PDA

View Full Version : The East and West - who's better?



Boston Faithful
02-25-2009, 05:58 AM
The East is basically a five team conference, with three other sub to .500 teams and the rest a bunch of mediocre teams. The amazing thing is that the East could potentially have three 60 win teams (Celtics, Cavs, Magic), two potential 50 win teams (Hawks with an 18-8 finish and Heat with a 20-6 finish) but the rest could finish below 41 wins (Pistons and Philly stand at 27-28)

The West has much more depth - 9 teams that are as good as the top four in the East. But then after the 9 they have 6 out of the 7 worst teams in the NBA. The West could finish with 8 or 9 50 win teams yet again.

So really who has the better conference?

The Celtics, Cavs and Magic are three out of the four best teams in the NBA. And an argument can be made that the Heat and Hawks rank in there with the bottom 6, 7 and 8 West teams. But the rest of the East is mediocre and beyond the 9 teams in the West, the rest of the bunch sucks. A case could be made those nine teams are so good because they feed off the bottom horrendous six teams.

I've been thinking about this for awhile - but I think it's only inevitable that after 2010 the East will be much better. The Celtics will still be very good and either the Knicks or Cavs will be on top. The Magic will be good for years and the Pistons (Boozer?)and Nets are in great position with their cap. Factor in Chicago growing with Rose (and maybe signing Bosh in 2010) and the Heat with Wade (and a potential 2010 signee).

The West has nowhere to go but down. The Spurs are aging, the Suns are aging as well (and probably will lose Amare now or in 2010) and the Mavs don't have much left either for another year or two. Will the Rockets even retain McGrady or Artest long term either?

That leaves the West with the Lakers, Hornets, Blazers, Thunder, Jazz and Nuggets as the long term teams in the West.

If I would have to give a final verdict - I think after the first round in the playoffs the East are hands down better but overall the West has a slight edge at this point - but the gap has definitely lessened significantly since the beginning of the decade thanks to the rise of the Celtics, Cavs and Magic as potential 60 win teams.

Kyle916
02-25-2009, 06:49 AM
The West has more quality.

I agree that the West's sun is setting...

JordansBulls
02-25-2009, 09:35 AM
http://www.boxscorebasketball.com/eastwest.htm

still1ballin
02-25-2009, 11:44 AM
West is still better. The Heat in the west would be far from the playoff race.

JJ81
02-25-2009, 12:30 PM
West.

m26555
02-25-2009, 01:15 PM
The East has the best team in Boston, but the West is much, much deeper. The ninth seed in the West has the same record as the fourth seed in the East.

Kyle N.
02-25-2009, 01:33 PM
The West is better but not by much.

Missing56&33
02-25-2009, 01:40 PM
The East is basically a five team conference, with three other sub to .500 teams and the rest a bunch of mediocre teams.

The East 5-8 seeds are probably the most dangerous teams in the playoffs. Hawks-Heat-sixers-bucks-knicks are capable of forcing a 7th game with any of the top 3 seeds

Lindystud36
02-25-2009, 01:58 PM
The East is basically a five team conference, with three other sub to .500 teams and the rest a bunch of mediocre teams.

The East 5-8 seeds are probably the most dangerous teams in the playoffs. Hawks-Heat-sixers-bucks-knicks are capable of forcing a 7th game with any of the top 3 seeds

The hawks went deeper into the series than the lakers did with boston last year

HiphopRelated
02-25-2009, 02:05 PM
West is still better. The Heat in the west would be far from the playoff race.
nope

Heat would have a much better record feasting on the garbage of 10-15 in the West. A 3rd of the West isn't even competitive. It's almost March and Sacramento doesn't have a win vs the East

East has 1 team under 20 wins, West has 5

nd4T.O.
02-25-2009, 02:19 PM
West is varsity while East remains the JV league...Phx 9th in the west would be 4th in the East

what54!?
02-25-2009, 02:22 PM
The east is better but the western conference playoff teams are more competitive

HOZ THE KNICK
02-25-2009, 02:26 PM
the east is a lot more fun too watch.

