Current NBA Playoff Structure

With the dominant NBA teams, excluding Detroit and Boston, being in the West, I personally think that they should change the playoff structure to being more like a March Madness type of thing, but with just the top 16 teams, record wise, getting in.

If teams like Denver or Golden State were in the East, they would be in the playoffs easily. I just dont think its fair that some teams can finish under .500 and make it in the east, while a solid team like Denver or Golden State, are not going to get in.

This year, any one of the teams, 1-8 in the West could make it to the finals. The Eastern Conference is pretty much a joke anymore. Its basically a two team race between Boston and Detroit. It pains me to say that being a Cavs fan, but I dont really see LeBron carrying the cavs to the finals again.

What do you think they should do in the NBA?

Big_Z wrote:

With the dominant NBA teams, excluding Detroit and Boston, being in the West, I personally think that they should change the playoff structure to being more like a March Madness type of thing, but with just the top 16 teams, record wise, getting in.

If teams like Denver or Golden State were in the East, they would be in the playoffs easily. I just dont think its fair that some teams can finish under .500 and make it in the east, while a solid team like Denver or Golden State, are not going to get in.

This year, any one of the teams, 1-8 in the West could make it to the finals. The Eastern Conference is pretty much a joke anymore. Its basically a two team race between Boston and Detroit. It pains me to say that being a Cavs fan, but I dont really see LeBron carrying the cavs to the finals again.

What do you think they should do in the NBA?

I agree with this, but it will never happen.

I was talking about this with one of my friends who was big NBA fan, and we thought this would be a better thing to do: Move New Orleans into the Southeast division (Eastern Conference) and create an expansion team in Las Vegas in the Pacific division. Then, after a couple of years, make an expansion franchise back in Seattle called the Supersonics to replace the team going to Oklahoma.

Two expansion teams would make the West worse, and New Orleans would make the East better. While the West would still be better, we'd be much better off.

SoxNats08 wrote:

Big_Z wrote:

With the dominant NBA teams, excluding Detroit and Boston, being in the West, I personally think that they should change the playoff structure to being more like a March Madness type of thing, but with just the top 16 teams, record wise, getting in.

If teams like Denver or Golden State were in the East, they would be in the playoffs easily. I just dont think its fair that some teams can finish under .500 and make it in the east, while a solid team like Denver or Golden State, are not going to get in.

This year, any one of the teams, 1-8 in the West could make it to the finals. The Eastern Conference is pretty much a joke anymore. Its basically a two team race between Boston and Detroit. It pains me to say that being a Cavs fan, but I dont really see LeBron carrying the cavs to the finals again.

What do you think they should do in the NBA?

I agree with this, but it will never happen.

I was talking about this with one of my friends who was big NBA fan, and we thought this would be a better thing to do: Move New Orleans into the Southeast division (Eastern Conference) and create an expansion team in Las Vegas in the Pacific division. Then, after a couple of years, make an expansion franchise back in Seattle called the Supersonics to replace the team going to Oklahoma.

Two expansion teams would make the West worse, and New Orleans would make the East better. While the West would still be better, we'd be much better off.

Yeah i cant say i disagree with you on this one.

I think in the next 5-7 years we could see expansion teams, or teams moved, to the Las Vegas area from all three major sports (football, baseball, basketball)

I think the Hornets should still be in the East anyways, and they would easily be the most dominant team in the east

Big_Z wrote:

SoxNats08 wrote:

Big_Z wrote:

With the dominant NBA teams, excluding Detroit and Boston, being in the West, I personally think that they should change the playoff structure to being more like a March Madness type of thing, but with just the top 16 teams, record wise, getting in.

If teams like Denver or Golden State were in the East, they would be in the playoffs easily. I just dont think its fair that some teams can finish under .500 and make it in the east, while a solid team like Denver or Golden State, are not going to get in.

This year, any one of the teams, 1-8 in the West could make it to the finals. The Eastern Conference is pretty much a joke anymore. Its basically a two team race between Boston and Detroit. It pains me to say that being a Cavs fan, but I dont really see LeBron carrying the cavs to the finals again.

What do you think they should do in the NBA?

I agree with this, but it will never happen.

