Part 2: Eliminate Conferences for Competitive Balance

On April 11 Commissioner Adam Silver acknowledged the inequities of the NBA playoffs, unfortunately he said it would only be looked into. “I don’t know if there will be movement,” Silver said. “My initial thought is we should take a fresh look at it. When these conferences were designed it was in the day of commercial travel. … It was very different when we moved teams around the country. In this day and age, where every team in the league is flying charter, it changes everything.”

The league's regular season is a non-division and non-conference driven schedule, all the teams play each other. As noted in the previous post the NBA's obsessive allegiance to the conference playoff format is competitively destructive -- superior (western) conference teams either fail to qualify and/or are instantly put under pressure while inferior (eastern) conference teams are handed a smoother path. The best records belong to San Antonio and Oklahoma City but the league believes fans want a fabricated East vs West finals match-up rather than the two best teams.

Currently the division winners are prioritized and the remaining top 5 teams in each conference qualify for the playoffs. This year's suckers are the Phoenix Suns with a 48-34 record -- a better record than all the teams in the Eastern Conference except Indiana and Miami.

• Last season the Utah Jazz were left out with a 43-39 record while the Milwaukee Bucks qualified with a 38-44 record. 
• In 2009 and 2010 the Houston Rockets should have replaced the Chicago Bulls and the Indiana Pacers respectively. 
• The Phoenix Suns were locked out of the 2009 playoffs with a better record than the 5th seeded Miami Heat. 
• The 2008 playoffs should have included both the Golden State Warriors (48-34) and Portland Trail Blazers (41-41) over the Philadelphia 76ers (40-42) and Atlanta Hawks (37-45). 

And the list goes on. Only 9 of the last 30 seasons did NOT have such discrepancies. (1) The Eastern and Western Conferences are not equal and seeding based on division winners invariably slants the match-ups even further.

This year the San Antonio Spurs are the NBA's version of Witchita State where the best record is rewarded with the toughest opponents.

• They get Dallas, a first round opponent that would have been ranked third in the east. 
• Then both potential second round opponents have the same record as Miami and higher SRS ratings.(2)
• Only potentially to have to defeat Oklahoma City, the second best team, to qualify for the league final. 

It is no wonder Spurs Coach Popovich rests his starters on nationally viewed games, the league does his team no favors. 

Imagine the outrage if the NCAA qualified a fixed number of teams from each conference regardless of their relative strength to other conferences.

Since NBA teams play 66 of 82 games outside of their division and play all teams, the seedings should correspond to the overall record. Below is a chart comparing the various leagues' division and conference schedule. 

1. Percentage of Division Games
2. Percentage of Non-Division Games
3. Percentage of Conference Games 
4. Percentage of Non-Conference Games

It is easy to discover the NBA plays the most non-division and non-conference games, yet their playoff format is determined within conferences and elevates division winners. MLB and NFL teams play 47% and 38% of games within divisions and 88% and 75% within conferences, respectively, which justifies rewarding division winners and employing conference standings for playoff seeding. By contrast the league's sloppy attempt to impersonate these playoff structures fail because less than 20% of games are within divisions and only 63% within conferences. They play each other too often in the regular season for the playoffs to be limited by an ill-fitting conference format with division priorities.

Conferences in the NBA provide no value and arguably help to perpetuate myths and conspiracies concerning the league's clunky administration skills. Divisions however may be a necessary evil. Winning the division can be a simple qualifier for the playoffs but division winners should not be elevated. Divisions have little relevance other than a way to format the regular season schedule in a palatable manner and should only be used for that reason.

If the division winners and remaining overall top 10 teams qualified for the playoffs the last weeks of the season would be dramatically different. Listed below are the overall true top 16 teams and then the NBA's conference driven top 16.