Fireworld
02-25-2009, 02:26 PM
West easy

nyybronxborn
02-25-2009, 02:48 PM
the top 3 teams from the east are better then the top team in the west
east by a--------------------------------------------long shot

alem0022
02-25-2009, 02:58 PM
I'll have to go with the West if Ginobili's ankle is alright and Duncan's knee doesn't become a problem.

Leafsleeve
02-25-2009, 05:28 PM
The East is where the trophy is.

Lost Art
02-25-2009, 05:31 PM
The east has more crappy teams as well as more elite teams. I'd say that accumulating W's would be tougher in the West because of the amount of quality teams that you have to play night in and night out..........but the road to the finals is going to be tougher in the east because the three powerhouses are going to have to pass through each other before reaching the finals.

what54!?
02-25-2009, 05:33 PM
The east has more crappy teams as well as more elite teams. I'd say that accumulating W's would be tougher in the West because of the amount of quality teams that you have to play night in and night out..........but the road to the finals is going to be tougher in the east because the three powerhouses are going to have to pass through each other before reaching the finals.
So the thunder, grizzles, T-wolves, clippers, and kings are quality teams?

Lost Art
02-25-2009, 05:37 PM
So the thunder, grizzles, T-wolves, clippers, and kings are quality teams?

No, those are awful teams. But there are many more awful teams in the eastern conference. Even some of the teams in the playoff picture in the eastern conference are pretty awful. The west only has 6 teams under 0.500.........while the east has 10. And the 4th seed in the eastern conference standings would be in 10th place in the western conference. See the difference?

still1ballin
02-25-2009, 08:03 PM
nope

Heat would have a much better record feasting on the garbage of 10-15 in the West. A 3rd of the West isn't even competitive. It's almost March and Sacramento doesn't have a win vs the East

East has 1 team under 20 wins, West has 5

So?

Like I said, the Heat are like what? 31-27? Put them in the West, and they would not make the playoffs. Had the Heat been in the West, they would of been below .500 because they would have to play tougher teams 4 times out of the year rather the teams like the Bucks who are below. 500 sitting in 8th spot.

oldenpolynice
02-25-2009, 08:11 PM
The West is deeper. The East is stronger up top.

Ranking the title contenders, I'd go like this:

1. Cavaliers
2. Lakers
3. Celtics
4. Spurs
5. Nuggets
6. Magic
7. Jazz
8. Rockets
9. Blazers
10. Hornets

So I guess it just depends on your individual preference. Do you like the East because they have 2 of the 3 top contenders? Or do you like the West because they have 7 of the top 10?

lorenz00
02-25-2009, 08:22 PM
west no for the first 9 teams but other in the west are soft lol...

in the east 14-6 rank are close

DCB/LAL
02-25-2009, 08:30 PM
The West is deeper. The East is stronger up top.

Ranking the title contenders, I'd go like this:

1. Cavaliers
2. Lakers
3. Celtics
4. Spurs
5. Nuggets
6. Magic
7. Jazz
8. Rockets
9. Blazers
10. Hornets

So I guess it just depends on your individual preference. Do you like the East because they have 2 of the 3 top contenders? Or do you like the West because they have 7 of the top 10?

Or do you like the West becuse they have 3 of the top 5?? This is quite simple actually. Why dont you look at it this way if the east has 3 60win teams its because theirs only 4 teams that are good!! I mean they have teams under .500 making the playoffs where as the west might have a 50 win team miss the playoffs this shouldnt even be a question me as a laker fan i would love to face the sixers, knicks, bulls, bucks, all those teams rather than a Utah or PHX or Houston wouldnt you

MakaSizzle
02-25-2009, 08:32 PM
Why is the East winning head-to-head if the West is that much better/deeper?

cambovenzi
02-25-2009, 08:39 PM
Why is the East winning head-to-head if the West is that much better/deeper?

a few horrible teams against the east really bring down the head-to-head totals.
the last place kings for example are 0-22 against the east.
what on earth does that have to do with the top 9 teams in the west being very good? not much.