I was talking about this with one of my friends who was big NBA fan, and we thought this would be a better thing to do: Move New Orleans into the Southeast division (Eastern Conference) and create an expansion team in Las Vegas in the Pacific division. Then, after a couple of years, make an expansion franchise back in Seattle called the Supersonics to replace the team going to Oklahoma.

Two expansion teams would make the West worse, and New Orleans would make the East better. While the West would still be better, we'd be much better off.

Yeah i cant say i disagree with you on this one.

I think in the next 5-7 years we could see expansion teams, or teams moved, to the Las Vegas area from all three major sports (football, baseball, basketball)

I think the Hornets should still be in the East anyways, and they would easily be the most dominant team in the east

I don't see baseball adding a team there, but I could possibly see a football team.

And I disagree about the Hornets, I think the Celtics would be the #1 team, and they'd be the #2 but it'd be close.

SoxNats08 wrote:

Big_Z wrote:

SoxNats08 wrote:

Big_Z wrote:

With the dominant NBA teams, excluding Detroit and Boston, being in the West, I personally think that they should change the playoff structure to being more like a March Madness type of thing, but with just the top 16 teams, record wise, getting in.

If teams like Denver or Golden State were in the East, they would be in the playoffs easily. I just dont think its fair that some teams can finish under .500 and make it in the east, while a solid team like Denver or Golden State, are not going to get in.

This year, any one of the teams, 1-8 in the West could make it to the finals. The Eastern Conference is pretty much a joke anymore. Its basically a two team race between Boston and Detroit. It pains me to say that being a Cavs fan, but I dont really see LeBron carrying the cavs to the finals again.

What do you think they should do in the NBA?

I agree with this, but it will never happen.

I was talking about this with one of my friends who was big NBA fan, and we thought this would be a better thing to do: Move New Orleans into the Southeast division (Eastern Conference) and create an expansion team in Las Vegas in the Pacific division. Then, after a couple of years, make an expansion franchise back in Seattle called the Supersonics to replace the team going to Oklahoma.

Two expansion teams would make the West worse, and New Orleans would make the East better. While the West would still be better, we'd be much better off.

Yeah i cant say i disagree with you on this one.

I think in the next 5-7 years we could see expansion teams, or teams moved, to the Las Vegas area from all three major sports (football, baseball, basketball)

I think the Hornets should still be in the East anyways, and they would easily be the most dominant team in the east

I don't see baseball adding a team there, but I could possibly see a football team.

And I disagree about the Hornets, I think the Celtics would be the #1 team, and they'd be the #2 but it'd be close.

right now the celtics r better but i think the hornets have a much better future, especialy sinec they have the best point guard in the league

PatsDynasty wrote:

SoxNats08 wrote:

Big_Z wrote:

SoxNats08 wrote:

Big_Z wrote:

With the dominant NBA teams, excluding Detroit and Boston, being in the West, I personally think that they should change the playoff structure to being more like a March Madness type of thing, but with just the top 16 teams, record wise, getting in.

If teams like Denver or Golden State were in the East, they would be in the playoffs easily. I just dont think its fair that some teams can finish under .500 and make it in the east, while a solid team like Denver or Golden State, are not going to get in.

This year, any one of the teams, 1-8 in the West could make it to the finals. The Eastern Conference is pretty much a joke anymore. Its basically a two team race between Boston and Detroit. It pains me to say that being a Cavs fan, but I dont really see LeBron carrying the cavs to the finals again.

What do you think they should do in the NBA?

I agree with this, but it will never happen.

I was talking about this with one of my friends who was big NBA fan, and we thought this would be a better thing to do: Move New Orleans into the Southeast division (Eastern Conference) and create an expansion team in Las Vegas in the Pacific division. Then, after a couple of years, make an expansion franchise back in Seattle called the Supersonics to replace the team going to Oklahoma.

Two expansion teams would make the West worse, and New Orleans would make the East better. While the West would still be better, we'd be much better off.

Yeah i cant say i disagree with you on this one.

I think in the next 5-7 years we could see expansion teams, or teams moved, to the Las Vegas area from all three major sports (football, baseball, basketball)

I think the Hornets should still be in the East anyways, and they would easily be the most dominant team in the east

I don't see baseball adding a team there, but I could possibly see a football team.

