Eastern Division W-L records

[Lurker]

We could look at your beloved Sixers the same way.  They are 15-14 against the west and split with the Lakers.  They are 6-10 against the 2-9 seeded teams in the west.  And 8-3 against the bottom 6 teams...and 6 of those wins were against the 3 worse teams in the west (sac, clips, memphis).

Very poor comparison.  DiLeo Sixers are much better then the Mo Cheeks Sixers.

So you seem to think...

DiLeo is 12-11 vs the west and Cheeks was 4-3.

DiLeo vs the top 9 west teams:  7-9   vs the bottom 6   5-2
Cheeks                                   0-2                           4-1

Doesn't seem to matter who the coach is...

[Reality]

DiLeo vs the top 9 west teams:  7-9   vs the bottom 6   5-2
Cheeks                                   0-2                           4-1

Doesn't seem to matter who the coach is...

Mo was 0-2 vs the Wests top 9 and i predict the reeming would have continued.
DiLeo 7-9 vs top West, that's not too shabby considering he just took over and they had to go thru the Eltie Brand injury scenario.

In March the 6ers are 2-1 vs West Playoffers and 8-4 overall. 
They be gellin.

[Lurker]

They be gellin.

Good thing they play in the WEAK east so they will make the playoffs.  In the west they would be battling for 10th place.

[Reality]

They be gellin.

Good thing they play in the WEAK east so they will make the playoffs.  In the west they would be battling for 10th place.

Or they'd be fattening up their record with a steady diet of Clippers, Sactown, Golden State and thus possibly become a playoff team.
You just don't get it.

[Lurker]

They be gellin.

Good thing they play in the WEAK east so they will make the playoffs.  In the west they would be battling for 10th place.

Or they'd be fattening up their record with a steady diet of Clippers, Sactown, Golden State and thus possibly become a playoff team.
You just don't get it.

Well, seeing that they are 1-1 vs GS, OKC and Minnesota I fail to see them "fattening" their records considerably.  Then we could talk about the "slimming" of their record against SA, Hous, NO, Den, Utah, Port, etc.

But we could take another approach.  Right now the Sixers are 16-14 (.533) vs the west and 21-19 (.525) vs the east.  So using those winning % they would end up winning 28 (52*.533) conference games and 16 (30*.525) non-conference games.  That is a total of 44 games.  Not a playoff team in the west.

[Reality]

Or we could take a look at Gregor Popavichs first 50 games with the Spurs.

[rickortreat]

They be gellin.

Good thing they play in the WEAK east so they will make the playoffs.  In the west they would be battling for 10th place.

Or they'd be fattening up their record with a steady diet of Clippers, Sactown, Golden State and thus possibly become a playoff team.
You just don't get it.

Well, seeing that they are 1-1 vs GS, OKC and Minnesota I fail to see them "fattening" their records considerably.  Then we could talk about the "slimming" of their record against SA, Hous, NO, Den, Utah, Port, etc.

But we could take another approach.  Right now the Sixers are 16-14 (.533) vs the west and 21-19 (.525) vs the east.  So using those winning % they would end up winning 28 (52*.533) conference games and 16 (30*.525) non-conference games.  That is a total of 44 games.  Not a playoff team in the west.

Except that if the Sixers were out West they'd be focused on strategies to beat the teams out there.  You can bet they wouldn't be dropping games to Golden State if they were in the same conference.  No one worries about scouting these teams when they play them twice a season.

Besides. You still don't get how much weaker the bottom of the West is.  Try going to ESPN and looking up the odds for teams to make the playoffs or win the lottery.  You will find that there are 6 teams in the West with a better than 2.5% chance of finishing with the worst record in the league. In the East there is ONE! 

The West is the weaker conference, repeat after me, the West is the weaker conference.....

[Lurker]

They be gellin.

Good thing they play in the WEAK east so they will make the playoffs.  In the west they would be battling for 10th place.

Or they'd be fattening up their record with a steady diet of Clippers, Sactown, Golden State and thus possibly become a playoff team.
You just don't get it.

Well, seeing that they are 1-1 vs GS, OKC and Minnesota I fail to see them "fattening" their records considerably.  Then we could talk about the "slimming" of their record against SA, Hous, NO, Den, Utah, Port, etc.

But we could take another approach.  Right now the Sixers are 16-14 (.533) vs the west and 21-19 (.525) vs the east.  So using those winning % they would end up winning 28 (52*.533) conference games and 16 (30*.525) non-conference games.  That is a total of 44 games.  Not a playoff team in the west.

