Cuban: 10 teams should make the playoffs

[NovU]

Mark Cuban proposed to fellow owners that 10 teams from each conference should make the playoffs.
As a way to help address the NBA's tanking problem, Cuban proposed expanding the playoffs to include 10 teams from each conference. It's unclear how Cuban's proposal was received by fellow owners, but we'll keep an eye on this one as it could make for a more competitive regular season if there are 20 playoff spots available.
https://twitter.com/townbrad/status/621679491077705728

[Lamrock]

They should just add expansion teams in Seattle and another market so we have 32 teams, then have all 16 teams in each conference make it, with the regular season only deciding seeding. It's much too unforgiving as is, with juggernauts like the Westbrook-less Thunder, Bosh-less Heat and George-less Pacers missing out last year. Let teams that aren't lucky to have superstars like Joe Johnson get a turn in the post-season!

[Kevin]

More games, more fun

[Andrew]

The tanking problem is overblown. So a couple of teams decide they're blowing everything up and will endure a rough season, in the hopes of starting over with a top prospect. Good luck to them, and condolences to their fans for the tough times they're about to endure. Leave it as it is.

[[Q]]

They should just add expansion teams in Seattle and another market so we have 32 teams, then have all 16 teams in each conference make it, with the regular season only deciding seeding. It's much too unforgiving as is, with juggernauts like the Westbrook-less Thunder, Bosh-less Heat and George-less Pacers missing out last year. Let teams that aren't lucky to have superstars like Joe Johnson get a turn in the post-season!

Expansion to 32 would be very interesting. The league has stated many times that they are not looking into expanding (especially with a few teams looking to move every year) but I'd like Seattle and Vegas to get teams. Maybe Anaheim??

[Patr1ck]

He just wants to make the playoffs every year instead of taking a hit in his pocketbook to win. As it stands in the NBA, it's pay to win.

What they should do is reduce the amount of teams that make the playoffs and reduce the chances the teams with the worst record get of having that top pick.

[Andrew]

I'd leave the Playoffs alone, and change the number of chances, if anything. Even then, I'm not sure that's necessary, when the team with the worst record has only won the lottery four times in three decades of the system being used.

[mp3]

They should just add expansion teams in Seattle and another market so we have 32 teams, then have all 16 teams in each conference make it, with the regular season only deciding seeding. It's much too unforgiving as is, with juggernauts like the Westbrook-less Thunder, Bosh-less Heat and George-less Pacers missing out last year. Let teams that aren't lucky to have superstars like Joe Johnson get a turn in the post-season!

If the Sonics returned would you switch back to supporting your home team?

[air gordon]

Less games in the regular season. No expansion. Would create even more bottom feeder teams.

I'm fine with more teams making the post season. The opening round should go back to best of 5 and have the top 2 teams with a bye for the first round but that's not going to happen

[NovU]

I honestly don't see what the fuss is about tanking. Can the league just work some mathematics and give more chance at the picks to the playoffs teams? Work with numbers to find perfect balanced point where all teams are actually encouraged to compete.

[Andrew]

I don't even think that's necessary. The lottery system already discourages tanking - in theory - because there's no guarantee of getting the top pick with the worst record, as there was pre-lottery. Even though you have the best odds, it's only snared the top pick four times in the three decades the lottery system has been in use...five times if you want to count the Cavs winning in 2003 (but since they were tied with the Nuggets for the worst record and best odds, technically the team with the best odds also didn't win the lottery that year).

[NovU]

I don't even think that's necessary.

But the league feels necessity though as tanking does exist and people won't talk about possible solutions.


I just think increasing number of playoffs teams or creating expansion teams sounds like a drastic measure for a mere tanking issue, especially when all solutions require some sort of odd changes in lottery changes which they simply could do without making major changes.

[shadowgrin]

I thought Cuban's suggestion was to reduce the number of teams making the playoffs to 10 in total, turns out it was to increase the teams to 20 in total.

Man is not thinking straight anymore after being cock blocked by DeAndre Jordan, Deron Williams, and Dwight Howard over the years.

[Murat]

actually i suggest the top 16 of whole nba makes playoffs.

i can't stand a team who won 38 games and made playoffs. i also can't stand a situation that a team who won 48 games failed to make playoffs.

[Patr1ck]

I can't wait for the day that a team makes the playoffs with less than 40 wins, and takes the championship.

[debiler]

I can't wait for the day that a team makes the playoffs with less than 40 wins, and takes the championship.

Was it ever even close to that? I remember the '95 Rockets being the 6th seed or something like that. Also, The Knicks reached the finals as an 8th seed, iirc. I don't even know if I'd find it half bad. An underdog story is always entertaining and inspiring.

But anyhoo - how would a 20-team playoff tree even work? I think it's bollocks.

[mp3]

When the knicks got to the finals that year it was a lockout season so I am guessing 40 wins would of being pretty good then.

[Andrew]

I can't wait for the day that a team makes the playoffs with less than 40 wins, and takes the championship.

Was it ever even close to that?

Technically it has actually happened, as the San Antonio Spurs won 37 games in the 50 game lockout season of 1999, then won their first NBA championship. But yeah, that's obviously not less than 40 wins in the traditional sense. The Knicks were 27-23 that year, when they were indeed the first eighth seed to make it through to the Finals.

The Phoenix Suns made the NBA Finals in 1976 (that classic series against the Boston Celtics) despite being 42-40. Of course, if you look at the records from that season, 42-40 was eighth best in the league, and two sub .500 teams made the Playoffs in the West. Those sixth seeded Rockets in 1995 were still 47-35, a game behind the fifth seeded Lakers and obviously still on the verge of 50 wins.

[mp3]

Funny seeing a winning record making the 8th seed in the east (99 knicks)

[Patr1ck]

Funny seeing a winning record making the 8th seed in the east (99 knicks)

Yeah, how long has it been in the east since all playoff teams had more wins than losses? Actually not that long ago. 2011-2012 76ers at 35-31.