DCB/LAL
02-25-2009, 08:39 PM
Everyone acts as if the bottom teams matter maybe the reason those teams are so bad is because they gotta face teams like the 9 teams that are fighting for a playoff spot 3 or 4 times a year the only teams that really matter except only to their loyal fans are the teams that make the playoffs and fact is in the west any team that makes the playoffs has a chance to make the finals and win where as in the east you only have 4 teams that have a legit chance

Leafsleeve
02-25-2009, 09:21 PM
Nobody mentions the Hawks cuz there not in the top three, don't forget they took Boston to 7 last year and could beat anyone in a series @ anytime, they are very athletic.

still1ballin
02-25-2009, 10:56 PM
Nobody mentions the Hawks cuz there not in the top three, don't forget they took Boston to 7 last year and could beat anyone in a series @ anytime, they are very athletic.

I agree, the Hawks will get the job done next time against Boston.

mrblisterdundee
02-25-2009, 11:00 PM
The East is better this year. There is no doubt about it. The Lakers and San Antonio are the only contending teams in the West. But the Western Conference is also young and talented, so watch out for the future less it should run you over like a freight train.

jrodmesche
02-25-2009, 11:09 PM
West is still better. The Heat in the west would be far from the playoff race.

you dont know what your talkin about, look at how well the heat have done on their west side trips, and they would easily get more wins from all the bottom feeders you have out west

Lakersfan2483
02-25-2009, 11:17 PM
The East has 3 top teams in Boston, Cleveland and Orlando. The West has LA, San Antonio, Utah, New Orleans, Houston, Denver, Portland it's a far deeper conference. The bottom teams like Phoenix and Dallas may win close to 50 games and not even make it to the postseason. In terms of the East, teams that are barely .500 make it to the playoffs. The gap is not as large as it was, but the West is still the tougher conference overall.

still1ballin
02-25-2009, 11:32 PM
you dont know what your talkin about, look at how well the heat have done on their west side trips, and they would easily get more wins from all the bottom feeders you have out west

Try playing them 4 times out of the year. West has 6 teams below .500 and the East has 9 teams not counting Philly which are currently .500 at 28-28. Dude it is not rocket science to determine which is the better conference. Do the math.

I rather play boston/magic/cavs 4 times in a year rather than spurs/denver/houston/portland/hornets/utah/dallas/suns.

DCB/LAL
02-25-2009, 11:39 PM
If you put a team like Utah, NO, or DEN in the east i bet they'd be close to 60 wins too the east is weak outside of the Celtics/Cavs/Magic/Hawks

Jaji
02-25-2009, 11:56 PM
East is better. West has the quantity but East has the quality. Boston > everyone in the West. Cleveland has the LeBron factor.

DCB/LAL
02-25-2009, 11:59 PM
East is better. West has the quantity but East has the quality. Boston > everyone in the West. Cleveland has the LeBron factor.

Funny you say that cause if i remember they lost twice to LA and if i remember correctly they lost to SA but its cool whatever floats your boat

Jaji
02-26-2009, 12:05 AM
Funny you say that cause if i remember they lost twice to LA and if i remember correctly they lost to SA but its cool whatever floats your boat

Yea but I remember the Celtics whupping on the Lakers in the Finals too so...

Those were 2 games LA had to win (well at least they had to win one) just so they would have the nerve to even show up should they meet Boston in the finals again. I don't think the Celtics lost too much sleep over those losses.

DCB/LAL
02-26-2009, 12:14 AM
Yea but I remember the Celtics whupping on the Lakers in the Finals too so...

Those were 2 games LA had to win (well at least they had to win one) just so they would have the nerve to even show up should they meet Boston in the finals again. I don't think the Celtics lost too much sleep over those losses.

