According to ESPN, the league has all but decided that New Orleans will move to the west in 2004 when the new Charlotte team is born. David Stern has been pushing for realignment into three 5-team divisions in each conference which makes more sense than 2 divisions (7 and 8 teams respectively), but it could be a little tricky to realign geographically. What's wierder, the team that could suffer the most is Minnesota who has been trying to get into the east along with Memphis, but who the hell would move west to replace them. No one is really geographically closer. Anyway, here's my choice for realignment if it were up to me: Western Conference South Division Dallas Houston Memphis New Orleans San Antonio North Division Golden State Minnesota Portland Sacramento Seattle Southwest Division Denver LA Clippers LA Lakers Phoenix Utah Eastern Conference Midwest Division Chicago Cleveland Detroit Indiana Milwaukee South Division Atlanta Charlotte Miami Orlando Washington North Division Boston New Jersey New York Philadelphia Toronto ------ Personally, I would love an all Texas plus New Orleans and Memphis division. That would make for some ridiculous rivalries. Thoughts?
Minnesota in the North Division?!?!?! For one thing, how is that "north". Second, Minnesota is 2 time zones behind. It's the stupidest thing. How are they in that division?!?!?! Minnesota SHOULD be in the same division as Chicago and Milwaukee. Move Cleveland east or to the "north". But I persoanlly don't like the California alignment. Sure it would give Seattle and Golden State a better chance at winning not being with the Lakers, but the geography is way off. Also, the (proposed) names of the divisions are misleading. Why not call the Divsion with Houston, New Orleans, etc. the Gulf Coast Division. The biggest problem is definitely the geography. It would be a lot easier to have two different "leagues" rather than conferences. There shouldn't be that many teams in California in the first place, but there will always be a few great teams on the West Coast and then the Clippers of the West that just plain suck, and honestly aren't given a chance to win in their respective division.
Three divisions per conference is a bad idea if the division winners are seeded 1-2-3, as in the NHL. Say San Antonio has the league's best record, 62-60, next year, and Dallas wins 61--then it's a four-seed for the Mavs.
They should also fix the names. New Orleans should be the JAZZ Utah can be the GRIZZLIES Memphis can be the HOUND DOGS Charlotte can be the HORNETS all will be good in the world of franchise names
HOLY CRAP!!!! ARE YOU SERIOUS?!?!?!? When did that happen?!?!?! Did you notice how all of the teams in the North Division are out West EXCEPT Minnesota. I wasn't pointing out how they are in the north, which they are, aren't they? Wait, lemme check my atlas.
can we get the lakers and clippers in different divisions? It's bad enough those 2 teams play 2 less road games than everyone else by virtue of sharing the same arena. how about having NO divisions and every team has to play each opponent 3 times a year. This would eliminate tie-breakers other than head-to-head record. The host site for the 3rd meeting could be a random decision or based on the previous year's season series. 29 opponents mean each team would play 87 games and the top 16 teams make the playoffs, regardless of geography.
why not do like baseball and football... you know... national and american. it would even everything out so the west wouldn't be a powerhouse and crappy teams from the east wouldn't make it in.
even more evidence... here's an excerpt from an orlando article: "With the Magic's loss, the East finished a mind-boggling 5-40 on the road in Texas this season." not fair that good teams in the west can't make the playoffs because of the Leastern conference.
Moving the Hornets to the Midwest division next year eh? The Hornets are one of the better teams in the east. That's all the Rockets and the West needs, is MORE talent and another GOOD team! Imagine how tough the West would be NEXT year with the Hornets in the west competing for a playoff spot!
Of course, three of those wins came against Houston, all of them by double digits, and two of the teams being New York and Miami
You're so smart. I'm sure he didn't know where Minnesota was. I think he is comparing Minnesota to the rest of the teams in the division. Maybe you should look just a little deeper into his post.
The tough thing about it is that there are not enough "West" teams to make 2, 5 team divisions without either splitting up the Texas division or moving one of the Northern most Midwest teams out to a western division. I am not opposed to Jeff's alignment except that I might move Memphis to the southeast division, move Washington to the Northeast division, move Toronto to the Midwest division and move one of the midwest teams to the south division(Chicago is probably geographically the closest). I also would consider moving the division around so it took on more of an NFL/MLB look with teams in each conference spread across the country, as was suggested earlier. CK
The idea of Utah and Denver in the same division is interesting, as it perpetuates the high altitude destinations. I have felt they should 'separate'. The point about time zones is significant. They need to remain within one zone of each other. That said, I am personally in favor of EIGHT groupings, six fours and two threes. The division winners + the eight next best records = the play offs.
Minnesota is considered in the northwest for two reasons. They are in the Western conference now and historically any state west of the Mississippi. That is why Texas is considered in the southwest even though they border the East coast. So compared to the other teams Minnesota does belong in the North along with the other Northwest teams.
