Re: Why don't they just get rid of divisions? there is no point for them because of the seeding system makes it so a whole division can get into the playoffs while another barely gets one team in there (Centeral and Atlantic)they should either combine the divisions into 2 divisions to even it out and put the top 4 teams from each division into the playoffs or just remove the divisions all together :beerchug:
Re: Why don't they just get rid of divisions? The way that they have it is fine. The easier and more simple solution would be just to change the playoff format. And do it by record rather than winning your division.
Re: Why don't they just get rid of divisions? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ballerman2112 @ Jul 20 2006, 11:40 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>The way that they have it is fine. The easier and more simple solution would be just to change the playoff format. And do it by record rather than winning your division.</div>I agree. Winning your division should only gaurantee you a playoff spot. After that do the seeding by record, which would probably cause the Atlantic winner to be #8.
Re: Why don't they just get rid of divisions? I heard that starting this year division winners will get a top 4 seed but they will get their seed their based on record.
Re: Why don't they just get rid of divisions? Is it just me or do we have alot of Celtics fan all of a sudden?Anyways I like divisions it's fun playing those damn suns 4 times a year and seeing Kobe own Raja even when he's flopping. This year we played 11 games against the Suns.
Re: Why don't they just get rid of divisions? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (arya202 @ Jul 20 2006, 11:01 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Is it just me or do we have alot of Celtics fan all of a sudden?Anyways I like divisions it's fun playing those damn suns 4 times a year and seeing Kobe own Raja even when he's flopping. This year we played 11 games against the Suns.</div>Raja won the series and got that clotheline in. And Kobe got so mad all the time it was funny. I think Raja will consider that a very successful series. :happy0144:
Re: Why don't they just get rid of divisions? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ArizonaFan @ Jul 20 2006, 12:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I heard that starting this year division winners will get a top 4 seed but they will get their seed their based on record.</div>so basically it isnt much different than last year? So if it was like that this year...the spurs would have had the #1, and the Mavs would have had the #2? is that what u are saying?
Re: Why don't they just get rid of divisions? Yes and the Nuggets at 4. I like this way much better than the other way. More fair and winning the division still gets you something.
Re: Why don't they just get rid of divisions? ok i c....that is improvement but if you have 3 teams in one division that all have 60 win records(which wont happen but i am just using it as an example), one of the teams would end up being a #5. I wish they would just change the whole thing but at least this is improvement
Re: Why don't they just get rid of divisions? Well 3 teans winning 60 in one division is pretty rare. 3 teams winning 60 in a whole conference is even a big deal, but if it happens, big deal. The only difference is one more away game against the team you would have play anyway and if you're good enough you'd win either way.
Re: Why don't they just get rid of divisions? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ArizonaFan @ Jul 20 2006, 01:38 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Well 3 teans winning 60 in one division is pretty rare. 3 teams winning 60 in a whole conference is even a big deal, but if it happens, big deal. The only difference is one more away game against the team you would have play anyway and if you're good enough you'd win either way.</div>i was just using it as an example but even if it was like 60 54 and 52...they could all have better records than the winner of another division. But i agree...it shouldnt matter that much. Teams are going to have to play the best teams to make it to the finals anyways so it shouldnt matter when they play them i guess...
Re: Why don't they just get rid of divisions? I think it would be too cluttered to have 15 teams in each division. 6 divisions of 5 is perfect.
Re: Why don't they just get rid of divisions? There's still some benefits to divisions. It promotes rivalries and helps form schedules. Pretty much every major league has some sort of divisions so that the same teams play each other every year. I mean, imagine if the Yankees played the Red Sox one series every year. Or if the Cowboys didn't play the Redskins at all in a season. Divisions keep things orderly. I do agree, however, that divisions are a bit screwy in the NBA. They're divided by geography, which quite honestly, is pretty stupid.
Re: Why don't they just get rid of divisions? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Justice @ Jul 21 2006, 03:27 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>There's still some benefits to divisions. It promotes rivalries and helps form schedules. Pretty much every major league has some sort of divisions so that the same teams play each other every year. I mean, imagine if the Yankees played the Red Sox one series every year. Or if the Cowboys didn't play the Redskins at all in a season. Divisions keep things orderly. I do agree, however, that divisions are a bit screwy in the NBA. They're divided by geography, which quite honestly, is pretty stupid.</div>Why do you think it's stupid? I like it this way.
Re: Why don't they just get rid of divisions? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ArizonaFan @ Jul 21 2006, 12:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Why do you think it's stupid? I like it this way. </div>I don't know... it's like, they aren't grouping them so that each division is competitive and has a couple strong teams. I mean, normally you'd imagine the Northeast would be really strong because they would have more money and fervor, it's just that lately that hasn't been the case. I don't know, maybe that's just my opinion.
Re: Why don't they just get rid of divisions? Well they can't keep switching around divisions. Sometimes one division does worse and sometimes they are the best. Like when the D-Backs and Giants went to World Series in back to back years and then the NL West sucked. You can't change divisions to keep evening things up. On day you could see the Mavs and Spurs sucking in a bad SouthWest division while the Jazz are back on top of the West...
Re: Why don't they just get rid of divisions? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ArizonaFan @ Jul 21 2006, 02:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Well they can't keep switching around divisions. Sometimes one division does worse and sometimes they are the best. Like when the D-Backs and Giants went to World Series in back to back years and then the NL West sucked. You can't change divisions to keep evening things up. On day you could see the Mavs and Spurs sucking in a bad SouthWest division while the Jazz are back on top of the West...</div>Yeah, it's possible, and stuff like that will happen. I'm just saying that the NW division and Atlantic division are pretty weak. You bring up the NL West, well look at it right now. It certainly isn't the best division in baseball, but it's competitive and fun to watch. Same with the AL West. Every division in baseball has had a race or two at the end of the season in recent years. Can you say the same for basketball? Do you think that will change in the next couple years? It's possible, but probably not that likely, really. That's all I'm getting at.
Re: Why don't they just get rid of divisions? competition in division changes all of the time. The celtics used to be the best team in the 80's and in the 50's and 60's. In the 90's it was detroit, bulls and lakers and a little bit of the spurs. And you know who the better teams in the league are now. The best teams will change around as players leave the game and such. There is nothing wrong with the system right now.
Re: Why don't they just get rid of divisions? <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Living_Legend33 @ Jul 20 2006, 12:06 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I agree. Winning your division should only gaurantee you a playoff spot. After that do the seeding by record, which would probably cause the Atlantic winner to be #8.</div>I agree about winning the div should only give you a playoff spot. By the way the Atlantic div winner would not be 8th lol Because the Nets are a very good team.But what happened this past season with Spurs, and Mavs having the best record in the Western Conference, but having to play each other in the 2nd round should not have happened. Now hopefully it changes like Stern said.
