Reply With Quote
With the East that damned weak, it's surprising the race for NBA HCA has been as compe ive as it has (although never that in doubt). Detroit should have walked away w/it LOOOONG ago.
One step up, two steps back
East contenders play hot potato with last playoff spots
Posted: Monday April 10, 2006 12:03PM; Updated: Monday April 10, 2006 11:43PM
Sixers guard Allen Iverson sat down in front of his locker stall and carefully wrapped a towel around his neck and shoulders before meeting the media Saturday night after his team's victory at Chicago.
"It's fun just knowing that we['ve] still got a chance to get in the playoffs," said Iverson, who was either trying to keep warm or attempting to hide his chest and neck tattoos from the TV cameras. "When you're a basketball player, or a compe or, that's what you want.... If you had a wish, you wouldn't want it to come down to this situation, but it's the way it is."
Too bad the NBA can't throw a towel over this Eastern Conference playoff race.
Between the Sixers, the Bulls, the Bucks and the Pacers, the bottom half of the playoff bracket is starting to take on a rather grotesque appearance.
The Sixers (36-41) have lost 13 of 19.
The Pacers (37-40) have lost seven of nine.
The Bucks (37-40) have lost four in a row, and five of six.
Even the Bulls (35-41), the "hot" team in the group, are only 6-6 in their last 12 games.
It's beginning to look as though three Eastern teams -- maybe four, if the Wizards stumble -- could make the playoffs with losing records. Not since 1985-86, when six sub-.500 teams reached the postseason (New Jersey, Washington, Chicago, Sacramento, San Antonio and Portland), has the NBA had a more lackluster playoff crop, according to the Elias Stats Bureau. One has to go back to 1996-97 to find the last time three losing teams made the playoffs (Minnesota, Phoenix, L.A. Clippers).
"We are embarrassing ourselves each and every night," Pacers forward Jermaine O'Neal said after his team's 25-point loss Sunday. "There are talkers and there are doers. All we are is a talking team. I don't know if we are tanking the season or if we just don't want to go to the playoffs, but we're getting murdered every night on the defensive end."
If O'Neal thought his Pacers team was bad, he should have seen the Bulls on Saturday night. In its biggest game of the season, with a full house at the United Center and a chance to all but lock up the No. 8 spot, Chicago got run out of its own gym. The Bulls managed to score just 75 points (including 16 points and 12 points, respectively, in the second and third quarters) and shot a season-low 32.6 percent against a Sixers defense that came in ranked No. 26 in the league. Philadelphia, playing without Chris Webber, shot just 39 percent -- and still won the game.
It was a big game for both teams," Bulls guard Kirk Hinrich said. "Everybody knew it. I'm embarrassed and disappointed [with] the way we played."
It's not as if the Sixers weren't practically begging for the knockout punch, either. The Sixers have been in disarray for weeks. On Friday night they lost by 10 at home to the Celtics, prompting Iverson to openly question his teammates.
"I'm not going to point fingers at anybody, but as a group we aren't playing hard enough to win basketball games," Iverson said. "We don't seem hungry. We don't seem like we want to make the playoffs."
Maybe that's the problem. Maybe deep down inside the Bucks, Pacers, Sixers and Bulls know that even if they reach the postseason, they are going to be dispatched quickly by the likes of the Pistons, Heat or Nets.
Maybe David Stern should just do them all a favor and skip right to the second round.
Who's Up
Jamal Crawford, Knicks
Since entering the starting lineup for the injured Stephon Marbury, Crawford has been on a tear. He scored 31 points and tied a career high with 11 rebounds Sunday as the Knicks rallied at Boston to run their win streak to three games, their longest since January. The 6-foot-5 guard, who hit game-winning shots at the end of wins over Cleveland and Indiana last week, scored 11 of his points in the fourth quarter Sunday as New York overcame a 76-70 deficit. In his previous five games before Sunday (four starts), Crawford averaged 23.0 points, 3.6 rebounds and 3.2 assists. Even Larry Brown can't find anything to complain about when it comes to Crawford's game of late.
