Re: The idiocy of three divisions

Alson Wong wrote:

"Dewey" <dewey3kNOSPAM@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:Xns97A8765D9F995dewey3kNOSPAMgmailco@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

So, Denver can finish, at best, one game ahead of the Lakers. But they get
seeded 4 spots higher because they play in the shittiest division in the
league? Makes sense to me.

Even better, the Clippers and Grizzlies have an incentive to lose when they play each other tomorrow to get the sixth seed and HCA against Denver instead of the fifth seed and a matchup against Dallas. There was no good reason to go to three divisions instead of two. As MB mentioned, three divisions make more sense if there's an unbalanced schedule, as there is in baseball.

Though I don't like the way it's being employed with regard to playoff priviledges, I like the 3-division alignment because in order to have a healthy league, you need as many teams as possible feeling that they have a shot at SOMETHING, be it a division championship or the playoffs in general. I don't want to see one big 30 team glob in my sports page, and even two 15-team conferences need to be broken up. Now, as it happens, I also happen to like symmetry, and eight teams in one division is over my limit. But, these are my own personal preferences.

I'd prefer to see them make the 3-division thing work by tuning up the schedule and the playoff rules. For one, I think that this Clipper-Grizz thing situation would be of less impact if the division winners were all given homecourt over the lower seeds. Seems unfair to some, but hey, they won a division, and the truly better team can just go and win on the road. As it is, the Clips and Grizz players aren't just playing for an easier matchup, but you've got the organizations behind them feeling a vested interest ($$$$$$$) in losing to get an extra home game. Take that factor out of it.

Besides, there are other things in sports that are far less fair than idea above. Just look at how they choose the home team for the World Series.