I have a question: does winning a division automatically guarantee a home court advantage in 1st round? can a 6th seed have a HCA over 3rd seed?
thanks!
Seeding determines opponents. Record (and tie-breakers) determine HCA.
I thought seeding only determined the first round match ups? If a #3 seed has a worse record than a #4 or #5 seed (as they probably will this year in both conferences), and they meet in the second round of the conference finals, then wouldn't record trump seeding for HCA? I thought this actually happened one year.
Yes, it was the Spurs VS Lakers, where Spurs had 3rd seed, but had the homecourt against the 2nd seed Lakers( back when there were 2divisions)
Minny won our division, putting them at 1st.
Yes. That's what I said.
I think the idea that a division le doesn't give a team home court in a playoff series is all the more reason to ditch the current system and seed according to record while guaranteeing that all three division winners will make the playoffs. If you aren't going to give HCA to each division winner, why make that division winner a top-3 seed? It doesn't accomplish anything, and in fact, distorts the playoff chase by encouraging teams in the lower half of the draw to jockey for the 6th seed (by losing games, generally) to set up the most favorable matchups. (3 v. 6; 6 v. 2 or 7).
If it was like the NHL, where the 3 seed gets home ice in Round 1 and the teams were reseeded after each round, the NBA system would make more sense. For now, though, it seems pretty much asinine.
I agree. Go ahead and guarantee the division winners a playoff spot...just don't seed them on that basis. And re-seed after every round!
I thought Doug Collins offered a sensible (gasp!) and obvious compromise solution, suggesting that the first round seedings continue as is, but that there be rebracketing in the 2nd round with the regular season records, rather than the seeds, setting the matchups. Best remaining record vs. worst in one matchup, the other two teams in the other matchup.
In 2003, the league decided at the all-star break that it would change the playoff format to make the First Round a best of 7 series. Stern has suggested that there's no need to reconsider the current format, but I wonder if the growing concern for a Dallas/San Antonio matchup in Round 2 rather than in the WCF will start some movement. The league has said that this is basically a 1-year anomaly, but if you incorporate a re-seeding plan while maintaining the First Round seeding standards, you would avoid the anomaly in any year, by at least assuring that the teams with the best records in a conference can't meet until the Conference Finals round.
I guess the counter-argument is that if Dallas/SA is the premier West matchup this season, there's a great chance that they'll play in Round 2 as things stand, since each is very likely to win a First Round series. That pretty much guarantees that the league will get that matchup (much as it used to get SA/LA -- 4 times in the Second Round from 1999 through 2004). If you reseed, there's a better chance that either Dallas or SA will be eliminated in Round 2 and that at least one won't reach the WCF, which means you never get that matchup, regardless of the round.
Bingo... this is a very good point, and I think in Stern's mind, an almost guaranteed great matchup in the second round (or any round for that matter) may be better than the possibility of no matchup at all.
The new seediny system sucks, i cant stand how a scrub team .500% is first in one division gets hca against a team thats probaly has a higher record then that team, but its penalise for a seed spot cose sum other team has a higher record then them in their division. What the nba needs to do is let the teams get their flags or trophies for winin their minor division, and then seed the rest base on overall records in the conference. their best player should not even be mention in mvp or any award talks since they are only a .500% winnin team, a good example is that moron kome n his faker team.
One more time...seeding does NOT determine HCA. It only determines who your 1st round opponent is and in which bracket you are placed.
I could live with the current seeding fiasco if they would just get rid of the hard brackets.
hey wat happens if one team in one of the divisions are .400% top spot in their division, and there are 8 other teams with a higher %, so does that mean 1 in 8 teams missed out on a playoff spot?
Travis...have you looked at who prompted that last
One more time...seeding does NOT determine HCA. It only determines who your 1st round opponent is and in which bracket you are placed.? Don't bother.
True. Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa...
Just no rulers...I get flashbacks...
ive been trollin on laker threads and they are hopin a 6th seed tryin to avoid gettin the 8th spot to play the spurs or mavs. Man i really hope we do get the 1st seed and fakers 8th seed and then sweep them.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