Who's Down
Jamaal Tinsley, Pacers
Tinsley has lost his starting job to Anthony Johnson, and his days in Indiana appear to be numbered. The 6-foot-3 point guard has been in and out of the lineup all season with various nagging injuries and has not played well when healthy. The Pacers are 1-8 in their last nine games with Tinsley as a starter, and 13-14 on the season. In his last start, April 4 versus Chicago, he finished with just three points on 1-of-7 shooting. He then sat out the next two games with an Achilles' heel injury before getting a DNP-CD in Sunday's loss at Detroit. In his 27 starts this season, Tinsley is averaging just 10.3 points and 5.4 assists while shooting 42 percent from the floor.
Rumor Mill
Thomas joining Aldridge in heading to the NBA?
LSU forward Tyrus Thomas is expected to declare for the NBA draft. At least that was the word going around the annual Portsmouth Invitational last week. Meanwhile, Texas' LaMarcus Aldridge told reporters Monday night that he would enter the draft. Thomas, a 6-9 freshman, has seen his stock rise since leading LSU to the Final Four. Though still raw offensively, he is considered by many to be the most explosive post player in college hoops with the potential to be a dominant shot blocker and rebounder. Aldridge, a 6-11 sop re, is seen as the top big man available. While GMs and scouts are not allowed to comment on underclassmen, the consensus at the PIT was that Thomas and Aldridge would be likely top five picks.
Grudge Match of the Week
Friday, April 14: Clippers at Sonics
Clippers forward Vladimir Radmanovic and Sonics forward Chris Wilcox square off against their former teams for the first time. The two have thrived in their new cities since being traded for each other on Feb. 14, but some lingering bitterness remains. Radmanovic, a starter on last year's 50-win Sonics club, was upset with his role coming off the bench this season in Seattle. Now he's starting in L.A., and headed to the playoffs. Wilcox, a former No. 8 pick overall, got stuck behind Elton Brand and Chris Kaman in L.A. and was getting extensive pine time under Clippers coach Mike Dunleavy. Both players, free agents this summer, will be looking for a chance to show their former bosses that they made a mistake by letting them go.
Three Seconds
• The Pistons' decision not to punish Ben Wallace for refusing to re-enter Friday night's loss to the Magic was the smart thing to do. The incident was out of character for Big Ben, and he has earned the right for a second chance. Plus, Wallace is a free agent after the season and there is no point in making him mad now.
• The Grizzlies gave the Manu Ginobili-less Spurs all they could handle Sunday night, but they couldn't generate enough offense down the stretch. Tim Duncan's length around the basket gave Memphis fits, especially on the final play when Pau Gasol tried to drive baseline. San Antonio's D is why they're the team to beat again in the West.
• Heat guard Dwyane Wade has been sensational all season, but he still has room for growth. In the Miami-Detroit game last Thursday, Wade stopped playing to complain to the refs about a non-call and allowed his man, Rip Hamilton, to get down court for a layup. For a guy who's supposed to be an MVP candidate, that was inexcusable.
Around the Rim
Nuggets rookie guard Julius Hodge, who was shot three times in the leg early Saturday morning while riding in a car on a Denver highway, is expected to make a full recovery. Hodge, 22, used to be best known as the guy Chris Paul slugged in the groin during an N.C. State-Wake Forest game a couple years ago.... How bad a season has it been for Kevin Garnett? He had to sit out Sunday's game with the Hawks because of knee tendinitis, ending his league-leading streak of 351 games started.... One day after ripping NBA VP Stu Jackson and the refs, Shaquille O'Neal was named a candidate for the Sportsmanship Award.... Bulls forward Luol Deng and guard Eric Piatkowski sat out Saturday's game with the Sixers after they were injured in a freak accident during shootaround. Apparently they collided while running a drill, leaving Deng with a concussion and Piatkowski with 15-20 s ches in his noggin.... Jazz forward Andrei Kirilenko didn't mind a fan running from the stands and dancing on the Delta Center floor during Tuesday's loss to the Spurs. "In Europe, it usually happens," the Russian forward said. "At soccer games they're naked. He was not naked. That's good."
