Reply With Quote
I've heard a lot of it has to do with media travel - don't know how much truth there is to that.
My questions is why? Why does the NBA do the 2-3-2 format during the Finals? Is it to give the higher seeded team more pressure to win, and give the lower seeded team an optimistic view of hopefully winning the championship?
I've always said, homecourt is overrated, but still ask as to why this format when the rest of the playoff season is 2-2-1-1-1.
I've heard a lot of it has to do with media travel - don't know how much truth there is to that.
I think it is a blatant "give the lesser seed a chance" thing, edged to making it more interesting.
God knows what the Spurs would have done if they didn't Horry themselves out of that in format.
That's odd. If the media didn't complain about the travel during the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd round of the playoffs with multiple games being played. I don't see why they'd be bitter about traveling back and forward during the NBA Finals. Just odd if you ask me, but thank you for your reply.
Don't like it too much but hopefully the Spurs are a good road team!
MUCH more media for the Finals than any other round, and worldwide at that.
Good. Maybe we can get rid of the asterisks then.
lame
OH yeah, I forgot about the international media coverage. Screw them. They're in our country and they need to adapt to our original format. Screw the NBA Commissioner. I don't want the Spurs to win the Championship on the road. I want them to win at home.
Hey, go here to find info about NBA Finals details.
http://www.nba.com/finals2003/index.html
The NBA system differs from other sports playoffs in the fact that division champions are not guaranteed home-court advantage at any time in the playoffs, as home-court advantage is decided strictly on regular-season record, without regard to seeding.
Here's what Wikipedia's provided:
The present organization known as the National Basketball Association, then called the BAA (Basketball Association of America), had its inaugural season in 1946-1947.
In the current system, eight clubs from each of the league's two conferences qualify for the playoffs, with separate playoff brackets for each conference. In the 2002-03 season, the first-round series were expanded from best-of-5 to best-of-7; all other series have always been best-of-7. In all series, home games alternate between the two teams in a 2-2-1-1-1 format, except for the NBA Finals, in which the format is 2-3-2.
The 2-3-2 finals format was adopted for the 1985 finals, copying the format that was then in effect in the National Hockey League. Prior to 1985, almost all finals were played in the 2-2-1-1-1 format (although the 1971 finals between Milwaukee and Baltimore were on an alternate-home basis, some 1950s finals used the 2-3-2 format, and the 1975 Golden State-Washington and 1978 and 1979 Seattle-Washington finals were on a 1-2-2-1-1 basis). Also, prior to the 1980s, East and West playoffs were on an alternate-home basis except for those series when distance made the 2-2-1-1-1 format more practical.
Teams are seeded according to their regular-season record. The three division champions and best division runner-up receive the top four seeds, with their ranking based on regular-season record. The remaining teams are seeded strictly by regular-season record.
However, the NBA system differs from other sports playoffs in the fact that division champions are not guaranteed home-court advantage at any time in the playoffs, as home-court advantage is decided strictly on regular-season record, without regard to seeding.
See NBA Playoffs and 2007 NBA Playoffs for more information and the current NBA postseason.
Here's a copy/paste of how the 2-3-2 format has fared since 1985:
Home Team Wins First Two Games
2002: L.A. Lakers def. New Jersey; L.A. Lakers win series, 4-0
2000: L.A. Lakers def. Indiana; L.A. Lakers win series, 4-2
1999: San Antonio def. New York; San Antonio wins series, 4-1
1997: Chicago def. Utah; Chicago wins series, 4-2
1996: Chicago def. Seattle; Chicago wins series, 4-2
1989: Detroit def. L.A. Lakers; Detroit wins series, 4-0
1987: L.A. Lakers def. Boston; L.A. Lakers win series, 4-2
1986: Boston def. Houston; Boston wins series, 4-2
Road Team Wins First Two Games
1995: Houston def. Orlando; Houston wins series, 4-0
1993: Chicago def. Phoenix; Chicago wins series, 4-2
Teams Split First Two Games
2003: New Jersey at San Antonio; San Antonio wins series, 4-2
2001: Philadelphia at L.A. Lakers; L.A. wins series, 4-1
1998: Chicago at Utah; Chicago wins series, 4-2
1994: New York at Houston; Houston wins series, 4-3
1992: Portland at Chicago; Chicago wins series, 4-2
1991: L.A. Lakers at Chicago; Chicago wins series, 4-1
1990: Portland at Detroit; Detroit wins series, 4-1
1988: Detroit at L.A. Lakers; L.A. Lakers win series, 4-3
1985: L.A. Lakers at Boston; L.A. Lakers win series, 4-2
Home Team Wins Middle Three Games
None
Road Team Wins Middle Three Games
2001: L.A. Lakers def. Philadelphia; L.A. wins series, 4-1
1991: Chicago def. L.A. Lakers; Chicago wins series, 4-1
1990: Detroit def. Portland; Detroit wins series, 4-1
Home Team Wins Last Two Games
1994: Houston def. New York; Houston wins series, 4-3
1988: L.A. Lakers def. Detroit; L.A. Lakers win series, 4-3
Road Team Wins Last Two Games
None
Last edited by Clutch20; 06-02-2007 at 03:04 PM. Reason: cause I'm a little lazy....
The Pistons are the only team to ever win all 3 home games as a lower seed in the 2-3-2 format. Partly because any team that makes it to the final will be hard to beat 3 times in a row, AND that the lower seed is supposedly the underdog.
Did anyone see the article in the newspaper (SA Express) detailing what happens when the Home team wins 1st 2 games of series ? They chronicled it back for years.
Unfortunately, they made a mistake by saying we beat the Nets twice at home in the 1st 2 games of the series in 2003. That was glaring...it was only a few years ago. We lost home court against everyone that year except the Lakers.
Read it and saw the stats. I'm still against that format. I'd prefer the 2-2-1-1-1 format
It was put in for the media back when every NBA Finals was Boston vs LA. 2-3-2 is a stupid format: I think it screws over the lower-seeded team, ensuring the only way they can get a close-out game at home is to completely dominate and sweep or win in 5.
See also: The 2005-2006 Miami Heat
it was changed because of the travel times... during the eastern and western conferance finals you are in the east or west respectively... the finals however you have to travel between east and west.... it sucks but imagine if it was La vs Miami, thats alot of traveling doing a 2-2-1-1-1.
Then stop calling the NBA Champs "World Champions"
Great, another crybaby thread.
People have cried because LeBron is a great player and now they cry because Spurs will play game 5 on the road and game 6 at home instead of the opposite.
Maybe Spurs should play against a crappy team with all games at home ?
Home Team Wins Middle Three Games
None
They need to update that...
Detroit won the middle three as the home team in 2004. And they almost did it against us the next year.
2-3-3 is pointless these days...
It sure would've been nice to come back to Dallas 2-2 last year instead of staying in Miami...
2-2-1-1-1 is the only way it should be in all rounds...
Road Team Wins Last Two Games
None
There's the biggest key with this format....put the Cavs in that situation and they just won't have the juice to pull that off.
The heat just did that.
Aren't the '90 Pistons the only team to win all 3 on the road? Or were they just the first to do it?
Hear them talking about this a couple of days back.
Said it is because of all the international media that covers the finals. Entails too many bookings on airlines, hotels, etc.......
Believe they mentioned something like 1650 press passes for the finals.
Gawd, is Spurfan ever spoiled. Now we're ing about winning the NBA Championship on the road? GMAFB....
Go away.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
