PDA

View Full Version : Is This The Worst Case Of Conference Disparity There's Ever Been?



MickeyMgl
02-20-2014, 05:52 PM
Just when it started to look a couple years ago like things were starting to balance out...

Toronto is a 3rd seed in the East. In the West, they wouldn't qualify for the playoffs.

Three teams that aren't qualifying for the playoffs in the West - Memphis, Minnesota, Denver - would qualify in the East. Memphis would be the 3rd seed! The Grizzlies, at present, would be sitting home watching SIX teams with worse records participate in the playoffs, TWO of them enjoying homecourt.

I've usually agreed with the Commissioner saying this stuff was cyclical, but this "cycle" is going on about 15 years now. I'm only bringing this subject up again because it appears to be the worst I ever remember.

NYCkid12
02-20-2014, 06:21 PM
Just when it started to look a couple years ago like things were starting to balance out...

Toronto is a 3rd seed in the East. In the West, they wouldn't qualify for the playoffs.

Three teams that aren't qualifying for the playoffs in the West - Memphis, Minnesota, Denver - would qualify in the East. Memphis would be the 3rd seed! The Grizzlies, at present, would be sitting home watching SIX teams with worse records participate in the playoffs, TWO of them enjoying homecourt.

I've usually agreed with the Commissioner saying this stuff was cyclical, but this "cycle" is going on about 15 years now. I'm only bringing this subject up again because it appears to be the worst I ever remember.

I agree this is the worst it has ever been, no doubt about that.

But as far as going on for 15 years, that's a little off. Ordinarily it is maybe the 7-8 seed in the east that is horrible and wouldn't make the playoffs in the West. But never where the 3rd seed is

mnatiq
02-20-2014, 06:21 PM
Exactly, this is a reason why NBA is going downhill. NBA needs to change fast, NHL is already taking over their market share.

NBA players just prefer to play with their buddies and have a few select cities where they wanna play. What has to happen is NBA needs to adopt the franchise tag.

NYCkid12
02-20-2014, 06:27 PM
Exactly, this is a reason why NBA is going downhill. NBA needs to change fast, NHL is already taking over their market share.

NBA players just prefer to play with their buddies and have a few select cities where they wanna play. What has to happen is NBA needs to adopt the franchise tag.

Is this your opinion or did you see this somewhere ?

Crackadalic
02-20-2014, 06:38 PM
The whole eastern conference is mostly tanking

Bucks
Philly
Boston
Magic
Atl

Three teams hit hard by
Bulls(should be up there win wise with Miami/pacers)
Knicks(outside melo the whole starting 5 miss 10 plus games,amare and Martin also 10 plus games, jr never had a training camp after knee surgery and the. Suspension)
Brooklyn(Lopez/ak47 miss time/d-will)

Teams that underachieve
Detroit
Knicks
Cavs

And teams just taking advantage of the weak eastern conference
Wiz
Bobcats
Raptors

It's just a lot of bad luck on top of tanking making the east worse then it normally is

NYCkid12
02-20-2014, 06:41 PM
The whole eastern conference is mostly tanking

Bucks
Philly
Boston
Magic
Atl

Three teams hit hard by
Bulls(should be up there win wise with Miami/pacers)
Knicks(outside melo the whole starting 5 miss 10 plus games,amare and Martin also 10 plus games, jr never had a training camp after knee surgery and the. Suspension)
Brooklyn(Lopez/ak47 miss time/d-will)

Teams that underachieve
Detroit
Knicks
Cavs

And teams just taking advantage of the weak eastern conference
Wiz
Bobcats
Raptors

It's just a lot of bad luck on top of tanking making the east worse then it normally is

I wouldn't put Atlanta in the tanking category, they're still a 7 seed right now and they also ran into bad luck losing Horford. Before losing Horford, they were actually playing well.

