Should the NBA Playoffs be best 16 records, regardless of conference

What about having each division winner make the NBA playoffs, but aside from that, the best teams by record, regardless of conference or division?

Pros? Cons?

why have conferences then?

and if we're gonna rip apart the conferences, take out the divisions as well - cause why should a team in a division get a good spot for being 42-40 and in another division, a team gets slighted for having a 52-30 record...

Too much traveling and whatnot if we were to have no conferences. It's fine the way it is, it makes the lesser teams in the eastern conference feel like they are still in it! and out west, things are still very competitive...

They should have done it years ago, IMO. Wouldn't it be much more interesting, in 2002 for example, to have a finals' series of LAL-Sac, instead of the LAL-NJ thing? Or to have Finals' series between Boston-Philadelphia, Chicago-New York, Lakers-Blazers and so on? East-West should only be a matter of All Star Games.
The only disadvantage I think of right now is that a fair 82-game schedule will still be practically impossible and that, among else, team travels would become more tiresome, since eastern and western teams would have to face each other an equal number of times.

[QUOTE=brwnman]why have conferences then?

and if we're gonna rip apart the conferences, take out the divisions as well - cause why should a team in a division get a good spot for being 42-40 and in another division, a team gets slighted for having a 52-30 record...

Too much traveling and whatnot if we were to have no conferences. [B]It's fine the way it is, it makes the lesser teams in the eastern conference feel like they are still in it![/B] and out west, things are still very competitive...[/QUOTE]

I'm not worried about the feelings of the fans/players of mediocre teams. The best teams in the league should absolutely make the playoffs. Blow-up the system and start again. I wouldn't mind extending the season, playing fewer games and having everyone play everyone twice before the playoffs.

i dont want to screw up conferences and divisions---those are important.

but....they need to institute some kind of "play-in" games to round out the bottom 16. Philly and NJ might not win 40 games and they're in but Dallas or Denver might not make it with 48 wins?

no... what then would be the motivation for a team like atlanta, new jersey or toronto to keep playing? you'd have had teams tanking for 3 months now if the playoffs were the top 16 overall....

right now a team like toronto (just an example raptors fans) feels they may be that one player away from competing in the east as a top 4 team, in a top 16 format suddenly they are in fact 2 players away from even making the playoffs alone, and probably 3 away from making any noise if they got there and forget about being one of the two finalists...



it will balance out slowly but surely, you have 4 good teams in the east now and a couple others that are one or two players away from being contenders...

[QUOTE=Psileas]They should have done it years ago, IMO. Wouldn't it be much more interesting, in 2002 for example, to have a finals' series of LAL-Sac, instead of the LAL-NJ thing? Or to have Finals' series between Boston-Philadelphia, Chicago-New York, Lakers-Blazers and so on? East-West should only be a matter of All Star Games.
The only disadvantage I think of right now is that a fair 82-game schedule will still be practically impossible and that, among else, team travels would become more tiresome, since eastern and western teams would have to face each other an equal number of times.[/QUOTE]
agreed.

teams travel in chartered jets today. with the one day off between playoff games (2 to travel?) and film sessions available on flights in dvds i don't think the travel would even be that bad. hell jfk to lax today really doesn't take that long compared to teams years ago who had to fly commercial or even bus to the closer cities.

this offers the fans the best matchups and gives all teams a fair shot at winning the ring, and i think those should be top priorities of any sports league.

Get rid of the 82 game regular season. Make a 32-team tournament and run it twice a year.

[QUOTE=gts]no... what then would be the motivation for a team like atlanta, new jersey or toronto to keep playing? [B]you'd have had teams tanking for 3 months now if the playoffs were the top 16 overall[/B]....

right now a team like toronto (just an example raptors fans) feels they may be that one player away from competing in the east as a top 4 team, in a top 16 format suddenly they are in fact 2 players away from even making the playoffs alone, and probably 3 away from making any noise if they got there and forget about being one of the two finalists...



it will balance out slowly but surely, you have 4 good teams in the east now and a couple others that are one or two players away from being contenders...[/QUOTE]

I don't know about that...I don't think anything would change in that regard because all of the sudden Sac and Portland are back in the race if anything fighting for those last couple of positions becomes more intense.

I like the idea of 1 playing 16, 2 v 15 and so on and seeing new inter conference playoff series would be good.

The NBA should get rid of the 82 game format and strictly evolve to tournament play. There is currently 30 teams in the NBA, add two additional franchises. Then have a total of three tournaments spanning from November to June These tournaments will feature best of seven series from all 32-teams. The way you set up the brackets is through lottery. Each team will be randomally placed in their brackets. There isn't 1v32 2v31 matchups. We won't know what teams will play. So it becomes highly unpredictable who matches up. And the way teams are picked randomally will determine who gets the four home games and what team gets the three road games.

