-IF all teams play up to their position, re-seeding is a non-starter as an argument (1 plays 4, 2 plays 3, 1 ends up playing winner of 2 vs 3...etc)
-IF a team outperforms a supposedly better team, they get that bracket, and that path which balances the strength of schedule for each team. And thus is also more likely to result in exciting rounds with more competitive matchups.
See Fanchie's post
**EDIT: And again, the reward for higher seeds is homecourt advantage, which is very real. They already have an inherent advantage in their schedule, but they deserve more? I don't think so.
Last edited by white men can't jump; Mon Apr 28th, 2014 at 10:08 PM.
As for the comment about conferences. Reseeding amongst conference still makes sense because you build your rivalries in a conference. You play the majority of your games vs other teams in your conference & then battle it out with them to get to the finals. If you had a league format where everybody played every team an equal amount of games then I'd agree on just reseeding the entire league, but leagues don't build themselves like that in order to build rivalries amongst both the teams & fan bases. And also for fan familiarity, to become more familiar with the 16 teams in your conference better, you have better knowledge of the teams/players you are facing & you are more intrigued with the matchup. If you played vs a team you only saw 2 times all year it wouldn't be as intriguing playing a team that you don't know as much about & don't have much of a history or rivalry against.
as for your comment (the hawks beat the pacers so they should get their bracket the rest of the way). I disagree. Styles make fights (or matchups in this case). Just because a team has the style to beat a team doesn't mean they should just earn the #2 seed for the win. I think the team that earns their ranking over the course of an 82 game season has done way more to get the better placement in round 2 then the team that did well for one 7 game series.
Last edited by CashGameND; Mon Apr 28th, 2014 at 10:10 PM.
I'm back. I no longer worship joe johnson
Another reason that the reseeding format is nice is for the excitement it brings to other series. Like for me, I was so excited to see what was happening in the Pacers & Heat series in hopes that 1 of the teams would be upset so we could face a lower ranked team in round 2. Now I know my only hope was the Bobcats, and that the other series didnt have any impact on who the Raptors face in round 2.
sooooo disappointed we coulda been facing wizards in round 2 and have a GREAT shot at getting to the conference finals. (if we win, and pacers get upset of course)
PLUS. I've been looking at this mostly from a Raptors fan perspective. What about the Heat who finished 54-28. They have to play a team that was 48-34 instead of a 38-44 team. In my mind that doesn't make any sense. yes they pulled off an upset, but they played TERRIBLE in the regular season & deserve an insanely hard road to the finals. The Hawks were 38-44 & could face the #5 seed to get to the conference finals. The Heat had a phenomenal record & deserve the easier road through the playoffs, they earned it all year long (not just in 1 series)
Sigh...this is going nowhere.
My opinion is that re-seeding is the worst possible choice for the type of 8-team playoffs the NBA runs.
Bracketing makes it likely all teams get a mix of supposedly easy and hard teams through the rounds....Teams are unlikely to get 2 straight easy rounds or two straight hard rounds (based on seeds at least). Going through potentially 14 hard games in a row vs 14 easy games in a row is a significantly different road. And no team deserves one or the other based on regular season success. Again, home court should be reward enough...
Why? Because other things factor into regular season. What if you dominate until the last 2 months and then are basically average? Why do you deserve an easier schedule for not being consistent and playing worse than many of the lower seeds for a significant chunk of the season? What if you're a "bad" team because of an injury and then one of the best teams in the league if your star comes back? Why shouldn't you have a chance at the same path through the playoffs as the higher seed you beat in the 1st round?
Bracketing is more fair, and more exciting all around. Re-seeding just makes things unfairly easy/difficult depending on seed, and doesn't necessarily reflect regular season consistency or dominance.
Last edited by white men can't jump; Mon Apr 28th, 2014 at 10:42 PM.
I am starting to come around to the idea of the fact that with this format every team is faced with 1 easier & 1 difficult matchup in the first 2 rounds regardless, which makes things more fair all around. But what if the 4/5 seed gets to face the 8 seed, then they are getting 2 easy matchups, so that still defeats that purpose. Not that it will hardly ever happen, but it could (this year, when the Raptors would've benefited from reseeding most).
Still just think over the course of an 82 game season it matters more & is more deserving of the easier matchup, then winning 1 round in the playoffs. But maybe thats just me.
Last edited by CashGameND; Mon Apr 28th, 2014 at 10:47 PM.
1) Playing Miami is vastly better for Toronto in every possible way.
2) Reseeding is a dumb idea, for all the reasons listed in this thread already.
007's Agents of Hardwood
RR Legacy League 2015
Atlanta beating the #1 seed doesn't mean Miami isn't getting rewarded. If anything, Miami avoids a hot team that just dismantled a great team. Sounds like a reward to me.
Indiana's regular season record rewarded them with home court up until the Finals. Atlanta beating them rewards Atlanta by essentially stealing Indy's path to the finals (completely fair). However, they don't steal Indy's home court advantage (would be unfair).
Seeds should only dictate first round matchups and homecourt advantage the rest of the way.
Teams aren't jockeying to finish 8th because of a possible second round advantage.
I'll agree to disagree with everyone on RR then it seems. Surprised nobody even sees my logic of earning it in the regular season being more valid then having 1 upset in the playoffs.
as i keep saying it keeps coming down to comparing what you value more. a 1st round win, or the value of a full season. (imo, its allot easier to pull off a playoff upset then it is to earn your high rank over an 82 game season).
- and yes i get that the higher ranks still get home court advantage. But the fact that its even possible the wizards could face the hawks (a 5 and 8 seed) to get to the conference finals, to me is a joke.
I like your confidence though, hope your right (heat are easier matchup).
People know there's no reseeding in the NHL anymore either, right?
Last edited by CashGameND; Mon Apr 28th, 2014 at 11:58 PM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)