With the East that damned weak, it's surprising the race for NBA HCA has been as compe ive as it has (although never that in doubt). Detroit should have walked away w/it LOOOONG ago.
Your point would be well taken 101A if it weren't for the fact that the Piston's have a better win percentage against the West than the East
Against the West 25-5 (almost makes me wish we were in the West)
Against the East 37-10
Against teams with a winning record 31-9
Against teams with a losing record 31-6
Probably the best record in team history
Not sure what more you'd expect.
Give credit to S.A. and Dallas for having almost an equally impressive year as the Piston's contributing to not "running away with HCA".
Wow, the Eastern Conference sucks. Think about how many of the teams who will make it to the playoffs will have a below .500 winning average. If the Sonics or Wolves or even Jazz were in the East, they'd be making the playoffs.
east suck ever since duncan came into the nba
With some notable exceptions (e.g. Detroit).
Too many teams make the Playoffs. It's that simple. There's no hope of ever fixing it because there's too much money in a 2-month-long Postseason, but that's the root of the problem. The 16th best team in the League after 82 games should NEVER have a shot at playing for the NBA Championship.
The Playoffs should consist of the three division winners and a Wild Card, and that's all.
Your point would be well taken 101A if it weren't for the fact that the Piston's have a better win percentage against the West than the East
Against the West 25-5 (almost makes me wish we were in the West
Against the East 37-10
Against teams with a winning record 31-9
Against teams with a losing record 31-6
Probably the best record in team history
Not sure what more you'd expect.
Give credit to S.A. and Dallas for having almost an equally impressive year as the Piston's contributing to not "running away with HCA".
Actually, you're helping 101A's point, not rebutting it.
His point is that with the East being so weak, the Pistons should have run away with HCA. Since the Pistons have a great record against the WC and more losses in the "weak" East, the Pistons should have a better record against those weak East teams.
Losses to Atlanta, New York, and Orlando could easily make HCA an already sealed deal. Having a very good record against the West only shows that the Pistons should have done their work in conference. The Pistons should have won those above mentioned games (all games decided by 2 pts or 1 pt), and they probably should have won at least one game against Washington (double overtime at home) and one against Utah (overtime at home).
67-10 with five games left would be enough to sit the starters the last five games and get ready for the playoffs.
Four games in the Eastern Conference the Pistons should have won, and in fact probably five with the two point loss to Miami when they had a 10 pt fourth quarter lead. So, 101A actually had a very good point.
I wouldn't be too overly proud of the west if the lakers end up making the playoffs.
edit: also note the northwest division in general. Basically both conferences have a handful of good teams at the top and a whole bunch of awful teams. The only difference is that the teams at the bottom of the East's playoff picture are all slumping at the same time.
Last edited by mike detroit; 04-11-2006 at 12:29 PM.
Actually my point was that since we have a better win percentage against the West that the East isn't necessarily the weaker conference. With that in mind I wouldn't be supporting 101A's post.
The East's 7th and 8th seeds (Ind and Philly) also have a much better win percentage against the West than they do against the "weak" East.
Combined 41-54 against the East and combined 32-27 against the West.
On the other hand their 7th and 8th seeds (Lakers and Kings) have a similar win percentage against the so called "weak" East. Combined 50-46 against the allegedly stronger West and 32-28 against the East. (Kings 14-16 against the East)
San Antonio also has a better win percentage against their conference than against the weak East.
Those facts certainly don't help 101A's post and they definitely don't rebut mine.
101A's point is that since the East is as weak as it is, the Pistons should have won HCA much earlier.
Since the Pistons have a good record against the West, the Pistons have had some really bad losses in the East (considered a weaker conference).
Losing to non-playoff Eastern Conference teams like Atlanta, Orlando, and New York supports the notion that Detroit should have done better in the "weaker" conference. Those three games alone would give Detroit a 65-12 record and would have all but solidified homecourt advantage throughout the playoffs.
That does support 101A's argument.
Having a good record against the West doesn't refute what 101A was getting at. Having given away games against really bad teams in the East does.
The Pistons should have won more games against Eastern Conference teams, especially the weak teams as mentioned. That would have helped Detroit walk away with HCA much earlier.