First tournament Nov 1 - Jan 10: 2007-2008 Winter Ball
Second tournament Jan 28 - March 13: 2007-2008 Mid-Season Ball
Third tournament April 1 - May 30: 2007-2008 Road to the Finals
--> Bracket the third tournament according to their performance in the first two tournaments. Have 1v32 2v31, etc here since you have an idea how to bracket each team.

Make each tournament mean something. The big prize should go to the winner of the tournament. Say each tournament winner receives a check of $30 million. Second place, $25 million. Third place-fourth place $20 million. Fifth-8th place $15 million. 8th-16th place $10 million. 16th-32th place $5 million. The cash will be distributed to the team based on individual performance. Or some kind of formula dished out. Therefore, if you never pass the first round, you won't be rewarded a lot of money. And if you make a lot of money, you must play on a good team, and very talented.

[QUOTE=Run&Gun=Fun]I don't know about that...I don't think anything would change in that regard because all of the sudden Sac and Portland are back in the race if anything fighting for those last couple of positions becomes more intense.

I like the idea of 1 playing 16, 2 v 15 and so on and seeing new inter conference playoff series would be good.[/QUOTE]your right in that, but they are still not in the playoffs, and you just took 2 teams out of any chance of making the playoffs.... that's where my tankers came from...

the only teams that benefit from a new playoff format this season would be western conference teams, so i don't see how this format adresses the difference between the two conferences and in fact only serves to make the east appear to be even more of a second tier conference then they already do.

I like the Playoffs as they are.

Its worked for years the way its been set up but just because we have one year when a 50 win team will miss the Playoffs in the West while a 45 loss team will make the Playoffs in the East we all of a sudden need to change the format.

Think.

If The Best 16 Records Were In The Playoffs
10 Western Conference Teams
6 Eastern Conference Teams

The NBA Lottery Would Be:
9 Eastern Conference Teams
5 Western Conference Teams

Thats an unfair advantage on both sides for each conference,our current Playoff System is fine unless we allow the top 4 seeds in each conference to get a 1st Round Bye.

And the Playoffs would be expanded to include 12 teams

Some think that weak teams in the East are benefiting from having a weak conference, but it is just the opposite. Bad team that make the playoffs end up with lower draft picks than better teams in the stronger conference that do not make the playoffs. This just makes the strong conference even stronger.

This playoff system would keep the conferences and divisions important, but would also work for years in which a conference or divisions within a conference are weak.[LIST][*]Conference winners are the top 2 seeds on each half of a 16 team playoff.[/LIST][LIST][*]The next 6 seeds would be the 4 division winners (that did not win their conference), and the team with best record from each conference that is not among those first 6. So, 4 teams from each conference make up the top 4 seeds in each half of the bracket. Seeding (except for the conference winners which are automatic 1 seeds), would be done by record. Tie breakers would be head to head matchups, team with fewer teams from their conf in playoffs, +/- total points, coin flip. That would be the top 8 seeds.[/LIST][LIST][*]The bottom 8 seeds would be taken from the best 8 remaining records league wide. Tie breakers would be head to head matchups, team with fewer teams from their conf in playoffs, +/- total points, coin flip.[/LIST][LIST][*]Better record would get the home court during each round of the playoffs, with tie breakers being head to head matchups, +/- total points, coin flip.[/LIST]

[QUOTE=vert48]Some think that weak teams in the East are benefiting from having a weak conference, but it is just the opposite. Bad team that make the playoffs end up with lower draft picks than better teams in the stronger conference that do not make the playoffs. This just makes the strong conference even stronger.

This playoff system would keep the conferences and divisions important, but would also work for years in which a conference or divisions within a conference are weak.[LIST][*]Conference winners are the top 2 seeds on each half of a 16 team playoff.[/LIST][LIST][*]The next 6 seeds would be the 4 division winners (that did not win their conference), and the team with best record from each conference that is not among those first 6. So, 4 teams from each conference make up the top 4 seeds in each half of the bracket. Seeding (except for the conference winners which are automatic 1 seeds), would be done by record. Tie breakers would be head to head matchups, team with fewer teams from their conf in playoffs, +/- total points, coin flip. That would be the top 8 seeds.[/LIST][LIST][*]The bottom 8 seeds would be taken from the best 8 remaining records league wide. Tie breakers would be head to head matchups, team with fewer teams from their conf in playoffs, +/- total points, coin flip.[/LIST][LIST][*]Better record would get the home court during each round of the playoffs, with tie breakers being head to head matchups, +/- total points, coin flip.[/LIST][/QUOTE]

players from East don't wanna play in the West because of stiff competition, we're saying that East is weak conference... weak competition... any superstar will have a free path to the finals...

then why not do the vice-versa... superstars from West why not play in the East, for lesser competition and an easy path to the finals... they can play in Boston a core of young players and a college coach guy... :confusedshrug:

Either make it like the NFL (where teams in the same geographic region can be either AFC or NFC) or make it top 16