Living in the past man get over it the year before last year SA won the champioship and that didnt matter the next year did it?? Didnt think so if anything boston has yet to prove they can beat LA this year and they haven't you cant tell me it meant nothing because if i remember correctly rivers got fined for crying about the game

G-Funk
02-26-2009, 12:18 AM
East - Wins: 436 Losses: 424 Total Games: 860


West - Wins: 421 Losses: 430 Total Games: 851


Playoff Teams 1-8


East - Wins: 277 Losses: 177 Total Games: 454

West - Wins: 297 Losses: 135 Total Games: 432

G-Funk
02-26-2009, 12:20 AM
Yea but I remember the Celtics whupping on the Lakers in the Finals too so...

Those were 2 games LA had to win (well at least they had to win one) just so they would have the nerve to even show up should they meet Boston in the finals again. I don't think the Celtics lost too much sleep over those losses.

No, they only lost 2 win streaks and the first 1 hurt the most.

Jaji
02-26-2009, 12:21 AM
Living in the past man get over it the year before last year SA won the champioship and that didnt matter the next year did it?? Didnt think so if anything boston has yet to prove they can beat LA this year and they haven't you cant tell me it meant nothing because if i remember correctly rivers got fined for crying about the game

Silly me. I didn't realize I was talking to a Lakers fan :laugh2:

The Celtics are the defending champs RIGHT NOW because they embarrassed the Lakers. The post season is what matters. Who cares if the Lakers won 2 in the regular season? I'm sure they'd trade those 2 wins for the 'ship. Get real. Boston won when it counted most.

Besides, the Lakers didn't beat Boston tonight so isn't all in the past? :confused:

DODGERS&LAKERS
02-26-2009, 12:25 AM
The only teams that matter are playoff teams. So in that sense, the west in much tougher. Especially for the number 1 seeds.

The Cavs at this point would face the 28-32 Bucks right now. With no Redd. Then maybe the Hawks or Miami. I think everyone knows neither are a threat. Then they will get a good series with most likely the Celtics.

The Lakers are going to face Utah, then either the Blazers or Rockets, then the Spurs.

I would rather be the number 1 seed in the east. You are pretty much getting 2 byes into the eastern conference finals.

DCB/LAL
02-26-2009, 12:27 AM
Silly me. I didn't realize I was talking to a Lakers fan :laugh2:

The Celtics are the defending champs RIGHT NOW because they embarrassed the Lakers. The post season is what matters. Who cares if the Lakers won 2 in the regular season? I'm sure they'd trade those 2 wins for the 'ship. Get real. Boston won when it counted most.

Besides, the Lakers didn't beat Boston tonight so isn't all in the past? :confused:

Yes it is in the past hmm if boston was the same team that won last year they wouldnt be signing stephon they sign him because they know that with the team they have they wont beat LA or CLE they hope that signing steph that'll take them over the top they know they need help if they want a chance to repeat and that perfectly fine LA is a new monter this year so is CLE and ORL and if i must i will correct it last season has nothing to do with this season is that better for you??

KIDDSNETS0324
02-26-2009, 12:28 AM
Everyone acts as if the bottom teams matter maybe the reason those teams are so bad is because they gotta face teams like the 9 teams that are fighting for a playoff spot 3 or 4 times a year the only teams that really matter except only to their loyal fans are the teams that make the playoffs and fact is in the west any team that makes the playoffs has a chance to make the finals and win where as in the east you only have 4 teams that have a legit chance

or is the top teams so good because they play trash like the clippers, kings, thunder, and grizzlies. who has a combined 16-69 record against the east
im tired of people saying one CONFERENCE is better than another but only include several teams in a conference to prove a point. so what if a 9th seed in the west will be 4th in the east. 3rd seed in the east will be 2nd in the west.
some teams in the west look stronger because they play trashy teams, while the trash in the east is the wizards, bobcats, pacers, and raptors
i believe 1-15 the east is better

Lakersfan2483
02-26-2009, 12:33 AM
The only teams that matter are playoff teams. So in that sense, the west in much tougher. Especially for the number 1 seeds.

