View Full Version : NBA: When was the Last Time a Team Seeded worse than 4th Won it All?
Not that I can recall tbh
Jacob1983
02-01-2015, 03:21 AM
1995 Rockets
apalisoc_9
02-01-2015, 12:03 PM
seed is irrelevant. Many teams have won rings with only 54 wins..
if they go 24 - 10 in their next 34 games..that should get them to 54
seed is irrelevant. Many teams have won rings with only 54 wins..
if they go 24 - 10 in their next 34 games..that should get them to 54
It's not irrelevant in terms of indication of strength. If every team entered the playoffs at the same strength, the sure, seed might be irrelevant, but being seeded 6th is an indication that during the regular season you didn't perform as well as a few other teams. There's a reason it's been 20 years since a team lower than 4th seed has won it all.
apalisoc_9
02-01-2015, 12:28 PM
It's not irrelevant in terms of indication of strength. If every team entered the playoffs at the same strength, the sure, seed might be irrelevant, but being seeded 6th is an indication that during the regular season you didn't perform as well as a few other teams. There's a reason it's been 20 years since a team lower than 4th seed has won it all.
That's not the case this year though
Typically, teams lower than the 4th seed have less than 54 wins..Sure some 5th seeded teams in the last 4 years have won 50-5 wins but at the end of the day 54 wins is historically a home court advantage record...Just more good regular season team this year...
And the spurs are a special case..Splitter, Parker, Leonard have missed a combined 40+ games and to win 54 with that in mind speaks volume of their potential and strength...
of course it matters. That means you have to go through every round without HCA :lol
Applesauce :lol
Malik Hairston
02-01-2015, 01:25 PM
Spurs will be in the top 4, tbh..
Warriors and Grizzlies are playing well, the rest of the West has been inconsistent, including the Spurs..they will finish 3rd IMO..
baseline bum
02-01-2015, 01:37 PM
Spurs will be in the top 4, tbh..
Warriors and Grizzlies are playing well, the rest of the West has been inconsistent, including the Spurs..they will finish 3rd IMO..
Bold prediction with Parker looking so washed up.
apalisoc_9
02-01-2015, 01:39 PM
Even with the loss, all the injuries the spurs are only 3 games away from the 3rd seeded clippers..:lol
The absence of Great teams this year is the spurs biggest chance of repeating...
If this was any other year, no way the spurs repeat....
Lucky I guess...
daslicer
02-01-2015, 03:10 PM
Spurs need to get on one of their super winstreaks that they have had in the past. If they can go on 10-15 game winstreak then they can end up atleast in third or 4th place.
Clipper Nation
02-01-2015, 03:12 PM
of course it matters. That means you have to go through every round without HCA :lol
Applesauce :lol
:lol Thinking the Spurs are fazed by playing on the road come playoff time
Mugen
02-01-2015, 03:20 PM
Not sure about the last time, but I know when the next time is tbh....
:flag::lobt2::flag::cheer
Pelicans78
02-01-2015, 05:19 PM
Wouldn't surprise me if the Spurs come out of the West. All the other contenders have enough warts to get beat.
That's not the case this year though
Typically, teams lower than the 4th seed have less than 54 wins..Sure some 5th seeded teams in the last 4 years have won 50-5 wins but at the end of the day 54 wins is historically a home court advantage record...Just more good regular season team this year...
And the spurs are a special case..Splitter, Parker, Leonard have missed a combined 40+ games and to win 54 with that in mind speaks volume of their potential and strength...
Seeding is seeding. It's not about HCA, it's about strength of the team. Otherwise there would be more instances of a team lower than 4th seed winning a championship. HCA would only exist in the 1st round, if lower seeded teams were just as capable. They aren't.
It's not even the break, so we don't know which team will be seeded where.
of course it matters. That means you have to go through every round without HCA :lol
Applesauce :lol
No it doesn't.
If you're a 6th seed and end up facing a 7th or 8th, you have HCA. You know as well as I do that you probably won't be facing the 7th or 8th though. That's my point.
No it doesn't.
If you're a 6th seed and end up facing a 7th or 8th, you have HCA. You know as well as I do that you probably won't be facing the 7th or 8th though. That's my point.
Did you really bother stating that? Comeon son...
Anyways CN, I was on record months ago stating that if there was a team that could do it , it would be the spurs. That being said, winning that many road games is not an easy task for anyone. Will be pulling for them.
Did you really bother stating that? Comeon son...
Well yeah, since you said something stupid and wrong, which ignored the point of the OP in the first place.
Seeding is seeding. It's not about HCA, it's about strength of the team. Otherwise there would be more instances of a team lower than 4th seed winning a championship. HCA would only exist in the 1st round, if lower seeded teams were just as capable. They aren't.
It's not even the break, so we don't know which team will be seeded where.
Well, it just shows that in the past 20 years, there wasnt a team that choked as much as the spurs did and didnt play to their potential throughout the whole regular season..
Same as how teams usually win when they are up 5 with 28secs to go
Well yeah, since you said something stupid and wrong, which ignored the point of the OP in the first place.
No, you said something stupid by actually stating that it isn't impossible, when I never said it was. It was implied that it is highly unlikely that another upset, from a lower seed, would take place concurrent with the hypothetical that was posted. In that case, it is almost guaranteed that "x" team will go on every round without HCA. Why else would teams have such an incentive to get top records in the regular season? Why not coast here and there, rest players etc.. ---> (6,7,8), if HCA wasn't linked to seeding--in a tight WC? In the pursuit of this, yes, the better teams obviously obtain a better record and thus, seeding, and the not so good teams obtain a lower seeding.
My post was in response to applesauce who said "seed was irrelevant," not yours. I didn't ignore your OP, it was actually answered in the first post, and the second post by me----very stupid considering you could have just googled the information and gotten your response, don't know why you expect others to do it for you. Also, don't reply, simply for the sake of replying. That useless title belongs to the resident parrot.
:bobo
Well, it just shows that in the past 20 years, there wasnt a team that choked as much as the spurs did and didnt play to their potential throughout the whole regular season..
Same as how teams usually win when they are up 5 with 28secs to go
The Bulls had a similar issue. When Rose went down, they were done. Same happened when Manu went down.
No, you said something stupid by actually stating that it isn't impossible, when I never said it was. It was implied that it is highly unlikely that another upset, from a lower seed, would take place concurrent with the hypothetical that was posted. In that case, it is almost guaranteed that "x" team will go on every round without HCA. Why else would teams have such an incentive to get top records in the regular season? Why not coast here and there, rest players etc.. ---> (6,7,8), if HCA wasn't linked to seeding--in a tight WC? In the pursuit of this, yes, the better teams obviously obtain a better record and thus, seeding, and the not so good teams obtain a lower seeding.
My post was in response to applesauce who said "seed was irrelevant," not yours. I didn't ignore your OP, it was actually answered in the first post, and the second post by me----very stupid considering you could have just googled the information and gotten your response, don't know why you expect others to do it for you. Also, don't reply, simply for the sake of replying. That useless title belongs to the resident parrot.
:bobo
I have fucking idea who applesauce is since I don't do pet names and you obviously don't do quotes.
Budkin
02-03-2015, 12:17 AM
That 1995 Rockets team was something else. So many huge clutch plays and wins.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.