The Play-In: Should it Be Permanent?

the NBA is entertainment, and I have to say the play-in has made the last 2-3 weeks pretty damn entertaining

should the NBA keep it? I'm thinking yes but maybe there's something I'm not considering....?

in fact, I'm thinking not only keep the play-in but use it to expand entertainment value in the lottery. Even out the odds a little bit and have a full lottery for all 10 teams that don't make the play-in. Draw lottery balls for all 10 slots. Then take the 8 teams that made the play-in and have a second 'even-odds' lottery for slots 11-18. Hell, make it even more interesting and hold a another even-odds lottery for all 12 playoff teams and slots 19-30

this would even make trading draft picks more entertaining

 

I don't think it should, unless they change it so that a team has to be within shouting distance. If the 9th and 10th teams are absolute shit and have horrible records, they have no business being in the playoffs.

 

Anytime the NBA see's an opportunity to increase revenue and audience, it will get serious consideration. Its a marketing driven business targeting all aspects of fandom. It would surprise me a bit if the play-in becomes an annual event. The players union would have input too.

 

I like it. Gives many tweener teams incentive to compete late and adds playoff games. For the 7th and 8 seeds, that is potentially two more playoff games. As a season ticket holder, those are gold.

 

They're not in the playoffs, they're in the play-ins. And if they're as bad as your premise, they pose little threat to the 7th and 8th place teams.

I think it adds interest overall. The only negative I can see is increased injury risk. Teams go hard during the playoffs, with guys playing through stuff they would have sat out during the regular season, and use the last couple weeks of the season to rest up for that as much as possible. With the play-in format, lower seeded teams can't do that and higher seeded teams have to think twice about it if their opponent suddenly has more to play for.

 

Lets see how it goes, but I am warming up to it. If the 7th or 8th place teams are ones that have been slipping due to an injury, it might be best to have them removed from a 7 game series. Plus if I am a fan of one of those teams, the lottery is not a bad option.

 

It is creative, so I hope they keep it around, if only to keep iterating on it. Parity between east/west was relatively good this year, but if we run into multiple sub-500 teams making the playoffs again, the play-in format makes less and less sense, unless it is conference agnostic.

 

Mods: can you change the first part of the title to "The Special Zion Play-in Tourney" (even though they failed to account for just how bad the Pelicans would be again) maybe next year ALL teams will make it into the pre-playoff tournament.

 

They should just make the whole regular season the play-in tourney.

 

I think that it should be permanent, but I agree that there should be some sort of qualifier like there was last season. If the 7 seed is like 5 or more games above 8, they shouldn't have to play in. And if 9 or 10 is so far away, they shouldn't get the chance to play either.

 

essentially, it already is

 

Yeah, that was sort of my point. For that reason I think the play-ins are kind of stupid. They do provide a bit more excitement towards the end of the season though, so I'm in for whatever the NBA decides.

 

not sure how that would work..?

I guess it could be if the 7th seed is x number of games above the 8th seed, it's an automatic 7th seed, which in turn, eliminates the 10th seed? Or just a 3-team play-in for 8th seed?

 

The playin sort of makes tanking less appealing to 4 bottom feeders in the league and makes lower seeds keep playing to the end instead of resting starters. I have a problem with teams being rewarded for having losing records in the regular season...this is my biggest issue with the playin or playoffs..

 

I think if 7 is far ahead, then 9 and 10 play, winner faces 8. And maybe 8 has to lose twice to be eliminated, but only has to win once, similar to last year's?
And something similar, like if 10 is too far back, then maybe it's just 8 versus 9, and winner faces 7.

If you go back just like 2 years ago, 7 and 8 in the west were tied, but then 9th place was 9 games behind them, and 10th was 11 games out.

 

It depends what the ultimate goal is.

Arguments for yes:

• More teams competing for playoff spots
• More difficult for top seeds to jocky for matchups
• Might result in less teams resting guys to end the regular season
• Better TV ratings (money)

Arguements for no:

• Diminshes the value of an 82 game season
• One bad game, injury, etc. could cost a team a playoff spot

 

What I like about it is that it prioritizes the low end playoff teams that are playing the best (and are healthy) at the end of the season. It makes for more interesting 1-8 and 2-7 matchups in my opinion.

Though I like Zach Lowe's idea of having the top seeds (1-4) choose their opponent from the bottom seeds 5-8)... at least for the first round.

While we're at it, I propose that we replace the all-star game with a giant one-on-one tournament between all selected all-stars. Just think about the storylines, the street cred, and the rivalries that would be born. The union would agree, right? Right?

 

I like the potential for a March Madness-type 10th seed Cinderella, as unlikely as it may be in the NBA.

 

Might as well call it SBA and count me out as a fan. Already hard enough to watch the NBA as it currently is.

 

I think so. I like it.