Sportsnet Raptors PreviewQuote:
Prediction: 40-42 (Division: 5th Atlantic, Conference: 9th Eastern).
It's interesting to see that a sub .500 team may not make the playoffs in the East this year. We'll see what happens come April.
Printable View
Sportsnet Raptors PreviewQuote:
Prediction: 40-42 (Division: 5th Atlantic, Conference: 9th Eastern).
It's interesting to see that a sub .500 team may not make the playoffs in the East this year. We'll see what happens come April.
Ideally, that's the way it should be. A team which loses more games than it wins, should not be rewarded with a playoff berth.Quote:
Snizzoop wrote:
I fully agree.
When was the last time this was the case in the east?
I really think that Philly might be in trouble. Bynum is out all month with knee problems, that at the very least will make it difficult for them to get off to a quick start. I think he will be in an out of the lineup all season. I think Raps will finish 4th in the division 8th in east and could possibly even catch the Knicks for 3rd in Atlantic and 7th in East with a 42-40 record.
Don't forget that more than half the league makes the playoffs. Unless you decrease the number of playoff spots (or add at least 2 new teams to the league), most years you're going to get a team or two with a losing record in the playoffs. Personally, I'd be against reducing the number of teams in the playoffs because I'm a basketball junkie and the longer the playoffs are, the better as far as I'm concerned.Quote:
Nilanka wrote:
Kinda wish they'd just go back to a 5 game first round though. First round match ups are more of a formality than anything in most cases. There are exceptions but for the most part I'm fine for making it easier on the better teams early on.
Me too. I've been saying that for years for basketball and hockey.Quote:
minks77 wrote:
They will never go back now, it means more games and more money. So, most good teams rest up their stars leading to shitty end of season games.
I actually like the 7 game first round.. the chance for an upset would be greater in a 5 game series (bad team only has to win 3 times instead of 4). What I hate is all those preseason games. They really should cut back on those, but as Fuchan pointed out - it's all about money.
I prefer the 7-game first round too, simply for consistency's sake.
But what I do hate is the 2-3-2 format for the finals, while each of the previous rounds are 2-2-1-1-1. I realize they do this to minimize travel between East and West coasts, but giving any team 3 home games in a row is too big of an advantage for my liking.
Totally agree with your point about the finals format! I'd much rather they minimize the effects of East/West travel by adding an extra day off at that point.Quote:
Nilanka wrote:
Also agree on keeping the first round at 7 games, but more toward the fairness of a 7 game vs 5 game, rather than consistency. Any team can have a couple of bad games, but the good ones that deserve a fair shot to go further can easily bounce back in a 7 game series, where having to win 3 in a row is a much tougher chore.
It is a huge advantage, but it makes getting a higher seed all that much more importantQuote:
Nilanka wrote:
I agree. I think that format actually favors the underdog. If you assume teams will split the first 2, then the home teams takes 2 of 3, that forces the favored team to comeback and sweep games 6 & 7 to win. I much prefer the 2/2/1/1/1 format.Quote:
Nilanka wrote:
40 wins for this roster seems incredibly optimistic. I hope they are right. I don't see any chance they get there without major contributions from Valancunias and Ross or a real breakout year for Derozan. I don't think either scenario is likely.
But it's the lower seed that gets the advantage of 3 games in a row :confused:Quote:
Fuchan wrote:
The finals format is complete garbage. Didn't they create it that way back in the day so they didn't have to move TV crews around as much? I really don't get it.
This just happened. Both 8th seeds (Philly and Utah) were above .500. Last time it happened in an unshortened season was the 2009-2010 season. Not as rare as you thought, right?Quote:
Snizzoop wrote:
That is surprising.
I went as far back as 99-00 and until 03-04 all 8 seeds were .500 or better in the east.Quote:
ebrian wrote:
03-04 Celtics 36 wins
04-05 Nets 42 wins
05-06 Bucks 40 wins
06-07 Magic 40 wins
07-08 Hawks 37 wins
08-09 Pistons 39 wins
09-10 Bulls 41 wins
10-11 Pacers 37 wins
So in the last 8 regular length seasons, only two 8th seed teams have been .500 or better in the east.
Looking at the west is incredible for the last 8 regular length seasons.
03-04 Nuggets 43 wins
04-05 Grizz 45 wins
05-06 Kings 44 wins
06-07 Warriors 42 wins
07-08 Nuggets 50 wins
08-09 Jazz 48 wins
09-10 Thunder 50 wins
10-11 Grizzlies 46 wins
There was a time when the east was actually more dominant but we'd have to go back to the 90's. In fact we'd have to go all the way back to 96-97 and the Bullets (not Wizards, kids!) for a time when the east had an 8th seed above .500 with 44 wins while the west had an 8th seed below .500 in the Clippers with 36 wins.
From watching both Washington and New York play, I can honestly say those that are optimistic should be proud. Although, Toronto without Lowry, New York with Stoudemire, Washington without Nene & Wall.
I would expect with Stoudemire out, Carmelo would easily take things over. Well.... Oh, and Jason Kidd plays like he's 60, and Felton just sucks.