Proposed NBA Changes for 2021-2022

[McCall]

On 12/8/2019 at 3:36 PM, NicDB said:

Memphis is relatively close to it, but the actual center is currently in south central Missouri.

I used to play against Hartville in basketball and baseball.

 

I would just separate them into the four divisions, no conferences. Essentially, each division is it's own conference. Probably expand by 2 and then do 4 games against division (28) and 2 against all other teams (48). That would drop it to 76. I still always look towards 66 as the ideal, but that would only work with contracting 2 teams to lower it to 28 where the same breakdown (4 games division, 2 against all others) would equal 66. And I don't see that happening.

 

As for the playoffs, you can have a couple different ways. Divisional first, with the 1 vs 4 and 2 vs 3 and whoever wins goes to the NBA Semifinals where all are seeded by record. Or just the four division winners guaranteed and then the next 12, regardless of division, with all seeded by record.

 

No in-season tournaments.

[4_tattoos]

Honestly, I'm intrigued by the idea of doing away with conferences and divisions. If that were to happen I'd prefer a 58 game regular season where every team plays each other twice. I'd keep a 16 team playoff with the first two rounds being best of 5, while the semifinals and finals would be best of 7.

[Magnus]

Just had some thoughts this morning on the idea of a mid-season NBA tournament. I'm not sure where the other thread went for that discussion.

Mid Season NBA Tournament (Only NBA Teams)

Championship Prize:

Cash Prize (30% of ticket pool)
Guaranteed #4 seed in NBA Playoffs 
(if team is ranked 5th or lower at end of regular season)
Highest odds in NBA Draft Lottery for upcoming draft

Tournament Structure:

5-game ROUND ROBIN
Teams play all divisional opponents once, plus one game against an opponent
in the other conference who had the same divisional ranking as them the previous season.

Group winners are then ranked 1-6 based on record and various other statistical tiebreakers.

Teams 1 and 2 play the winners of 3 v 6 and 4 v 5. Remaining 2 teams play for the Mid Season Title.

Total of 7 or 8 games. Tournament lasts about 2 weeks. All-Star Game is either eliminated or pushed to after NBA Finals.
8 games are removed from regular NBA season.

Mid Season NBA Tournament (Open to worldwide club teams)

64 team tournament - Straight single elimination bracket
Top 16 NBA clubs from previous season qualify
4 NBA clubs are placed in each quarter of the bracket
First 4 rounds hosted in 4 different countries
Final Four hosted in a pre-determined NBA market

Championship Prize:

Cash Prize (30% of ticket pool)
Guaranteed #4 seed OR invite to NBA Playoffs (if int'l)
Title of World Club Champions
8 games are removed from regular NBA season.

[BBTV]

Ridiculous. 
1) 30% of ticket sales isn’t enough to get NBA players to risk injury. Even the last guy on the bench is probably making more than they can imagine. 
 

2) NBA would never risk losing face by having an international team beat one or more of theirs. 
 

3) Giving a great team (if they actually tried) best odds in draft lottery is a great way of demolishing competitive balance. 
 

4) a guaranteed playoff spot means nothing to good teams that know they’re getting in anyway, so there’s still no incentive for them to actually play. 

[Magnus]

3 hours ago, BringBackTheVet said:

Ridiculous. 
1) 30% of ticket sales isn’t enough to get NBA players to risk injury. Even the last guy on the bench is probably making more than they can imagine. 
 

2) NBA would never risk losing face by having an international team beat one or more of theirs. 
 

3) Giving a great team (if they actually tried) best odds in draft lottery is a great way of demolishing competitive balance. 
 

4) a guaranteed playoff spot means nothing to good teams that know they’re getting in anyway, so there’s still no incentive for them to actually play. 

Ah, well. I gave it my best shot. I'm not sure if any sort of mid-season tournament would work in the Big Four either. This was the best I could come up with.

[dfwabel]

On 12/30/2019 at 10:07 AM, Magnus said:

Just had some thoughts this morning on the idea of a mid-season NBA tournament. I'm not sure where the other thread went for that discussion.

Mid Season NBA Tournament (Only NBA Teams)

Championship Prize:

Cash Prize (30% of ticket pool)
Guaranteed #4 seed in NBA Playoffs 
(if team is ranked 5th or lower at end of regular season)
Highest odds in NBA Draft Lottery for upcoming draft

Tournament Structure:

5-game ROUND ROBIN
Teams play all divisional opponents once, plus one game against an opponent
in the other conference who had the same divisional ranking as them the previous season.

Group winners are then ranked 1-6 based on record and various other statistical tiebreakers.