The Cavs at this point would face the 28-32 Bucks right now. With no Redd. Then maybe the Hawks or Miami. I think everyone knows neither are a threat. Then they will get a good series with most likely the Celtics.

The Lakers are going to face Utah, then either the Blazers or Rockets, then the Spurs.

I would rather be the number 1 seed in the east. You are pretty much getting 2 byes into the eastern conference finals.

Talk about a cakewalk in the first round, the Cavs would face the Bucks in round 1. (Redd is gone for the year) It's much harder in the west, esp. in the first round and second round.

Lakersfan2483
02-26-2009, 12:35 AM
Utah is the eighth seed right now and they are well over .500, while the Bucks are the eighth seed and are below .500. That should give people an indication of the talent in the west.

DCB/LAL
02-26-2009, 12:36 AM
or is the top teams so good because they play trash like the clippers, kings, thunder, and grizzlies. who has a combined 16-69 record against the east
im tired of people saying one CONFERENCE is better than another but only include several teams in a conference to prove a point. so what if a 9th seed in the west will be 4th in the east. 3rd seed in the east will be 2nd in the west.
some teams in the west look stronger because they play trashy teams, while the trash in the east is the wizards, bobcats, pacers, and raptors
i believe 1-15 the east is better

Dude all that matters are the playoff teams every series in the west this year will probably be a good series where as in the east the first round will be like a scrimmage maybe you'll have one thats a good series but c'mon quit being an ignoranus the bottom feeders in the west do so bad cause they have the toughest team to play almost every night you know ill even go as far and say that put one of the bottom teams of the west in the east and they would be probably fighting for a playoff spot with the rest of them it doesnt take much in the east

Lakersfan2483
02-26-2009, 12:44 AM
Let's look at records in the East

After Boston, Cleveland and Orlando, Atlanta is in 4th place and are 32-25 on the year, that is only 7 games over .500. Next, Miami is the 5th seed and is only 4 games over .500, the bottom 3 teams are Philly (28-28), Detroit (27-29) and Millwaukee (28-32)

Out West it's a different story after LA, San Antonio and Denver. Houston is the 4th seed and they are 15 games over .500 (36-21), the 8th seed is Dallas and they are 11 games over .500 (34-23)!!! When comparing the East and the West, outside of the East's 3 good teams, it's no comparison to the West's bottom teams. (teams 4 thru 8). Overall, the West is still a harder conference to play in.

jnb58
02-26-2009, 12:50 AM
I wish the Playoffs were a 16 team tournament based on divisional standings. Best 8 from each Division. Seeded purely by standings.

This would be better than East vs. West only in the finals.

The East would still benefit from the weaker schedule and make a higher seeds with weaker teams. The upsets would be outrageous.

The lottery system is flawed for benefiting teams that don't make the playoffs rather than the worst record. It favors the West because the worst teams and the best teams are all in the same division.

The East gets screwed because probably 5 of their playoff teams would be in the lottery in the West. Free Agency and bad trades are the only things that can sway the balance of power.

JabberJaw
02-26-2009, 12:52 AM
The East has the best team in Boston, but the West is much, much deeper. The ninth seed in the West has the same record as the fourth seed in the East.

Best team is Boston? Maybe...but I don't know how you can say it so easily considering the Lakers swept them this year. Last years team was better, but not this year. And yes, the West is much deeper. The East is getting better though. 2010 will decide the Easts fate

Supa
02-26-2009, 02:49 AM
So it's official, the 9th place Suns has better record than 4th place Hawks; the Suns also won both head to head.

If the playoff start today, a team that can't make the playoff in the west has a better record than a team that will have home court advantage in the east.

Doesn't sound too fair to me.

---

HiphopRelated
02-26-2009, 09:13 AM
you can't just count playoff teams when the rest of the West is such sh1t

It's not just sub .500, it's WAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! below

again, Sacramento doesn't have a SINGLE win vs. the East. Over a third of the conference is completely out of the playoff picture in January and straight tanking. Western playoff teams have about 20 games where they just have to step on the court and it's a win