          True Top 16                                                             Conference Top 16

1. San Antonio Spurs*........... (62-20)...(62-20) .....San Antonio Spurs*
2. Oklahoma City Thunder*.. (59-23)...(56-26) .....Indiana Pacers*
3. Los Angeles Clippers*...... (57-25)...(59-23) .....Oklahoma City Thunder*
4. Indiana Pacers*.................. (56-26)...(54-28) .....Miami Heat*
5. Miami Heat*...................... (54-28)...(57-25) .....Los Angeles Clippers*    
6. Houston Rockets............... (54-28)...(48-34) .....Toronto Raptors*
7. Portland Trail Blazers........ (54-28)...(54-28) .....Houston Rockets
8. Golden State Warriors....... (51-31)...(48-34) .....Chicago Bulls
9. Memphis Grizzlies............. (50-32)...(44-38) .....Washington Wizards
   
10. Dallas Mavericks................ (49-33)...(54-28) .....Portland Trail Blazers
11. Toronto Raptors*............... (48-34)...(44-38) .....Brooklyn Nets
12. Phoenix Suns...................... (48-34)...(51-31) .....Golden State Warriors
    
13. Chicago Bulls..................... (48-34)...(43-39) .....Charlotte Bobcats
14. Washington Wizards.......... (44-38)...(50-32) ......Memphis Grizzlies
15. Brooklyn Nets.................... (44-38)...(38-44) ......Atlanta Hawks
16. Charlotte Bobcats.............. (43-39)...(49-33) ......Dallas Mavericks

* Division Winner
  
If one did not think the league fixes playoff match-ups it would not be difficult to persuade them.

• Do the Atlanta Hawks deserve to be in the playoffs?
• Division winner Toronto Raptors are actually the 11th best team.
• Phoenix Suns are the 12th best team and are not included.
• Dallas Mavericks are the 10th best team and seeded last.

Another flaw of the conference playoff format is it diminishes the regular season, where individual games eventually carry little significance. Teams need only to compete within their conferences or relative to their conference opponents and if the conference is weak, as is the East, then teams are motivated to rest players and otherwise not fully compete. This convoluted and contrived playoff structure leads to unsavory and predictable end-of-season schemes that discredit the league's reputation. It seems only in the NBA do teams tank.

With a true and honest format Indiana and Miami would have been put under genuine pressure before the playoffs from Los Angeles, Houston and Portland contending for the weaker opponent (as it should be in a professional league). Establishing overall seeding will add legitimate intrigue and drama, the league will have playoff-atmosphere games finishing every season, higher caliber teams qualifying, and more cutthroat regular season games. This is the simple incentive the league fails to provide but could easily rectify. 

And by the way, the Minnesota Timberwolves might have seen an easier opportunity in trying to catch up to the Charlotte Bobcats for the final seed, who finished only 3 games ahead, rather than competing against the Phoenix Suns who were 8 games ahead.

One perceived flaw in overall seeding is one side of the country may not be represented in the finals. The NFL and MLB regularly have finals that excluded half of the country and yet continue to create more enthusiasm and success than the NBA.

Ultimately this change would alter how the season is sold. The league believes the big four teams are San Antonio, Indiana, Oklahoma City and Miami. The Los Angeles Clippers, with a better record than Indiana and Miami, would be first to argue against that. It should impact the MVP award -- would LeBron James be as strongly considered if his team were perceived as being 4th, 5th or 6th overall rather than a 2nd seed? 

Knowing the NBA season and playoffs are not a prefabricated event designed to exploit regional markets would bring in both casual viewers looking for honest entertainment as well as the sports fans who have moved on. Most coaches believe competition breeds more competition (which is why Western Conference teams are more entertaining), that authentic competitive battle is what brings excitement and passion to the game for fans, players, coaches, broadcasters, sponsors, etc.

If the NBA were to play an honest season followed by straightforward playoffs it can be a league like none other with an impervious reputation to match. It has the most popular players in the world and a game most people have played and understand but continues to languish well behind the NFL and MLB. 

Next post: 82 Games Too Many.

(1) If you're bored or at work go to www.basketball-reference.com click the Eastern Conference and Western Conference headings, it will sort according to records, go back to previous seasons and compare the 8th seeded Eastern Conference team to the 9th seeded Western Conference team to see how often and egregious the seedings have been.

(2) SRS - Simple-Rating-System - calculated by average point differential and strength of schedule by basketball-reference.com

Eliminate Conferences for Competitive Balance

A brief study of the NBA's final season's standings during the David Stern Era (1983-2013) reveals that competitive balance never existed. First, only 9 different teams of the 30 NBA teams have won the championship during the past 30 years, the NFL has had 18 and the MLB has had 20 different teams over the same period. The same large market teams win continually and consecutively. The San Antonio Spurs are the exception since they have had three core players for over a decade, that consistency is not seen in any large or small market teams and not in any other league.