Teams 1 and 2 play the winners of 3 v 6 and 4 v 5. Remaining 2 teams play for the Mid Season Title.

Total of 7 or 8 games. Tournament lasts about 2 weeks. All-Star Game is either eliminated or pushed to after NBA Finals.
8 games are removed from regular NBA season.

Mid Season NBA Tournament (Open to worldwide club teams)

64 team tournament - Straight single elimination bracket
Top 16 NBA clubs from previous season qualify
4 NBA clubs are placed in each quarter of the bracket
First 4 rounds hosted in 4 different countries
Final Four hosted in a pre-determined NBA market

Championship Prize:

Cash Prize (30% of ticket pool)
Guaranteed #4 seed OR invite to NBA Playoffs (if int'l)
Title of World Club Champions
8 games are removed from regular NBA season.

 

11 hours ago, BringBackTheVet said:

Ridiculous. 
1) 30% of ticket sales isn’t enough to get NBA players to risk injury. Even the last guy on the bench is probably making more than they can imagine. 
 

2) NBA would never risk losing face by having an international team beat one or more of theirs. 
 

3) Giving a great team (if they actually tried) best odds in draft lottery is a great way of demolishing competitive balance. 
 

4) a guaranteed playoff spot means nothing to good teams that know they’re getting in anyway, so there’s still no incentive for them to actually play. 

BBTV is so right.  30% of the gate is a non-starter since approximately 22.18% of current gate revenue accounts for total basketball revenue.  If the Players are to get 50% of TBR (Total Basketball Revenues), why should they accept 30% of the gate just for the winners?  They need half of the total revenue, especially TV.

 

The median NBA salary is close to $3.2M.

 

 

[Magnus]

21 hours ago, dfwabel said:

 

BBTV is so right.  30% of the gate is a non-starter since approximately 22.18% of current gate revenue accounts for total basketball revenue.  If the Players are to get 50% of TBR (Total Basketball Revenues), why should they accept 30% of the gate just for the winners?  They need half of the total revenue, especially TV.

 

The median NBA salary is close to $3.2M.

 

 

Tweaks are welcome; it's not like this tournament has any real possibility of occurring.

[JG36]

I like the idea of an in season tournament, it gives an added excitement to the season. And shortening from 82 to 78 games might not sound like a lot, but I’m going to use the Celtics schedule as an example. 

 

They started the season with 4 October games. I’m going to remove all of them to get it down to 78. 
 

10/23, 10/25, 10/26, and 10/30’s games are taken out. 
 

However, the start of the season date wouldn’t change. This means that those 78 games could be spread over an extra 9 days, which could bring back-to-backs to the brink of extinction, and should guarantee the elimination of 3 games in 4 days. That would mean a lot to players rest

[BBTV]

13 hours ago, JG36 said:

I like the idea of an in season tournament, it gives an added excitement to the season. And shortening from 82 to 78 games might not sound like a lot, but I’m going to use the Celtics schedule as an example. 

 

They started the season with 4 October games. I’m going to remove all of them to get it down to 78. 
 

10/23, 10/25, 10/26, and 10/30’s games are taken out. 
 

However, the start of the season date wouldn’t change. This means that those 78 games could be spread over an extra 9 days, which could bring back-to-backs to the brink of extinction, and should guarantee the elimination of 3 games in 4 days. That would mean a lot to players rest

how does a tournament that doesn’t count for anything and doesn’t feature the top players in it give “added excitement to the season”?

 

 

[The_Admiral]

Thing new! Fun when thing new. 

[dont care]

16 hours ago, JG36 said:

I like the idea of an in season tournament, it gives an added excitement to the season. And shortening from 82 to 78 games might not sound like a lot, but I’m going to use the Celtics schedule as an example. 

 

They started the season with 4 October games. I’m going to remove all of them to get it down to 78. 
 

10/23, 10/25, 10/26, and 10/30’s games are taken out. 
 

However, the start of the season date wouldn’t change. This means that those 78 games could be spread over an extra 9 days, which could bring back-to-backs to the brink of extinction, and should guarantee the elimination of 3 games in 4 days. That would mean a lot to players rest

How does reducing the season 4 games mean anything when you got a mid season tournament that will have more than the 4 games?

[Guest]

On 12/15/2019 at 11:28 AM, 4_tattoos said:

I'd keep a 16 team playoff with the first two rounds being best of 5, while the semifinals and finals would be best of 7.

 

I was thinking about making the 1st round 5 games again but I like your idea of 2nd round also being 5 games.

