PDA

View Full Version : So uh, is the East better than the West?



chi-townlove1
12-28-2015, 11:35 AM
As a conference, which is better? Warriors are in a league of their own. But the power seems like it has balanced out. Or even shifted in the Easts favor. Pretty crazy considering just last year we were laughing at the Eastern Conference.

BKLYNpigeon
12-28-2015, 11:51 AM
I think you have to wait 2-3 years to make that statement.

Its still only about 1/3 of the season, still plenty of games left. On Paper I would still take the teams in the West over the East.

Tony_Starks
12-28-2015, 11:52 AM
As a conference, which is better? Warriors are in a league of their own. But the power seems like it has balanced out. Or even shifted in the Easts favor. Pretty crazy considering just last year we were laughing at the Eastern Conference.


The bad-mediocre teams in the east are better than the bad-mediocre teams in the West but as far as legit contenders? No. It's still Cleveland and then a pretty huge drop off until the next best team.

For all intents and purposes you can pencil Cleveland in for the Finals now, unless a miracle happens. Even if that miracle happened, whoever lucked up against Cleveland would get absolutely murdered by whoever comes out of the West.

In the West you at least still have the Spurs, and possibly OKC and the Clipps to challenge the Warriors. So we're talking 3 to 4 legitimate championship contenders and possibly 1 more depending on what Houston decides to do with their roster.

shep33
12-28-2015, 11:52 AM
If there were a 7 game series between any team out east outside of Cleveland, I would still take Houston or Memphis over them in 5-6 games. So I say not even close yet.

2-ONE-5
12-28-2015, 12:00 PM
I would take ATL and the Bulls to beat Houston and Memphis probably or at least compete

Scoots
12-28-2015, 12:02 PM
It's definitely strange. I was looking at the standings this weekend and the West has a team winning 97%, a team winning 81% and a team winning 68% but no other teams over 60% and only 7 total over 50% ... the best team in the East is winning 68% but there are 4 teams north of 60% and 11 over 50%.

To some extent maybe the top of the West is holding the middle of the West down, and certainly the 2nd tier in the West is underperforming while the 3rd tier in the East is doing better than expected.

The East has closed the gap, but the West is still superior. It's possible in a couple years the East will be dominant as they have good young talent on teams that are performing well early while some of the top Western teams are looking at some possibly major changes in the coming years (SAS retirements, OKC free agency, LAC blowing up the team).

Bron > Kobe
12-28-2015, 12:05 PM
The NBA is a tank fest now.

beasted86
12-28-2015, 12:29 PM
The bad-mediocre teams in the east are better than the bad-mediocre teams in the West but as far as legit contenders? No. It's still Cleveland and then a pretty huge drop off until the next best team.

For all intents and purposes you can pencil Cleveland in for the Finals now, unless a miracle happens. Even if that miracle happened, whoever lucked up against Cleveland would get absolutely murdered by whoever comes out of the West.

In the West you at least still have the Spurs, and possibly OKC and the Clipps to challenge the Warriors. So we're talking 3 to 4 legitimate championship contenders and possibly 1 more depending on what Houston decides to do with their roster.

You don't really believe this, do you? I'm hoping there aren't people this blinded.

Clippers and Thunder can best the Warriors in a 7 game series? Not sure we are watching the same teams, and what caliber you consider them in at their best.

At their best, the only team that can challenge the Warriors is the Spurs. I figured this was common sense knowledge by now.

beasted86
12-28-2015, 12:41 PM
If there were a 7 game series between any team out east outside of Cleveland, I would still take Houston or Memphis over them in 5-6 games. So I say not even close yet.
Again, are we watching the same Memphis teams and Houston teams? I don't even consider the HEAT a very good team, and both those teams looked like they were far more flawed than Miami when they played them.

For unknown reasons, seems there are "conference homers" as if there is something to be proud of. I have no clue how or why this logic even exists.

Anyway, how I see it is there is one contender in the East, and 4 possible teams from the West that could beat the East's contender, but that doesn't necessarily mean the West has 4 contenders. There are 3 contenders in the entire league and everyone else is praying for an injury.

Gander13SM
12-28-2015, 12:46 PM
I think the West still has more talent and depth of talent.

But so far, this season, the Eastern conference teams as a whole have definitely outperformed them.

Scoots
12-28-2015, 12:50 PM
http://basketball.******.com/nba/team-stats/2016/Advanced_Stats/Team_Totals/Regular_Season

Top 3 teams are Western, next 8 are Eastern.

It's an odd league at the moment.

blahblahyoutoo
12-28-2015, 12:57 PM
according to winning percentages as of right now, yes.

east - 227-224
west - 230-233

this says nothing about SOS though.

cmellofan15
12-28-2015, 01:11 PM
If there were a 7 game series between any team out east outside of Cleveland, I would still take Houston or Memphis over them in 5-6 games. So I say not even close yet.

houston is 5-7 against the east and in those 12 games they've played only one team above .500 (Charolette)

but hey at least memphis is 7-7! lmao

-Kobe24-TJ19-
12-28-2015, 01:20 PM
The NBA is a tank fest now.

you are very wrong

Crackadalic
12-28-2015, 01:24 PM
I said this in my "is the east catching up?" thread

The east is getting better and no longer a joke of a conference

Besides the Warriors and Spurs everyone below those two are beatable and can be beat by any team out east 2-10

shep33
12-28-2015, 01:29 PM
I think west teams have been through so much wear and tear too. by years end everything will be right in terms of standings

Bron > Kobe
12-28-2015, 01:29 PM
you are very wrong
Ok

Vee-Rex
12-28-2015, 01:44 PM
I said this in my "is the east catching up?" thread

The east is getting better and no longer a joke of a conference

Besides the Warriors and Spurs everyone below those two are beatable and can be beat by any team out east 2-10

The difference in opinions have drastically changed, it seems (only 1 page in this thread but the tone seems to be different). Funny given the fact that your thread was created only a few weeks ago, and was focused solely on the East catching up rather than being better.

My personal opinion is that the East is definitely catching up, but not better at this point. Need more time/longevity. However, no one can honestly say that the East is a joke like they preached about all the time before.

