PDA

View Full Version : jazz are ahead of spurs in western conference standings



greyforest
01-29-2008, 03:11 AM
can someone explain why?

utah is 27-18
spurs are 28-15

Johnny_Blaze_47
01-29-2008, 03:13 AM
can someone explain why?

utah is 27-18
spurs are 28-15

Utah is a division leader and guaranteed a Top 4 spot. Dallas is second in the SW and the wildcard (so to speak).

duncan228
01-29-2008, 03:13 AM
Jazz are first in their division.
The 3 division leaders get the top 3 seeds.

greyforest
01-29-2008, 03:13 AM
thanks



that's dumb

conferences are dumb though too imo

Man In Black
01-29-2008, 03:15 AM
Incidentally, just because they get a higher seed, that doesn't guarantee home court. The win-loss record is still going to mean something.

J.T.
01-29-2008, 03:17 AM
Jazz are first in their division.
The 3 division leaders get the top 3 seeds.

It's actually been modified so that the division winners are guaranteed a top 4 seed. After 2006 when the Mavs and Spurs met a round earlier than they should have, the seeding rules were modified so that if a team does not win their division, but has a better record than another division winner, they are not automatically bumped to the 4th seed.

genomefreak13
01-29-2008, 03:19 AM
does that mean that if eventually they have the same record at the end of the season spurs might not make the playoffs just because utah leads in its division?

Johnny_Blaze_47
01-29-2008, 03:21 AM
does that mean that if eventually they have the same record at the end of the season spurs might not make the playoffs just because utah leads in its division?

Eight teams make the playoffs. If the Jazz win the division, they can finish no lower than fourth, so if the Spurs had the same record, they'd likely be the fifth seed (possibly higher depending on Dallas and New Orleans).

duncan228
01-29-2008, 03:24 AM
It's actually been modified so that the division winners are guaranteed a top 4 seed. After 2006 when the Mavs and Spurs met a round earlier than they should have, the seeding rules were modified so that if a team does not win their division, but has a better record than another division winner, they are not automatically bumped to the 4th seed.

You are correct of course.
And the funny thing is I was just explaining that exact change to someone, and why it happened, and I realized what I had posted! :oops

Old habits die hard!