The glaring injustice is readily seen by reviewing the season's standing and the playoffs' seeding format. The NBA is organized (two conferences containing three divisions with five teams in each) so that the division winners and the remaining top 5 teams within each conference qualify for the playoffs. 

Longtime NBA fans have held that the Eastern and Western Conferences are not equal, are not balanced. Specifically that teams in the West are superior to teams in the East. The greatest injustice the NBA perpetuates is against Western teams who play a preponderance of their games against tougher competition and are then punished for that excellence (teams play a majority of their games within their conference). A 9th or 10th place Western team with a better record, having faced stiffer competition, will not qualify for the championship so that an inferior Eastern team can qualify, solely to maintain the dated notion of conference symmetry. 

The NBA would have you believe that this imbalance is either part of the natural order, that it will balance-out or that the balance shifts over time. This is largely a myth. Since 2000, 19 Western Conference teams have held superior records to the 8th seeded Eastern Conference team and failed to qualify for the playoffs. Overall during the 30 seasons of the David Stern Era:

• 20 seasons finished with a minimum of one team failing to qualify for the playoffs even though it earned a better record than the 8th seeded team in the opposing conference
• 10 seasons finished with multiple teams failing to qualify for the playoffs even though they earned a better record than the 8th seeded team in the opposing conference
• 14 seasons finished with Western teams failing to qualify for playoffs with better records than Eastern teams (most recently 2012-13 Dallas & Utah)
• 6 seasons finished with Eastern teams failing to qualify for playoffs with better records than Western teams (most recently 1997-98 Washington Wizards)
• 19 seasons finished with playoff-qualified teams who won less than half their games (under .500)
• Since 2000, 10 Eastern Conference teams, who won less than half their games, qualified for the playoffs while 14 Western Conference teams with better records failed to qualify in those same years

The NBA conference system is broke and has been for long time. However the most unfortunate aspect for NBA fans is that the new commissioner, Adam Silver, has no plans to alleviate this perpetual injustice of basic structure. The simplest solution is to eliminate the conferences all together. The conferences are an archaic and antiquated conception designed to mitigate travel and expenses and whose rationale deteriorates as time moves forward. Instead the NBA should eliminate the conferences and have the division winners and the remaining overall top 10 teams qualify for the playoffs.

If these changes were applied to last season, the first round playoff match-ups would be as follows:

• 1. Miami Heat vs. 16. Boston Celtics
• 2. Oklahoma City Thunder vs. 15. Utah Jazz*
• 3. San Antonio Spurs vs. 14. Atlanta Hawks
• 4. Denver Nuggets vs. 13. Houston Rockets
• 5. Los Angeles Clippers vs. 12. Los Angeles Lakers
• 6. Memphis Grizzlies vs. 11. Chicago Bulls
• 7. New York Knicks vs. 10. Golden State Warriors
• 8. Indiana Pacers vs. 9. Brooklyn Nets

* Utah Jazz with a 43-39 record failed to qualify because they were in the Western Conference while the Milwaukee Bucks with a 38-44 record did qualify because they were in the Eastern Conference (also Dallas Mavericks had a 41-41 record).

Finally thanks to www.basketball-reference.com for stats.
 

Part 2: Adding Back Divisional Games to Match 82-game Schedule

Most all of the feedback I received instantly pointed out that fewer games is a non-starter. I had underestimated the significance of matching the current 82-game schedule, dismissing those 8 games (4 home games) is dismissing 10% of the schedule. That is obviously too much to ask for, my bad.

So, while holding on to the tournament as previously outlined, the most simple option would be to add those 8 games to the regular season by exploiting the current divisional format (eliminating conferences). Teams would play their respective divisional opponents four times (16 games) and opponents outside the division only twice, home and away (50 games). Each division winner and then the overall remaining top 10 teams would go to the playoffs. This reaches the almighty 82-game destination exactly and precisely.

