This is the most chaotic final day standings / playoff picture of all time, easily

[ArbitraryWater]

Nothing is locked.

(if the Hawks wouldnt consistently flunk last minute games, theyd be H2H with the Bulls for the last game as well)

The Nuggets last second loss to the Spurs has thrown the entire conference/seedings into turmoil.


For some bs reason, in the two 3-way ties, the best team (Sixers, Nuggets) have the losing H2Hs and are last, giving us the most unbalanced version of how those 3 teams could be ranked.

Using H2H as decider is bs and arbitrary anyway, it should be point differential.


Inter-locking match-ups left, with seeding implications for both:

Bucks vs. Magic
Timberwolves vs. Suns
Pelicans vs. Lakers

[Kblaze8855]

Most Sports go head to head as main tiebreaker don’t they? It makes sense to me. If I beat you three times and we have the same record but you have a better point differential because you beat the wizards by 56 twice how does that make you better than me?

[ArbitraryWater]

Most Sports go head to head as main tiebreaker don’t they? It makes sense to me. If I beat you three times and we have the same record but you have a better point differential because you beat the wizards by 56 twice how does that make you better than me?

The problem with this is that its a bullshit hypothetical.

H2H is arbitrary.

There are 30 teams in the league.

Your league wide performance across 82 games says much more about you as a team than 3 random games in November, January and March.

It makes 0 sense and thats undebatable.

Dont even try it with another bs hypothetical where you make up the stipulations.

[ArbitraryWater]

Most football/soccer leagues have gone away from H2H too.


They noticed that if you share the same point tally with a team but are 30+ goals better and have regularly been blowing teams away more but lost a head to head duel in November, it makes 0 sense to put you behind the other team.

[Kblaze8855]

The problem with this is that its a bullshit hypothetical.

H2H is arbitrary.

There are 30 teams in the league.

Your league wide performance across 82 games says much more about you as a team than 3 random games in November, January and March.

It makes 0 sense and thats undebatable.

Dont even try it with another bs hypothetical where you make up the stipulations.

if one team beating another more often than the opposite is an arbitrary way of determining which one should advance….why should we determine who goes ahead in the playoffs by who beats each other?

if I beat you every time we play and we end up with the same record because you beat bad teams by more there is no reason you should be in the playoffs and I shouldn’t or ahead of me in standings. We aren’t talking individuals. We are talking teams. As many things as possible, should come down to head to head.

Thats how it’s gonna be decided anyway. A couple months of head to head.

if you’re of the opinion that those head heads should count but regular season one shouldn’t I don’t know how you’re also of the opinion that lowly regular season matchups versus the Pistons and such should.

how we played versus each other, has to matter more than the margin by which we beat teams that have nothing to do with our matchup. You want to be ahead of me….beat me. It’s entirely in our hands as it should be.

Don’t go beat the Rockets. You think you’re better than me. Beat me. If we can’t figure it out that way then we move on to Something else.

[tpols]

The problem with this is that its a bullshit hypothetical.

H2H is arbitrary.

There are 30 teams in the league.

Your league wide performance across 82 games says much more about you as a team than 3 random games in November, January and March.

It makes 0 sense and thats undebatable.

Dont even try it with another bs hypothetical where you make up the stipulations.

The balls on this ****ing guy.

After saying there's no way Denver could get the 3 seed. Walking jinx you are.

[ArbitraryWater]

if one team beating another more often than the opposite is an arbitrary way of determining which one should advance….why should we determine who goes ahead in the playoffs by who beats each other?

if I beat you every time we play and we end up with the same record because you beat bad teams by more there is no reason you should be in the playoffs and I shouldn’t or ahead of me in standings. We aren’t talking individuals. We are talking teams. As many things as possible, should come down to head to head.

Thats how it’s gonna be decided anyway. A couple months of head to head.

if you’re of the opinion that those head heads should count but regular season one shouldn’t I don’t know how you’re also of the opinion that lowly regular season matchups versus the Pistons and such should.

how we played versus each other, has to matter more than the margin by which we beat teams that have nothing to do with our matchup. You want to be ahead of me….beat me. It’s entirely in our hands as it should be.

Don’t go beat the Rockets. You think you’re better than me. Beat me. If we can’t figure it out that way then we move on to Something else.

The problem is youre making things up to fit your argument.

No one said the other team with the better PD beat bad teams more.

It doesnt say they beat bad teams by bigger margins than you did either.

Youre having to create a situation that doesnt exist for your argument.

This is a matter of principle.

The principle is simple.

I will repeat it:


Your league wide performance across 82 games says much more about you as a team than 3 random games in November, January and March.

Those 3 games are indeed random, because at the time of them there is no knowledge / awareness that these games will have the meaning to decide your seeding.

[ArbitraryWater]

The balls on this ****ing guy.

After saying there's no way Denver could get the 3 seed. Walking jinx you are.

Please at least pretend to make sense with your next post

[Kblaze8855]

The problem is youre making things up to fit your argument.

No one said the other team with the better PD beat bad teams more.

