PDA

View Full Version : NBA Playoff Reconfiguration



jnb58
03-09-2009, 01:40 PM
The way I see it, the whole playoff system could use reconfiguration.

I would take the NBA's 16 best records regardless of Conference. I would make one big tournament. Seed them from best to worst record.

It would fix the draft problems. Being that bad Eastern teams get bumped from the playoffs and into the lottery where they belong (with a better chance to improve).

My idea would put more pressure on inter-divisional match-ups and put better teams in the playoffs. Why does it need to be East vs West? The NFL and MLB don't do it that way.

This year would look like:
1)L.A.- 16)Phi.
8)Uta.- 9)Por.
5)SA.- 12)Atl.
4)Orl.- 13)Pho.

2)Cle.- 15)Det.
7)NO.- 10)Den
6)Hou.- 11)Dal.
3)Bos.- 14)Mia.

superkegger
03-09-2009, 01:46 PM
If they do this, then they need to change the entire way they do the season schedule. Otherwise having conferences at all would be pointless.

What they should do is restructure like the other pro sports do. So that the #1 seed will always play the lowest seed. I also think its kinda goofy that its easier to make the playoffs than miss them (16 make it 14 don't). Kinda goofy.

albertc86
03-09-2009, 01:54 PM
If they do this, then they need to change the entire way they do the season schedule. Otherwise having conferences at all would be pointless.

I agree; however, this isn't a bad idea. I'm all for intra-conference rivalries, but they're starting to get a little mundane. The finals should be a match-up between the two best NBA teams --- not the best team from each conference. There are too many variables that come into play --- such as injuries and the conference being watered down.

superkegger
03-09-2009, 01:58 PM
I agree; however, this isn't a bad idea. I'm all for intra-conference rivalries, but they're starting to get a little mundane. The finals should be a match-up between the two best NBA teams --- not the best team from each conference. There are too many variables that come into play --- such as injuries and the conference being watered down.

I don't see why not. This is how all pro sports in America (as far as I know anyway) decide their champion. The top teams from each conference play eachother, and I think for the most part, it works just fine. Sure there has been a few years the east didn't matchup or the west didn't, but I still think it's a fine way to decide the champion, because the 2 best teams from each conference still make it to the finals. And making it one big tourney would essentially completely dilute all rivalries.

IndyRealist
03-09-2009, 01:59 PM
David Stern believes in the Conference/Division system. He feels it promotes regional rivalries, which means fans. It also gets more population centers caring about the playoffs. If Chicago makes it, then the NBA gets all of Illinois, Indiana, Wisconsin, Missouri, etc watching games as well. If they don't, then they'll still get most of Chicago, but the rest of Illinois won't care, and either would most of the Midwest (except Ohio). It's in the NBA's best interest to get as much of the country watching as possible.

If we had an all Texas Finals, who would watch outside of the southwest?

albertc86
03-09-2009, 02:03 PM
I don't see why not. This is how all pro sports in America (as far as I know anyway) decide their champion. The top teams from each conference play eachother, and I think for the most part, it works just fine. Sure there has been a few years the east didn't matchup or the west didn't, but I still think it's a fine way to decide the champion, because the 2 best teams from each conference still make it to the finals. And making it one big tourney would essentially completely dilute all rivalries.

It would most certainly eliminate rivalries from the game, but as you alluded to, the eastern conference has been watered down for years. Aside from the Pistons and Celtics, the eastern conference has provided less than stellar teams. Miami beat Dallas, but Dallas got lucky (IMO) to reach the finals. It was nice seeing two new teams on the championship scene, but neither team was the best in the NBA (IMO, again).

charlsdq7
03-09-2009, 02:14 PM
Other changes not the mentioned ones

superkegger
03-09-2009, 02:15 PM
It would most certainly eliminate rivalries from the game, but as you alluded to, the eastern conference has been watered down for years. Aside from the Pistons and Celtics, the eastern conference has provided less than stellar teams. Miami beat Dallas, but Dallas got lucky (IMO) to reach the finals. It was nice seeing two new teams on the championship scene, but neither team was the best in the NBA (IMO, again).

Yeah, but thats just been of late, and besides, before that it was the east that was dominant (ok the bulls that were dominant, but whatever). I would be pretty upset to see the playoff rivalries pretty much disappear. Suns-Spurs has been a great playof rivalry, as has Mavs Spurs. Lakers Kings, Lakers Blazers, Pistons Cavs, Pistons Celtics, and so on.

To lose that would be a major loss in NBA tradition. Plus, you'd then have to redo the entire regular season, which would further eliminate rivalries,and also make travel more burdensome.

Plus in that playoff format, you could have a Lakers team that could potentially play, boston, philly, new jersey and orlando in the playoffs (probably unlikely but still) That's a lot of cross country travel. And at the same time you could have the spurs play dallas houston new orleans and phoenix, a much less traveled schedule, perhaps making their route easier.

The conference set up works just fine, and does not need to be scrapped.

JordansBulls
03-09-2009, 02:36 PM
The way I see it, the whole playoff system could use reconfiguration.

I would take the NBA's 16 best records regardless of Conference. I would make one big tournament. Seed them from best to worst record.

It would fix the draft problems. Being that bad Eastern teams get bumped from the playoffs and into the lottery where they belong (with a better chance to improve).

My idea would put more pressure on inter-divisional match-ups and put better teams in the playoffs. Why does it need to be East vs West? The NFL and MLB don't do it that way.

This year would look like:
1)L.A.- 16)Phi.
8)Uta.- 9)Por.
5)SA.- 12)Atl.
4)Orl.- 13)Pho.

2)Cle.- 15)Det.
7)NO.- 10)Den
6)Hou.- 11)Dal.
3)Bos.- 14)Mia.

No what they should do is go back to having two divisions per conference instead of 3. They would do that before doing anything else.

The NBA isn't trying to be like the NCAA. Also how do you determine Allstar teams, etc?

jnb58
03-09-2009, 05:44 PM
Wow... I didn't say anything about getting rid of Conferences or Divisions. Nothing during the season has to change (I do prefer the 2 Divisions). This only effects the Playoffs and who is in the Lottery.

-In season rivalries would not change.
-All-star games would not change.
-You get the 16 best teams. Not the 14 best teams and 2 scrubs from a weak Conference.
-Division Champs would not get home court advantage automatically (dumb anyway).

Are we really worried about how much the teams will have to travel in the Playoffs? Because that is the only negative change.
Tradition is killing MLB. Why not make NBA competition the best it can be?

chicagowhitesox
03-09-2009, 05:46 PM
i like the playoffs how they are.

Hellcrooner
03-09-2009, 05:47 PM
No what they should do is go back to having two divisions per conference instead of 3. They would do that before doing anything else.

The NBA isn't trying to be like the NCAA. Also how do you determine Allstar teams, etc?
Usa team vs Nba foreigners team?