PDA

View Full Version : Divisional Realignment



Grey
05-27-2004, 11:38 PM
Sorry if this has been discussed here before, but I'm curious to know what you guys think of the new divisional realignment for next season.

Consider if it had been put in place this year. The Playoffs would be seeded this way:

1. Indiana
2. New Jersey
3. Miami
4. Detroit
5. Milwaukee
6. New York
7. Boston
8. Cleveland

Of course this means that the Pacers and Pistons would be meeting in the second round with the winner most likely playing NJ or Miami in the Conference Finals.

That just doesn't seem fair, does it? The teams with the two best records shouldn't meet until the final round.

Anthem
05-27-2004, 11:44 PM
Man, talk about an off bracket.

First round we've have Cleveland, second we'd have Detroit, third we'd have Miami. :devil:

But look at the other bracket: Miami could munch on New York and Jersey before facing serious competition.

Ryan
05-27-2004, 11:52 PM
But look at the other bracket: Miami could munch on New York and Jersey before facing serious competition.

Much like we did in the first two rounds this year?

Hicks
05-27-2004, 11:54 PM
But look at the other bracket: Miami could munch on New York and Jersey before facing serious competition.

Much like we did in the first two rounds this year?

Yes, but in our case we earned it by winning 61 games. They would have been spoon fed it by winning 42 games.

Grey
05-27-2004, 11:58 PM
But look at the other bracket: Miami could munch on New York and Jersey before facing serious competition.

Right, and considering how weak the Atlantic and Southeast Divisions will be, you could very well have a .500 team in the Conference Finals.

Anthem
05-28-2004, 12:14 AM
But look at the other bracket: Miami could munch on New York and Jersey before facing serious competition.

Much like we did in the first two rounds this year?

Yes, but in our case we earned it by winning 61 games. They would have been spoon fed it by winning 42 games.

Exactly my point, sorry I didn't make it clear. I was just amazed that a team that barely broke .500 could have such a favorable schedule. In fact, every round for Miami would have been easier than ours, and we would have won 20 more games than them!

Cleveland > Knicks
Pistons > Nets

What does winning 20 extra games get you? Nothing!

Indyfan
05-28-2004, 12:16 AM
That is scary! It really doesn't seem right to work so hard all season and have it end up actually being better to be a third seed then a first seed. Seems like the NBA would be able to realize that isn't right. It should be strictly by record as long as the conferences are so unevenly matched talent wise. You gotta think the teams will protest that kind of thing when it comes up next year.

Kstat
05-28-2004, 12:19 AM
I just dont like the possibility of the conference's two best records meeting in round TWO, which is GUARENTEED as long as the two best teams are in the same division. Its not right.

I'd suggest doing what the NHL does: re-seed every round.

Hicks
05-28-2004, 12:21 AM
I just dont like the possibility of the conference's two best records meeting in round TWO, which is GUARENTEED as long as the two best teams are in the same division. Its not right.

I'd suggest doing what the NHL does: re-seed every round.

Yeah, that'd just be wrong. Not to mention as someone else pointed out: If this was already in place, us winning 19 more games than Miami would have given us a HARDER road to the Finals than Miami. Yeesh!

MagicRat
05-28-2004, 08:52 AM
In a division with the Hawks, Magic, Wizards and Bobcats the Heat are practically guaranteed three seed or higher, if indeed that is how the system will work........ :rolleyes:

Will Galen
05-28-2004, 09:04 AM
My solution, just seed the best two teams as number one seeds and ignore the division winner that comes in third.

In others words the seeds would have been the same as this year.

obnoxiousmodesty
05-28-2004, 03:25 PM
I'd suggest doing what the NHL does: re-seed every round.
Bingo. That's the best, most obvious, and most fair solution to the problem realignment will cause for the playoffs. I'm surprised this already hasn't received serious consideration by the NBA.

indygeezer
05-28-2004, 03:32 PM
Re-seed the brackets???? Oh goodie...a whole new level to add to the conspiracy theory, somehow!






j/k

Steveman
05-28-2004, 03:41 PM
But look at the other bracket: Miami could munch on New York and Jersey before facing serious competition.

Right, and considering how weak the Atlantic and Southeast Divisions will be, you could very well have a .500 team in the Conference Finals.

Not meaning to throw this off topic, and please correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the Houston Rockets once make it to the NBA final with a sub .500 record?

Aw Heck
05-28-2004, 05:26 PM
What if the top 2 seeds received byes in the first round? It would give much more meaning to getting the top two seeds.

However, I can see how it could lead to teams getting rusty. But that could also mean rest for injured players.

sig
05-28-2004, 05:46 PM
As it is set up now, the 2 best teams in the league (Spurs and Lakers) played in the Western Conference semis. There is always gonna be anomalies.

Grey
05-28-2004, 06:11 PM
As it is set up now, the 2 best teams in the league (Spurs and Lakers) played in the Western Conference semis. There is always gonna be anomalies.

The Spurs and Lakers were not even the two best teams in the Western Conference.

And the Pacer fans here might have something to say about who was best in the entire league.

Hicks
05-28-2004, 06:16 PM
As it is set up now, the 2 best teams in the league (Spurs and Lakers) played in the Western Conference semis. There is always gonna be anomalies.

Yeah, it can always happen, but this new format is BEGGING for it.

ChicagoJ
05-28-2004, 06:17 PM
But look at the other bracket: Miami could munch on New York and Jersey before facing serious competition.

Right, and considering how weak the Atlantic and Southeast Divisions will be, you could very well have a .500 team in the Conference Finals.

Not meaning to throw this off topic, and please correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the Houston Rockets once make it to the NBA final with a sub .500 record?

I think the '81 Rockets team was sub 0.500. If that's right, they beat a good Lakers team along the way. But I've slept since then, so I might be wrong.

Grey
05-28-2004, 09:17 PM
Yeah, it can always happen...

With the current format, it can never happen.

Hicks
05-28-2004, 09:21 PM
Yeah, it can always happen...

With the current format, it can never happen.

Spurs/Lakers

Grey
05-28-2004, 10:51 PM
With the current format, it can never happen.

Spurs/Lakers

The Spurs and Lakers are not the two best teams in the West.

1. Timberwolves (58-24)
2. Lakers (57-25)
3. Spurs (56-26)

Hicks
05-28-2004, 11:37 PM
With the current format, it can never happen.

Spurs/Lakers

The Spurs and Lakers are not the two best teams in the West.

1. Timberwolves (58-24)
2. Lakers (57-25)
3. Spurs (56-26)

Maybe not in the standings, but IMHO, yes, yes they were the two best teams in the West.