Except that if the Sixers were out West they'd be focused on strategies to beat the teams out there.  You can bet they wouldn't be dropping games to Golden State if they were in the same conference.  No one worries about scouting these teams when they play them twice a season.

Besides. You still don't get how much weaker the bottom of the West is.  Try going to ESPN and looking up the odds for teams to make the playoffs or win the lottery.  You will find that there are 6 teams in the West with a better than 2.5% chance of finishing with the worst record in the league. In the East there is ONE! 

The West is the weaker conference, repeat after me, the West is the weaker conference.....

That's is what you don't understand.  They have lower records because they get to play teams with .600 records 4 times each instead of a bunch of sub .500 teams that can't play consistent enough to win half their games.  If the east is so strong why does it have to playoff teams with losing records?  If the east was so strong then why do they have only 3 teams with 10+% chance of making the finals and the west has 5 (if you want to use the odds table as proof)? 

Do you honestly believe a Cle/Atl/Philly/Det bracket is tougher than a LA/Den/NO/Dallas one?

Or that Orl/Bos/Miami/Chi is tougher than SA/Hous/Port/Utah?

 

[Reality]

Do you honestly believe a Cle/Atl/Philly/Det bracket is tougher than a LA/Den/NO/Dallas one?

No.  But i believe its much closer then you do.  The Wests playoff teams combined are better then the Easts, yes.

Or that Orl/Bos/Miami/Chi is tougher than SA/Hous/Port/Utah?

Not that much difference.  Orl and Boston can hang with any of the aforementioned.  Utah is tough but can't win on the road, at least not deep in the playoffs.  Chi is much weaker then the others, yes.

Can SA overcome Popazit?  Its getting harder and harder.  Its conceivable Pop could get worked well before Phil has a chance to own him again.

[rickortreat]

They be gellin.

Good thing they play in the WEAK east so they will make the playoffs.  In the west they would be battling for 10th place.

Or they'd be fattening up their record with a steady diet of Clippers, Sactown, Golden State and thus possibly become a playoff team.
You just don't get it.

Well, seeing that they are 1-1 vs GS, OKC and Minnesota I fail to see them "fattening" their records considerably.  Then we could talk about the "slimming" of their record against SA, Hous, NO, Den, Utah, Port, etc.

But we could take another approach.  Right now the Sixers are 16-14 (.533) vs the west and 21-19 (.525) vs the east.  So using those winning % they would end up winning 28 (52*.533) conference games and 16 (30*.525) non-conference games.  That is a total of 44 games.  Not a playoff team in the west.

Except that if the Sixers were out West they'd be focused on strategies to beat the teams out there.  You can bet they wouldn't be dropping games to Golden State if they were in the same conference.  No one worries about scouting these teams when they play them twice a season.

Besides. You still don't get how much weaker the bottom of the West is.  Try going to ESPN and looking up the odds for teams to make the playoffs or win the lottery.  You will find that there are 6 teams in the West with a better than 2.5% chance of finishing with the worst record in the league. In the East there is ONE! 

The West is the weaker conference, repeat after me, the West is the weaker conference.....

That's is what you don't understand.  They have lower records because they get to play teams with .600 records 4 times each instead of a bunch of sub .500 teams that can't play consistent enough to win half their games.  If the east is so strong why does it have to playoff teams with losing records?  If the east was so strong then why do they have only 3 teams with 10+% chance of making the finals and the west has 5 (if you want to use the odds table as proof)? 

Do you honestly believe a Cle/Atl/Philly/Det bracket is tougher than a LA/Den/NO/Dallas one?

Or that Orl/Bos/Miami/Chi is tougher than SA/Hous/Port/Utah?

 

I think that with Orlando, Boston, Miami, Chicago is significantly better than SA, Houston, Portland and Utah.  Boston and Orlando are elite teams with win totals over 50 with 10 games left. None of the WC teams in that bracket have 50 wins now or a chance at 60 by the end of the season.

With the other bracket, I think LA an Cleveland are a wash, 1 and 1A by their records. Atlanta, Phila., and Detroit are less well regarded, but these are teams in transition, and old Championship team in decline and two young teams who haven't proven anything. In both instances, the 1 and 1A are heavily favored. 

