winning 3 rings that doesn't count, and then being relegated to playing with Smush and Kwame in your prime.

That's some bad luck right there.

[Mr. Jabbar]

lebron thinking early retirement

[navy]

No Shaq?

I thought Kobe won zero "real" rings with Shaq.

Imagine that. Winning 3 rings that doesn't count, and then playing with Smush and Kwame in your prime.

That's some bad luck right there.

Hypothetically speaking of course.

How many rings does Kobe have if he was played for the Hornets his whole career. Just give me a number.

[Magic 32]

Hypothetically speaking of course.

How many rings does Kobe have if he was played for the Hornets hos whole career. Just give me a number.

His whole career?

More than zero I'm guessing (he did it with Pau and a crackhead after all).

Or at least he would get the stats that Shaq took away, or the deep playoffs runs that you get for free in the east.

[navy]

His whole career?

More than zero I'm guessing (he did it with Pau and a crackhead after all).

Or at least he would get the stats that Shaq took away, or the deep playoffs runs that you get for free in the east.
Pau and Odom were definitely solid players. Plus they were coached by Phil Jackson.

Hornets are in the West. Move them East and what? Deep playoff runs, more Finals loses?

[Magic 32]

Hornets are in the West.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/CHH/1997.html

[navy]

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/CHH/1997.html
Alright, moved West in 2001-2002

[The Iron Sheik]

What are the chance of a different title winner from recent years ?

Does the team with the most talent, best coaching, best system, etc... still win or will there be a surprise team ?

it won't make a difference. best teams will still win. they'll just have to beat more inferior teams on the way to the title.

[Magic 32]

Alright, moved West in 2001-2002

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/NOH/2003.html

[tpols]

Hypothetical are just that. Hypothetical. he might have more rings as well as you never know what could have happened in the matchups for all the teams not just Lebrons.

I know. Guy responded to me said LeBron led teams would be "at worst ecf teams no matter the format".. that clearly isn't true based on hypothetical matchups in the newly proposed format. Theres no way he would have more rings. His opponents and roads would all be tougher.

[navy]

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/NOH/2003.html
lol, 04-05 for sure

[navy]

I know. Guy responded to me said LeBron led teams would be "at worst ecf teams no matter the format".. that clearly isn't true based on hypothetical matchups in the newly proposed format. Theres no way he would have more rings. His opponents and roads would all be tougher.
"No way". Like I said, hypothetical are hypothetical. "Tougher opponents" might have been weaker based on match ups and timing faced. Might have avoided the Celtic teams, the Mavericks, Spurs might have lost in different rounds. "No Way" any of that happens though. Which just isnt true.

[Magic 32]

lol, 04-05 for sure

So he gets 8 years to stretch he's legs in the East (96-04)?

http://worldonline.media.clients.ellingtoncms.com/img/photos/2003/06/15/sptsnbafinals_t640.jpg?a6ea3ebd4438a44b86d2e9c39ec f7613005fe067

[navy]

So he gets 8 years to stretch he's legs in the East?

8 years and no/less rings. :confusedshrug:

Im sure he would definitely would pick the Hornets if he could do it again.

[Magic 32]

8 years and no/less rings. :confusedshrug:

But Kobe never won real rings during that time anyway right?

Sure making the finals from the east side would be better.

He could join these guys...

http://s29.postimg.org/a8mi6c26v/Mountrushmore.jpg

[Sarcastic]

Of course it's important. Just because you say it's not doesn't make it true, dickhead.

Keep the conferences, divisions, and just get the Top 16 teams to duel in the postseason


It's important, but the 1 and 2 seeds will still win >90% of the time. The 3 seed might be upset a few more times. The 4 and 5 match up is really the only toss up spot there is.

[tpols]

"No way". Like I said, hypothetical are hypothetical. "Tougher opponents" might have been weaker based on match ups and timing faced. Might have avoided the Celtic teams, the Mavericks, Spurs might have lost in different rounds. "No Way" any of that happens though. Which just isnt true.

Saying they might have been weaker based on matchup.. there's no way to twist maverick vs bobcat. No way to twist okc vs nets. Theyre flat out better competition. And you can run it through his whole career. East has been weaker.. if he had to face west teams in first or second round it wouldve been way tougher. He's 40% against west in the playoffs.. this won't bode well for you.

[sdot_thadon]

Not a big fan of this. If you change it tradition goes out of the window. Rivalries are pretty much done and besides none of the previous generations cared who made the playoffs and with what records. Wonder why it matters so much all of a sudden.

[Magic 32]

Not a big fan of this. If you change it tradition goes out of the window. Rivalries are pretty much done and besides none of the previous generations cared who made the playoffs and with what records. Wonder why it matters so much all of a sudden.

It has mattered for 15 years now.

But nobody did anything about it.

[tpols]

It's important, but the 1 and 2 seeds will still win >90% of the time. The 3 seed might be upset a few more times. The 4 and 5 match up is really the only toss up spot there is.

True.. but according to seeding Miami would've been a 7th out of 16th seed in 2014.. nowhere near "true contenders" yet they were in the finals based on a shitty format.