It doesnt say they beat bad teams by bigger margins than you did either.

Youre having to create a situation that doesnt exist for your argument.

This is a matter of principle.

The principle is simple.

I will repeat it:


Your league wide performance across 82 games says much more about you as a team than 3 random games in November, January and March.

Those 3 games are indeed random, because at the time of them there is no knowledge / awareness that these games will have the meaning to decide your seeding.

If teams and players don’t know after 75 years that head to head matchup will help determine their seedings it’s simple idiocy. They are told and every single one of them know it. It would determine the seeding, even if it didn’t come down to head to head. Every game helps determine seedings and games versus other good teams help determinate more so. And when you get to the playoffs, everything is decided by head to head. it’s the only thing that matters in a team sport and will ultimately decide everything.

I don’t have to make shit up. Performance versus the entire league is how you get to your record in the first place. If that can’t settle it the logical next thing to move on is performance versus the other team in question. Your way, not only makes no sense by factoring in irrelevant data like how much you win by when record is binary and not by degree it actually is putting more weight on the performance versus irrelevant opponents then your performance versus good ones because there will always be more mediocre and bad teams than great ones.

it gets us to a season long version of the in season playoff point differential tie breakers where teams are out there going unnecessarily hard trying to stretch out blowouts to win money. Half the league was complaining about it off the bat and it will definitely change because it’s simply ridiculous. What does the NBA gain by teams up 30 late still playing stars trying to push the lead to 54 for point differential? In a league where teams already want to rest stars?

In a league that already has too many marquee matchups ruined by rest? If your total point differential matters more than winning big games teams are incentivized to go harder versus shit teams they can beat by 50.

Who exactly does that help? The players were already complaining about lopsided games of poor sportsmanship when they were incentivized to have massive blowouts for money in the tournament.

How exactly do any of us benefit more from the best teams trying to win by 66 versus a shit team by playing key players bigger minutes than necessary and running it up than by taking what should be a key matchup versus another great team who is a conference rival seriously and giving us a good game?

everything about your plan would result in a worse season and it’s entirely possible it would result in more injury. The NBA will absolutely never do such a thing and they shouldn’t. Nobody at the league office is stupid enough to incentivize playing stars bigger minutes in bad games to facilitate larger blowouts Instead of incentivizing the marquee matchups they intend to put on TV.

It’s bad business it’s bad basketball and it’s bad sense.

[ShawkFactory]

The problem is youre making things up to fit your argument.

No one said the other team with the better PD beat bad teams more.

It doesnt say they beat bad teams by bigger margins than you did either.

Youre having to create a situation that doesnt exist for your argument.

This is a matter of principle.

The principle is simple.

I will repeat it:


Your league wide performance across 82 games says much more about you as a team than 3 random games in November, January and March.

Those 3 games are indeed random, because at the time of them there is no knowledge / awareness that these games will have the meaning to decide your seeding.

It doesn’t make sense to do that in the NBA though because that’s not where the line of thinking is, nor should it be. Some teams coasts more with a lead than others, rest guys in the 4th when other teams wouldn’t, etc.

Winning games is what matters. The Warriors having to play Steph 46 minutes to run the score up on the Hornets isn’t good for the league. You say that over a large sample it would come out in the wash so to speak, but running the score up on bad teams to pad the PD is exactly what would happen and likely what would make the difference at the end of the day.

Mpg for stars would spike, as would injuries.

[Kblaze8855]

It doesn’t make sense to do that in the NBA though because that’s not where the line of thinking is, nor should it be. Some teams coasts more with a lead than others, rest guys in the 4th when other teams wouldn’t, etc.

Winning games is what matters. The Warriors having to play Steph 46 minutes to run the score up on the Hornets isn’t good for the league. You say that over a large sample it would come out in the wash so to speak, but running the score up on bad teams to pad the PD is exactly what would happen and likely what would make the difference at the end of the day.

Mpg for stars would spike, as would injuries.

when the Celtics needed to expand their point differential trying to win that money in the in season tournament they were out there doing ****ing hack a shaq up 30 and the coaching staff had to go apologize and explain themselves

The Celtics, for example, went to a hack–Andre Drummond strategy in the fourth quarter despite holding a lead of nearly 30 points when first sending him to the line. Tatum also played the vast majority of a fourth quarter that was a blowout from the start.
Joe Mazzulla had to discuss Boston’s point differential situation with Billy Donovan mid-game to explain why he was hacking Drummond. Did it lead to some uncomfortable feelings? Yes. People on both sides after the game expressed mixed emotions about the Celtics hunting points.

relying on point differential as a tiebreaker because head to head isn’t necessarily available in an incomplete season got complaints on day one. And early in the year many teams won’t even have played each other so they had to think of something and after a week they realized they’re gonna have to come up with something else because it’s ridiculous and likely dangerous to incentivize. One guy goes down trying to push a lead to 50 the whole league revolts.

This takes like 30 seconds of thought to see the disaster potential.


ain’t nobody trying to see hack a shaq in a third quarter 38 point game in January. Let’s get this shit over with and everybody go home healthy.