And, if your point was that was that the Eastern Conference is not necessarily the weaker conference, then you are likely saying that Detroit should have lost games against Atlanta, Orlando, and New York. That's not true. Look at the four teams fighting for the bottom three playoff seed in the East (Indiana, Milwaukee, Chicago, Philadelphia), and you'll see that Detroit is 1-13 against those teams. The bottom half of the playoff bracket in the East is weak. Detroit should have beaten Atlanta, New York, and Orlando. Had Detroit beaten those three teams, their winning percentage against EC teams would be higher than their winning percentage against WC teams.
So, are you saying Atlanta, Orlando, and New York is as tough as Western Conference teams? I know you are not.
Back to the original argument ...
In such a "weaker" Eastern Conference, Detroit should have walked with HCA loooong ago.
That's true. If Detroit only beat three non-playoff Eastern Conference teams like they should have, Detroit would be 65-12, and they would have already locked up HCA.
Oh, and jochhejaam,
Why would you use the 7th and 8th seeded playoff teams to gauge which conference is tougher? I would guess because it was the most favorable to your argument. Let's also look at the top six playoff teams in each conference and how they fared against the opposing conference:
Western Conference teams' records against the Eastern Conference
Spurs 21-8
Mavs 23-7
Suns 22-8
Grizz 17-12
Clippers 20-10
Nuggets 19-11
Eastern Conference teams' records against the Western Conference
Pistons 25-5
Heat 17-13
Nets 16-14
Cavs 16-14
Wizards 13-17
Bucks 11-19
Makes you wonder why you chose to only talk about the 7th and 8th seeds in each conference. Which conference is better? Which argument do those inter-conference records support?
Jamstone, please don't tell me that if the two weaker playoff teams in the Eastern Conference playoff picture have a winning percentage against a supposedly stronger Western Conference and a losing percentage against an allegedly weaker Eastern Conference that you believe that supports the Western Conference as stronger than the East. Please don't say that.
1. The 76er's and the Pacers have a much better winning percentage against the West than they do the East. Does that support the premise that the West is stronger than the East? Yes or No.
2. The Pistons and the Spurs have a worse winning percentage against the East than they do the West. Does that support the West being stronger that the East? Yes or No?
3. The Kings have a much better winning percentage against the West than against the East. Does that support the premise that the West is stronger than the East? Yes or No?
If there are many examples or facts that undermine 101A's premise that the West is stronger than the East then at the very least his point needs to be modified if not retracted altogether.
So, you just ignore the other 10 playoff teams and their record against the opposing conference?
How about talk in totality rather than getting one or two samples that support your argument. How about ALL Eastern Conference teams and ALL Western Conference teams?
Western Conference v. Eastern Conference: 251-196
Eastern Conference v. Western Conference: 196-251
It's not even close. The Western Conference has the much better record against the Eastern Conference than vice versa. The Western Conference has SEVEN teams that have winning records against the East, FOUR other teams that have .500 records against the East. Meanwhile, the Eastern Conference has SIX teams with winning records against the West, none with .500 records.
It just so happens that Indiana and Philly play the West tough, while Sacramento has had a subpar year against the East (14-16 still not bad).
But, you look hard enough, and you're going to find statistics that you can manipulate to support an argument.
1. I guess there aren't many teams in the West that contain Allen Iverson, and the Eastern Conference teams have seen him enough times to know how to better play him.
2. The Pistons and Spurs have the two best records in the league. One conference record is going to be better than the other. You can hardly say that the discrepency is all that meaningful when it's just a handful of games here and there. Spurs had losses at Cleveland and Philadelphia at the end of a long road trip and at Atlanta on a back-to-back and travel night. They shouldn't have lost those games either, just like Detroit should not have lost to New York, Atlanta, or Orlando. That tells me that some losses to Eastern Conference teams were a result of playing the Spurs and Pistons at the right time. None of those teams should beat either the Pistons or Spurs. Hiccup games happen.