So to summarize this post with the previous, my proposal for the NBA is to:

• scrap the preseason completely.

• have each team to play 16 games of group-play (6 groups of 5 teams seeded according to final regular season's standing, see previous post).

• have top 3 teams in each group enter the tournament (similar to sweet 16, a.k.a. NBA Super Bowl, see previous post).

• create a 66-game regular season with current divisions, leading to playoffs as is currently constructed.

Finally I would like to thank the guys at Drive and Dish Podcast (driveanddish.podbean.com) and Steve Kyler (@stevekylerNBA) for their feedback to the initial post.

Reboot the NBA: Ditch the Preseason, Add a Tournament and Cut the Season to 58 Games

What if players had more opportunity to win while playing fewer games?  What if NBA owners could create substantially more revenue, practically an additional season’s worth?  What if fans had more to root for rather than the polar extremes of a championship or a lottery pick?  What if each team’s final position in the season’s standings was made relevant for seeding in next season’s tournament?  What if the NBA could be as grand as the Olympics, as global as soccer, as frenetic as the NCAA, as fan-devoted as the NFL while spreading more hope than the Pope?

Of course let me get out of the way the subjects of arena lease agreements, broadcasting rights, revenue contracts, the CBA and all the legal and financial business arrangements of the NBA and the players’ union that I have no knowledge of and will attempted to maintain my distance from.  The focus (and assumption these obligations are based on) of this article will revolve around the current parameters of an 82 game regular season.

First eliminate the preseason.  Second start the regular season later and reduce it to where teams play each other twice, at home and on the road.  Next is to remove all notions of conferences and divisions and then allow the overall top 16 teams to qualify for the playoffs, which would play out as is currently constructed.  Going from an 82 to a 58 game regular season would add substantial value and urgency to games throughout the season and especially going into the playoffs.  My proposal is to replace the 24 games lost with a 20 game group-play tournament, similar to world cup soccer, to be held annually prior to the regular season.  This tournament will create unimaginable new life for basketball fans, players and owners while setting NBA apart from all other leagues.

Similar to the current divisional format, the tournament begins with 6 groups of 5 teams, seeded according to the previous season’s standing, where each team would play each other four times (group-play) to qualify and to establish seeding for the tournament.  Based on the win-loss percentage of teams in the 2012-13 season, the following groups would’ve competed in a 2013 NBA Tournament:

    Group A                                                Group B                                              Group C

1. Miami Heat                                2. Oklahoma City Thunder                   3. San Antonio Spurs

7. New York Knicks                       8. Indiana Pacers                                     9. Brooklyn Nets

13. Chicago Bulls                          14. Atlanta Hawks                                   15. Utah Jazz

19. Philadelphia 76ers                  20. Toronto Raptors                                 21. Portland Trailblazers

25. Sacramento Kings                  26. New Orleans Hornets                       27. Phoenix Suns

 

      Group D                                                Group E                                               Group F

 4. Denver Nuggets                         5. Los Angeles Clippers                          6. Memphis Grizzlies

10. Golden State Warriors            11. Los Angeles Lakers                           12. Houston Rockets

16. Boston Celtics                          17. Dallas Mavericks                              18. Milwaukee Bucks

22. Minnesota Timberwolves        23. Washington Wizards                        24. Detroit Pistons

28. Cleveland Cavaliers                29. Charlotte Bobcats                              30. Orlando Magic 

Please note the teams in each group will change each year according to where they finish in the overall regular season’s standings, providing further intrigue in addition to playoff and lottery seeding as the season finishes. 

In group-play, teams will play each team in their group four times, two at home and two on the road, for a minimum of 16 games and a maximum of 21 games, going through tournament-play.  Following 6 weeks of group-play the top 3 teams in each group would advance according to win percentage, point differential, points scored or whatever the competition committee decides to rank them by and then (after qualifying) seeded 1-18 accordingly.  There could be several identical records so whatever criteria are used it should readily translate to the court, thus providing a potential basketball laboratory where different incentives, rules and regulations can be tested.  Group-play is basically starting the season with playoffs -- 5 teams go in, 3 teams get out.  The final tournament would consist of 18 teams in 2 play-in games, a first round of 8 games, quarter-finals, semi-finals and a final championship game.  The last 4 teams would have to compete in play-in games to round-out the brackets properly.  The winner of the 15^th versus 18^th seeded match up would play the 1^st seed and the 2^nd seed would play the winner of the 16^th versus 17^th seeded match up, these last four teams will have to play an extra game to win the tournament.  It is possible to go with the top 16 teams but that could punish teams in difficult groups considering they only play within their respective groups. The overall brackets would look something like this: 