[navy]

Saying they might have been weaker based on matchup.. there's no way to twist maverick vs bobcat. No way to twist okc vs nets. Theyre flat out better competition. And you can run it through his whole career. East has been weaker.. if he had to face west teams in first or second round it wouldve been way tougher. He's 40% against west in the playoffs.. this won't bode well for you.
40% against the Western teams that made the Finals, but like I just said if we are switching the the brackets around for hypothetical reasons you are also suggesting there is the chance that they dont make the finals because they also had different brackets.

[Magic 32]

It's important, but the 1 and 2 seeds will still win >90% of the time. The 3 seed might be upset a few more times. The 4 and 5 match up is really the only toss up spot there is.

But it can also help undeserving players win all-star spots and even MVP awards.

And the "getting out of the first round" stigma exist solely because everyone could get out of the first round in the east for the last 15 years (minus T-Mac).

A 41-41 team made the second round for god sake:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/NJN/2007.html

[DatAsh]

Not a big fan of this. If you change it tradition goes out of the window. Rivalries are pretty much done and besides none of the previous generations cared who made the playoffs and with what records. Wonder why it matters so much all of a sudden.

It matters because the East has been so atrocious in the past few years. The West is a true battle in every round; the East is basically a free ride to the conference finals for the 2 best teams.

[houston]

it won't make a difference. best teams will still win. they'll just have to beat more inferior teams on the way to the title.

exactly with this

[Magic 32]

exactly with this

So you don't think a bad matchup could have beaten a champion...ever?

2012 Spurs vs Heat?
2006 Spurs vs Heat?

[tpols]

40% against the Western teams that made the Finals, but like I just said if we are switching the the brackets around for hypothetical reasons you are also suggesting there is the chance that they dont make the finals because they also had different brackets.

Yea.. if they faced west teams in the first rounds it likely would've led to a better percentage against the west since they wouldn't be facing the best of the west.. but those lesser west teams were still better than the lesser east teams and thus would've presented a greater challenge and very likely worse results. So they would've won less over the time were talking about overall.. kinda ridiculous to say "it's all hypothetical! They might've win more!" Just defying all logic.

[houston]

So you don't think a bad matchup could have beaten a champion...ever?

2012 Spurs vs Heat?
2006 Spurs vs Heat?


the thing is Spurs lost both them years against Thunder and Mavs. The point is in the NBA it only a legit 3-5 teams that are going to win anyways everything else is fools gold. It a reason fron 99-2010 Shaq,Kobe, and Duncan played in multi finals. It always same ol players going to the Finals.

Hell what with this competition edge stuff. Lakers in 80's went to the finals 8 out of ten years. Talent wins in the NBA period.

[Sarcastic]

But it can also help undeserving players win all-star spots and even MVP awards.

And the "getting out of the first round" stigma exist solely because everyone could get out of the first round in the east for the last 15 years (minus T-Mac).

A 41-41 team made the second round for god sake:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/NJN/2007.html


All this is irrelevant stuff, except to nerds on forums like this.

[Magic 32]

the thing is Spurs lost both them years against Thunder and Mavs. The point is in the NBA it only a legit 3-5 teams that are going to win anyways everything else is fools gold.

But 4 out of those 5 legit teams usually resides in the west.

And by the way, I think the 2006 Spurs would have been a nightmare for the Heat.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200512070SAS.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/200601200MIA.html

These games were over before halftime.

[Magic 32]

All this is irrelevant stuff, except to nerds on forums like this.

I think T-Mac would disagree with that...

http://pclayer.com/images/2012/05/Tracy-Mcgrady-%E2%80%93-The-Second-Round-Virgin-iPhone-Wallpaper1-150x150.png

[Sarcastic]

It matters because the East has been so atrocious in the past few years. The West is a true battle in every round; the East is basically a free ride to the conference finals for the 2 best teams.


Go look over the past 5 or 6 years. I can assure the top 2 seeds from the East did not cake walk to the ECF, and half the time the top 2 didn't both make it.

[T_L_P]

Sarcastic is shook.

He knows if this goes through the Knicks won't make the Playoffs for at least another half decade. :oldlol:

Pathetic. :oldlol:

Fans of lower seeded Eastern teams. :oldlol:

[sdot_thadon]

It matters because the East has been so atrocious in the past few years. The West is a true battle in every round; the East is basically a free ride to the conference finals for the 2 best teams.
The east has been weak since the 90s though. In the 80s didn't teams make the postseason with 30 something wins? I don't remember the exact numbers but it's said fairly often that the west was weak during the 80s. That's why I wonder why now it is an issue that requires action. You do this might as well trash conferences all together.

[TheReal Kendall]

Definitely need to do the Top 16 teams. This year playoffs have been soooo boring.

[BigBoss]

Adam Silver is so alpha

[Sportal]

People talk about "rivalries", but there are none.. Not really..

Not like Lakers vs Celtics.. They are more likely to play each other in this new format than in the current.. You could end up having powerhouse 1st round matchups that turn into yearly rivalries quite easily.

Someone did make a point to me where the big markets and fanbases are in the East and you might alienate a lot of viewers.. But if this happened then the lottery should work out better too.