3. The Kings also had a big 6 game road trip against Eastern Conference teams in January without Bonzi Wells and Shareef Abdur-Rahim in which the Kings lost 5 games. That was also before the Ron Artest trade. The Kings have played very few Eastern Conference teams after acquiring Ron Artest and having Bonzi Wells and Shareef Abdur-Rahim back. Of course, you probably didn't take that into consideration when claiming how the West isn't stronger than the East.
So tell me about the 251-196 record of WC teams against the East. How do explain more than 50 plus wins the West has over the East? How about 11 WC teams having a .500 record or better against the EC, but only six EC teams have winning records against the WC.
Go ahead and use your small sample that actually almost supports your argument. You know the truth. Let's be real.
The Western Conference is a much tougher conference than the East.
And, with the East being as weak as it is, the Detroit Pistons could have easily wrapped up HCA well before now.
Jamstone, please don't tell me that if the two weaker playoff teams in the Eastern Conference playoff picture have a winning percentage against a supposedly stronger Western Conference and a losing percentage against an allegedly weaker Eastern Conference that you believe that supports the Western Conference as stronger than the East. Please don't say that.
I didn't say that. That point does support what you're saying.
I asked why you only took the 7th and 8th playoff seeds to use an example, when all the other teams in each conference is contrary to your point.
Every Western Conferenc e playoff team except for Sacramento has winning records against the East, and Sacramento's record is 14-16 against the East. The Western Conference playoff teams have a record of 154-84 against the East. The Eastern Conference playoff teams have a record of 130-109 against the West.
Again, why did you only choose to reference Sacramento, Lakers, Philadelphia, and Indiana?
Things are just as bad out west. The anic division hasn't had a 50-game winner take the crown since 2001-02 when the Nets won 52 games. Besides that, the Nuggets are the first division winner to not win 50 games since the 1983-84 Utah Jazz (45-37). The Grizzlies, who had a dismal 4-12 stretch in late February and early March, could have homecourt as a sixth seed.
The New Orleans Hornets have gone 8-17 in their last 25 games to go from a sixth seed to a team looking on the outside of the playoff picture.
If not for the Ron Artest trade, a playoff team in the west would be under .500. At various times Minnesota, Golden State, Utah, and New Orleans have been playoff teams.
The truth is, it's been about Detroit, San Antonio, Dallas, and Miami all year long. New Jersey and Phoenix got in on the act, but the top of the league has been too good. Check 1996-97 - Chicago (69), Utah (64), Miami (61), Seattle (57), Houston (57), New York (57), LA Lakers (56), Atlanta (56), Detroit (54), Charlotte (54) and Portland (49) all had great seasons. I just named all but 3 winning teams in the league that year (Orlando - 45-37, Washington - 44-38, and Cleveland - 42-40). No one else had over 40 victories for the other 15 NBA teams. There are a finite amount of winnable games in the NBA, in all sports.
Another way to put it:
Average winning record:
1996-97: 55-27 with 14 teams.
2004-05: 50-32 with 18 teams.
[QUOTE=JamStone]You point blank refused to answer my pointed questions, why was that?So tell me about the 251-196 record of WC teams against the East. How do explain more than 50 plus wins the West has over the East? How about 11 WC teams having a .500 record or better against the EC, but only six EC teams have winning records against the WC.
And now you want me to answer yours? That's an interesting concept Jamstone.
I'll answer it anyway, the real reason for the inequity is the slugs at the bottom of the East that are a combined -59 wins against the West which would leave the top 12 teams, or 75% (large enought sample for you?) with a better W-L record against the West.
That being the case it would be accurate to say that the East has the most bottom feeders but it's more than a bit of a stretch to label the Eastern Conference as "weak".
Thirty percent of the teams refuting that the East is weak is good enough for me. Especially when the two top teams records don't support the premise. It positively is a large enough percentage to cast reasonable doubt on them being "weak" which is exactly what I intended to do. Mission AccomplishedGo ahead and use your small sample that actually almost supports your argument. You know the truth. Let's be real.
Unless you happen to be the Pacers, the Sixers, the Spurs, the Pistons or the Kings.The Western Conference is a much tougher conference than the East.
Jamstone on this one, for what it's worth, I'll agree that they "could have".And, with the East being as weak as it is, the Detroit Pistons could have easily wrapped up HCA well before now.
