Playoff Seeding Update

by Dave on Apr 1, 2009 11:16 AM PDT

After a couple days of inquiries and research (based on rumors floating around out there) and with some help from the great Henry Abbott of TrueHoop fame we have discovered that there was, indeed, a minor rule change put in at the beginning of this season which could affect playoff seeding.

The rule affects the tiebreaker system. It says basically that division winners win ties, regardless of head-to-head record or other criteria. So if two teams tie for 54 wins but one won their division and the second did not (Portland wins the Northwest but Houston comes in second in the Southwest, each with 54 wins) the first team would have the higher seed.

The other tiebreaking criteria follow as stated here, with the exception that the sixth tiebreaker is now point differential instead of points generated.

ESPN.com has an "If the Playoffs Started Today" page here that could be helpful, though the actual matchups are sure to change daily.

--Dave (blazersub@yahoo.com)

Tweet Comment 12 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Division winner tiebreak could come into play...

But only if Denver tanks, Spurs/Rockets both do good, and we tie for 3rd with one of them. Unlikely at best.

by Zaig on Apr 1, 2009 11:23 AM PDT reply actions

pretty stupid rule if you ask me

benefits the team in the weaker division.

by jksnake99 on Apr 1, 2009 11:45 AM PDT reply actions

only way the new tiebreak rule hurts us

is if we somehow finish 2nd in our division but tied for 3rd overall with Houston, SA, or both. Let’s say it’s Houston that wins the SW and has the same record as us, but we beat them next week. We would normally own the tiebreak (2-1 seasons series), but since they won the SW they would get the 3 seed and New Orleans and we would get the 4 seed and San Antonio. Ouch.

How did you guys win that?
"We scored enough points. We scored 107, they scored 105.
-Nate McMillan Postgame, 3/4/2009

by douglast on Apr 1, 2009 11:53 AM PDT reply actions

plus the 4 seed means a 2nd round date with the Lakers if you survive

this new rule would drastically drop our WCF odds in your (very plausible) scenario.

by jksnake99 on Apr 1, 2009 12:10 PM PDT up reply actions

Pffft

Beating 2 seed then 1 seed or 1 seed then 2 seed. No biggy either way!

by Zaig on Apr 1, 2009 1:55 PM PDT up reply actions

Thanks for the clarification Dave

I was thinking about a situation just like this and wondered why you didn’t cover it in your original post.

by tominhawaii on Apr 1, 2009 2:50 PM PDT reply actions

Seeding vs home court advantage

I understand that if a division winner finishes tied with a non-winner, the division winner will be the higher seed regardless of head-to-head. Also, any division winner will automatically be one of the top 4 seeds. BUT when it comes to the 7 games series, I’ve heard that a lower seed could still receive home court advantage against a higher seeded division winner, if that lower seed had the same record and a better head-to-head. In other words, a 5th seed non-division winner could have home court advantage against a 4th seed division winner! That seems strange, but isn’t it correct? (Also, what happens if the 4th seed and 5th seed are 2-2 in the head to head — does it move to conference record or does the 4th seed division winner get home court at that point?) Sorry to nitpick, but all this stuff could actually happen this year!

by Odenforce on Apr 1, 2009 3:48 PM PDT reply actions

Which is SOOOOOOOOOOOOO Blomming stupid

That a forth seed division winner doesn’t have home court over a lower seed. So the entire point of division winning is so that you make sure your in the top four seeds which means nothing because you could still not have home court advantage and thus it means nothing.

That just made my head hurt but if you can rap your head around it you realize it makes zero sense.

The Divisions are only there for asthetics. 3 divisions look nicer on paper than one big 15 team conference.

Good thing the NCAA rules committy is around so the NBA’s version doesn’t look quite as stupid.

by Blazersaurus on Apr 1, 2009 10:44 PM PDT up reply actions

What if both have the same record and both win their division. Then it goes by series and conference record?

by BRoyInThe4th on Apr 1, 2009 7:30 PM PDT reply actions

The next tiebreaker in that case

would be head-to-head record. After that record against conference teams.

—Dave

by Dave on Apr 1, 2009 8:03 PM PDT up reply actions

This whole division nonsense drives me insane.

I am sure the league does this because they want to artificially stoke particular kinds of rivalries. It ain’t working. As it is, by my count, we play four games/year against six of the ten intra-conference non-division teams.

I simply refuse to feel any more passion about Denver or Minnesota than I do about Sacramento or Golden State.

It’s all ridiculous marketing b.s. and playoff tweaks like this one are just inexcusable.

When I’m dictator, we go to two conferences, 15 teams each. Right after OKC moves back to Seattle.

by chnews on Apr 1, 2009 8:45 PM PDT reply actions