PDA

View Full Version : Disparity 2014/15: West with 10 over .500; East with 4



JasonJohnHorn
11-21-2014, 09:21 AM
It's just over 10 games into the season, but already there is a huge disparity.

The Southwest division BY ITSELF has MORE teams over .500 than the East, and the Pacific Division has as many. The Northwest if the only division struggling in the West right now with one team over .500

That makes TEN teams OVER .500 in the West, whilst only FOUR teams in the East are over.500


When the East/West was created, it was because travel was expensive. Is it time to drop this format? I mean, by all means, keep the divisions in tact, but split the games up evenly instead of having teams in the Southwest play each other more. Then let the best 16 teams in regadless of conference. Division titles still get handed out, but the playoffs are for the best teams.

jerellh528
11-21-2014, 11:42 AM
We all knew this was going to happen. The system stays, the east will just have to get better.

koreancabbage
11-21-2014, 11:52 AM
the same teams will suck in the new system (the teams in the East I mean) so i don't know how it will help the bad teams... It would just help the good teams become even better.

Protection in the East is what the bad teams need i guess... to make the the playoffs. Still gets pretty competitive now that Lebron is in Cleveland. a little more parity here now.

HoopsDrive
11-21-2014, 12:39 PM
The best format is the one where the best teams make it, I've always believed in that. Always disliked the whole division winner guarantees a playoff spot and best 8 out of a conference make it with different schedules for everyone. IMO the best format is just take the best 16 teams in a schedule where every team plays the same teams an equal number of times, or at least as equal as schedule you can get with a 30 team league and 82 game schedule.

jerellh528
11-21-2014, 12:48 PM
Nah, think about the poor fans of **** divisions. You want them to think they're team has a shot at the playoffs. After all, there's only a handful of teams that have a realistic shot at the ship each yr anyways. I don't think swapping Atlanta for New Orleans is going to make huge difference in the grand scheme of things.

HoopsDrive
11-21-2014, 12:52 PM
Nah, think about the poor fans of **** divisions. You want them to think they're team has a shot at the playoffs. After all, there's only a handful of teams that have a realistic shot at the ship each yr anyways. I don't think swapping Atlanta for New Orleans is going to make huge difference in the grand scheme of things.

What about the fans of the teams that are good enough to be in the playoffs yet were screwed by the system? The Pelicans fans in your example... I'd imagine they'd be annoyed when they see a sub .500 team making it in over them (assuming it stays this way).

I mean the point is to have the best teams in the playoffs right?

valade16
11-21-2014, 01:04 PM
Playing all other teams three times would be 87 games total. Playing all other teams twice would be 58 games. Either way, it would be a great system. The first way you could pitch it to the NBA as they get to make more money from the extra games. The second way you pitch it as there really doesn't need to be that many games anyway.

beasted86
11-21-2014, 01:23 PM
Playing all other teams three times would be 87 games total. Playing all other teams twice would be 58 games. Either way, it would be a great system. The first way you could pitch it to the NBA as they get to make more money from the extra games. The second way you pitch it as there really doesn't need to be that many games anyway.
And how do you spin the travel cost increases and loss of revenue from local media markets since nobody is staying up to watch every game that ends at 1-2 AM, or they are simply at work still at 4PM when their team is playing?

Or conversely plain losses across the board from the decreased number of games?

koreancabbage
11-21-2014, 01:24 PM
What about the fans of the teams that are good enough to be in the playoffs yet were screwed by the system? The Pelicans fans in your example... I'd imagine they'd be annoyed when they see a sub .500 team making it in over them (assuming it stays this way).

I mean the point is to have the best teams in the playoffs right?

Meh, in the grand scheme of things it doesn't really make a difference.

Pelicans would be considerably more respectful if they actually got in the top 8 in the west.

