That's what I was thinking because they used the word "leader" and not "winner". And if that is the case, I agree that it's stupid and pointless to have a piece of criteria that only applies to regular season standings. If we were still in the same position and tied with Denver on 4/15 then Denver would be listed 3rd but on 4/16, when the regular season was officially over, we'd be listed 3rd even though nothing really changed. Pointless.
Dear NBA, Cannonball and I think your regular season seedings are dumb and pointless. That is all. Sincerely, ScriboErgoSum
My bad, seems like I read that just a week or so ago but you are right. That is how it played out the last two years.
It was like that twice in the league in '04-'05 and '05-'06. It was after the Bobcats joined the league and divisions got realigned from 4 to 6 divisions.
Didn't the NBA modify the rule a few years back when the Nuggets faced the Clippers in the playoffs? The Clippers had a better record, but the Nuggets won their division. Anyway, the Clippers destroyed the Nugs in the first round, and I think it was the beginning of a new system. I'm probably mistaken, though.
That was the playoffs (2006), but the real tragedy was the Spurs-Mavs matchup in round 2. Those teams had the 2 best records in the entire league. However, since division winners got the first 3 seeds, it was Spurs #1, Mavs #4 and a second round matchup. Everyone thought it was the equivalent of the Finals, although somehow the Heat won it all that year. The Clippers definitely tanked their last few games in order to fall to #6 and draw the Nuggets. The Nuggets had the 8th best record in the West that year, so LA had home court advantage. It was an absolute joke that they were the #3 seed. That was the year I started disliking the Nuggets and calling them Enver. I still think Stern did a poor job of "fixing" the problem. Seed the teams 1-8 and forget about rewarding division winners. Give all 3 an automatic playoff berth so every division is represented. If 2006 happened again, the Nuggets should be #8 and face the #1 seed. It's not right for them to get the #4 seed and play the #5 seed.
If the rested Kings beat the Suns on the back end of a back to back in Sacramento, the Rockets are in the playoffs.
Suns lose. Too bad. But now the Rockets can clinch a playoff spot with a Suns loss in Sacramento tomorrow.
After tonight, it looks like: 1. LAL 2. SAS (56 wins) 3/4 Hou/Den (53-54 wins) 5 Port (52 wins) 6/7 NOH/ Utah (50-51 wins) 8 Dall (49 wins) If Rox go 6-2 they would have 54 wins, which should be good enough to tie Denver because of Denver's easy remaining schedule. (Rox hold the tiebreaker) Unless NOH loses more easy games (like the Knicks) they should keep the 6 seed, given Utah's tough remaining road schedule, Utah may even slip to 8. My guess is Hou 4 vs. Port 5, which would be OK. Hou 3 vs NO 6 would be even better. Hou 3 vs UT 6 would be a harder first round matchup. If it came down to losing the last game (@ Dall) to avoid UT in the first round, I would do that.
Sacramento sucks. Suns will probably win, but that's OK. Rockets can seal the deal themselves on Wednesday.
Scribo can you explain the Nugs in the 3 spot? Don't we have the tie break over them? (or should I scoot back in this thread to find the answer - I thought I had read everything but I might have skipped a page or something)
