Unofficial Word from Adam Silver on Future Playoff Format

News: Commish Adam Silver just told #Spurs broadcasters NBA "might move" on playoff format to go to top 16 teams, sted of 8 per conference

---@Monroe_SA

Would make the playoffs more exciting for me. Travel time is one main concern but other than that it should be more competitive basketball.

What does he mean by 16 teams? Is it like for example there's gonna be 10 teams in the West and 6 teams in the East?

Top 16 teams record wise regardless of conference. So yeah one year it could be 10 from West and 6 from East.

Yes, teams would probably be selected by their win-loss record and not bound by their conference competition when seeding. It would break the current format of deciding Conference champions, though.

Yes, teams would probably be selected by their win-loss record and not bound by their conference competition when seeding. It would break the current format of deciding Conference champions, though.

Yeah and also, I don't know if true NBA fans would like that. I mean it hasn't changed for a long time why change now?

Sounds good but I still want a distinction between East and West in the playoffs because what's the point of having conference divisions or 3-4 same conference games compared to only 2 cross-conference games during the regular season when it has no bearing in the playoffs.

Top 2 seeds go to the #1 teams of both East and West, even if the #2 record in the West is higher than that of the #1 in the East the #1 in the East still gets the top 2 seed. Minimum of 3 teams from either conferences because of division leaders otherwise just eliminate the division groupings in each conference.

Better yet is to stop having half of the NBA go to the Playoffs.

Yeah and also, I don't know if true NBA fans would like that. I mean it hasn't changed for a long time why change now?

Because it's long past time to dump something outdated now that it's no longer necessary?

Sounds good but I still want a distinction between East and West in the playoffs because what's the point of having ... 3-4 same conference games compared to only 2 cross-conference games during the regular season when it has no bearing in the playoffs.

Travel. They can just do them by distance.

As always, I can see the merit in changing the format, but I'm still a bit iffy about it. I realise that it may be largely due to the fact that it's simply what I'm used to, but I do like the idea of having conferences/divisions from an organisational standpoint. If they were to make any changes, I'd like to see them keep a similar structure for seeding, rather than just expanding things to #1 vs #16, #2 vs #15, and so on.

I still don't know that the current format is as broken as is often suggested. That's not to say there isn't a better system and alternatives shouldn't be explored, but I feel this is a bad year to make that decision. The East being so bad this year may strike many as a good reason to explore these changes, a catalyst for an overhaul and all that, but I think it needs to be put into perspective. It is just one season, one in which a few teams got off to slow starts or had bad runs here and there due to injuries. The West being the stronger conference is nothing new, but it's not usually quite as lopsided.

As it stands, if the new system were implemented with this year's standings - as of this post - the only change would be that Phoenix is in and Atlanta is out. No argument that the Suns deserve to be there more than the Hawks, but when 15 of the 16 teams that are currently bound for the Playoffs also have 15 of the top 16 records in the league and would be in the postseason under the new system, I don't think the current system is quite as flawed and broken as it's often made out to be. Even in a year with such a lopsided imbalance between the conferences, it's got 15 out of 16 correct.

Again, that's not to say things can't be better, nor that the NBA absolutely shouldn't change the system and that it's wrong to explore alternatives. I'm just not sure it's absolutely necessary to change either, or that the current system isn't working at all.

Another way would be to change the scheduling so east and west teams only play each other once a year. With less cross conference play, records would be less likely to be skewed for one conference. They might even see more competition within a conference.

With less cross conference play, records would be less likely to be skewed for one conference.

Unless there's only two good teams in the conference who beat everyone else in it five to six times.

I still don't know that the current format is as broken as is often suggested. That's not to say there isn't a better system and alternatives shouldn't be explored, but I feel this is a bad year to make that decision. The East being so bad this year may strike many as a good reason to explore these changes, a catalyst for an overhaul and all that, but I think it needs to be put into perspective. It is just one season, one in which a few teams got off to slow starts or had bad runs here and there due to injuries. The West being the stronger conference is nothing new, but it's not usually quite as lopsided.