No one is respecting the bottom 4-6 playoff teams in the East anyways.

pebloemer
11-21-2014, 01:27 PM
It is a little early to be looking at records and comparing conferences. But did anyone really expect the East to "catch up" this year? Everyone already expects the West to be vastly superior.

beasted86
11-21-2014, 01:29 PM
Meh, in the grand scheme of things it doesn't really make a difference.

Pelicans would be considerably more respectful if they actually got in the top 8 in the west.

No one is respecting the bottom 4-6 playoff teams in the East anyways.

Nobody is respecting the bottom 4 teams in either conference. I mean seriously are you going to increase travel and create all these scheduling problems because you really care that much who the 7-8th seed is?

How many times has a 5th-8th seed even went to the Finals the past 40 years? Like 1 that I know of (Rockets). It's not that serious an issue.

blahblahyoutoo
11-21-2014, 01:33 PM
The best format is the one where the best teams make it, I've always believed in that. Always disliked the whole division winner guarantees a playoff spot and best 8 out of a conference make it with different schedules for everyone. IMO the best format is just take the best 16 teams in a schedule where every team plays the same teams an equal number of times, or at least as equal as schedule you can get with a 30 team league and 82 game schedule.

yup, the thing about divisions and conferences that people keep forgetting is that you play teams in your division/conf more than the others so there's that aspect to worry about, instead of just best 16 teams advance.
glad someone picked up on this.

blahblahyoutoo
11-21-2014, 01:36 PM
Nah, think about the poor fans of **** divisions. You want them to think they're team has a shot at the playoffs. After all, there's only a handful of teams that have a realistic shot at the ship each yr anyways. I don't think swapping Atlanta for New Orleans is going to make huge difference in the grand scheme of things.

so that team would be cannon fodder in the 1st round?
dumbing down the entire league so an undeserving team makes the playoffs?
i'm gonna say no to that.

HoopsDrive
11-21-2014, 02:35 PM
Meh, in the grand scheme of things it doesn't really make a difference.

Pelicans would be considerably more respectful if they actually got in the top 8 in the west.

No one is respecting the bottom 4-6 playoff teams in the East anyways.

I get your point but, in principle at least, the best teams should be making the playoffs... at least that's how I've always seen it. I understand the lower seeds will probably never win the title but then again only 1 team in 30 does so even higher seeds aren't guaranteed anything. I just find it hard to defend a system that has teams with worse records and played a weaker schedule make it to the playoffs.

As for added travel expenses, I'll admit that I haven't given much thought to that. 87 games would mean more revenue from games but also complicated since it's not a 50-50 home/away schedule. 58 and 116 is too extreme on either end of the scale.

It's something to think about though. The easy way out would be to just have the current schedule with the best 16 making it in. The schedules would still not be on equal footing but at least the records would show that the best teams made it to the playoffs.

DODGERS&LAKERS
11-22-2014, 01:20 AM
Travel expenses is a horrible excuse. For many reasons with the main one being the league craps money. Secondly it could actually be less expensive.

If you want an 82 game schedule, every team will play 24 teams 3 times and 5 teams twice. Not totally balanced but much better than today. And you would rotate the teams you play only twice every year.

Obviously a team will play 2 games on the road and one at home vs certain opponents in some cases. And vice versa in others. Say one year the Lakers play the Celtics twice in Boston. They could do what baseball does and have a "home stand" and the Lakers would play two games in a row in Boston. That would eliminate the travel excuse and actually save the league money. Best 16 teams get in and you get rid of conferences.

Crackadalic
11-22-2014, 01:41 AM
East will be much better by Jan. How many teams out west in the top 8 have huge changes?

East still fails in comparison of course by a lot of teams here are adjusting. The Cavs are 5-6 for christ sakes

DODGERS&LAKERS
11-22-2014, 02:03 AM
East will be much better by Jan. How many teams out west in the top 8 have huge changes?