Tony_Starks
02-20-2014, 06:52 PM
But wait we're supposed to have parity across the league now?
( sarcasm )

ManRam
02-20-2014, 06:53 PM
The whole eastern conference is mostly tanking

Bucks
Philly
Boston
Magic
Atl

Three teams hit hard by
Bulls(should be up there win wise with Miami/pacers)
Knicks(outside melo the whole starting 5 miss 10 plus games,amare and Martin also 10 plus games, jr never had a training camp after knee surgery and the. Suspension)
Brooklyn(Lopez/ak47 miss time/d-will)

Teams that underachieve
Detroit
Knicks
Cavs

And teams just taking advantage of the weak eastern conference
Wiz
Bobcats
Raptors

It's just a lot of bad luck on top of tanking making the east worse then it normally is

The only teams that don't care about winning are MLW, PHI, BOS and ORL. That's 4 teams. The rest might be taking advantage of a weak east, but they aren't "tanking", unless you have a dumb definition of the word.


The East is bad, for sure. Unprecedented? IDK.

There were some bad seasons in the early-mid 2000s for the East. The West was bad to awful a few times in the late 90s. That's just at the top of my head. I'm sure there are other poor years.

bholly
02-20-2014, 06:56 PM
Stein tweeted a day or two ago (via Elias) that the East have the worst ever combined win percentage for one conference vs the other. So by that measure the answer is yes.



But wait we're supposed to have parity across the league now?
( sarcasm )

What? When did anyone ever say there was supposed to be parity between the two conferences? I feel like most of the time half the people here just don't really understand what people are talking about, but then try to rearrange the same words into their own vaguely related point later. There has never been any discussion of, or mechanism/policy/rule for promoting inter-conference parity. No idea what you're talking about.

bholly
02-20-2014, 06:57 PM
The only teams that don't care about winning are MLW, PHI, BOS and ORL. That's 4 teams. The rest might be taking advantage of a weak east, but they aren't "tanking", unless you have a dumb definition of the word.


The East is bad, for sure. Unprecedented? IDK.

There were some bad seasons in the early-mid 2000s for the East. The West was bad to awful a few times in the late 90s. That's just at the top of my head. I'm sure there are other poor years.

And at least MIL (not sure about Orlando, and hard to say with Boston) weren't 'not caring about winning' to start the season - just came about because they sucked. They started the season targeting the playoffs, and haven't made many (any?) moves to get worse since then, they just suck.

Tony_Starks
02-20-2014, 07:07 PM
Stein tweeted a day or two ago (via Elias) that the East have the worst ever combined win percentage for one conference vs the other. So by that measure the answer is yes.




What? When did anyone ever say there was supposed to be parity between the two conferences? I feel like most of the time half the people here just don't really understand what people are talking about, but then try to rearrange the same words into their own vaguely related point later. There has never been any discussion of, or mechanism/policy/rule for promoting inter-conference parity. No idea what you're talking about.

I'm sure you don't. During the negotiating for the new CBA the leagues main slogan was "this is going to create parity across the league." Some fans bought that but most of us saw that was total bs. If you're mismanaging your team it doesn't matter what system is in place. The Leastern conference is a prime example of that...

Slug3
02-20-2014, 07:09 PM
It's bad but at least the top 2 teams in the east are great teams and capable of winning it all. Remember the nets and Indy teams the Lakers played (not dissing the Lakers). Those teams and eastern conference was just horrid.

ManRam
02-20-2014, 07:16 PM
And at least MIL (not sure about Orlando, and hard to say with Boston) weren't 'not caring about winning' to start the season - just came about because they sucked. They started the season targeting the playoffs, and haven't made many (any?) moves to get worse since then, they just suck.

I think the word "tank" is used way too liberally. There are just teams that suck, and aren't trying to, as you said. There are people that use it to describe every team that's rebuilding in a way that insinuates the players/coaches are trying to lose. I refuse to believe at this point that there are players and coaches who are actively trying to sabotage games to lose.

Tanking is a derogatory word :laugh: Most of these teams are just rebuilding in a proper and smart way.

Hawkeye15
02-20-2014, 07:40 PM
this is the largest disparity I can remember. Hopefully Hinkie and Toronto's GM (can never remember his name) help fix that. They seem to be the only hope outside Riley/Bird as far as GM's come out east.