[simtek34]

More on the changes:

 

Some key points from the article by Adrian Wojnarowski and Zach Lowe

 

"Many teams, especially those on the coasts, have expressed concerns about the increased travel that could lead to competitive disadvantages and a loss of traditional rivalries, sources said. For example, a Milwaukee-Indiana conference final would presumably benefit the winner of that series over a team that emerged from a cross-country Los Angeles-Miami series. The NBA's coastal teams have been largely against this reseeding idea, sources said. The league's research has shown that the proposal of reseeding teams based on regular season records could lead to travel increases of 60% and could result in one in one out of every four series being played across three time zones, sources said."

"The NBA is hopeful of instituting the calendar changes for the 2021-22 season, the league's 75th anniversary, and that would require passage of the proposals at the April meeting of the board of governors, sources said."

 

[alxy8s]

Reseeding the conference finals was the best idea they had, and they're going to shelve it for the dumbest possible reason. Travel time and "traditional rivalries?" Like what? The only one in the NBA that has held up through different eras is Lakers-Celtics, and they're about as far away as possible. I'd love to see the data on any advantage gained by having less travel time in a previous series. I doubt there's any correlation at all.

 

Every playoff should try to hold off its best matchups for the latest rounds possible. Reseeding the ECF/WCF was only a half measure, but it was a good one.

[floydnimrod]

If the goal is to get the best two teams in the Finals, just eliminate the playoffs and put the two best teams there. If you're the best team in your conference, prove it, and win the games to get you to the Finals. If you lose, too bad?

 

Earlier last decade we were close to having a Grizzlies/Pacers NBA Finals. I would have loved that.

[Digby]

The reseed idea is nice in theory but the travel absolutely wrecks it, so that's good news that it's being reconsidered.

 

Take the current standings and you could very easily have a team do something like eight flights between Philly/Boston and Los Angeles over the span of a month. I think that's too much, and the neverending angst over conference imbalance is a little much, anyway.

[The_Admiral]

Travel doesn't matter, they fly charter, they're not up there stuffed ass-to-ankles on Spirit or something. b-b-but sleep science don't overdo it on Cheesecake Factory and whores when you land then.

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

2 hours ago, fnz said:

If the goal is to get the best two teams in the Finals, just eliminate the playoffs and put the two best teams there.  If you're the best team in your conference, prove it, and win the games to get you to the Finals.

 

This is a good idea philosophically.  But it should be applied to division champions. I have said many times that playoffs in every sport should include only division champs, as the regular season should be regarded as the first round of the overall championship competition, with only the division champions having earned the right to move on to the subsequent rounds known as playoffs.  Be a champion or go home, as in Major League Baseball from 1969 through 1993.

In the current alignment, the top-ranking division champion in each conference would get a bye to the conference finals, while the other two division champs play for the right to oppose that top team.  (To avoid too much rust, that round would have to be only best-of-five.)  Alternatively, you could bend the "be a champion or go home" principle to include one wild-card team per conference, as in the NFL from 1970 through 1977; or, even better, you could reestablish the classic two-divisions-per-conference alignment. 

Of course, any such approach would get the entire playoffs over in two weeks, rather than two months; and that is not at all what the league wants.  But it would be very rewarding from the standpoint of competition.

[DG_ThenNowForever]

Any idea that division champions are the best is refuted by wild card and lower seeded teams that routinely win titles.
Have your president's trophy or supporters shield, but in American sports, we like playoffs.

 

Reseeding the playoffs is dumb. The system that exists now is as elegant as it'll get and makes sense. Introducing confusion into simplicity is never a good idea. E.g., I don't understand NHL playoffs and have no desire to figure it out.

 

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

2 hours ago, DG_Now said:

Any idea that division champions are the best is refuted by wild card and lower seeded teams that routinely win titles.

 

No, it isn't.  A lesser team can win three games out of five or four games out of seven against a superior team.  But a lesser team cannot finish above a superior team in the division standings over an 82-game schedule.

Anyway, let us note that the last several NBA Finals have been contested between divisional champions; I think you have to go back to 2011 to find a Finals involving a non-divisional-champion (Jason Kidd's Mavericks).  Those lower-seeded teams are just making up the numbers.  Get 'em out of there!

 

 

2 hours ago, DG_Now said:

in American sports, we like playoffs.

 

Playoffs are great, but not when they are so bloated that they involve more than half the league.  Qualifying for the playoffs should be a privilege reserved only for the elite teams that have earned it over the long season.  Nothing beats the baseball postseason through 1993, which was a competition solely amongst champions.

Anyway, I have already said that I understand that this will never happen in the NBA because it would make the playoffs much shorter. But this sort of playoff format would be far more exciting.