Talk:NBA playoffs

message: Help!!  Is there an Admin out there who can change the name of this article to "NBA Playoffs" (with the "p" capitalized). Wiccan Quagga 03:02, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Move

message: The criticism section does not make sense. If cavs and bulls have same records on the 17th and then bulls lose on the 18th while the cavs win, the cavs will have a better record. So what is the problem. Maybe it should be clarified.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.227.129.98 (talk) 22:45, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Criticism section

message: this are? Really? 03:54, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  ein? 

message: What are the criteria for awarding home-court advantage in the NBA finals if the two teams have the same record and split the season series 1-1? Juve2000 (talk) 17:31, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Point differential between the two games of the finalists. –Howard the Duck 15:09, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Home Court Advantage in NBA Finals

message: One criticism I have heard and read about was the fact that if a significant disparity exists between conferences, there can exist teams missing the playoffs in the stronger conference while teams with weaker records in the other conference still advance to the playoffs.  This is especially egregious if the qualifying teams in the weaker conference have sub-.500 records while the non-qualifying teams in the stronger conference have records at or above .500.  At one point in the middle of this season alone, there existed as many as three such teams in each conference.
After the 2007-08 season, for example, the Philadelphia 76ers and the Atlanta Hawks finished with sub-.500 records yet were seeded 7th and 8th, respectively, in the Eastern Conference, while the Golden State Warriors and the Portland Trail Blazers each finished with better records, both above .500 (Golden State at 48-34, or .585), yet failed to qualify for the playoffs in the deep Western Conference.  The next season (2008-09), the Phoenix Suns finished at 46-36, or .561 yet missed the playoffs in the West, while the Detroit Pistons finished at 39-43 yet earned the 8th seed.  While the '08 Hawks at least managed to force seven games against the eventual 2007-08 NBA Champion Boston Celtics, and the 76ers lasted for six games against the Eastern Conference finalist Detroit Pistons, the '09 Pistons were swept in four games against the top-seeded Cleveland Cavaliers.  
J.A. Adande once purposed selecting the top sixteen teams regardless of conference on Around the Horn, but I remember this was before the 2007 format change.  This idea and its variations, such as a system similar to that of the MLS Cup Playoffs, are still floated around today.  Other ideas include reseeding, like for the Stanley Cup playoffs.
DaDoc540 (talk) 07:59, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Additional criticism to current playoff format: conference disparity 

message: "team with the better record, not the better seeding, division winners are guaranteed no better than a de-facto five seed"
This is not true. The editor is confusing seeding with home-court advantage. The seeding determines the placement in the single-elimination bracket. Home-court advantage is determined slightly differently from seeding. It seems that the editor is using the term "de facto" incorrectly. De-facto seeding is seeding. Home court is home court. "De facto seeding" means seeding. Not home court. This is not complicated. Seeding and home court are not determined by the same criteria in the NBA. Let's not mix the terminology; this is an encyclopedia, we don't have to introduce claims that what it is is what it isn't. There is no reference to support the editor's use of "de facto seeding".
"No better" is also used incorrectly.
"Division winners are guaranteed no worse than a fourth seed." That's the simple statement of the facts, as supported by the official playoff seeding rules of the NBA.
Discuss? Otherwise I will just change it. 
139.68.134.1 (talk) 17:38, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seeding and home court: terminology. 

message: The appearances table currently lists every variation of every franchise name making the table kinda hard to read. I think it would make more sense to list the current team name in a single column and perhaps have a different column that lists other names that franchise has appeared under. Zaqwert (talk) 14:06, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Appearances table hard to read 

message: There are a lot of things wrong with the bracket in the format section... It appears to come from the 2004 playoffs, but it never says that anywhere. Also, the first round series in the eastern conference only go to 3 games, when they were really best of 7. The bracket also shows the Spurs beating the Lakers 4-1 but the Lakers still advancing (the Lakers actually won 4-2). I can't figure out how to edit the template. Can anyone help me with this? Thanks! Rjpg12 (talk) 05:37, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bracket template 

message: Can you add a page that talks about the conference semifinals? I want to see more information on it. I am Rjsb0192 (talk) 14:38, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  NBA CONFERENCE SEMIFINALS