And I disagree about the Hornets, I think the Celtics would be the #1 team, and they'd be the #2 but it'd be close.

right now the celtics r better but i think the hornets have a much better future, especialy sinec they have the best point guard in the league

WOOT WOOT! Finally someone recognizes Chris Paul as the best PG in the league, he does everything, he plays good defense, hes a great passer, great shooter, great scorer and overall one of the best players in the league. Chris Paul for MVP!!!!!

mksadng wrote:

PatsDynasty wrote:

SoxNats08 wrote:

Big_Z wrote:

SoxNats08 wrote:

Big_Z wrote:

With the dominant NBA teams, excluding Detroit and Boston, being in the West, I personally think that they should change the playoff structure to being more like a March Madness type of thing, but with just the top 16 teams, record wise, getting in.

If teams like Denver or Golden State were in the East, they would be in the playoffs easily. I just dont think its fair that some teams can finish under .500 and make it in the east, while a solid team like Denver or Golden State, are not going to get in.

This year, any one of the teams, 1-8 in the West could make it to the finals. The Eastern Conference is pretty much a joke anymore. Its basically a two team race between Boston and Detroit. It pains me to say that being a Cavs fan, but I dont really see LeBron carrying the cavs to the finals again.

What do you think they should do in the NBA?

I agree with this, but it will never happen.

I was talking about this with one of my friends who was big NBA fan, and we thought this would be a better thing to do: Move New Orleans into the Southeast division (Eastern Conference) and create an expansion team in Las Vegas in the Pacific division. Then, after a couple of years, make an expansion franchise back in Seattle called the Supersonics to replace the team going to Oklahoma.

Two expansion teams would make the West worse, and New Orleans would make the East better. While the West would still be better, we'd be much better off.

Yeah i cant say i disagree with you on this one.

I think in the next 5-7 years we could see expansion teams, or teams moved, to the Las Vegas area from all three major sports (football, baseball, basketball)

I think the Hornets should still be in the East anyways, and they would easily be the most dominant team in the east

I don't see baseball adding a team there, but I could possibly see a football team.

And I disagree about the Hornets, I think the Celtics would be the #1 team, and they'd be the #2 but it'd be close.

right now the celtics r better but i think the hornets have a much better future, especialy sinec they have the best point guard in the league

WOOT WOOT! Finally someone recognizes Chris Paul as the best PG in the league, he does everything, he plays good defense, hes a great passer, great shooter, great scorer and overall one of the best players in the league. Chris Paul for MVP!!!!!

yes chris paul SHOULD be the MVP, but ill bet Kobe gets it for the "lifetime acheivement award"

which is BS

if i had to start an NBA franchise and could get any player i wanted it would be 1A. Lebron James 1B. Chris Paul

Chris Paul is the Most VALUABLE Player, without him the Hornets would be awful.

Big_Z wrote:

mksadng wrote:

PatsDynasty wrote:

SoxNats08 wrote:

Big_Z wrote:

SoxNats08 wrote:

Big_Z wrote:

With the dominant NBA teams, excluding Detroit and Boston, being in the West, I personally think that they should change the playoff structure to being more like a March Madness type of thing, but with just the top 16 teams, record wise, getting in.

If teams like Denver or Golden State were in the East, they would be in the playoffs easily. I just dont think its fair that some teams can finish under .500 and make it in the east, while a solid team like Denver or Golden State, are not going to get in.

This year, any one of the teams, 1-8 in the West could make it to the finals. The Eastern Conference is pretty much a joke anymore. Its basically a two team race between Boston and Detroit. It pains me to say that being a Cavs fan, but I dont really see LeBron carrying the cavs to the finals again.

What do you think they should do in the NBA?

I agree with this, but it will never happen.

I was talking about this with one of my friends who was big NBA fan, and we thought this would be a better thing to do: Move New Orleans into the Southeast division (Eastern Conference) and create an expansion team in Las Vegas in the Pacific division. Then, after a couple of years, make an expansion franchise back in Seattle called the Supersonics to replace the team going to Oklahoma.

Two expansion teams would make the West worse, and New Orleans would make the East better. While the West would still be better, we'd be much better off.

Yeah i cant say i disagree with you on this one.

I think in the next 5-7 years we could see expansion teams, or teams moved, to the Las Vegas area from all three major sports (football, baseball, basketball)

I think the Hornets should still be in the East anyways, and they would easily be the most dominant team in the east

I don't see baseball adding a team there, but I could possibly see a football team.

