i agree i am confused cause last yr it was: 1. lakers 2. hornets 3. spurs 4. jazz 5. rockets 6. suns 7. mavs 8. nuggets hornets won the sw division and jazz won the NW division but spurs are three and because spurs had a better record than jazz. since we have the tie-breaker over denver shouldn't we be 3 even though nuggets are the division leader?
But I think the Spurs had a better record than Enver? Right? Removing the tie breaker from the discussion. D
Last year LA, SA & Utah were division winners. They were guaranteed a top 4 seeding. The seedings were #1. LA #2. SA #3. NO #4. Utah & #5. Houston. NO had a better record than Utah & us, so they landed the #3 seed. We had a better record than Utah, therefore we had hca in our 1st round playoff series. In that division winner rule was in effect last year, why was Utah seeded 4th instead of 3rd?
Wing, Across & I have different versions of what teams finished in what seeds last year. But we agree that a division winner finished 4th(instead of 3rd) while the 5th seed had hca in their 1st round playoff series..
If the Spurs had finished with the same record as Utah, then Utah would have automatically been 3rd regardless of the H2H between the two.
SA did not win the division last year, NO did. LA was 1, NO 2, SA 3, Utah 4, Hou 5. If Utah had finished with the same record as SA, then Utah would have been the 3rd seed and San Antonio the 4th, but Utah finished two games behind SA.
Regardless how it plays out - that is too early to tell, which one of the following scenarios would you guys prefer? A) a higher seed (2 or 3) but difficult first round (say Jazz), and Spurs as your potential second round opponent; B) a lower seed (4) but easier first round while having to meet the Lakers in the second Round. I know the worst case (knock on wood) would be getting the 4th seed and playing Utah for the first round. The best? 1) LA 2) Rox 3) Nuts 4) Spurs 5) Jazz 6) NO 7) Blazzers 8) Mavs That would put LA, Spurs and Jazz in the same half. It's debatable what 6-8 should be.
our records last year all are on the same page. the problem is people aren't comprehending that LAST YEAR THERE WAS NO TIE WITH ANY DIVISION LEADERS. The division leaders won outright and no one, from seeds 1-5, tied with a division leader to put perspective on last year's Playoff determination. this is a new set of circumstances and I agree with Scribo, the new provision seems to be as new this year as any rule I've seen prior. the other confusion seems to be where Houston has finished in the last few seasons. in 05, we were the legitimate 5 seed without HCA in 07, we were the 4th best in the West with the 5 seed and HCA in 08, we were the 4th best in the West with the 5 seed and HCA