Tony_Starks
12-28-2015, 01:46 PM
The bad-mediocre teams in the east are better than the bad-mediocre teams in the West but as far as legit contenders? No. It's still Cleveland and then a pretty huge drop off until the next best team.

For all intents and purposes you can pencil Cleveland in for the Finals now, unless a miracle happens. Even if that miracle happened, whoever lucked up against Cleveland would get absolutely murdered by whoever comes out of the West.

In the West you at least still have the Spurs, and possibly OKC and the Clipps to challenge the Warriors. So we're talking 3 to 4 legitimate championship contenders and possibly 1 more depending on what Houston decides to do with their roster.

You don't really believe this, do you? I'm hoping there aren't people this blinded.

Clippers and Thunder can best the Warriors in a 7 game series? Not sure we are watching the same teams, and what caliber you consider them in at their best.

At their best, the only team that can challenge the Warriors is the Spurs. I figured this was common sense knowledge by now.


Totally disagree. At their best I give the Clippers a punchers chance of beating the Dubs in a 7 game series. They were up on them by 20 earlier this season before blowing the game. Their team is still very much in flux, by seasons end I expect them to be very formidable and they always play the Warriors tough.

and OKC? I'd bet my money on a healthy Russ and KD in a 7 game series verses anybody. That's the only concern I have with them, enter the playoffs healthy.

mngopher35
12-28-2015, 02:03 PM
I said this in my "is the east catching up?" thread

The east is getting better and no longer a joke of a conference

Besides the Warriors and Spurs everyone below those two are beatable and can be beat by any team out east 2-10

The difference in opinions have drastically changed, it seems (only 1 page in this thread but the tone seems to be different). Funny given the fact that your thread was created only a few weeks ago, and was focused solely on the East catching up rather than being better.

My personal opinion is that the East is definitely catching up, but not better at this point. Need more time/longevity. However, no one can honestly say that the East is a joke like they preached about all the time before.

I was just going to say that I think the east is catching up but isn't better yet. Have to give it some more time but at least they are evening up.

beasted86
12-28-2015, 02:54 PM
Totally disagree. At their best I give the Clippers a punchers chance of beating the Dubs in a 7 game series. They were up on them by 20 earlier this season before blowing the game. Their team is still very much in flux, by seasons end I expect them to be very formidable and they always play the Warriors tough.

and OKC? I'd bet my money on a healthy Russ and KD in a 7 game series verses anybody. That's the only concern I have with them, enter the playoffs healthy.

At their best, DeAndre is still a liability and sits in the 4th quarter essentially "breaking" the Clippers' sham of a defense or turning their offense to mush whereby PPP is concerned, while the Warriors play small on the other end knocking down 3s while holding a sensible level of defense.

Thunder are probably a better bet, but I'm still holding my money unless I'm seeing 4:1 odds or better. Their team is inherently flawed in that they rely on both of those guys to have a good game 4 out of 7 games. One being a beast and the other just being solid isn't good enough. Their team also has had a long run of bad luck when it comes to injuries. It's either Durant or Westbrook or Ibaka for like the past 3 years.

5ass
12-28-2015, 03:03 PM
Fans of western conference team have been complaining about how the east is weak for the last few years now. It's going to take some time for it to sink in, but it's entirely possible that the east is already better than the west overall.

KnicksorBust
12-28-2015, 03:10 PM
I consider better by potential title contenders and by that measure the West still has a clear edge.

tredigs
12-28-2015, 03:14 PM
Three of the top four teams and 8 of the top 10 players are still in the West. I'm glad that the East middle rungs are stepping up this year, but the power still lies heavily in the Western Conference.

kobe4thewinbang
12-28-2015, 03:42 PM
The East is improving, but west is still a juggernaught. Only difference is a couple teams are struggling (Pelicans) or declining (Grizzlies, Blazers) and others are possibly going to take their spot. Still too early to tell, but I am impressed by Deron Williams and the Mavs andd the Kings are my underdog for the 8th seed. Utah's doing better too. I can't believe the Wizards are .500. I hope the Knicks sneak in, and I hope the Heat do well. Wade's looked good. My Lakers, though, ugh. Hibbert is horrid, and almost everybody else. I hope OKC stays healthy and knocks someone out.

Tony_Starks
12-28-2015, 03:59 PM
The East is improving, but west is still a juggernaught. Only difference is a couple teams are struggling (Pelicans) or declining (Grizzlies, Blazers) and others are possibly going to take their spot. Still too early to tell, but I am impressed by Deron Williams and the Mavs andd the Kings are my underdog for the 8th seed. Utah's doing better too. I can't believe the Wizards are .500. I hope the Knicks sneak in, and I hope the Heat do well. Wade's looked good. My Lakers, though, ugh. Hibbert is horrid, and almost everybody else. I hope OKC stays healthy and knocks someone out.

Man Hibbert has been shockingly bad. I get that he long ago fell off offensively but you would think if your SOLE job was to play D and rebound that he would be killing it.

I would seriously consider the old Kwame better than Hibbert at this point....

Scoots
12-28-2015, 04:07 PM
The middle of the league is always in transition and such stories can always be told ... team A would be doing a lot better but player W hasn't been integrated yet ... team B would be doing a lot better but player X hasn't been fully healthy yet ... team C would be doing a lot better but player Y and player Z have missed too many games.

SoxFan05
12-28-2015, 04:12 PM
The West is unfortunately. It'd be nice to see the East win this year though. The Bulls need to trade Noah before the gas runs out on Gasol or leave Noah as a backup. Most likely it'll be Spurs vs Cleveland in the Finals

Scoots
12-28-2015, 04:28 PM
The West is unfortunately. It'd be nice to see the East win this year though. The Bulls need to trade Noah before the gas runs out on Gasol or leave Noah as a backup. Most likely it'll be Spurs vs Cleveland in the Finals

Chicago is up and it's easy to see them getting worse in the near future ... the similar Western narrative this year is that some middle teams were in a similar position last year (Memphis, Portland, and Dallas) ... and the young teams in the west (NOP, Minny, Utah, Denver, Portland) have not come up enough to fill the gap ... and the middle teams expected to fill the playoff spots are worse than expected (Houston, LAC) and the other teams trying to fill the gap are not consistent or good enough yet (Sac, Phoenix) ... with 1 truly terrible team (LAL).

