Moderators AHF Posted March 9, 2014 Moderators Report Share Posted March 9, 2014 Problem: What execs would agree to not having playoff games? You really think they'd give up the extra dollars? No chance.The system is fine. You would still have the same number of playoff games. All the East Execs right now would be wary of this while all the West Execs would be all over it -- actually, I say that but Atlanta's owners might be all over it this year so we wouldn't face the possibility of getting either the #15 pick or the #11 pick or something similar. Commish is supposed to make the call in these types of "zero sum" scenarios in the best interests of the long-term revenues, the fans, and the sport. Ultimately, it would probably take convincing a good number of East owners that they would make more money over the long-term by putting the best 16 teams in the playoffs. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJHAWK Posted March 9, 2014 Report Share Posted March 9, 2014 (edited) I dont want to tank but I also wont be able to stomach watching a Hawks/Heat series. Watching Captain Sportscenter be glorified for the way he chews gum or drinks water. If we take another beating from Indiana so be it. We may get them to a game 6 or 7. Edited March 9, 2014 by NJHAWK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gsuteke Posted March 9, 2014 Author Report Share Posted March 9, 2014 Either way this is going to be ugly 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member hawkman Posted March 9, 2014 Premium Member Report Share Posted March 9, 2014 Either way this is going to be ugly... that sums it up perfectly. The Hawks obviously got the order to tank but CLE, DET, and NY are too bad to take the 8th spot. The 7th/8th spots are NOT the place to be if you want to have any chance to advance to the 2nd Round. So we are out of the Lottery AND simultaneously heading to a 1st Round beat down. Ugly is the perfect description. Purgatory also comes to mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gsuteke Posted March 9, 2014 Author Report Share Posted March 9, 2014 I was thinking we could miss the playoffs by going something like 2-20 (haven't looked at the standings this weekend) or we could make the playoffs and get housed 4 straight.Either way it's going to be ugly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ag82 Posted March 9, 2014 Report Share Posted March 9, 2014 What's the difference really in being the 8 seed and being the best team in the lottery? One or two spots in the draft? Wouldn't it be better for us to get some playoff experience in exchange for drafting one spot lower? We probably have the assets to trade up in the draft if we really like a certain player.So what am I missing? Don't say the lottery because it's not like we'll end up with a to 10 pick anyways. People are cooling down on this draft compared to 6 months ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViperXX79 Posted March 9, 2014 Report Share Posted March 9, 2014 What's the difference really in being the 8 seed and being the best team in the lottery? One or two spots in the draft?Wouldn't it be better for us to get some playoff experience in exchange for drafting one spot lower? We probably have the assets to trade up in the draft if we really like a certain player.So what am I missing? Don't say the lottery because it's not like we'll end up with a to 10 pick anyways. People are cooling down on this draft compared to 6 months ago. I'll take my chances in the lottery than getting absolutely embarrassed on national tv when the 1 seed destroys us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gsuteke Posted March 9, 2014 Author Report Share Posted March 9, 2014 When you're at .400 it's a 5 spot difference Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Jody23 Posted March 10, 2014 Premium Member Report Share Posted March 10, 2014 (edited) What's the difference really in being the 8 seed and being the best team in the lottery? One or two spots in the draft? Wouldn't it be better for us to get some playoff experience in exchange for drafting one spot lower? We probably have the assets to trade up in the draft if we really like a certain player.So what am I missing? Don't say the lottery because it's not like we'll end up with a to 10 pick anyways. People are cooling down on this draft compared to 6 months ago.With three or four Western non-playoff teams having a better record, the difference can be significant. And I've seen no indication that people are "cooling" on this years draft. There's a reason why storied franchises like the Lakers and Celtics among many others have been and continue to tank until the end of the season. Edited March 10, 2014 by Jody23 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gsuteke Posted March 10, 2014 Author Report Share Posted March 10, 2014 Detroit lost to Boston. This is ridiculous. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrReality Posted March 10, 2014 Report Share Posted March 10, 2014 Either way this is going to be uglyIt already is ugly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duff_Man Posted March 10, 2014 Report Share Posted March 10, 2014 You would still have the same number of playoff games. All the East Execs right now would be wary of this while all the West Execs would be all over it -- actually, I say that but Atlanta's owners might be all over it this year so we wouldn't face the possibility of getting either the #15 pick or the #11 pick or something similar. Commish is supposed to make the call in these types of "zero sum" scenarios in the best interests of the long-term revenues, the fans, and the sport. Ultimately, it would probably take convincing a good number of East owners that they would make more money over the long-term by putting the best 16 teams in the playoffs. Well except for missing out on the East Coast TV dollars that would be missed. If your "best teams" scenario was the case, you risk having many (most) games of interest starting at 10pm. Good luck with that for the advertising money. And good luck getting people to tune in for Spurs/Nets. Another issue then is giving the Commissioner veto rights over playoff teams. No owner in their right mind would allow this. "best interests of the league" is great in theory, but no team owner would ever think that way. It would also affect free agency, etc. It's just not realistic. At that point, just let the fans vote for the playoff teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 10, 2014 Report Share Posted March 10, 2014 (edited) A "de-conferencing" would eliminate Charlotte and Atlanta. Phoenix and Minny would be the two teams added in. Minny has 2 more wins than Charlotte.No owner in the East will agree to that. Edited March 10, 2014 by JayBirdHawk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators AHF Posted March 11, 2014 Moderators Report Share Posted March 11, 2014 Another issue then is giving the Commissioner veto rights over playoff teams. No owner in their right mind would allow this. "best interests of the league" is great in theory, but no team owner would ever think that way. It would also affect free agency, etc. It's just not realistic. At that point, just let the fans vote for the playoff teams. Nobody was talking about giving the Commish veto rights over playoff teams. The discussion was putting the best 16 NBA playoff teams in the playoffs by virtue of them winning the most games. That isn't subjective or subject to abuse. Your point on losing viewers when there is an extreme tilt towards the East or West coast is well taken, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now