NBA Playoffs
I may be a week late with this, but I can’t just dismiss the disparity among the regular season records of the teams in this year’s NBA playoffs. The NBA playoffs are a 16 team tournament to decide the championship. Teams play 82 games in the regular season to determine which 16 teams get the chance to compete for the championship. This year, the NBA has determined that the Atlanta Hawks, with a record of 37-45, have earned the right to compete for the championship while the Golden State Warriors, with a record of 48-34, did not win enough games to compete for the championship.
That’s an eleven game difference. The Warriors won 11 more games than the Hawks in the regular season, yet it is the Hawks who are in the playoffs. Is the Hawks .451 winning percentage the lowest ever for a playoff team in professional sports?
The biggest surprise to me is that no one seems to have a problem with the above situation. Maybe it is because neither team is likely to win the championship, but if I were the Golden State Warriors I wouldn’t be too happy. The only reason I can think of why team owners, particularly in the NBA and NFL, don’t make more of a fuss about this sort of situation is because they know what comes around goes around – meaning the Warriors know that next year they very well could have a .451 winning percentage and make the playoffs. But does this system represent the best way to determine a champion?
I know I’ve said it before but I’ll ask it again: what would be wrong with eliminating conferences and divisions in professional sports and just taking the teams with the top regular season records to compete in the playoffs?
Comments
I see no problem in that. It should always be the best teams. That's my problem with the BCS system. It's practically pre-determined which of 2 teams will win the championship. Why have those games (besides money).
Back to the NBA, part of the problem is that no one pays attention to the regular season. Not even the teams themselves. Once they've figured that they made the playoffs, they are only going to win games to "match" against the weakest possible opponent they can face in the first round.
On the other hand, since Atlanta is playing as well as they are against the Celtics, you have to wonder how good the Celtics record was or how bad Atlanta's really was.
Posted by: Big Money Tony
|
May 2, 2008 10:03 AM
Bob,
The NHL used to have a 1-16 format. I liked the format much better. It really had a March Madness feel to it. It also proved a few things. That teams couldn't dump games for a match up, when there were so many times fighting for the last playoff spot. It also encouraged teams to perform well for seeding purposes.
Ultimately, the NHL in its infinite wisdom decided to go to a division alignment and then conference alignment to create a deeper rivalry and drive up revenue in attendance for ticket holders that were already familar with the teams they were playing.
By the sounds of it, you'd like a 1-16 format better too.
Posted by: The Sports Freak | May 3, 2008 7:36 PM