East and West Work Fine, Thanks
There has been a lot of chatter of late about making a change in the way the NBA playoff participants are determined and seeded. I’ve heard two different propositions: one of them is to abolish the conferences altogether and simply take the 16 best teams in the NBA to determe who makes the playoffs; the other argument aims to keep the conferences as they are, but re-seed the 16 teams based on their records once eight teams from each conference have qualified.
Fans, bloggers and journalists alike all seem to think that it would make sense for things to change pronto because the West is so much more powerful than the East right now. Some point out the obvious, which is that teams out West will win almost 50 games and miss the playoffs, while in the East teams could possibly be fighting for - and winning - seeds 6, 7 and 8 with sub-.500 records. Some even point to the fact that the Warriors team that beat Dallas in the first round last year were clearly better than their 8th seed suggested.
To all the people who point to these so-called “facts” and claim there be a need to restructure the NBA playoffs, I say hogwash. Hogwash!
I think this is a bad idea for two reasons:
- The balance of power doesn’t last forever: How long ago were we talking about an Eastern Conference dominance? Sure, the West has been a powerhouse since Shaq went to LA in the late 90s. But didn’t the Heat win a title a few years back? Didn’t the Pistons win a title a few years ago? I know you’re thinking “But the road to the NBA title in the West is tougher than it is in the East.” Well, what road to a championship isn’t a hard road to travel on? Nobody coasts to a championship. In no time, we’ll be talking about how stacked the East is after players realize the opportunity to play in big markets like New York/Brooklyn, the chance to be “the next…” in Chicago, or to play alongside superstars like LeBron, Dwyane, Dwight, etc.
- This is one doodle that can’t be undid: Once you mix the East and West in the playoffs before the NBA Finals, you lose momentum. For those that propose we take the best 16 records in the NBA and put them into the playoffs, what happens when all the teams from the East are eliminated and we’re left with the Suns, Lakers, Spurs, and Mavericks (hypothetically)? You get a great set of match ups, but the markets out east don’t have any team nearby to care about. There’s also the fact that the owners of Eastern Conference teams would never agree to this because the money they stand to make from losing a first-round series can mean the difference between making a profit and taking a loss for the season. But that’s beside the point. The point is that while re-seeding makes sense in theory, in practice it’s only good for the West for the short-term, and that’s very short-sighted.
Thoughts?
Comments
By Anthony RapFan on March 4th, 2008 at 10:59 pm
The one thing that really tanked the East from dominance were terrible draft choices from 1997 to 2007 and just plain bad trades by incompetent GMs. Atlanta’s Billy Knight (Pau and Paul would be in the East), Billy King (plain bad trading and salary -cap killing contracts, and AI bye bye), Rick Pitino (Garbage draft and no sympathy to the Duncan MISS) and some Danny Ainge (Telfair and u gave up on B. ROY?), Rob Limp-cock (toronto’s former GM retard, he just made us RAPS suck), Otis Thorpe (Gift wrapped T-mac and inheritted NIGGA-Baller Steve Francis, ISIAH FRIGGIN THOMAS (just take a guess), Larry Harris (he just sucks), Michael Jordan (killing two Eastern Team’s futures with Kwame and Puberty Boy from Gonzaga and still is), and Larry Bird (Golden State and Nellie sends flowers and fruit). If I am missing anything, please inform me….
By Connor on March 5th, 2008 at 10:56 am
Nicely put, Chris. What happens when the power shifts to the East in a couple years? Do you change the format again? No chance. The NBA has proven to be cyclical and there’ s no doubt the power will once again shift to the East within the next decade.
I also find it weird that fans forget two of the past four NBA Champions resided in the East. While most of the top teams reside out West I wouldn’t be shocked to see Beantown or Motown win it all this season as they have deep teams, playoff experience and have rosters filled with All-Stars. Plus, they have a lot easier road to the Finals and can rest key vets.
By Tom on April 20th, 2008 at 11:55 pm
I completely agree, Chris. I’ve read a lot of articles on this subject this season, and they all eventually bring me back to the same conclusion. While it would be great if the NBA could some how realign or restructure the league or playoffs, we just have to accept that that kind of maneuver just isn’t realistic. Besides the fact that the NBA isn’t willing to give up a red cent of the money generated by the current system, changing the league around might not necessarily have such a beneficial effect on the league anyway.
I’ve suggested in comments to other posts, and in my own stories, that the best way to make the NBA more balanced, and therefore more competitive and exciting, would be to make the league smaller. Simply put, fewer teams=fewer bad players. But this kind of drastic change is impossible. Besides the fact that it would alienate entire cities in which teams are disbanded, it would severely cut into the profits of the NBA. Sure, it would make for an exciting league. But excitement is only part of the sports watching experience.
Because that’s what the NBA is. The Experience. Mark Cuban has been an innovator in helping change the NBA into what it currently is. It’s not just watching your favorite team. It’s feeling like you are a part of that team. Changing the playoff format would not just take away from the natural rivalries, it would basically be a slap in the face to every fan who considers himself a part of his teams’ magical playoff run at 38-44. I know I sound sarcastic here, but it’s the truth. If the NBA wants to market itself as an experience, then it needs to stay loyal to that promise.