This topic contains 6 replies, has 5 voices, and was last updated by AvatarAvatar JNixon 12 years, 10 months ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • Posted on: Mon, 06/13/2011 - 4:20pm #30344
    AvatarAvatar
    Tongue-Out-Like-23
    Participant

    Two thoughts:

    I was thinking about the Houston Rockets, and how they’ve had a winning record the last two years and missed the playoffs becaues of how good the Western Conference is.  I started thinking how would the NBA be if conference seeding did not take place.  If it was simply the top 16 teams in the league.  If teams had the same record, a tiebreaker could be made by taking a look how the teams matched up in the regular season.  If that’s also a tie, then the conference record could be used.  If it’s still a tie, then the division record could be looked at.  What’s your take on having a 16-seed playoff style tournament?

    ————————————————————————————————————

    What’s your take on an 58 game season.  Play each team twice, home and away.  I know many veterans prefer a shorter season simply because they don’t want to waste their bodies during the regular season and prefer to get ready for the playoffs.  With a shortened season, there is a better chance for teams with poor records to make the playoffs becaues each game takes on a larger importance.  A string of 10-15 good games would be worth a lot more and playoff seeding would be even  more dramatic towards the end of the season because of so many teams with somewhat identical records.  It would lengthen careers of players by a long shot.  Guys like LeBron would cut about 850 minutes per season not including the playoffs.  Playing 25% less during the regular season would reduce wear and tear of athletes that get banged up like Derrick Rose, Dwyane Wade, and Russell Westbrook. 

    0
  • Posted on: Mon, 06/13/2011 - 4:35pm #544527
    AvatarAvatar
    GottaBeTheShoes
    Participant

    I don’t like the idea of a 58 game season..  I would die for a chance to play an 82 game season in the nba so I really think they should enjoy as much basketball as possible although i see where the idea is going at.. Maybe a 70 game season? takes off a month then.

    0
  • Posted on: Mon, 06/13/2011 - 4:46pm #544538
    AvatarAvatar
    Tongue-Out-Like-23
    Participant

    I believe the only people who really want a shortened season are the veterans guys.  I think Kevin Garnett and Shane Battier wanted it

    0
  • Posted on: Mon, 06/13/2011 - 5:06pm #544547
    AvatarAvatar
    GottaBeTheShoes
    Participant

     Yeah Shane said that it should be 58 and garnett said something about it.

    0
  • Posted on: Mon, 06/13/2011 - 5:12pm #544553
    AvatarAvatar
    royk927
    Participant

    But that wont happen i can see something like 60 games a season.

    0
  • Posted on: Mon, 06/13/2011 - 5:40pm #544560
    AvatarAvatar
    Bossy13
    Participant

    You’re talking about taking away 12 home games from each team. The owners would never go for that. They already want a % of salaries scaled back across the board, if you take away more revenue, the owners will want even more money back from salaries. Basically they players would have to agree to something liek a 40-50% reduction in salary. ‘Cause of that, the players wouldnt agree to it either.  

    0
  • Posted on: Mon, 06/13/2011 - 5:55pm #544566
    AvatarAvatar
    JNixon
    Participant

    Yeah that’s taking alot of money out of owners pockets and players pockets too. I don’t think they would be down with that.

    0
  • Author
    Posts

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login