You are not serious.
1. I answered each of your questions. I even numbered my answers in each of the responses. Sixers and Pacers are two teams out of 30 that support your argument. Pistons and Spurs have lost so few games, that they aren't very good examples of showing which conference is tougher. And, the Kings are 14-16 against the East with many of those losses to EC teams without Bonzi Wells, Shareef Abdur-Rahim, and Ron Artest. I did answer your questions. You just looked for a simple "yes" or "no" without going deeper into the "why." Typical stat geek logic.
3. It's not 30% of the teams refuting that the East is weaker. Five (Pistons, Spurs, Sixers, Pacers, and Kings) divided by 30 is 16.7%. 16.7% is not a good argument. So, I guess 83.3% of the teams proving that the East is weaker is not good enough for you?
4. Look at each teams' record.
WESTERN CONFERENCE RECORDS AGAINST THE EASTERN CONFERENCE
Spurs 21-8
Mavs 23-7
Phoenix 22-8
Memphis 17-12
Clippers 20-10
Nuggets 19-11
Kings 14-16
Lakers 18-12
Jazz 15-15
Hornets 13-17
Seattle 15-15
Rockets 15-15
Wolves 13-16
Warriors 15-15
Blazers 11-19
EASTERN CONFERENCE TEAMS AGAINST THE WESTERN CONFERENCE
Pistons 25-5
Heat 17-13
Nets 16-14
Cavs 16-14
Wizards 13-17
Bucks 11-19
Pacers 16-13
Sixers 16-14
Bulls 11-19
Magic 11-18
Celtics 14-16
Raptors 7-23
Hawks 7-23
Bobcats 8-21
Knicks 8-22
2. Even if you take the "bottom feeders," let's say the bottom four teams of each conference, you get:
WC top 11 teams against the EC: 197-131
EC top 11 teams against the WC: 166-162
Take away the "bottom feeder" teams, and the Western Conference still has 30 more wins over the Eastern Conference than vice versa, and the Eastern Conference is barely ove .500 against the WC.
I actually was working on my post while you were answering the questions so It was error on my part on that one.
I hope this issue has been settled to everyone's satisfaction.
It hasn't been. I think we need another four pages at least. I'm sure we can change some minds.
You'd have a valid point if I was arguing that the East was better than the West but I was never arguing that. My point all along was that the East was mislabeled as "weak". If the top 12 teams in the East have an overall winning record against the West then I've made the point to my satisfaction.
I bolded 10 of the 16 Western Conference teams that have either a worse winning percentage against the East than against the West, are holding their own against the East or have a losing record against the "weak" East.
I also bolded 7 of the 16 Eastern Conference teams (yes that's almost half) that have either a better overall record against the West or a higher winning percentage against the West.
That's 17 of the 32 teams that support my point that the East deserves a better description than "weak", a label that is overly simplistic and undeserving. (I wouldn't have bothered at all if the Piston's hadn't been called out in his post
And with this post the defense rests its case.
Take over for me Darrin I have to finish my taxes.It hasn't been. I think we need another four pages at least. I'm sure we can change some minds.
Except for Pistons Nets Heat and for a good college try Cavs and throw away the whole East = probably all the rest miss playoffs in West!
You'd have a valid point if I was arguing that the East was better than the West but I was never arguing that. My point all along was that the East was mislabeled as "weak". If the top 12 teams in the East have an overall winning record against the West then I've made the point to my satisfaction.
I bolded 10 of the 16 Western Conference teams that have either a worse winning percentage against the East than against the West, are holding their own against the East or have a losing record against the "weak" East.
I also bolded 7 of the 16 Eastern Conference teams (yes that's almost half) that have either a better overall record against the West or a higher winning percentage against the West.
That's 17 of the 32 teams that support my point that the East deserves a better description than "weak", a label that is overly simplistic and undeserving. (I wouldn't have bothered at all if the Piston's hadn't been called out in his post
And with this post the defense rests its case.