East still fails in comparison of course by a lot of teams here are adjusting. The Cavs are 5-6 for christ sakes

It's not really about east vs west. As far as conference superiority goes, there are ebbs and flows. In 10 years the east may be superior from top to bottom but bad west teams will make the playoffs with a worse record while facing an easier schedule. Say the Knicks had a 50 win season and didn't get into the playoffs because the 42 win Lakers played in a crappy conference. Would that not bother you?

beasted86
11-22-2014, 02:13 AM
Travel expenses is a horrible excuse. For many reasons with the main one being the league craps money. Secondly it could actually be less expensive.

If you want an 82 game schedule, every team will play 24 teams 3 times and 5 teams twice. Not totally balanced but much better than today. And you would rotate the teams you play only twice every year.

Obviously a team will play 2 games on the road and one at home vs certain opponents in some cases. And vice versa in others. Say one year the Lakers play the Celtics twice in Boston. They could do what baseball does and have a "home stand" and the Lakers would play two games in a row in Boston. That would eliminate the travel excuse and actually save the league money. Best 16 teams get in and you get rid of conferences.
You realize it's impossible to have 41 home games in any of these schedule suggestions, right? So they lose money in that regard for one...

And, a plane ticket might actually costs less than renting out hotel rooms, practice facilities, and medical equipment and expertise when playing on the road in an extended layover like you are suggesting.

And it definitely ruins some of the drama and story lines of the league having teams just play back to backs against the same team.

Bostonjorge
11-22-2014, 02:43 AM
People still watch east basketball?

Crackadalic
11-22-2014, 03:07 AM
It's not really about east vs west. As far as conference superiority goes, there are ebbs and flows. In 10 years the east may be superior from top to bottom but bad west teams will make the playoffs with a worse record while facing an easier schedule. Say the Knicks had a 50 win season and didn't get into the playoffs because the 42 win Lakers played in a crappy conference. Would that not bother you?

O I agree. The problem is the same lottery west teams get lottery picks with 35-42 wins while that same amount gets you a mid 1st round pick. Your chances of picking a impact player decrease.

Thats not even the main issue but I do wish they can adjust it a bit

JasonJohnHorn
11-22-2014, 08:33 AM
It is a little early to be looking at records and comparing conferences. But did anyone really expect the East to "catch up" this year? Everyone already expects the West to be vastly superior.

With Chi-town getting Rose back and adding Gasol, Cleveland grabbing an franchise player from the West and adding LBJ, the Heat keeping Bosh and Wade and adding Deng, the Hornets adding Stephenson, and the Wizards' young core improving, as well as the Raptors maintaining the roster from last season's success and the Hawks getting Horford back, I think people did expect the East to be better. And even teams like Detroit and New York were expected to make improvements with coaching changes. Of all those teams, only four were over .500 going into last night's games.

Mean while, the Suns, Kings and Pelicans are all over .500 and none were even playoff teams last year.

pebloemer
11-22-2014, 10:02 AM
With Chi-town getting Rose back and adding Gasol, Cleveland grabbing an franchise player from the West and adding LBJ, the Heat keeping Bosh and Wade and adding Deng, the Hornets adding Stephenson, and the Wizards' young core improving, as well as the Raptors maintaining the roster from last season's success and the Hawks getting Horford back, I think people did expect the East to be better. And even teams like Detroit and New York were expected to make improvements with coaching changes. Of all those teams, only four were over .500 going into last night's games.

Mean while, the Suns, Kings and Pelicans are all over .500 and none were even playoff teams last year.

I think most people were expecting Cleveland to take time. I still expect them to figure it out.
I do think Chicago is better this year. Although looks like they just lost Gibson.
I expected a trainwreck in New York

Ill admit I expected more from Charlotte and Brooklyn than we have seen so far. But I would not expect either of them to be able to compete in the West.

Miami, Atlanta, Toronto and Washington all look fine. As I mentioned, it is very early to compare records.

Out West looks better than ever though. Sacramento and New Orleans both have taken nice steps. Phoenix was pretty exceptional last year too, so there is already precedent for how they are playing.

I expected more balance in the East, but certainly not them catching up. Imagine if OKC was healthy.