Plenty of doom and gloom and plenty of hope ... just like every other year in the history of the NBA.

Too early to tell if the swing will stop and swing back to the west or finish swinging to the East for a period of time.

Chronz
12-28-2015, 05:10 PM
The NBA is a tank fest now.

LOL. Wat?

5ass
12-28-2015, 05:23 PM
LOL. Wat?

Yeah that was stupid. Only the Sixers and Lakers are tanking and happy not to make the play offs.

R. Johnson#3
12-28-2015, 05:23 PM
It's still early and it's something nobody is used to seeing. As much as I would like to believe it, I still need to see more. If the difference is similar to what it is now when the all-star break hits then I'll start to believe it a bit.

With that being said, I think there are some teams in the West who are about to make a push. Dallas is the first that comes to mind. Parsons seems to be shaking off the rust and once D Will comes back they'll really be fully healthy for the first time this year. There's also Memphis. I just can't see them being as bad as they've been for much longer.

Chronz
12-28-2015, 05:30 PM
If we look at the results thus far this year, the 3 best teams are in the West (OKC is the 3rd) and the rest of the Eastern playoff squads are next in line. But we do know that Houston is underachieving after a stellar run, the Clips have proven a higher level of play but have been without key players and are struggling to integrate the new additions. We can believe that Boston is the best team in the East or that lots of teams are still acclimating themselves, I think we can ignore the Cavs level of efficiency at this point because they are missing most of their guys. We'll have a better picture by the All-Star break (tho the Clips are sure to struggle without Blake).

Im not willing to ignore all of last season so I still have the very best 5 in the West with the East having maybe 2 or 3 heavyweights.

D-Leethal
12-28-2015, 05:53 PM
I think the majority of West teams still win in a playoff series. I think a lot of the rising East teams are younger and hungrier, some of them tasting success for the first or second time in the NBA so they are going full throttle right now. West teams are a little older, have had sustained success for the past 5+ years and are more apt to coast through the doldrums of the regular season, so record wise it will appear the East is better than the West.

They aren't there yet but they are getting close. You can sense the tide turning a little bit.

All-In
12-28-2015, 07:21 PM
10 teams out of the top 13 in defensive efficiency are from the Eastern Conference....Im sure you can guess who the 3 teams from the West are......so maybe its defense or maybe its coaching but whatever the reason is the East is catching up to the West....Is it better? Maybe......but you really cant be too sure since its only a couple months in and considering the past dominace of the West but I just love how its a discussion now

Hawkeye15
12-28-2015, 08:35 PM
THe middle of the pack teams are stronger out east probably, but the east still has only 1 team that can win the title. West has 2-4.

But, at some point, the power shifts a little, you have to figure the east has probably been riding the lottery longer, and at some point they might grow? But they aren't there.

So, it depends on what you mean by "better". This will be the first time (if things keep up) that the east won't have a sub .500 team in the playoffs in a long time, and vice versa for the west.

Hawkeye15
12-28-2015, 08:38 PM
If we look at the results thus far this year, the 3 best teams are in the West (OKC is the 3rd) and the rest of the Eastern playoff squads are next in line. But we do know that Houston is underachieving after a stellar run, the Clips have proven a higher level of play but have been without key players and are struggling to integrate the new additions. We can believe that Boston is the best team in the East or that lots of teams are still acclimating themselves, I think we can ignore the Cavs level of efficiency at this point because they are missing most of their guys. We'll have a better picture by the All-Star break (tho the Clips are sure to struggle without Blake).

Im not willing to ignore all of last season so I still have the very best 5 in the West with the East having maybe 2 or 3 heavyweights.

best 5 out west? Eh, I think Cleveland is right below GS and SA.

Munkeysuit
12-28-2015, 09:09 PM
Warriors and Spurs for the West and there is like a 6 car pile up in the East, which any one of those teams could beat each other for the top spot, those teams would be Cavs, Heat, Raptors, Bulls, Hawks and Pacers.

Chronz
12-28-2015, 09:27 PM
best 5 out west? Eh, I think Cleveland is right below GS and SA.

Yeah I worded that wrong, Cleveland is among those 5 best.

DODGERS&LAKERS
12-28-2015, 09:31 PM
Yeah that was stupid. Only the Sixers and Lakers are tanking and happy not to make the play offs.

I wish we could say we were tanking. We just suck.
As far as the question, how are the records head to head? It used to be where a 50 win team in the West was much better than a 50 win team in the east. Just due to schedule imbalance. Is the West still beating the east more often then not or has it flip flopped? I think I read somewhere that the East has won more against the west only once in the past 17 years. If the East has a better record that is telling that they might have the stronger overall conference

Mr. Baller
12-28-2015, 09:38 PM
If there were a 7 game series between any team out east outside of Cleveland, I would still take Houston or Memphis over them in 5-6 games. So I say not even close yet.

That is absolutely ridiculous

5ass
12-28-2015, 10:40 PM
I wish we could say we were tanking. We just suck.
As far as the question, how are the records head to head? It used to be where a 50 win team in the West was much better than a 50 win team in the east. Just due to schedule imbalance. Is the West still beating the east more often then not or has it flip flopped? I think I read somewhere that the East has won more against the west only once in the past 17 years. If the East has a better record that is telling that they might have the stronger overall conference

Yeah lol that's true, but I think at this point they're relishing it. I doubt the FO is looking to make moves midseason to improve their team.

5ass
12-28-2015, 10:41 PM
If the heat lose tonight they drop from 3rd seed to 8th. LOL

nycericanguy
12-29-2015, 01:27 PM
The east is definitely deeper than the west this year.

ATL is 20-13 and 2nd in the east, CHA is 17-13 and out of the playoffs currently...lol.

there is no separation, 9 teams from 2nd to 10th all within 1 loss of each other.