[ArbitraryWater]

It doesn’t make sense to do that in the NBA though because that’s not where the line of thinking is, nor should it be. Some teams coasts more with a lead than others, rest guys in the 4th when other teams wouldn’t, etc.

Winning games is what matters. The Warriors having to play Steph 46 minutes to run the score up on the Hornets isn’t good for the league. You say that over a large sample it would come out in the wash so to speak, but running the score up on bad teams to pad the PD is exactly what would happen and likely what would make the difference at the end of the day.

Mpg for stars would spike, as would injuries.

That doesnt make any sense.

Why would those aberrations be so one sided across 82 games that they could be that misleading?


Youre forced to create these uber weird scenarios in order to reject point differential in favor for h2h.

Which by the way, all the negatives you mention, could HIT those 3-4 h2h games, ironically...


let that sink in.

[ArbitraryWater]

If teams and players don’t know after 75 years that head to head matchup will help determine their seedings it’s simple idiocy. They are told and every single one of them know it. It would determine the seeding, even if it didn’t come down to head to head. Every game helps determine seedings and games versus other good teams help determinate more so. And when you get to the playoffs, everything is decided by head to head. it’s the only thing that matters in a team sport and will ultimately decide everything.

I don’t have to make shit up. Performance versus the entire league is how you get to your record in the first place. If that can’t settle it the logical next thing to move on is performance versus the other team in question. Your way, not only makes no sense by factoring in irrelevant data like how much you win by when record is binary and not by degree it actually is putting more weight on the performance versus irrelevant opponents then your performance versus good ones because there will always be more mediocre and bad teams than great ones.

it gets us to a season long version of the in season playoff point differential tie breakers where teams are out there going unnecessarily hard trying to stretch out blowouts to win money. Half the league was complaining about it off the bat and it will definitely change because it’s simply ridiculous. What does the NBA gain by teams up 30 late still playing stars trying to push the lead to 54 for point differential? In a league where teams already want to rest stars?

In a league that already has too many marquee matchups ruined by rest? If your total point differential matters more than winning big games teams are incentivized to go harder versus shit teams they can beat by 50.

Who exactly does that help? The players were already complaining about lopsided games of poor sportsmanship when they were incentivized to have massive blowouts for money in the tournament.

How exactly do any of us benefit more from the best teams trying to win by 66 versus a shit team by playing key players bigger minutes than necessary and running it up than by taking what should be a key matchup versus another great team who is a conference rival seriously and giving us a good game?

everything about your plan would result in a worse season and it’s entirely possible it would result in more injury. The NBA will absolutely never do such a thing and they shouldn’t. Nobody at the league office is stupid enough to incentivize playing stars bigger minutes in bad games to facilitate larger blowouts Instead of incentivizing the marquee matchups they intend to put on TV.

It’s bad business it’s bad basketball and it’s bad sense.

Exactly, and the extension of that is the point difference, to get an even clearer picture of league wide performance. Its not h2h.


So that was a good point you made for me.

The fact that the barometer IS the all around league wide record, already shows that the PD barometer is probably much fairer than the random assembly of 3 games that happened to be between 2 teams that are tied by the end of the year.

This is really simple.


You can always create scenarios in which something makes less sense or comes out unfortunate, but you need to understand:


Rules are a matter of principle, kblaze.


You need to understand that.


The principle of using PD as tiebreaker, with an 82-game sample, makes obvious sense. The principle of using H2H as decider for 3-4 games in favor of point differential, does not.

[Kblaze8855]

There’s nothing weird about his scenario. Teams literally started playing superstars necessary to their title chances absurd minutes in blowouts immediately when they realized point differential was the key tiebreaker in the in season tournament. We just watched it happen. Many many players and coaches commented on it being stupid and something that should change.

This already played out in the real world.

[Kblaze8855]

Exactly, and the extension of that is the point difference, to get an even clearer picture of league wide performance. Its not h2h.


So that was a good point you made for me.

The fact that the barometer IS the all around league wide record, already shows that the PD barometer is probably much fairer than the random assembly of 3 games that happened to be between 2 teams that are tied by the end of the year.

This is really simple.


You can always create scenarios in which something makes less sense or comes out unfortunate, but you need to understand:


Rules are a matter of principle, kblaze.


You need to understand that.


The principle of using PD as tiebreaker, with an 82-game sample, makes obvious sense. The principle of using H2H as decider for 3-4 games in favor of point differential, does not.

at this point, you’re either blind or pretending not to see and I’m not interested in that. There are obvious reasons what you’re saying is ridiculous and it will never happen in the real world because of it. Even the attempt to do it a brief tournament for money resulted in controversy and hurt feelings And would eventually result in hurt players. They already talked about changing it for year two. The system is what it is because it makes more sense than the one you want and there’s absolutely no way it’s going to change because people put The necessary 30 seconds of thought into it and see that you’re wrong.

Head to head will always come first as it should so let’s just see how it shakes out. One more night to see.