And I disagree about the Hornets, I think the Celtics would be the #1 team, and they'd be the #2 but it'd be close.

right now the celtics r better but i think the hornets have a much better future, especialy sinec they have the best point guard in the league

WOOT WOOT! Finally someone recognizes Chris Paul as the best PG in the league, he does everything, he plays good defense, hes a great passer, great shooter, great scorer and overall one of the best players in the league. Chris Paul for MVP!!!!!

yes chris paul SHOULD be the MVP, but ill bet Kobe gets it for the "lifetime acheivement award"

which is BS

if i had to start an NBA franchise and could get any player i wanted it would be 1A. Lebron James 1B. Chris Paul

Agreed, he should def be MVP and is by far the best PG in the NBA

mksadng wrote:

Chris Paul is the Most VALUABLE Player, without him the Hornets would be awful.

I completely agree, and I tried to explain this to the friend I was previously talking about (he argued it should be Lebron).

w/o Lebron, cavs win 35-40 games
w/o paul, hornets win like 25-30 games

and no way in hell is kobe mvp

SoxNats08 wrote:

mksadng wrote:

Chris Paul is the Most VALUABLE Player, without him the Hornets would be awful.

I completely agree, and I tried to explain this to the friend I was previously talking about (he argued it should be Lebron).

w/o Lebron, cavs win 35-40 games
w/o paul, hornets win like 25-30 games

and no way in hell is kobe mvp

no way do the cavs win 35-40 without lebron, like like 25-30, but i think the hornets would be a 30 win team or less without paul as well

Big_Z wrote:

SoxNats08 wrote:

mksadng wrote:

Chris Paul is the Most VALUABLE Player, without him the Hornets would be awful.

I completely agree, and I tried to explain this to the friend I was previously talking about (he argued it should be Lebron).

w/o Lebron, cavs win 35-40 games
w/o paul, hornets win like 25-30 games

and no way in hell is kobe mvp

no way do the cavs win 35-40 without lebron, like like 25-30, but i think the hornets would be a 30 win team or less without paul as well

well take into account theyre in the east

mksadng wrote:

Chris Paul is the Most VALUABLE Player, without him the Hornets would be awful.

i agree chris paul made an average team into one of the best team in the nba. i dont get why the mvp race is between KG, Chris paul, lebron, and kobe. lebron doesnt deserve it because his team is 4th in teh east, and kobe and KG have a ton of help from other players.

SoxNats08 wrote:

Big_Z wrote:

SoxNats08 wrote:

mksadng wrote:

Chris Paul is the Most VALUABLE Player, without him the Hornets would be awful.

I completely agree, and I tried to explain this to the friend I was previously talking about (he argued it should be Lebron).

w/o Lebron, cavs win 35-40 games
w/o paul, hornets win like 25-30 games

and no way in hell is kobe mvp

no way do the cavs win 35-40 without lebron, like like 25-30, but i think the hornets would be a 30 win team or less without paul as well

well take into account theyre in the east

well they are only 44-36 WITH LeBron

Big_Z wrote:

SoxNats08 wrote:

Big_Z wrote:

SoxNats08 wrote:

mksadng wrote:

Chris Paul is the Most VALUABLE Player, without him the Hornets would be awful.

I completely agree, and I tried to explain this to the friend I was previously talking about (he argued it should be Lebron).

w/o Lebron, cavs win 35-40 games
w/o paul, hornets win like 25-30 games

and no way in hell is kobe mvp

no way do the cavs win 35-40 without lebron, like like 25-30, but i think the hornets would be a 30 win team or less without paul as well

well take into account theyre in the east

well they are only 44-36 WITH LeBron

oh shit i didnt know they were that bad i thought they had like 50 wins

the ben wallace deal?

yeah the wallace deal

shit i thought that was good for u guys

it was a good trade but they just havent clicked yet

isnt ben wallace injured?

yeah but they werent playing well with him either

cavs r better defensively now but they need someone who coud help lebron out

PatsDynasty wrote:

cavs r better defensively now but they need someone who coud help lebron out

how the fuck did u post that at 1:41?

was it in study hall

SoxNats08 wrote:

PatsDynasty wrote:

cavs r better defensively now but they need someone who coud help lebron out

how the fuck did u post that at 1:41?

was it in study hall

yea, i didnt feel like doing hw