Bruno
02-20-2014, 08:15 PM
i feel like we've been asking ourselves the same question since MJ retired. i don't know if this is the worst but its gotta be up there. the east always has a couple of beasts who can compete and defeat the west but is usually loaded with mediocre teams.

king4day
02-20-2014, 08:27 PM
I'd like to see something where, if you are under .500, but there's a team in the other conference outside looking in above .500, they should be able to get in. If a team under .500 is in both conferences but a weaker team in their conference is in a playoff position, they can still go in.
It should only apply if the non qualifying team is above 500.
Can't reward losing. That's just not right.

Yanks All Day
02-20-2014, 08:41 PM
The East is usually very top-heavy with pretty good middle of the pack teams and bad bottom teams.

The West is mostly solid throughout the entire conference with pretty good teams and 1 or 2 standouts usually.
The West is holding up its part of the tradition.

The problem with the East this year is their middle teams are all hurt. If a healthy Chicago, New York, and Brooklyn made up the 3/4/5 spots and Washington/Toronto/etc fought for the 6/7/8 spots, it wouldn't look as bad.

The West is clearly superior, but the East looks extra bad because of injuries to their middle of the pack teams.

DODGERS&LAKERS
02-20-2014, 08:46 PM
I'd like to see something where, if you are under .500, but there's a team in the other conference outside looking in above .500, they should be able to get in. If a team under .500 is in both conferences but a weaker team in their conference is in a playoff position, they can still go in.
It should only apply if the non qualifying team is above 500.
Can't reward losing. That's just not right.

I like that. Lets say the Grizz, Denver and Minny all get above 500 but miss the playoffs in the west, they should be able to get into the east playoffs if there are 3 teams that are under 500. But Memphis should not be a top 3 seed and have home court advantage in any rounds. They would have to be the bottom seeds if they have a better record than all but two teams in the east.

Only problem with that is you would punish Miami and Indy and whoever the top seed in the east is going forward. That eastern team would have to take long flights to play road games in the west when the other teams would have a normal schedule. Right now the 3 teams in the west are not too far west but lets say its the Warriors next year who get put in the 8th spot and they play the Heat. Miami would have to fly all the way to Oakland in round one.

MickeyMgl
02-20-2014, 08:56 PM
I agree this is the worst it has ever been, no doubt about that.

But as far as going on for 15 years, that's a little off. Ordinarily it is maybe the 7-8 seed in the east that is horrible and wouldn't make the playoffs in the West. But never where the 3rd seed is

No, it hasn't been like THIS for fifteen years, but it's been close to 15 (or more) that the West has been stronger than the East. I went back and looked at the records, but stopped when it was approaching 15. Could be longer.

king4day
02-20-2014, 09:01 PM
I like that. Lets say the Grizz, Denver and Minny all get above 500 but miss the playoffs in the west, they should be able to get into the east playoffs if there are 3 teams that are under 500. But Memphis should not be a top 3 seed and have home court advantage in any rounds. They would have to be the bottom seeds if they have a better record than all but two teams in the east.

Only problem with that is you would punish Miami and Indy and whoever the top seed in the east is going forward. That eastern team would have to take long flights to play road games in the west when the other teams would have a normal schedule. Right now the 3 teams in the west are not too far west but lets say its the Warriors next year who get put in the 8th spot and they play the Heat. Miami would have to fly all the way to Oakland in round one.

Good points. It would probably entail reseeding the whole league. Or maybe allow the 3 division winners the ability to pick who they want to face of the bottom 4 teams.

sportsfan222
02-20-2014, 09:07 PM
its odd, because although the east record wise is as putrid as its been in a while, i feel that many of the teams that are part of those putrid records like the nets for example and the pistons if they can get in, will be a lot tougher matchups for miami and indiana than say last year when u had the heat playing the bucks and the pacers playing the hawks.

so as bad as the eastern conference is record wise, i feel the playoffs can be a bit more exciting come the time as opposed to last year.

obviously in the end everyone will be shocked if its not miami vs indiana, but up until then, i feel some teams can be a bit physical with them and maybe not be pushovers like there opponents last year in the playoffs.

lots of the teams that are underachieving have a lot are puzzling, because the pistons, nets, knicks, and cavs have way more talent than there record indicates. its very baffling what has happened this year.

bholly
02-20-2014, 09:44 PM
I'm sure you don't. During the negotiating for the new CBA the leagues main slogan was "this is going to create parity across the league." Some fans bought that but most of us saw that was total bs. If you're mismanaging your team it doesn't matter what system is in place. The Leastern conference is a prime example of that...

