http://www.nba.com/standings/team_record_comparison/conferenceNew_Std_Cnf.html Look closely at the standing of the league, Orlando and Boston would struggle to get the playoff position if they are in the west(play way more west elite teams and way less games against east scrubs). Also Cleveland's record is obviously misleading. They will most likely lose half a dozen more games if they are in the west. Remember they would have to play Lakers twice more, and play 2 less games with weak east teams in the sense. Then how about 2 more games against Spurs, Rockets..., 2 less games against chicago, new york... It's not fair, not to mention way more wear and tear for west teams in the playoffs. East elite teams ACTUALLY have a ridiculous advantage over west ones.
I hear what you're saying but if you look at their record against the West, it isn't that bad at all. Cleveland 55-13 overall 23-4 against the west Boston 52-18 overall 18-9 against the west Orlando 50-18 overall 21-7 against the west those are the top 3 teams in the east while the top 3 teams in the west... LA 54-14 overall 17-7 against the east San Antonio 45-23 overall 16-11 against the east Houston 46-25 overall 17-12 against the east So it is kind of a weird thing, top three teams in the east only have a combined 20 losses against western conference teams, and the top three teams in the west have a combined 30 losses to eastern conference things. I know that there are several weak teams in the east, and that it seems like every year there is a team in the west that gets left out of the playoffs, but that is how the system works. I don't think anyone should complain about which conference they are in, you still play the same number of games, same number of minutes, and if you get into the playoffs, you put that all aside, and if you win 16 games, you're champs.
http://rafer.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?t=164986 Already discussed. FYI, Boston actually played the most playoff games last year in what was considered a terrible conference.
Atlanta and Miami is only getting better. Bulls got a better line up after the TD hopefully those teams can make it a better challenge next year.
The post is referring to how they have it easy being the only 3 contenders while the west has a easy 9 contenders.
Then how does that explain how the top 3 eastern teams have a better record vs the west than the top 3 west teams? The east has a better overall record vs the west.
Even though the West has 5 bonafide bottom-dwellers for the top 9 to "feast on" while the East only has one garbage team.
With all due respect, the teams in the West have more "bottom dwellers" than the East does. They actually have it harder in the East than we do here in the West. Plus, they are good overall against the west against the "bottom dwellers" and the good playoff teams.
Lols maybe you should look at the standing a bit closer. Cavs have been dominating the West. how can that be misleading when they are already something like 22-4 against West opponents? If they played in the West they'd have an even better record! P.S. Anybody else notice the "rafer" in the url for the link? Wtf's up with that? Did Rafer hack clutchfans or something?
Check record on the play-off teams against the other side's play-off teams. The Rockets right now are 3-2 against the top 3 in the east. Lakers swept the Celtics.
This topic has been discussed and many times I see people throw out one single statistic and base their argument on that. That is not enough. Why do you think the West has 5 bottom dwellers and the East only has 1? Have you ever thought that those 5 have bad records because they have to play more against stronger top teams in the West? This year in particular the top 9 teams in the West do not lose to the bottom teams very much because they are in a tight race. You can make a comparison between East and West but you have to use many different statistics together.
I think a lot of you are forgeting getting worn out. If you play competitors day in and day out you get worn out more often. Thats not the case for the 3 East teams.
I agree that the west have more bottom dwellers. I think you should look at it from the other direction. In the east there are 3 good teams, whereas in the West there are 9 good teams. So that are 8 difficult games in the east and 32 difficult games in the west for an elite team from the respective conference. That being said, i believe that the top 3 in the east are great teams. But overall the west is the better conference IMHO.
I can't believe there have been more than 10 new posts in this thread since someone pointed out that the EXACT same topic is being discussed in another thread that is still among the ten most recent threads in the NBA Dish.
Can you at least look at the standings before you throw these weak arguments out there? Of the six (not five) bottom dwellers in the west, three (Golden State, OKC, and Sacramento) have either virtually the same record against the West as against the east, or an even BETTER record against the west (in the case of Sacramento). Do you know how many total wins the bottom dwellers would have if they played all season at the same win percentage that they've played against the "weaker" East? Here are the numbers: MIN: 26 (real 20) GS: 26 (real 25) OKC: 19 (real 19) MEM: 20 (real 17) LAC: 20 (real 17) SAC: 2 (real 15) So MIN, GS, OKC, MEM, and LAC combined would have 13 more wins and SAC would have 13 more losses. Is that finally proof enough that those teams really do suck and it's not just that they have to play the big, tough West powerhouses too many times?
I didn't see that, but anyways, who cares? You can't lock this one up or anything, so might as well just do it here.
The west has a very wide disparity between good and bad teams The East has the Cavs, Celtics, Magic, then everyone else who are all sort of mediocore, but aren't as bad as the bad teams in the West, save 1 or 2 teams.
East will rise now because lotta east teams have had lottery picks last few years and those players are finally developing so this is where the east will start to rise.