FlashBolt
12-29-2015, 02:55 PM
East is better. I think this is enough games to seriously argue that. Houston will never get better; this is as good as they will get. 30 games into the season and it looks like nothing has changed at all. I don't see West having a better conference. Crazy how things change. Just a few months ago, people were talking about changing the lottery system and playoff seeding as well. Now, I think those talks will slow down. Still, East only have 1 legitimate contender and that is the Cavs. And it's not even about the better players being on the East. The best players are all on the West and somehow, those teams aren't winning as many games. East is just a better coached/better built conference atm.

AllBall
12-29-2015, 03:48 PM
Winning Records

1. Golden State Warriors
2. San Antonio Spurs
3. Cleveland Cavaliers
4. Oklahoma City Thunder
5. Atlanta Hawks
6. Indiana Pacers
7. Miami Heat
8. Los Angeles Clippers
9. Toronto Raptors
10. Chicago Bulls
11. Dallas Mavericks
12. Orlando Magic
13. Boston Celtics
14. Charlotte Hornets
15. Detroit Pistons
16. Memphis Grizzlies

East is better as a whole until proven otherwise.

Gander13SM
12-29-2015, 03:50 PM
I wouldn't go as far as to say it's better coached^

And the balance is better in the east. I've said this from the start, teams like OKC would be better to pick either KD or Westbrook to build around, trade the other for tons of really good role players.

The league should thank Presti for being incapable of building a supporting cast worthy of a contender. Give Westy and KD an offensive system similar to Spurs/Warriors and a roster with the same depth and this league would've been theirs for the last 3 years (if the injury situation was different).

One of the problems with the West is their teams have no balance, OKC, Houston, LAC are all top heavy. Big 2s and big 3s only work if the supporting cast is of a high caliber.

The only player in the history of the league to win a title with a lackluster supporting cast is MAYBE Olajuwon. But even then it wasn't terrible.

I think all the talent is in the west and I would still take Memphis over any Eastern team outside the top 2/3 in a 7 game series just because of their track record and experience. Clippers as well.

BUT, as early as it is. A shift is happening. Somebody else put it best (can't be bothered checking to see who it was). East has more depth with mid table teams, West had more legitimate contenders.

That won't last forever. And I'm looking forward to the parity returning. I hope KD or Russ heads east either in free agency or via trade (for the latter). Just to make it even better.

Imagine seeing KD and Wall vs LeBron and Irving for the next 3/4 years in the playoffs.

KnicksorBust
12-29-2015, 04:05 PM
Winning Records

1. Golden State Warriors
2. San Antonio Spurs
3. Cleveland Cavaliers
4. Oklahoma City Thunder
5. Atlanta Hawks
6. Indiana Pacers
7. Miami Heat
8. Los Angeles Clippers
9. Toronto Raptors
10. Chicago Bulls
11. Dallas Mavericks
12. Orlando Magic
13. Boston Celtics
14. Charlotte Hornets
15. Detroit Pistons
16. Memphis Grizzlies

East is better as a whole until proven otherwise.

But in reality who cares if Orlando-Boston-Charlotte-Detroit all have better records than the Grizz. They are playoff fodder and will be forgotten about.

Vee-Rex
12-29-2015, 04:18 PM
http://forums.prosportsdaily.com/showthread.php?901035-Is-the-East-Catching-Up

^^ the comments in that thread are hiLARIOUS.

AllBall
12-29-2015, 04:40 PM
But in reality who cares if Orlando-Boston-Charlotte-Detroit all have better records than the Grizz. They are playoff fodder and will be forgotten about.

Who cares wasn't the question.

tredigs
12-29-2015, 04:55 PM
The West has a better win percentage 13 of the last 14 seasons, and has 8 of the top 10 players in the league as well as 3 of the top 4 contenders. Regardless of some middle rung disparity here and there, the East simply can't match the West when it comes to competing for titles. Outside of the Celtics Big 3, since Lebron showed up there has been no consistent forces out East. It's why you just have to laugh at those who try to throw shade on the Warriors title for having such an easy road. That's the East nearly every year this decade. This year is no different. The road to the Finals in the West is ridiculous between a healthy OKC, Spurs and Warriors (plus a very tough Clippers squad if they can finally get it going). In the East, there is nobody.

Vee-Rex
12-29-2015, 05:44 PM
The West has a better win percentage 13 of the last 14 seasons, and has 8 of the top 10 players in the league as well as 3 of the top 4 contenders. Regardless of some middle rung disparity here and there, the East simply can't match the West when it comes to competing for titles. Outside of the Celtics Big 3, since Lebron showed up there has been no consistent forces out East. It's why you just have to laugh at those who try to throw shade on the Warriors title for having such an easy road. That's the East nearly every year this decade. This year is no different. The road to the Finals in the West is ridiculous between a healthy OKC, Spurs and Warriors (plus a very tough Clippers squad if they can finally get it going). In the East, there is nobody.

You don't see the irony in the two bolded parts?

I think most people (outside a few delusional posters) have crowned the Warriors the best in the league, and they worked for every inch of that crown. They deserved it. No question about it. But you can't really get upset/frustrated or feel invalidated if someone just so happens to mention that the Dubs did not face any of the top Western teams that YOU listed in last year's finals run.

KnicksorBust
12-29-2015, 05:54 PM
But in reality who cares if Orlando-Boston-Charlotte-Detroit all have better records than the Grizz. They are playoff fodder and will be forgotten about.

Who cares wasn't the question.

But why should mediocre teams with low ceilings dictate the better conference? That is my question. It is like asking who is the better team and comparing benches to decide the winner. It is illogical. The better conference is the one with more title contenders and that is still easily the West.

tredigs
12-29-2015, 06:01 PM
You don't see the irony in the two bolded parts?

I think most people (outside a few delusional posters) have crowned the Warriors the best in the league, and they worked for every inch of that crown. They deserved it. No question about it. But you can't really get upset/frustrated or feel invalidated if someone just so happens to mention that the Dubs did not face any of the top Western teams that YOU listed in last year's finals run.

I never argued that the Warriors had a terribly difficult run. Yet, they beat the team who beat the team that beat the Spurs in the first round. The Spurs had a must win versus the Pelicans (who the Warriors beat in a first round sweep) to secure HCA in the last game of the season, and got smoked. They weren't going to beat the Warriors 4 of 7 without HCA. Neither were the Clippers. The Thunder were not even in the playoffs. Trust me, I wish they got to face those teams, but they were not good enough to meet up. This year, the Spurs will be there. This is possibly their best team to date.