1. v (15. v 18.) ________                                          

7. v 10.            ________   >  ________                            

3. v 14.            ________                         >    ________                                               

5. v 12.            ________   >  ________                           \

2. v (16. v 17.) ________                                                   __________   >  Champion

8. v 9.              ________   >  ________                           /

4. v 13.            ________                          >   ________

6. v 11.            ________   >  ________ 

Logistically group-play is impossible to consider as simple replacement to a month long preseason.  Time and travel are large obstacles since 16 games for each of the 30 teams means 480 total games.  Currently the regular season consists of each team playing 82 games over 26 weeks, however with a new 58 game regular season played over the course of 20 weeks (playoffs stay the same) and then taking the 4 weeks of now-defunct preseason games it is simple to locate the 10 weeks or so needed to conduct the tournament.

Travel and competitive balance are another obvious consideration to make.  As intriguing as the groups are, having teams travel coast-to-coast constantly in a short time frame does not bode well for competitive balance.  However it can be mitigated as the current NBA format routinely allows for competitive imbalance with back-to-back games where it is not unusual for teams with significant differences in rest to play each other.  For example near-coastal teams could play consecutive games against each other at their respective home games.  

Finally tournament-play would be conducted over two weekends much like the NCAA tournament from the sweet 16 onward and interest will also be generated in selecting the locations of the tournament which should rotate much like the All-Star game and Super Bowl.  A minimum of two arenas are required for the first weekend, 12 games over 4 days, hosting an afternoon and evening game on the Thursday and Friday and quarter-final games over each Saturday and Sunday afternoon or evening.  The final three games can held in one arena over the next weekend with the semi-final games on a Friday and the final on a Sunday.  I predict the schedule will be constructed to maximize interest, viewership, revenue, etc.  This is where it is easy to imagine the NBA taking the tournament overseas every now and then once it matures.

The new NBA season would have group-play begin in October so that the first weekend of the tournament could be played over Thanksgiving weekend finishing the next weekend.  The regular season would begin around Christmas running through April as it currently does with All-Star weekend and the playoffs following normally as well.  The draft process in June and the free agency period beginning in July would remain untouched as well.  It is my hope the tournament, group-play specifically, will both test and allow for better evaluation of players than the preseason.  An added incentive for teams not to treat the tournament like the preseason would be to reward a team winning all three, the tournament, regular season and playoffs, in a single season with induction directly into the NBA Hall of Fame as a triple-crown winning team.

Another impediment is time off for players and teams.  A championship team would have less than three months off before beginning to prepare for the tournament and possibly only two weeks off before beginning the regular season.  Previously I identified 24 games for each team as the primary difference to compensate for, which means 12 home games, unfortunately the 16 group-play games leaves us with 8 home games and thus I am short 4 home games.  However the value this tournament will add can restore any economic casualties related to those lost games.  The issues of making up lost games and off-season rest, much like the time, travel and competitive balance considerations made in group-play, are not impossible to mitigate but could be an easy obstacle for detractors to point to as there are no absolute and equitable answers. 

There it is -- an epic, annual tournament in addition to the regular season and playoffs -- putting the NBA where no league has gone before.  Greatness can be redefined with more trophies for teams and players to chase and possibly a third could be created for winning the regular season.  With further differentiation between the regular season, the playoffs and now the tournament, the legacy of players and teams will be further analyzed with added statistical ammunition, debating who can excel in which format.  For fans there will be a ton of fantasy type games and gambling opportunities, new rivalries between cities and added hope that your team or player could “shock the world”.  Finally for owners it is a new product to sell, exercising the same mechanisms already in existence to establish new broadcasting deals, new licensing and sponsorship rights, etc.  For all parties involved, fans, players, coaches and owners it sounds too good to be true.  What if?