Phx-Suns.Net

Indy wrote:

The Bobster wrote:You couldn't really compare East and West won-lost record unless they get rid of the unbalanced schedule, which would mean a lot more travel for the players, so you can probably forget it.

Why do you need balanced schedules. You don't have it in football and that seems to work out fine.

They aren't lumping everybody into the same playoff pool and reseeding them though. A 50-win season in the East isn't nearly as impressive as a 50-win season in the West. Should they be counted the same if you re-seed the teams in one 16-team playoff pool? Probably not.

The difference between the NBA and NFL is that the NBA plays a schedule that's simply determined by which conference/division you play in, the NBA plays one designed for parity where the better teams play tougher schedules and the worst teams play easier schedules. The NFL really wants as many teams in the playoff race as possible, and have designed their schedule accordingly.

carey wrote:I am probably alone here in liking a recent proposal I saw but... it was about adding 5 Europe based teams to the NBA bringing the total to 35 teams. Then you play each team in the league home & away including one Euro tour each season. It would mean decreasing the total amount of games played by a dozen or so. It would dilute the talent pool in the league a bit but you might get more Euro players interested in coming to the NBA. I think overall it would be very interesting. What effect would having true Euro teams in the league have?

Personally I am not really interested in expanding the NBA to Europe. Money talks, but I think it wouldn't work very well as long as the massive amount of top players keeps coming from USA.

I'd be really curious about a tournament featuring the two finalists from the NBA and Euroleague. Somewhat like the former Intercontinental cup in soccer.

If altering the number of games is actually entertained, my revised schedule would be: Three games against every team. One home, one away. Home court for third game decided by the series of the prior season. First season decided by luck.

Also, no team can get more than X home games every season. If it has rights to more than that, the excess goes to the teams more deserving according to a given principle, be it location, TV ratings, point differential, whatever.

That the record shows much more accurately how teams feared in the regular season, so you can set the playoffs with the best 16 teams period.

The Bobster wrote:

Indy wrote:

The Bobster wrote:You couldn't really compare East and West won-lost record unless they get rid of the unbalanced schedule, which would mean a lot more travel for the players, so you can probably forget it.

Why do you need balanced schedules. You don't have it in football and that seems to work out fine.

They aren't lumping everybody into the same playoff pool and reseeding them though. A 50-win season in the East isn't nearly as impressive as a 50-win season in the West. Should they be counted the same if you re-seed the teams in one 16-team playoff pool? Probably not.

The difference between the NBA and NFL is that the NBA plays a schedule that's simply determined by which conference/division you play in, the NBA plays one designed for parity where the better teams play tougher schedules and the worst teams play easier schedules. The NFL really wants as many teams in the playoff race as possible, and have designed their schedule accordingly.

I get the difference between the two. My point is that you don't have to have balanced schedules so every team plays the same games.

Ring_Wanted wrote:If altering the number of games is actually entertained, my revised schedule would be: Three games against every team. One home, one away. Home court for third game decided by the series of the prior season. First season decided by luck.

Also, no team can get more than X home games every season. If it has rights to more than that, the excess goes to the teams more deserving according to a given principle, be it location, TV ratings, point differential, whatever.

That the record shows much more accurately how teams feared in the regular season, so you can set the playoffs with the best 16 teams period.

So you want them playing more games? That would be 87. The idea is to play less games.

The idea could be just reducing the stress players suffer, not necesarily through sheer number of games. And it's just 5 more, when one way or another you have to fix things like back to backs, the length of preseason and such so you could end up reducing fatigue and making schedules and playoff seeding actually fair.

carey wrote:I am probably alone here in liking a recent proposal I saw but... it was about adding 5 Europe based teams to the NBA bringing the total to 35 teams. Then you play each team in the league home & away including one Euro tour each season. It would mean decreasing the total amount of games played by a dozen or so. It would dilute the talent pool in the league a bit but you might get more Euro players interested in coming to the NBA. I think overall it would be very interesting. What effect would having true Euro teams in the league have?

Satisfying as it was to ship Mook to Detroit, wouldn't it have been even more awesome to trade him to Russia?

Cap wrote:

carey wrote:I am probably alone here in liking a recent proposal I saw but... it was about adding 5 Europe based teams to the NBA bringing the total to 35 teams. Then you play each team in the league home & away including one Euro tour each season. It would mean decreasing the total amount of games played by a dozen or so. It would dilute the talent pool in the league a bit but you might get more Euro players interested in coming to the NBA. I think overall it would be very interesting. What effect would having true Euro teams in the league have?

Satisfying as it was to ship Mook to Detroit, wouldn't it have been even more awesome to trade him to Russia?

http://www.sbnation.com/nba/2014/11/26/ ... p-playoffs


I like this idea.

They should flip the Suns and Jazz though, as Phoenix is closer to the coast and has more natural and traditional rivalries.

That was the best one I've seen as well.

Probably too dramatic for the NBA to consider.

A 5-4-3-2 system keeps it at 82 games but still doesn't solve the problem of accurately reflecting who is who when it is playoff time, or for draft order purposes for instance.

Josh Smith joins the Clippers.

LRMAM failed his physical with Sacramento. They voided his contract.

carey wrote:LRMAM failed his physical with Sacramento. They voided his contract.

Who?

Luc Richard Mbah-A-Moute (spelling)?

Ring_Wanted wrote:I've wanted the best 16 at the playoffs for a long time now, but first the schedule would need to be indeed balanced out. I don't see traveling today as a problem, though. I don't really care about old rivalries either.

i dont need it to be balanced out. the west teams are doing okay with a tougher schedule. the east teams still suck even if they are playing against each other most of the time.

which teams benefit from a top 16 format? the west

which teams benefit from an imbalanced sked? on paper, the east... but are they? when was the last time?

https://twitter.com/WojYahooNBA/status/622937567953031169

Yea Denver shoulda dealt him wayyyyyyyyyy sooner. They basically got nothing, but I understand why they did it. Mudiay is gonna be a ROY darkhorse.

Hmmm. That's a big get for Houston. Though he will take the ball out of Harden's hands some.