SpursReport.com

SpursReport.com (http://www.spursreport.com/forums/)
-   Spurs and NBA Fan Feedback (http://www.spursreport.com/forums/spurs-nba-fan-feedback/)
-   -   Should all NBA teams play each other 3 times? (http://www.spursreport.com/forums/spurs-nba-fan-feedback/119970-should-all-nba-teams-play-each-other-3-times.html)

MRJONESIII 06-21-13 09:35 PM

Should all NBA teams play each other 3 times?
 
It would help even out the crappy conference teams. Plus I'd rather see the top 16 teams.... Period.

clovisnmspurfan 06-22-13 07:06 PM

Makes more sense than what we have now.

TRUTH 06-22-13 07:13 PM

It's an idea that makes complete sense theoretically. It just wouldn't make sense in reality because it would take a toll on a team physically with all that traveling. East coast and west coast teams would suffer, which means the Miami cHeat and the Lakers will be affected. I'm in!

scarlet 06-22-13 08:03 PM

Are you saying instead of breaking up the playoffs into 2 conferences, just have one playoff where 1 plays 16 ,2 plays 15 , etc?

MRJONESIII 06-22-13 08:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scarlet (Post 1300738)
Are you saying instead of breaking up the playoffs into 2 conferences, just have one playoff where 1 plays 16 ,2 plays 15 , etc?

Exactly... Weed out the garbage teams. Can you imagine what the records would be if the West played more East teams and visa-verse? No $h!tty 27 game win steaks. Crappy teams will always be crappy and tank seasons for lottery picks... Only to still suck @$$!

Spurd_On 06-22-13 09:02 PM

I think the question becomes...Would the Miami Heat have had homecourt advantage with both conferences playing each other an equal number of games.

scarlet 06-22-13 10:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TRUTH (Post 1300727)
It's an idea that makes complete sense theoretically. It just wouldn't make sense in reality because it would take a toll on a team physically with all that traveling. East coast and west coast teams would suffer, which means the Miami cHeat and the Lakers will be affected. I'm in!

I say cut the number of games to 60 and just have every time play each other twice. Then have a one conference 16 team playoff.

Sadly the NBA will never do this for historical reasons. You would not be able to compare points records between eras and stupid **** like that. NBA does not care about good basketball.

MRJONESIII 06-22-13 10:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spurd_On (Post 1300749)
I think the question becomes...Would the Miami Heat have had homecourt advantage with both conferences playing each other an equal number of games.

Not even close! All the games our guys sat out for rest and injury.... Miami needed every bit of that 27 game win streak to get homecourt. The western conference would eat the eastern conference alive. It's sad when you win 45 or more games and you have to go home. But the high 30's are enough to qualify in the East. You probably get 10 teams from the West and 6 from the East in a 16 team playoff.

scarlet 06-22-13 11:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MRJONESIII (Post 1300760)
Not even close! All the games our guys sat out for rest and injury.... Miami needed every bit of that 27 game win streak to get homecourt. The western conference would eat the eastern conference alive. It's sad when you win 45 or more games and you have to go home. But the high 30's are enough to qualify in the East. You probably get 10 teams from the West and 6 from the East in a 16 team playoff.

It would still be 8 and 8, just the lower seeds will be east teams. The only east team that would not make it would probably be the bucks. The east is not as bad as people say, the east vs west record is always around 50%. The low wins is probably due to the cold weather over there or something.

MRJONESIII 06-22-13 11:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scarlet (Post 1300762)
It would still be 8 and 8, just the lower seeds will be east teams. The only east team that would not make it would probably be the bucks. The east is not as bad as people say, the east vs west record is always around 50%. The low wins is probably due to the cold weather over there or something.

But if you check last year's standings, if Dirk played all year I'm pretty sure they would have won 45 games which makes Utah 10th in the West and 5 games better than Milwaukee. But Bynum's injury hurt too. Maybe like 9-7 West. But it doesn't matter cause the nba would never do it.

Uwe Blab 06-23-13 03:36 AM

It would take a completely new commissioner for any major change like that to happen. And Stern has one of his cronies taking over when he leaves, so don't count on anything changing.

b1gdon 06-23-13 12:50 PM

This is a bad idea. In addition to raising travel costs and increasing travel time, it would be unfair to fans and lower TV ratings. Orlando road games on the West Coast would start at 10:30pm ET or the start time would have to be pushed up to 6:30pm PT which would be unfair to fans trying to get to the games by putting it smack dab in the middle of rush hour. I will admit that Spurs fans would come out ahead in this structure being in the central time zone by trading 9:30 west coast road starts for 6:30 east coast starts.

You would also have to raise the number of regular season games by 5 to 87 and that is before any expansion to get every team 3 times. I think what the NBA has right now is just fine. No team that has ever truly deserved to be in the playoffs (i.e. has decent chance of making the finals) has been in the lottery because of conference imbalance. Even if by far the best 2 teams are in the same conference, they will still have to play each other and it will still be fun to watch no matter what round it is in (see Spurs/Mavs WCSF 2006) I much prefer seeing additional games against natural rivals like Dallas, Houston, LA, etc than having an extra game against Bos, NY or Mia.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:38 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.7.4


Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0