As it stands, if the new system were implemented with this year's standings - as of this post - the only change would be that Phoenix is in and Atlanta is out. No argument that the Suns deserve to be there more than the Hawks, but when 15 of the 16 teams that are currently bound for the Playoffs also have 15 of the top 16 records in the league and would be in the postseason under the new system, I don't think the current system is quite as flawed and broken as it's often made out to be. Even in a year with such a lopsided imbalance between the conferences, it's got 15 out of 16 correct.

The problem isn't who gets in the playoffs as much as it is who has to play who in the playoffs. Getting two round byes is a big advantage.

What difference does it make whether it's Phoenix or Atlanta losing in the first round against Miami? If anything it'll help Memphis/Phoenix & Minnesota get better by giving them a higher draft pick.

It'd be the Bobcats, not Phoenix.

I'm not really too keen on the idea. However I see the merits and really wouldn't mind either way.

I think they'd have to reformat regular season scheduling if they did go this route, and even out the east vs west matchups then, which would be a nightmare travel and logistics-wise. It would just seem out of place (to me at least) for teams to play conference and division rivals more during the reg. season, with the chance of not even playing them in the playoffs,

Also as it is now, I like that claiming the division actually means something. While I feel bad for teams like Phoenix, I don't feel that this reason alone is enough to warrant a change. The more evenly spaced playoff matchups may be interesting, with the majority of the west having the favourable advantage in the first round matchups.

Because I should be studying, 1st round matchups with top 16:
SA vs CHA
OKC vs WAS
LAC vs BKN
IND vs CHI *
MIA vs TOR *
HOU vs PHX *
POR vs MEM
GSW vs DAL

That does look a little more interesting, and again the only change in teams actually in the playoffs would be ATL for PHX. In the end it's 2 one-sided matchups (top 16), vs 3 one-sided matchups (8/conference). This sort of format might create more motivation for top seeded teams later in the regular season as well, but who knows.

Yeah, but look at the rounds after that, just assuming top seed wins:

SAS vs GSW
OKC vs POR
LAC vs HOU
IND vs MIA

SAS vs IND
OKC vs LAC

SAS vs OKC

As is, you'll have (assuming the same thing) Portland and Golden State gone in the first round, then the Clips gone in the second. And Indiana vs. Miami happens in the Conf Finals instead of the second round meaning they only have to beat two contenders instead of three (or more) to win a title.

I don't think the current format poses major issues for Silver to take extreme measures.

East still has more championships on their side (same w/ ASG wins iirc). Some era, west has the edge, some don't. As simple as that.

Another way would be to change the scheduling so east and west teams only play each other once a year.

Owners wouldn't want that. Remember one season when the Suns owner got butthurt because his team had no (home) game against the Heat? Popular teams bring in the $$$ (ticket sales/TV coverage) when they play other teams, owners want that dosh and they won't get that with only 1 game against the other conference's teams. 2 games (home/away) is probably the 'fairest' least number of games for east-west games that benefits both teams playing against each other.

Let's say you go on ahead and do this...

How do you make the regular season schedule?
You keep conference and divisions?...4 games vs division rivals 3/4 games vs conference rivals and 2 games with the other conference?
Then the system is still flawed since if you are in a easier division (i.e. South East) you'll most likely get a better record than someone in a harder conference/division.

You get rid of conferences/divisions?
Then how'd you make every team schedule fair?
You'd have to drop the regular season to 58 games (everyone plays everyone twice) or you have to up it to 87 games (everyone plays everyone 3 times)

I don't think the current format poses major issues for Silver to take extreme measures.

Come on man, the West is like 10xEast when you look at the East as a whole.

Let them figure out the logistics. I don't think there is much of a legit argument for why the top 16 teams in the league shouldn't battle it out in the playoffs.

Let them figure out the logistics. I don't think there is much of a legit argument for why the top 16 teams in the league shouldn't battle it out in the playoffs.

They already do, for the most part. As I said before, 15 of the 16 teams in this year's Playoffs remain unchanged if you do away with the Conferences. Even in a particularly lopsided year where the East was decimated by injuries and a couple of underperforming teams, and a team in the West overachieved to an impressive degree, it's still pretty much worked out as intended as far as the teams with the top records getting into the postseason.