I just wish this series wasn't tainted by Horry's cheap shot.nash said:congrats B and Dan. Im pretty upset, but congrats your team did good.
Bannister said:I just wish this series wasn't tainted by Horry's cheap shot.
Maybe the NBA will learn and start reseading after each round like all the other sports do. They finally learned that 2-3-2 was bad and gave the road team an advantage IMO.LOTRFan said:it could have been one of the most epic series in NBA history - and it wasn't even the Western Conference Finals. :eek
mfoga said:Maybe the NBA will learn and start reseading after each round like all the other sports do. They finally learned that 2-3-2 was bad and gave the road team an advantage IMO.
It's funny, the NBA changed the seeding rules this year to avoid what happened last year with SA and Dallas and it happened again anyway cause Dallas got their ***** handed to them by the Warriors.nash said:I also think that they should match up teams regarding their seed position. for example, it kind of sucks for the #2 seeded Suns having to go against the #3 seeded Spurs in just the second round.
If the first round goes #1-#8, #2-#7, #3-#6, #4-#5, then they should do the same for the second round too.
Bannister said:It's funny, the NBA changed the seeding rules this year to avoid what happened last year with SA and Dallas and it happened again anyway cause Dallas got their ***** handed to them by the Warriors.
There is no point. They only have two rounds before the World Series. Of course MLB is messed up in the fact that the All Star game determines home field for the World Series.jlcmsu said:MLB doesn't reseed after each round. You have the three division winners and 1 wild card. The wild card cannot play it's own division winner.
Last year the Spurs were #1, Phoenix #2, and Dallas #4. Dallas had a better record than Phoenix but was the 4 seed since they didn't win their division. Denver was #3, but they didn't even have home court in the first round because the 6 seeded Clippers had a better record. This year they changed it so the first 4 seeds are the three division winners and the team with the best record that didn't win their division. These four teams are then seeded by record. Funny thing about that was, in both conferences the fifth seed had a better record than the fourth seeded team so the fifth seeded team had home court. Houston had a better record than Utah, which won its division and Chicago had a better record than Miami which won it's division. Of course this doesn't really make a difference since the winner of those series still goes on to play the 1/8 series winner.nash said:how was the seeding order last year? I totally forget.
But anyways, I think keeping it highest seed vs lowest seed in all rounds makes the most sense. That way at least it will provide incentive and competition throughout the regular season to compete to be the highest seed possible and not just "make" the playoffs.
IMO if youre the #1 seed and you get beat by the 8th seed, that's your own damn fault lol.
I have no problem with them not reseeding after each round. What I always think is stupid is that the seeding doesn't completely go by record. It didn't matter as much this year when the five seed had a better record than the four seed, but last year when the six seed has a better record than the three seed, something is wrong.piccolodaimaoh said:I have no problem with the current playoff seedings in the NBA. 2 always has to play 3 if they both make it through to the second round.
Last year Dallas had to play San Antonio in the second round before the Mavs faced the Suns in the Conference finals. It almost always turns out that way. The only reason why it is different this year is because those fakes in Dallas lost to some true ballers in Golden State.
It is the way of the league, tournament style, that is why the NCAA March Madness is so exciting.
If things turn out the way they are supposed to on paper 1 plays 4 and 2 plays 3 in the second round. Just because for the 3rd time ever 1 lost to 8 we now should change the playoff system? That makes no sense, it punishes a team that rose above the rest, like the Warriors did against Dallas.
We are (most of us) Americans, we root for the little guy and we love a winner. When the little guy wins we should not punish him by making him play the next team with the best record. This is the NBA, not the NFL and certainly not the NHL. Let's keep it that way.