So you are saying the West teams with the bad records are being beaten up on by good teams, and that explains their records.  That's one explanation.  The other one is that these teams really SUCK! It is abnormal for so many teams to be so far below the level of competition in a Conference, but it can happen. Washington is the worst team in the East, but they've had serious injury problems.  They will get better long before any of these WC dregs rise from the bottom.  Sacramento is a dysfunctional franchise now and so are the Clippers. Memphis and OKC are new franchises that have to start building and Minnesota is retooling from the Garnett trade. Does anyone really think Golden State is a good franchise?  Even the Knicks are better!

If the East playoff teams aren't comparable with their Western Counterparts, how does Phila. beat LA and Portland in their own buildings?  And that's the 5th seed in the East we're talking about here, just a middling team that no one takes seriously as a contender. 

[Lurker]

Can SA overcome Popazit?  Its getting harder and harder.  Its conceivable Pop could get worked well before Phil has a chance to own him again.

Only box score reading fans would ask that type of question.

Or is your question really:  Because the west is so much tougher than the east is there a chance the Spurs could lose in the first round?

[Lurker]

If the East playoff teams aren't comparable with their Western Counterparts, how does Phila. beat LA and Portland in their own buildings?  And that's the 5th seed in the East we're talking about here, just a middling team that no one takes seriously as a contender. 

Because as a non-conference matchup the Lakers & Blazers didn't focus on trying to beat Philly.

Sounds real intelligent now, doesn't it?




Or should I use the odds generator as my support...if Philly was so good then why is their chances of making the finals lower than the 9th seed in the west?

[Reality]

Can SA overcome Popazit?  Its getting harder and harder.  Its conceivable Pop could get worked well before Phil has a chance to own him again.

Only box score reading fans would ask that type of question.

Or is your question really:  Because the west is so much tougher than the east is there a chance the Spurs could lose in the first round?

Only a super intelligent Realist would ask that.
Keep drinking the Pop kool aid.  3 HOF starters and the dipstick hasn't repeated nor done better then 4 in 12.

[rickortreat]

If the East playoff teams aren't comparable with their Western Counterparts, how does Phila. beat LA and Portland in their own buildings?  And that's the 5th seed in the East we're talking about here, just a middling team that no one takes seriously as a contender. 

Because as a non-conference matchup the Lakers & Blazers didn't focus on trying to beat Philly.

Sounds real intelligent now, doesn't it?




Or should I use the odds generator as my support...if Philly was so good then why is their chances of making the finals lower than the 9th seed in the west?

Because for Philly to get to the finals they would have to beat two of the three elite teams in the East to get there.  The ninth seed, if it manages to get in, only has to beat one elite team.

And, I'd agree that the Lakers and Blazers didn't get up for Phila. they way they would Boston or an inter-divisional rival. If they are really that much better, however, they shouldn't loose to a middle of the road team from the weaker conference.  The Lakers game you could excuse since it was very close and took a game-ending shot. The Portland game went to OT, but once they got there, Portland didn't look like they belonged, they don't know how to close out games like San Antonio. Portland is going to be early round fodder for some other team in the West IMO.

[Lurker]

If the East playoff teams aren't comparable with their Western Counterparts, how does Phila. beat LA and Portland in their own buildings?  And that's the 5th seed in the East we're talking about here, just a middling team that no one takes seriously as a contender. 

Because as a non-conference matchup the Lakers & Blazers didn't focus on trying to beat Philly.

Sounds real intelligent now, doesn't it?




Or should I use the odds generator as my support...if Philly was so good then why is their chances of making the finals lower than the 9th seed in the west?

Because for Philly to get to the finals they would have to beat two of the three elite teams in the East to get there.  The ninth seed, if it manages to get in, only has to beat one elite team.

And, I'd agree that the Lakers and Blazers didn't get up for Phila. they way they would Boston or an inter-divisional rival. If they are really that much better, however, they shouldn't loose to a middle of the road team from the weaker conference.  The Lakers game you could excuse since it was very close and took a game-ending shot. The Portland game went to OT, but once they got there, Portland didn't look like they belonged, they don't know how to close out games like San Antonio. Portland is going to be early round fodder for some other team in the West IMO.

And the only reason Atlanta won't be early round fodder is because there are only 3 legitimate teams in the east.  So they get to play one of the other mediocre middle of the NBA teams that populate the east.

So in the east there are at most only 2 tough series for a team to get to the finals.  And for Cleveland make that ONE tough series - in the ECF.  However the Lakers will have to face 3 tough series (Dallas is tougher out than any of the lower seeds in the east) to get to the finals.  But the east is stronger.