Again with the "MANIPULATION" of the stats. You include "holding their own against the East as in your breakdown?? Why? How does that prove the East is not weak if a WC team is "holding their own" against them? That doesn't make sense. Moreover, if a team has a losing record against the "weak" East, but has an even worse record against the West, how does that prove your point? You can't just identify a bad team and say "SEE, look they have a bad record against the "weak" East but ignore the fact they have an even worse record against the West. Makes no sense. And, does not support the notion that the East is not weak. It just means those WC teams are really, really bad.
How about I just bold the teams that have WORSE records against the East than they do against the West. It's a comparative analysis any way. In order to prove the Eastern Conference is weak, one would have to compare it to something. So, it's best to analyze by looking at ALL 30 NBA teams and see how the teams played against each conference ...
As of earlier today, before tonight's games, because I haven't referenced the game results of tonight's games, here is how the records of each team in each conference fared between each conference:
Western Conference / record against WC / record against EC
Spurs / 38-10 / 21-8 (better record against WC, but again, so few losses, come on)
Mavs / 36-12 / 23-7
Suns / 28-18 / 22-18 (better against the West, no doubt)
Grizz / 27-21 / 17-12
Clippers / 24-23 / 20-10
Nuggets / 25-23 / 19-11
Kings / 27-21 / 14-16 (your one good example)
Lakers / 23-25 / 18-12
Jazz / 23-24 / 15-15 (losing record against WC, even record against EC, not worse against EC ... why bold the Jazz?)
Hornets / 24-23 / 13-17 (another rare good example)
Sonics / 18-28 / 15-15 (again why bold because they are .500 against the EC when they really suck against the WC?)
Rockets / 18-30 / 15-15 (same as Hornets and Sonics, much better against EC teams)
Wolves / 19-29 / 13-16 (better winning percentage against EC teams)
Warriors / 15-31 / 15-15 (see a pattern? Why bold teams that do "ok" against the EC but are horrible against WC? How does that prove your point? It doesn't)
Blazers / 10-37 / 11-19 (same story)
You wrote: "I bolded 10 of the 16 Western Conference teams that have either a worse winning percentage against the East than against the West, are holding their own against the East or have a losing record against the "weak" East."
"Holding their own" against the East doesn't support your argument if they really suck against the Western Conference team.
Only FOUR Western Conference teams had worse records against the East than they did against the West.
Eastern Conference / record against EC / record against WC
Pistons / 37-10 / 25-5 (better record against WC, but so few losses, come on)
Heat / 33-14 / 17-13 (does not have better winning percentage against WC ... lie)
Nets / 31-15 / 16-14 (does not have better winning percentage against WC ... lie)
Cavs / 31-16 / 16-14 (does not have better winning percentage against WC ... lie)
Wizards / 26-21 / 13-17
Bucks / 22-21 / 11-19
Pacers / 21-27 / 16-13 (one of your few really good examples ... finally)
Sixers / 21-27 / 16-14 (another good example)
Bulls / 24-22 / 11-19
Magic / 22-26 / 11-18
Celtics / 18-29 / 14-16 (losing record against both, but better record against WC)
Raptors / 18-28 / 7-23
Hawks / 17-30 / 7-23
Bobcats / 14-34 / 8-21
Knicks / 14-33 / 8-22
You wrote: "I also bolded 7 of the 16 Eastern Conference teams (yes that's almost half) that have either a better overall record against the West or a higher winning percentage against the West."
Why did you bold the Heat, Nets, and Cavs? They didn't have a better overall record against the West or a higher winning percentage against the West. Do the math one more time.
So, FOUR Eastern Conference teams with better winning percentages against the West than against the East.
That makes EIGHT of the 30 NBA teams that played worse against the East than against the West. The other 22 NBA teams played better against the "weaker" Eastern Conference.
So, that is 26.7% of the entire NBA supports your argument that the East is not "weak". And, that is a full sample. 73.3% > 26.7%. And 73.3% of the NBA says it's easier to play against the East, and it's easier to WIN against the East.
73.3% of the NBA team records prove that the Eastern Conference is the weaker conference.
Not to mention, your honor, the defense told bold-faced lies in its arguments and alleged conlusions.
Last edited by JamStone; 04-12-2006 at 12:45 AM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
