re: SB Nation's NBA divison realignment

Bulls get 5 games vs bucks and wolves. Rockets get 5 games vs spurs and mavs. Huge advantage to the bulls here in securing home court. This proposal makes it more fair for fringe western playoff teams and more unfair for the Houstons Dallas Spurs of the league.

How about just getting rid of divisions altogether?

Pels would run the SE

quote:

---

If you can't make the top 8 you don't have an argument

---

You are retarded as usual.

The Pels could be a top 5 seed in the East this year. Might not make the playoffs in the West.

See how that changes perceptions?

that 5 is only one more than the current 4 you already play. and then you get a lot more games against inferior opponents

quote:

---

1. You would play the two teams in your hub five times each. These hubs are denoted by the vertical lines in the map above. Most are extremely tight geographically, with a couple unavoidable exceptions. This is 10 games.

2. You would play the other three teams in your region four times each. This is 12 games, for a running total of 22.

3. You would play teams from two other regions three times each. This is 36 games, for a running total of 58.

4. You would play teams from the remaining two regions twice each. This is 24 games, for a running total of 82.

---

and i mean if they aren't good enough to be a top 16 seed then they don't deserve to get in, right? that's your argument, isn't it, you contradictory twat?

quote:

---

and then you get a lot more games against inferior opponents

---

not even close

Giving up 2 games with NOP and adding 2 games with OKC. You didn't think this through at all did you.

The argument last year was that it was unfair that a Phoenix with 48-34 sits at home because of how loaded the west was. But a <.500 team in the east get to go play. Remember, 49 wins for Dallas was 8th.

So Phoenix w/ that SOS went .585 (48-34) last year. In theory, harder SOS would have put them at a disadvantage, so based off percentages it'd be 46.89 wins.

46.89 wins would have still put them at 9th in the western conference. 46.89 wins would have put them at 5th in the East (4th was 48 wins for chicago) where they would have made the playoffs, even with a harder SOS.

Lets just look at the actual SOS and division and how it would look vs. the new SOS division

Phoenix went 8-8 (0.500) in their division last year:
Sacramento: 2-2
Golden State: 2-2
LA Lakers 3-1
LA Clippers 1-3

Suns vs. their new division
(5)Denver 4-0 (1.00) -> 5 wins
(5)OKC 2-1 (0.667) -> 3.34 wins
(4)Dallas 1-2 (0.334) -> 1.34 wins
(4)SAS 1-3 (0.250) -> 1 win
(4)Houston 1-2 (0.334) -> 1.34 wins

12.02-9.98 (0.546) win percentage in the new division
8-8 (0.500) win percentage in the old division
Or you can do it another way - old system they went:
6-1 vs. OKC/Denver = .857 x 10 = 8.571
3-7 vs. Dal/SA/HOU = .300 x 10 = 3.000
11.57-10.43 (.526) (that takes away the factor of wins/losses weighing too heavily based off reduction/addition of sample size)

So in division, they actually got better?

Assuming you rotate what division you play 2/3x a year, I'll just use the closest two regions for 3games/ea = 36 games total to make it easier.
Sacramento: 2-2 (.500) -> 1.5 wins
Portland: 3-1 (.750) -> 2.25 wins
Golden State: 2-2 (.500) -> 1.5 wins
LA Clippers: 1-3 (.250) -> 0.75 wins
LA Lakers: 3-1 (.750) -> 2.25 wins
Utah: 2-2 (.500) -> 1.5 wins
Miami: 0-2 (.000) -> 0 wins
Orlando: 2-0 (1.000) -> 3 wins
New Orleans: 4-0 (1.000) -> 3 wins
Charlotte: 2-0 (1.000) -> 3 wins
Atlanta: 2-0 (1.000) -> 3 wins
Memphis: 0-4 (0.000) -> 0 wins
Theoretical Total: 21.75-14.25 (.604)
Last year: 23-17 (.575)
other equation: 20.7-15.3

Now the last part: Far regions 2 games/ea = 24 games total
Minnesota: 2-1 (.667) -> 1.334 Wins
Milwaukee: 2-0 (1.00) -> 2 Wins
Chicago: 0-2 (0.00) -> 0 wins
Indiana: 2-0 (1.00) -> 2 wins
Detroit: 1-1 (0.500) -> 1 win
Cleveland: 1-1 (0.500) -> 1 win
Toronto: 2-0 (1.00) -> 2 wins
Boston: 2-0 (1.00) -> 2 wins
NYK: 1-1 (0.500) - 1 win
Brooklyn: 0-2 (0.00) -> 0 wins
Philly: 2-0 (1.00) -> 2 wins
Washington: 1-1 (.500) -> 1 win
Theoretical Total: 15.334-8.666 (.639)
Last year: 16-8 (.667)
other equation: 16-8 (.667)

New SOS Record: 49.1-32.9 (.599)
Old SOS Record: 48-34 (.585)
Other Equation: 48.3-33.7 (.589)

So really, the SOS change actually benefited Phoenix, gave them 1 more win, and the new playoff seeding system gave them a playoff seat.

Please tell me where Phoenix would have been opposed to this?

quote:

---

The reason why the keep the conferences is for TV.

They do not want a first round series with an East Coast team like the Celtics playing in Los Angeles at 11pm on the East Coast.

Bad for business

---

Is that why every fricking rockets - blazers playoff game last year whether it was in Houston or Portland started at 9:00 pm earliest? ??


I don't think this is true really. The east coast can go Frick itself. Get a high seed and then you'll get the time you want.

quote:

---

You did a lot of work for nothing. You can't multiply their percentage by the new opposing SOS. That dog don't hunt. That's lazy math.

---

How else would you predict outcomes? You gotta use simple stupid math because I don't have an algorithm off the top of my finger to run 100 sample sizes of games to get a more accurate percentage or depiction if said teams were supposed to play 100 times to reduce the SD and p-value. I have 2-4 games from last year to re-predict the outcomes.

I gave you two methods:
1. Lazy math which multiplied their cumulative win % vs. certain batches of opponents and grouped them together to reduce the standard deviation; higher sample size, lower SD.

i.e. Grouping said opponents OKC and Denver, who they played 7 total times last year and went 6-1 cumulatively, got the win % (.857) and multiplied that by 10 = 8.57 wins.

2. Actually broke down individual win %'s of Phoenix vs. their opponents which created a slightly more precise prediction, but not as accurate.

i.e. They went 3-1 vs an Portland last year. In the new system, they only play Portland 3 times. It'd be dumb to wipe out game 4 off the map, so using win % off those 4 games and converting it to 3 games would give me a better prediction.

By calculations, due to the way SBN had zoned it out, a lot of the east games stayed the same and didn't alter much (i.e. played milwaukee twice both years) and zones that were altered where they went 2->3, the win distribution was barely changed. Why? Because teams like orlando they went 2-0, whereas miami they went 0-2. That means between those 4 games, it was a .500 record, adding a game vs. each opponent (2 more), odds are, it yields similar results and it i

The SOS was changed 1.3% and the mathematical odds balanced itself out. It isn't selection bias by taking out teams they did poorly against (i.e. Miami) and converting those games to teams they did well against (i.e. Orlando) or vise versa to make them do well. If it was, the numbers would be skewed and the p-value would be greater than 0.05 (which correlates to a change that is greater than +/- 4.1 wins).

All because the SOS increased by 1.2% it doesn't mean they're going to drop from 48 wins to 40 wins or something because the schedule is harder. Your theory doesn't take into account or factor in how well phoenix did against the sample sizes.