Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

waaait. so the playoffs don't reseed? YOU GOTTA BE KIDDING ME!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    white men can't jump wrote: View Post
    Why does it make no sense? It makes no sense that the lowest seed could have to face a team that's still "better" than them?

    Bracketing rewards strong play in the playoffs...which is what the playoffs should be about. Re-seeding rewards strong play in the regular season...well there's already a reward for that, it's called home court advantage.
    whaaa? Clearly you don't know what I mean by reseeding.

    it means that in round 2 they reseed the matchups based on their rankings. Instead of forcing the matchups through the set brackets from the beginning.

    example:
    winners of round 1: - 1Heat, 3Raptors, 5Wizards, 8Hawks.
    RESEEDING WOULD BE: 1heat vs 8hawks (thus giving the team with the best record in the regular season the biggest advantage in the 2nd round, which in my mind makes the most sense). 3raptors vs 5wizards
    NBA / NON-RESEEDING FORMAT: 1heat vs 3raptors / 5wizards vs 8hawks
    Last edited by CashGameND; Mon Apr 28, 2014, 11:57 PM.

    Comment


    • #17
      CashGameND,

      I understand you bro.. especially if you're used to watch nhl playoffs. It does look unfair sometimes, I know. I'm hockey fan myself.

      Adam Silver said that he'll take a fresh look at changing playoffs format.. so maybe we'll be reseeding someday - I don't know. We'll see.

      Comment


      • #18
        CashGameND wrote: View Post
        .... The NFL. The NHL always has, maybe they've changed this year (if they did it is a mistake on their part as well). For situations just like this (possibility of Indiana being eliminated) it makes absolutely no sense at all.

        MLB has too few teams to reseed. So... before this year, every professional league besides the NBA reseeded. NHL may be changing, if they are it is a mistake, but for as long as I can remember they have reseeded in round 2.
        Reseeding is the worst and most unfair idea in sports. Imagine you're a Hawks fan, you see your team upsetting the #1 seed and for what? Having to play #2 right after? That is not how sports should work. You beat the #1s, you get their bracket, that's just fair.

        Why is March madness so thrilling? Cause they don't reseed. Cause you know that no matter how low your seed is, you're one upset away from an open bracket.

        And BTW, if you're pro-reseeding, you must be against conferences, right? Otherwise, I'd love to hear how you think it's fair that with our 11th best record among playoffs teams, we get to play the 14th best (and 3rd worst) team.

        Comment


        • #19
          Joey wrote: View Post
          Lol Easy does it boys. We welcome new fans here. Not try and drive them away with a pompous "greather than thou" attitude.

          Welcome to the board CashGame! I'm not really familiar with how the reseeding system works (not a hockey fan), but it sounds like in our case, its the better system. LOL
          thankyou. Just because I love other sports, and don't follow NBA in depth to know about a reseeding format for the 2nd round doesn't mean I'm any less a Raptors fan then anyone here. I love this team & never miss a game. Yes I don't have great knowledge of the NBA playoff format, which is why this terrible format of not reseeding shocked me so much. Surprised people don't seem to care. But it has HUUUUUGE implications. Indiana getting eliminated SHOULD mean we play the Wizards instead of the Heat. Instead Wizards would get to play the Hawks for a chance to go to conference finals. Thats insane.

          Comment


          • #20
            I think the fact this has never really been an issue in the NBA shows how it's not very important. Upsets are rare enough if the NBA that it usually doesn't come into effect anyway. Both the Pacers and Heat were awful to end the season, it's just that only one team has picked it up in the playoffs.