B'sCeltsPatsSox
12-29-2015, 11:19 PM
FWIW, 8 of OKC's 10 losses have came to Eastern Conference teams. And then you look at Miami and they're 9-11 within the conference lol.

But the Western conference is definitely better for contenders. I feel like there are four teams clearly above the rest of the league, and three of them are in the West. The East on the other hand is probably better from top to bottom. As of today only 2.5 games separate the 2nd seed from the 10th seed. Then you've got teams like Washington and New York who have the potential to get in the playoff mix soon too.

5ass
12-30-2015, 12:58 AM
But why should mediocre teams with low ceilings dictate the better conference? That is my question. It is like asking who is the better team and comparing benches to decide the winner. It is illogical. The better conference is the one with more title contenders and that is still easily the West.

But OVERALL the east could be better than the west. Anyway, I said it last time, but the eastern conference is on the rise. Western conference teams are mostly older teams who have at least one of their main players in their 30s. The east have a ton of young talent because of the draft over the past few years. Eventually the east will have more contenders.

Sadds The Gr8
12-30-2015, 05:23 AM
But in reality who cares if Orlando-Boston-Charlotte-Detroit all have better records than the Grizz. They are playoff fodder and will be forgotten about.
so is Memphis.

KnicksorBust
12-30-2015, 09:15 AM
But in reality who cares if Orlando-Boston-Charlotte-Detroit all have better records than the Grizz. They are playoff fodder and will be forgotten about.
so is Memphis.

Probably true as well but that doesn't hurt my argument. People are using those 4 teams as the proof that the East is better. Throw Memphis out too and what are you left with?

KnicksorBust
12-30-2015, 09:18 AM
But why should mediocre teams with low ceilings dictate the better conference? That is my question. It is like asking who is the better team and comparing benches to decide the winner. It is illogical. The better conference is the one with more title contenders and that is still easily the West.

But OVERALL the east could be better than the west. Anyway, I said it last time, but the eastern conference is on the rise. Western conference teams are mostly older teams who have at least one of their main players in their 30s. The east have a ton of young talent because of the draft over the past few years. Eventually the east will have more contenders.

This is an interesting point. But the only West team that could reasonably be expected to fall off is Dallas. Okc is still young. Warriors are young. SaS retooled with Kawhi and LMA. Clips are still young. What East team(s) do you expect to rise to THAT level? The teams with the best young talents are the Wolves and the Pelicans and even they are both in the West.

Gander13SM
12-30-2015, 09:51 AM
It will take superstars from the West going out east to truly balance it.

Tg11
12-30-2015, 11:01 AM
Out of the 2 conferences the East is the easier conference to get into the playoffs whereas in the West it is harder but the West is more of a competitive conference but the East gets more popularity more exposure I guess if you can put it that way

Scoots
12-30-2015, 12:12 PM
If the top 2 teams in the East were winning 30% and 20% more games than anyone else in the conference then it stands to reason that the lower teams would be winning fewer games overall as a result. Some of this discrepancy from the 4th team in the west down is the dominance at the top of the Western standings.

Some of it is that the core of the west is aging and the young talent isn't ready to take up the slack yet.

Hardaway Here
12-31-2015, 09:01 AM
If the top 2 teams in the East were winning 30% and 20% more games than anyone else in the conference then it stands to reason that the lower teams would be winning fewer games overall as a result. Some of this discrepancy from the 4th team in the west down is the dominance at the top of the Western standings.

Some of it is that the core of the west is aging and the young talent isn't ready to take up the slack yet.

So when the East was top heavy with the top 3 teams or so winning the majority of games the rest of the conference is just weak. Easy road to the finals. This during the time no one knew who would come out west. Now they west is top heavy they are still the toughest conference not weak at all. No one knows who is coming out the East the heavy favorite is the Cavs, but they haven't been spectacular. Granted they've had injuries, but it is no where near a sure thing. Anything to discredit the East and glory to the west. I'm from the west coast to and I'll just never understand it.

Hardaway Here
12-31-2015, 09:06 AM
Out of the 2 conferences the East is the easier conference to get into the playoffs whereas in the West it is harder but the West is more of a competitive conference but the East gets more popularity more exposure I guess if you can put it that way

How is it easier when you have 9-10(almost 11 teams over .500) that can switch out with another team after a game in the East. Unlike the west when teams with subpar records are in the playoff slots. When it was the other way around it was a gauntlet for the West. Easy for the east. Just last year people were saying suns won't make playoffs despite their record because they were in West. If they were East they'd be 5-8 seed and what not. Now the situation is reversed, but no Eastern team gets that comparison. That's just crazy how biased people can be towards the west. Hypocrisy all the way around.

AllBall
12-31-2015, 09:52 AM
So when the East was top heavy with the top 3 teams or so winning the majority of games the rest of the conference is just weak. Easy road to the finals. This during the time no one knew who would come out west. Now they west is top heavy they are still the toughest conference not weak at all. No one knows who is coming out the East the heavy favorite is the Cavs, but they haven't been spectacular. Granted they've had injuries, but it is no where near a sure thing. Anything to discredit the East and glory to the west. I'm from the west coast to and I'll just never understand it.

Ether.

Too much logic in this post.

/thread

Gander13SM
12-31-2015, 10:38 AM
So when the East was top heavy with the top 3 teams or so winning the majority of games the rest of the conference is just weak. Easy road to the finals. This during the time no one knew who would come out west. Now they west is top heavy they are still the toughest conference not weak at all. No one knows who is coming out the East the heavy favorite is the Cavs, but they haven't been spectacular. Granted they've had injuries, but it is no where near a sure thing. Anything to discredit the East and glory to the west. I'm from the west coast to and I'll just never understand it.

The Cavs are clearly going to steam roll the East. No other team in that conference can touch them come playoff time.

Cavs will have a very easy road to the finals, not as easy as last year but still easy. And it's not their fault. They're just THAT good.