The CBA negotiations had little, if anything, to do with parity - they were about how much money the players got and what their movement freedoms were. The only people who think it was about parity are the people who didn't understand what was going on and bought into all the narrative ******** other stupid people in here were pushing in here about how the lockout was because of the Heat and whatever else.
To the extent that the league has done things about parity (ie the draft/lottery, and instituting a salary cap in the first place), it's been about mitigating the advantages that rich and big market teams have - there's been nothing ever done that has anything to do with making sure there isn't an East/West divide.
The fact that the East has more bad teams than the West has nothing to do with whether there's parity overall or not.

bholly
02-20-2014, 09:44 PM
I think the word "tank" is used way too liberally. There are just teams that suck, and aren't trying to, as you said. There are people that use it to describe every team that's rebuilding in a way that insinuates the players/coaches are trying to lose. I refuse to believe at this point that there are players and coaches who are actively trying to sabotage games to lose.

Tanking is a derogatory word :laugh: Most of these teams are just rebuilding in a proper and smart way.

Yup, absolutely agree.

jrice8to80
02-20-2014, 09:59 PM
http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-puck-daddy/nhl-selling-more-arenas-nba-225020461--nhl.html

Trying to reply to NYCkid12. Sorry i'm not used to posting on here i couldn't quote him.

Point is, the NHL IS passing the NBA for many of the reasons you guys have stated. Has the NBA ever had an 8th seed win the championship? Meanwhile the NHL just had the LA Kings DOMINATE the playoffs two years ago as an 8th seed. The NBA just has no parity and you can guess the championship teams before the season starts and be right more often than not, and you simply can't do that in the NHL because once you make the playoffs it's anybody's game.

THE MTL
02-20-2014, 10:25 PM
East has been a disgrace to the NBA this year. Bulls Nets Knicks were all supposed to be contenders. Atlanta got bad. Cleveland has been a disappointment. Boston Philly and Milwaukee are in a tanking race to the bottom.

Hawkeye15
02-20-2014, 10:30 PM
i feel like we've been asking ourselves the same question since MJ retired. i don't know if this is the worst but its gotta be up there. the east always has a couple of beasts who can compete and defeat the west but is usually loaded with mediocre teams.

the west was better even thru MJ's run.

Hellcrooner
02-20-2014, 10:57 PM
and it will keep being worse when half the lottery talented players go to west teams while 6 teams in the east that would need that talent will choose in the mid-late first round.


The fact taht teams play more times against their conference teams does not help it either.


The solution for this is

1 get rid of the whole conferences and divisions concept.
2 reduce the regular season to 58 games ( one home one away against each team) or make it 87 ( one home, one away , one on a neutral ground )

have the best 12 teams regardells of where they are play the playoffs ( you know wild card and then playoffs like in nefl) send the rest to the lottery.

the re

bholly
02-20-2014, 11:36 PM
the west was better even thru MJ's run.

How do you figure? East vs West win percentage seems to be the only real way to compare overall quality, as far as I can tell, and the East came out on top in 1992-93, 1995-96, 1996-97, 1997-98, 1998-99. 1991-92 they were 1 game away from .500 against each other, too. What basis are you using for saying the West was better?

DR_1
02-20-2014, 11:58 PM
The East is usually very top-heavy with pretty good middle of the pack teams and bad bottom teams.

The West is mostly solid throughout the entire conference with pretty good teams and 1 or 2 standouts usually.
The West is holding up its part of the tradition.

The problem with the East this year is their middle teams are all hurt. If a healthy Chicago, New York, and Brooklyn made up the 3/4/5 spots and Washington/Toronto/etc fought for the 6/7/8 spots, it wouldn't look as bad.

The West is clearly superior, but the East looks extra bad because of injuries to their middle of the pack teams.

This. I think it's really easy to forget how the Bulls, Nets, and Knicks have been killed by injuries. The Bulls especially were considered a top-3 team by most before the season began.