            Comment


            • #21
              CashGameND wrote: View Post
              thankyou. Just because I love other sports, and don't follow NBA in depth to know about a reseeding format for the 2nd round doesn't mean I'm any less a Raptors fan then anyone here. I love this team & never miss a game. Yes I don't have great knowledge of the NBA playoff format, which is why this terrible format of not reseeding shocked me so much. Surprised people don't seem to care. But it has HUUUUUGE implications. Indiana getting eliminated SHOULD mean we play the Wizards instead of the Heat. Instead Wizards would get to play the Hawks for a chance to go to conference finals. Thats insane.
              You could easily argue that since the Hawks upset the Pacers they deserve to vs the Wizards since it was so much harder than us beating the Nets (You have to imagine the Pacers actually played like a number 1 seed)

              Comment


              • #22
                CashGameND wrote: View Post
                whaaa? Clearly you don't know what I mean by reseeding.

                it means that in round 2 they reseed the matchups based on their rankings. Instead of forcing the matchups through the set brackets from the beginning.

                example:
                winners of round 1: - 1Heat, 3Raptors, 5Wizards, 8Hawks.
                RESEEDING WOULD BE: 1heat vs 8hawks (thus giving the team with the best record in the regular season the biggest advantage in the 2nd round, which in my mind makes the most sense). 3raptors vs 5wizards
                NBA / NON-RESEEDING FORMAT: 1heat vs 3raptors / 5wizards vs 8hawks
                I know exactly what you mean. Clearly you don't understand the concept of "reward". Re-seeding gives an unfair advantage/disadvantage scenario based on seeding. Bracketing ensures things in a way where...

                -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; Tue Apr 29, 2014, 12:08 AM.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Fanchie wrote: View Post
                  Reseeding is the worst and most unfair idea in sports. Imagine you're a Hawks fan, you see your team upsetting the #1 seed and for what? Having to play #2 right after? That is not how sports should work. You beat the #1s, you get their bracket, that's just fair.

                  Why is March madness so thrilling? Cause they don't reseed. Cause you know that no matter how low your seed is, you're one upset away from an open bracket.

                  And BTW, if you're pro-reseeding, you must be against conferences, right? Otherwise, I'd love to hear how you think it's fair that with our 11th best record among playoffs teams, we get to play the 14th best (and 3rd worst) team.
                  March Madness is completely different because there are SOOOOOOO many teams in a single game elimination format. And the reason its so exciting is definitely the cinderella story, I agree.

                  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; Tue Apr 29, 2014, 12:10 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Raptorsnz wrote: View Post
                    I think the fact this has never really been an issue in the NBA shows how it's not very important. Upsets are rare enough if the NBA that it usually doesn't come into effect anyway. Both the Pacers and Heat were awful to end the season, it's just that only one team has picked it up in the playoffs.
                    The upsets only make the nba even more interesting, the lower seeded team has earned that next round and should play the 4/5 team rather than having to play that number 2 team. I dont really want the format to change, this year has been amazing so many close matchups
                    I'm back. I no longer worship joe johnson

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      white men can't jump wrote: View Post
                      I know exactly what you mean. Clearly you don't understand the concept of "reward". Re-seeding gives an unfair advantage/disadvantage scenario based on seeding. Bracketing ensures things in a way where...

                      -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.
                      basically what it boils down to is what is valued more, the team that did it over the course of an 82 game season, or the team that pulled off the upset in 1 round of the playoffs. I guess my mind has been far more trained to think the team that earned it over the course of the regular season deserves it way more then a team that had 1 good round (like I said, styles make fights analaogy. A team could be built to take out a particular team, high seed, but still over the course of a season vs all other teams, may not really be all that great.) Which is, in my mind, why they don't deserve to suddenly get an easy round 2 matchup. gotta prove it all year).

                      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.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        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)

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          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)

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            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; Tue Apr 29, 2014, 12:42 AM.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              white men can't jump wrote: View Post
                              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. 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.
                              guess we'll agree to disagree. like i said it boils down to what should hold more weight (regular season vs winning the round in the playoffs). Maybe my mind has just been trained to think that the teams who did the best in the regular season have earned the right to the easiest path through the playoffs.

                              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; Tue Apr 29, 2014, 12:47 AM.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                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.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X