AllBall
12-31-2015, 02:31 PM
The Cavs are clearly going to steam roll the East. No other team in that conference can touch them come playoff time.

Cavs will have a very easy road to the finals, not as easy as last year but still easy. And it's not their fault. They're just THAT good.

Let me guess, when the Warriors steam roll the West they just got "lucky".

lol just lol @ this narrative

Gander13SM
12-31-2015, 05:50 PM
Let me guess, when the Warriors steam roll the West they just got "lucky".

lol just lol @ this narrative

No. The Warriors did not.

I mean luck is involved in every championship run. But they dominated the entire league in the regular season and tore apart everyone they faced in the playoffs. You can't knock them for that. It's not their fault the other teams have injury prone stars or didn't manage their players minutes well enough.

And what's so funny about this? Why lol? It's fact. I'm sorry but nobody in the east can beat the cavs 4 times in a series. There's a couple that can steal a game or two but beat a fully healthy Cavs roster? Nope.

The east is a cake walk for them. I'm not discrediting the other teams either. They're mostly just unfortunate.

chi-townlove1
01-01-2016, 01:44 PM
I seriously disagree. The Cavs are not INSANELY talented. They have Kyrie who is going to take a bit to get back. An aging Lebron, yes he is still great but nowhere near absolute dominance like before. And Kevin Love who is averaging 16/10 and shooting 43% from the field as a big man..

The Pacers, Heat, Celtics, Hawks, Pistons, Bulls, Magic and Raptors all have potential to play a 7 game series with the Cavs. Matchups are not nearly as one sided as they used to be

tredigs
01-01-2016, 02:22 PM
I seriously disagree. The Cavs are not INSANELY talented. They have Kyrie who is going to take a bit to get back. An aging Lebron, yes he is still great but nowhere near absolute dominance like before. And Kevin Love who is averaging 16/10 and shooting 43% from the field as a big man..

The Pacers, Heat, Celtics, Hawks, Pistons, Bulls, Magic and Raptors all have potential to play a 7 game series with the Cavs. Matchups are not nearly as one sided as they used to be
To "play", or win? All of those teams are significant underdogs to the Cavs if they are at full strength going into the post-season. In the East there's no better player than Lebron, no better 2nd option than Kyrie, and no better 3rd option than Love. There's also probably no better defense in the East either.

IKnowHoops
01-01-2016, 02:34 PM
As of right now, I would take Cleveland and Chicago over OKC in a 7 game series.

Cal827
01-01-2016, 02:43 PM
Yeah, I just don't think Cleveland is as good as they were last year. Lebron's a year older, and how much longer can he go without tiring out? Yes, they have Love and Irving, but they are practically useless if they aren't scoring. What happens, when they run into a team with defensive guys at the 1 and 4?

They are the best in the East right now, but they have had an easier schedule than most of the other top 8 in the East (at least right now), with only 14 games against teams above .500. Most East teams are close to 20 games against +.500 teams at this point, and the difference could be why they have the East lead over teams like Atlanta, Chicago, Toronto, etc.

I still think that they'll come out of the East, but they will probably get destroyed by the West winner (as would pretty much any East winner :laugh2: ). Yes they have Lebron, but think, if the East Stays healthy, there's a good chance he'll be in series defending guys like Paul George, Butler, Wade, or teams with suffocating defensive systems, like Boston, Miami, Toronto, etc. The East is a lot stronger than it has been in years, and it wouldn't be completely shocking to see the Cavs get taken down in a 7 game series against the Heat, Hawks, Raptors, Pacers, or Bulls.

The East is much deeper than the Western Conference this year. After Golden State, San Antonio and OKC out west, there's not much else. I don't think anyone is predicting the Clippers to surprise, and the rest of the West doesn't stand a chance. The last 3 playoff teams are hovering at the .500 level. It's been a long time since we've seen this, but it's probably gonna be harder to get in to the East playoffs than the West.

tredigs
01-02-2016, 03:41 AM
As of right now, I would take Cleveland and Chicago over OKC in a 7 game series.

Chicago? Lmao. You and only you. They'd be absolutely crushed if both are at full strength.

IKnowHoops
01-02-2016, 07:32 AM
Chicago? Lmao. You and only you. They'd be absolutely crushed if both are at full strength.

Has Chicago been full strength this year? They still gave it to OKC when they played. I'm going off of what has actually happened, not by the dream of what should happen when you go up against a team with two of the top 5 players in the league on it.

Vee-Rex
01-02-2016, 01:42 PM
Chicago? Lmao. You and only you. They'd be absolutely crushed if both are at full strength.

Under Thibs Chicago was a nightmare to play against in the playoffs. I swear they had an extra gear that most teams didn't have. Their defense was tenacious. Fully healthy, gun to my head, I'd take OKC in the series but you're severely underestimating the Bulls if you think they'd get crushed.

Obviously, things could be different under Hoiberg.

Chronz
01-02-2016, 02:47 PM
Has Chicago been full strength this year? They still gave it to OKC when they played. I'm going off of what has actually happened, not by the dream of what should happen when you go up against a team with two of the top 5 players in the league on it.
Whats actually happened is that the Thunder are the superior team thus far, with a greater room for improvement (That part is obviously subjective). What does Chicago have to look forward to? A trade for Jamal Crawford?


Under Thibs Chicago was a nightmare to play against in the playoffs. I swear they had an extra gear that most teams didn't have. Their defense was tenacious. Fully healthy, gun to my head, I'd take OKC in the series but you're severely underestimating the Bulls if you think they'd get crushed.

Obviously, things could be different under Hoiberg.

A nightmare? The Thunder were a greater nightmare to a superior team, the Spurs want no part of them and so far this year, the Thunder have the FAR superior Efficiency Differential. I dont know about blowout but I think its far more likely to go 4-5 than 6-7. Then again, sometimes 4-game sweeps can be tightly contested throughout and thats more of a close series than say, BostonVSAtlanta that went 7 and every Celtic win was convincing and the losses short and narrow. Those things can happen but complete domination of your opponent matters too.