Swashcuff
02-21-2014, 12:11 AM
No.

Talent wise the Bulls, Knicks and Nets are as good as most west teams. They have all been absolutely ruined by injuries not to mention the Hawks losing their best player for potentially 2/3 of the season.

The East also have two LEGIT title contenders and are home to what most would consider the best team in basketball. TBH the Early 00s were much worse in terms of conference disparity.

effen5
02-21-2014, 01:34 AM
How do you figure? East vs West win percentage seems to be the only real way to compare overall quality, as far as I can tell, and the East came out on top in 1992-93, 1995-96, 1996-97, 1997-98, 1998-99. 1991-92 they were 1 game away from .500 against each other, too. What basis are you using for saying the West was better?

Overall I don't think the west was better, I think there was a better balance.

effen5
02-21-2014, 01:43 AM
No.

Talent wise the Bulls, Knicks and Nets are as good as most west teams. They have all been absolutely ruined by injuries not to mention the Hawks losing their best player for potentially 2/3 of the season.

The East also have two LEGIT title contenders and are home to what most would consider the best team in basketball. TBH the Early 00s were much worse in terms of conference disparity.

Uh I don't agree with this. Most of us said that the Knicks and Nets were going to take a huge step back this year. The bulls, well they just have the misfortune of our very injury prone point guard.

SPURSFAN1
02-21-2014, 01:45 AM
Uh I don't agree with this. Most of us said that the Knicks and Nets were going to take a huge step back this year. The bulls, well they just have the misfortune of our very injury prone point guard.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZrwEtEwyFUk

ive posted this before. hahahaha

Swashcuff
02-21-2014, 08:50 AM
Uh I don't agree with this. Most of us said that the Knicks and Nets were going to take a huge step back this year. The bulls, well they just have the misfortune of our very injury prone point guard.

Most of us like whom? I can't remember that. The Nets would have taken a huge step back with a healthy Brook, Williams, Pierce, Garnett and Johnson? Interesting. I remember people saying the Knicks wouldn't be as good but they wouldn't be half as bad if it wasn't for injuries. They'd be at least at or around .500.

KnicksorBust
02-21-2014, 09:58 AM
This thread completes ignores that outside of Kobe, the 3 most significant "out for season" injuries all came in the Eastern Conference:

Derrick Rose
Brook Lopez
Al Horford

Dade County
02-21-2014, 10:12 AM
Exactly, this is a reason why NBA is going downhill. NBA needs to change fast, NHL is already taking over their market share.

NBA players just prefer to play with their buddies and have a few select cities where they wanna play. What has to happen is NBA needs to adopt the franchise tag.


And lets say a player gets hurt that year, that they are franchise... Will that player get whats owed to them, as if they would have got there 4 to 5 yr contract, based on what they would have gotten contractually, if they would have hit the open market; if NO... Then it's never going to happen.

And also, would you like this tag for 1yr only, or the owners could use it forever, locking a player down into 1 city...smh

Also, would you like to put an end to free agency... Or do you only care about star players having a right to sign where they want?

Shammyguy3
02-21-2014, 04:24 PM
this is the largest disparity I can remember. Hopefully Hinkie and Toronto's GM (can never remember his name) help fix that. They seem to be the only hope outside Riley/Bird as far as GM's come out east.

Gar Foreman of the Bulls should be included in that group as well

Hawkeye15
02-21-2014, 04:53 PM
How do you figure? East vs West win percentage seems to be the only real way to compare overall quality, as far as I can tell, and the East came out on top in 1992-93, 1995-96, 1996-97, 1997-98, 1998-99. 1991-92 they were 1 game away from .500 against each other, too. What basis are you using for saying the West was better?

yeah, looking at it, the east and west flipped back and forth in that decade really. It helps that the Bulls piled up wins for the east, but take 97-98' for example. The east had a 60 win team, and four 50 win teams. The west had three 60 win teams, and two 50 win teams. There were still better top level teams out west. There were also a handful of more garbage teams out west (3 more to be exact), so it makes the east versus west record a bit distorted. Same can be said of another couple of seasons you pointed out.

the 95-96' season is distorted by the Bulls 72 wins. There was one other elite team in the east that year, the west had three, and again, the bottom dwellers in the west dragged them down more.