Vee-Rex
01-02-2016, 03:28 PM
A nightmare? The Thunder were a greater nightmare to a superior team, the Spurs want no part of them and so far this year, the Thunder have the FAR superior Efficiency Differential. I dont know about blowout but I think its far more likely to go 4-5 than 6-7. Then again, sometimes 4-game sweeps can be tightly contested throughout and thats more of a close series than say, BostonVSAtlanta that went 7 and every Celtic win was convincing and the losses short and narrow. Those things can happen but complete domination of your opponent matters too.

Not sure what position you're taking on this?

When I say Chicago is a nightmare in the playoffs, that doesn't mean I'm saying the Thunder aren't. My post is in direct response to the suggestion that the Thunder would crush the Bulls in a 7-game series. (synonyms for crush used in his contexts are: pulverize, humiliate, annihilate, destroy)

To suggest one team would pulverize another is to suggest a clean, effortless sweep, or a 5-game series in which the winning team is blowing the losing team out in most games. This, is what I disagree with, on the basis that Chicago (IMO) has that extra gear and defensive intensity that makes them a tough team to defeat in a series. Even if OKC wins in 5 or 6 (I don't believe it would be a sweep), I think they would be some excruciatingly gritty games with perhaps multiple overtimes, etc...

So by quoting my post and countering it, you are effectively saying that you believe OKC would annihilate Chicago in a 7-game series, since that's essentially the only point I was contesting (I think OKC is the overall better team and would win the series, just not crush it). Is that right?

FlashBolt
01-04-2016, 12:43 PM
Not sure what position you're taking on this?

When I say Chicago is a nightmare in the playoffs, that doesn't mean I'm saying the Thunder aren't. My post is in direct response to the suggestion that the Thunder would crush the Bulls in a 7-game series. (synonyms for crush used in his contexts are: pulverize, humiliate, annihilate, destroy)

To suggest one team would pulverize another is to suggest a clean, effortless sweep, or a 5-game series in which the winning team is blowing the losing team out in most games. This, is what I disagree with, on the basis that Chicago (IMO) has that extra gear and defensive intensity that makes them a tough team to defeat in a series. Even if OKC wins in 5 or 6 (I don't believe it would be a sweep), I think they would be some excruciatingly gritty games with perhaps multiple overtimes, etc...

So by quoting my post and countering it, you are effectively saying that you believe OKC would annihilate Chicago in a 7-game series, since that's essentially the only point I was contesting (I think OKC is the overall better team and would win the series, just not crush it). Is that right?

He never said any of that, though. What I think Chronz said was that the Thunders are clearly a more dangerous team with more room for growth. In short, the Thunders are not 100% right now. Bulls unfortunately, are. How much better can they get? Rose is arguably the worst player in the NBA right now if you go by what his output should be. If they were to go up against each other, I'd say it would be a six game series max with Thunder's offense being just too much for them to contain. Only teams I can say that will legitimately win this title are the Thunder, Warriors, Spurs, and Cavs. Bulls are just not at that level.

chi-townlove1
01-04-2016, 12:54 PM
Alright let's stop with the whole Rose is the worst player in the NBA right now. We all know that's a ****in joke. The guy has played a hell of a lot better over the last 6 or so games. Whether we like to admit it or not, he also makes the team better when he's on the court, plain and simple. He's just another guy that has the potential to score a lot. And when that threat is out there, it makes the team better no matter what way we look at it.

FlashBolt
01-04-2016, 02:00 PM
Alright let's stop with the whole Rose is the worst player in the NBA right now. We all know that's a ****in joke. The guy has played a hell of a lot better over the last 6 or so games. Whether we like to admit it or not, he also makes the team better when he's on the court, plain and simple. He's just another guy that has the potential to score a lot. And when that threat is out there, it makes the team better no matter what way we look at it.

Maybe you have been looking at Draymond Green's statline for the past six games but no, Rose has not looked a "hell of a lot better." Over the last six games he has played in, he has shot 109 shots and scored only 18 points per game via 42% shooting. His team has also lost four of those games. (They have won the past three games without Rose). Check Rose's USG%. For a player to have such a high USG% and just those numbers? That's terrible. He is playing like the worst player when you take into account he has the ball for such an amount.

tredigs
01-04-2016, 02:35 PM
Let's put aside the eye test and ignore that OKC has the two best players in the series. Bulls have a +1.9 win differential, the Thunder +8.4. SRS the Thunder rank 3rd behind GS and SAS at a very impressive 7.54 (A better SRS than the Bulls have had since '96-'97). Bulls rank 9th at 2.54. That's a large chasm in their level of play this season.

It's definitely not just a lack of Thibs, it's a lack of Rose and Noah. That said, the fact that the Thunder have probably the most inept NBA coach in Billy Donovan does not play out well in their favor come playoffs when it's time to scheme for their opposition. It's why as a GS fan I don't fear them nearly as much as the Spurs.

Gander13SM
01-04-2016, 03:22 PM
Said it before and I'll say it again. The entire league needs to thank Presti and Co for being too incompetent to put together a high caliber supporting cast around KD and Westbrook.

FlashBolt
01-04-2016, 05:52 PM
Let's put aside the eye test and ignore that OKC has the two best players in the series. Bulls have a +1.9 win differential, the Thunder +8.4. SRS the Thunder rank 3rd behind GS and SAS at a very impressive 7.54 (A better SRS than the Bulls have had since '96-'97). Bulls rank 9th at 2.54. That's a large chasm in their level of play this season.

It's definitely not just a lack of Thibs, it's a lack of Rose and Noah. That said, the fact that the Thunder have probably the most inept NBA coach in Billy Donovan does not play out well in their favor come playoffs when it's time to scheme for their opposition. It's why as a GS fan I don't fear them nearly as much as the Spurs.

Coaching is terrible but I'm not sure who is building the roster here. I'm not seeing any consistency with this team and it is looking like a Westbrook/KD show every night. We have guys who don't know their roles and that's on Donovan. Can't for the life of me see why we chose him... You need an NBA coach with experience to coach an elite team -- not some guy who doesn't even know who plays what position.