The ridiculous disparity started happening around 99' obviously, but the case for the west being the more balanced conference was there 25 years ago.

Hawkeye15
02-21-2014, 04:54 PM
Most of us like whom? I can't remember that. The Nets would have taken a huge step back with a healthy Brook, Williams, Pierce, Garnett and Johnson? Interesting. I remember people saying the Knicks wouldn't be as good but they wouldn't be half as bad if it wasn't for injuries. They'd be at least at or around .500.

but didn't most of us predict that wasn't happening anyways?

Hawkeye15
02-21-2014, 04:55 PM
Gar Foreman of the Bulls should be included in that group as well

fair enough

Clippersfan86
02-21-2014, 05:00 PM
but didn't most of us predict that wasn't happening anyways?

Yup. Most people's biggest question about Brooklyn was age/health. Bunch of old guys who are injury prone.

JiffyMix88
02-21-2014, 05:24 PM
Just when it started to look a couple years ago like things were starting to balance out...

Toronto is a 3rd seed in the East. In the West, they wouldn't qualify for the playoffs.

Three teams that aren't qualifying for the playoffs in the West - Memphis, Minnesota, Denver - would qualify in the East. Memphis would be the 3rd seed! The Grizzlies, at present, would be sitting home watching SIX teams with worse records participate in the playoffs, TWO of them enjoying homecourt.

I've usually agreed with the Commissioner saying this stuff was cyclical, but this "cycle" is going on about 15 years now. I'm only bringing this subject up again because it appears to be the worst I ever remember.

ain't nobody ask these teams to be west of the mississippi river

Hellcrooner
02-21-2014, 05:41 PM
if im Memphis , nola , or Houston id be 24/7 trying to convince the league that they are East cities

Supreme LA
02-21-2014, 05:43 PM
Umm...is anyone surprised? Isn't this the expected fallout after the big 3 teamed up in Miami a few years back? I mean, you went from 3 teams in the east with stars to build around to just one super team to dominate the rest. This should be a shock to anyone.

MickeyMgl
02-27-2014, 06:31 PM
yeah, looking at it, the east and west flipped back and forth in that decade really. It helps that the Bulls piled up wins for the east, but take 97-98' for example. The east had a 60 win team, and four 50 win teams. The west had three 60 win teams, and two 50 win teams. There were still better top level teams out west. There were also a handful of more garbage teams out west (3 more to be exact), so it makes the east versus west record a bit distorted. Same can be said of another couple of seasons you pointed out.

the 95-96' season is distorted by the Bulls 72 wins. There was one other elite team in the east that year, the west had three, and again, the bottom dwellers in the west dragged them down more.

The ridiculous disparity started happening around 99' obviously, but the case for the west being the more balanced conference was there 25 years ago.

There was heavy expansion throughout the 90s. Measuring the situation based on top-level teams may not be the most accurate method. High- and low-end records were slightly distorted.

bearadonisdna
02-27-2014, 06:48 PM
While east players are more fatigued because of shoveling snow, the west want their playoff spots. Um no.

NBA_Starter
02-27-2014, 11:35 PM
I don't remember anything this bad..

poleandreel
02-27-2014, 11:55 PM
The Bulls made the playoffs when they were 28 games under .500 in one of Jordan's first few years in the league.

Swashcuff
02-28-2014, 08:04 AM
The Bulls made the playoffs when they were 28 games under .500 in one of Jordan's first few years in the league.

22 games under and that was the year Jordan played just 18 games and went ape ******* against the Celts in the first round. There wasn't any real disparity between conferences then however.

My thing with the league this year as compared to years gone by you have LEGIT forces in the East the Heat are a dynasty in the making the Pacers are probably the 2nd best team in the game (though they don't match up very well with the Thunder) and if health wasn't such a concern for all the Eastern Conference teams we'd see more of them over .500. In the Early 00s though you had more teams over .500 all the real competition was out West while the entire east was described a s JV League according to Stephen A Smith lol.

Goose17
02-28-2014, 08:47 AM
Yes.