Scoots
01-04-2016, 06:34 PM
Coaching is terrible but I'm not sure who is building the roster here. I'm not seeing any consistency with this team and it is looking like a Westbrook/KD show every night. We have guys who don't know their roles and that's on Donovan. Can't for the life of me see why we chose him... You need an NBA coach with experience to coach an elite team -- not some guy who doesn't even know who plays what position.

Yeah! Like Steve Kerr and his long coaching resume before last year :)

I didn't like the Donovan hire, but I'm all for getting new head coaches in the NBA rather than a parade of old HC retreads.

Chronz
01-05-2016, 12:12 AM
Not sure what position you're taking on this?

When I say Chicago is a nightmare in the playoffs, that doesn't mean I'm saying the Thunder aren't. My post is in direct response to the suggestion that the Thunder would crush the Bulls in a 7-game series. (synonyms for crush used in his contexts are: pulverize, humiliate, annihilate, destroy)
Thats kind of my point, it doesn't distinguish them at all and if anything, only enhances OKC IMO.


To suggest one team would pulverize another is to suggest a clean, effortless sweep, or a 5-game series in which the winning team is blowing the losing team out in most games. This, is what I disagree with, on the basis that Chicago (IMO) has that extra gear and defensive intensity that makes them a tough team to defeat in a series. Even if OKC wins in 5 or 6 (I don't believe it would be a sweep), I think they would be some excruciatingly gritty games with perhaps multiple overtimes, etc...
But both teams have that extra gear, I'd argue OKC has a greater step to take come post season, but this is the NBA... you can have a sub.500 team push the eventual champs to 7 while a superior Finalists only lasts 6. I've explained my stance on this, I somewhat agree with your definitions but I do think its closer to a 5 game series than anything else.

Chicago has a move to make tho, they are going figure out what to do with Rose and possibly find some guard help. OKC has holes on its roster but they are starting to gel and have posted far better regular season stats. The difference in their SRS is 3x greater, I know the Bulls have an established core so they aren't going full bore yet but Im willing to bet most series that began with such a staggering difference in efficiency, most end in 3(for the olden days), 4 or 5.

Redrum187
01-06-2016, 09:09 AM
Alright let's stop with the whole Rose is the worst player in the NBA right now. We all know that's a ****in joke. The guy has played a hell of a lot better over the last 6 or so games. Whether we like to admit it or not, he also makes the team better when he's on the court, plain and simple. He's just another guy that has the potential to score a lot. And when that threat is out there, it makes the team better no matter what way we look at it.

I'm curious, does requiring 15.4 shots to score 14.4 points help the Bulls like you're suggesting?

To put things into perspective:

(As of 1/6/16)
Kobe TS% .448
Rose TS% .437

Last 6 games
40/92 (43% FG), 4/16 (25% 3PT), 2.8 reb, 3.5 ast, 3 TO, 15.7 PPG
In this 6 game stretch you claim he's been playing "a hell of a lot better" he shot on average 15.3 times per game, to get 15.7 points while averaging an abysmal 1.17/1 assist/turnover ratio.


I'm sorry, Derrick Rose is utter garbage.

effen5
01-06-2016, 09:44 AM
The bulls on their winning streak has been hell of a lot better with just butler on the floor than both butler and rose. I'm sorry but Rose is still a joke

Scoots
01-06-2016, 11:01 AM
So, several pages of discussion later and the conclusion I can draw is ... the East is better than it was, the West is worse than it was, but most clearly think the title will end up in the West for another year.

I'm sure this debate will keep going every year until the NBA closes shop. :)

DODGERS&LAKERS
01-08-2016, 05:10 AM
As of today, east is leading the west 100-98 in head to head games. Huge improvement from last year

tredigs
01-08-2016, 12:38 PM
As of today, east is leading the west 100-98 in head to head games. Huge improvement from last year

It's actually 100-100 with the East still having played ~10% more home games. Middle of the pack in the East definitely looks to be actually improving, though, which is nice to see.

FlashBolt
01-08-2016, 02:18 PM
Yeah! Like Steve Kerr and his long coaching resume before last year :)

I didn't like the Donovan hire, but I'm all for getting new head coaches in the NBA rather than a parade of old HC retreads.

Well, Kerr does have experience. He has been heavily involved with the NBA from managing teams, playing alongside Jordan and then Duncan (two completely different personalities), playing under IMO, GOAT coach in Pop, and he always had a bright mind for the game. In commentaries, interviews, and as a guest on analyst shows, he had the right mind to be a coach. GSW is a much less complicated situation than OKC, too. You have two guys in OKC and that's literally all. GSW, you have much more room to work with and they were all lovey-dovey before Kerr even got there.

BuckWilliams
01-08-2016, 05:08 PM
the West is MUCH MUCH better from 1-4 seeds, but the East is better from 5-10 seed.

tredigs
01-08-2016, 06:10 PM
Well, Kerr does have experience. He has been heavily involved with the NBA from managing teams, playing alongside Jordan and then Duncan (two completely different personalities), playing under IMO, GOAT coach in Pop, and he always had a bright mind for the game. In commentaries, interviews, and as a guest on analyst shows, he had the right mind to be a coach. GSW is a much less complicated situation than OKC, too. You have two guys in OKC and that's literally all. GSW, you have much more room to work with and they were all lovey-dovey before Kerr even got there.

Really, tossing aside Ibaka as a nobody?

Scoots
01-08-2016, 09:11 PM
Well, Kerr does have experience. He has been heavily involved with the NBA from managing teams, playing alongside Jordan and then Duncan (two completely different personalities), playing under IMO, GOAT coach in Pop, and he always had a bright mind for the game. In commentaries, interviews, and as a guest on analyst shows, he had the right mind to be a coach. GSW is a much less complicated situation than OKC, too. You have two guys in OKC and that's literally all. GSW, you have much more room to work with and they were all lovey-dovey before Kerr even got there.
The fact remains kerr had no coaching experience at any level before he got the warriors gig.

FlashBolt
01-08-2016, 10:39 PM
Really, tossing aside Ibaka as a nobody?

For what he's getting paid, he's pretty replaceable.


The fact remains kerr had no coaching experience at any level before he got the warriors gig.

Never said he had any. Was insinuating that Donovan has had relatively zero experience with the NBA game. Never mentioned coaching experience one bit.