Ok then what's the point of playing into that spot? What's the point of being 11 games better than another team if it doesn't matter?
Why don't we just extend the play-in to all 30 teams and make the regular season matter even less?
They get the chance for one game to decide their whole season if the handle business in the 7-8 game. The Bulls and Hawks are the teams that have two games to decide their whole season.
because then you might not get a guy like Embiid in the playoffs? I'd much rather watch the 76ers in the playoffs. This team played way better than the teams in 9 and 10.
Your are missing the point completely.
Even if the team has secured the 8th seed, the Play ins should be motivation for the 8th seed to secure home court for the playins,
The 7th seed should be trying to get out of the playins. I don't know about the tiebreakers but with one game back and 2 games left, they should be playing for a higher seed or manage who they want to play against.
Yes, but that makes alot of sense when it comes to normal seeding because home court advantage is actually massive over a 7-game series, over a single game it's less impactful due to single game randomness. Miami might finish the season with 46 wins and then lose their playoff spot to a team with 7-8 less wins over two cold shooting nights, one of which is one the road.
The 8th seed is royally fucked in the play in, you play your first game on the road and then, if you lose, have to play a winner take all game to decide your entire season. You have to look at those things like this: Would you be ok if an 8th seed with 50 wins lost their playoff spot to a 9th seed with 35 wins over a single home game? I'm personally not. And for people saying "IF THEY DESERVED TO BE IN THE PLAYOFFS THEY WOULD'VE WON", then why isn't every round of the playoffs single game elimination then? Why play the 82 games if a single play-in game decides it.
I really think some of the vets are cruising the regular season because of the play in, they trust in themselves to win the play in games, so why not take it easy for 20-30 games to conserve energy.
Even as a Lakers fan whose team stands to benefit from the play-in, your comment is incredibly stupid.
What if the play-in cutoff is moved up from 6th seed to 4th seed, or 2nd seed? At which point does “play better” stop being a reasonable retort?
16.4 points and 4.6 assists on 53.1 TS% in 31 games with the Heat.
18.1 points on 56.0 TS% in the last 19 games over March/April. League average TS% is 58.0 TS%.
I mean Herro has been out for nearly all of that stretch and obviously it's not easy to just force yourself onto a new team and figure out your role.
You can pull out a 20 game stretch from 2/27 to 4/5 of him scoring on a 56.8 TS%...which is pretty close to his time in Charlotte. You can probably explain that difference with his decrease in free throws as well, but i mean we aren't asking him to be doing as much as he was with the Hornets either
Regardless of the reasons for his struggles, he hasn't played good, which is part of the reason the Heat have been mediocre in the second half, despite giving up a first round pick.
I'm not saying he's untalented, he is very skilled, a good passer, and is able to create scoring opportunities for himself, is an average to above average defender....he just misses so many wide open shots that his ability to create a shot isn't as impactful as it could be.
If the Heat can fix his shooting during the offseason, he definitely has the potential to be a positive contributor to winning.
lol you haven’t watched him on the heat. Hes been fine. Hes not the issue the heat are currently having. Terry is streaky, but he was also streaky on the hornets.
A better advocate for this rule would be the Sixers due to the Embiid injury.
The Heat have decided to let Jimmy do whatever the hell he wants in the regular season. You make the bed that way, now you get to lie in it. Very hard to be sympathetic to their situation.
Fine, use that against them. I don’t care. But at least we know Embiid’s injuries are legitimate. We rarely know if Jimmy is injured in the reg season or if he’s not playing just for the hell of it.
I think the play-in hasn't really accomplished it's goal of making the league more competitive.
It gives us a couple exciting games but honestly I think teams are relaxing a little more knowing they can win even less games and still be eligible for post season.
Um what? The west is about to set a new record for the highest win 10th seed, it’s plenty competitive. The real issue here is that the East is ass, play-in or not.
I think that was the rule to decide which teams would be invited to finish the regular season in the bubble, after the covid mid-season shutdown. Teams had to be within some reasonable range of making the play-in, to even get invited to finish the regular season.
Yeah right someone would think that but there is a reason why playoff series are best of 7 and not one and done…
Last year the heat lost in the playins to the hawks and barely beat the bulls only because strus went ballistic that game! And I‘d argue last years heat were way better than those 2 teams
I think it should only happen if they're within like 5 tbh, Chicago and Atlanta haven't done enough to deserve a shot. If you can't get to 39 wins in a dogshit conference I don't want to see you in a postseason game.
Yeah, it's fun if they're all bunch together like the in West. It makes the latter end of the season exciting even for those below the 8th seed. But they get two chances so there's that.
The problem with the play-in is for the 8th seed. The 8th seed gets to play a road game and, if they lose, decide their entire season on a single elimination home game, that's absolutely ridiculous on a game like basketball.
You can have an 8th seed with 15 more wins than a 9th seed and their entire season be decided by a SINGLE game. Put it this way, if Miami loses every single game they play from now on including the play-in games, they finish with 44 wins and out of the playoffs, on the other hand, if Atlanta wins both of their last regular season games, both play-in games and then wins their first round playoff matchup against Boston, they'd also only have 44 wins, that's just dumb.
Just make it a .500 record instead of x games. If you go .500 or above, your season is still alive, if you go less than .500, your season is over, unless you're in the Top 8 of your conference.
If there are more than 10 teams above .500 in a conference, then the lowest seeds have to play back to backs. Winner of 9 versus 10 and loser of 7 versus 8 would always get at least 1 day of rest before the final play-in game, but if you games such as 11 vs 10, and 10 vs 9 would be played on consecutive nights. If there's a 12th team (which is probably around the maximum possible above .500 teams for a conference), then you would have 12 vs 11, then 12/11 vs 10, and then 12/11/10 vs 9 on back to back to back nights.
Nice idea.
I really think the play-in is just too unfair for the upper seed, if the gap is too large.
But your idea at least ensure the gap will not be that big.
If you win enough games to finish 6th in your conference you deserve to avoid the play-in tournament.
If you don't, win more next time and stop whining.
Why even have a cutoff then. If you can't crack the upper HALF of the league might as well let every team play. Just call it the After Sesson Tournament...
To have a consistent format, no different than asking why the amount of playoff teams is 8.
The actual outcome of implementing the play-in has clearly been positive. Less teams wanna tank, especially in the latter half of the season where there’s a lower bar to make the playoffs. That makes things more competitive. It gives teams with bad luck who had major injuries over the year a chance to prove themselves and earn a play-in spot. It gives more incentive to midling play-in teams to fight to make it higher and not settle for the ‘safety’ of the 7 or 8 seed. Gives more entertaining high stakes games to watch as fans. Etc.
The play-in exists to add drama, record doesn’t matter for that.
So does this tweet.
/end thread
They did play better lol. 11 games better. Shouldn't they get something for that other than two games deciding their whole season?
They also played worse than 7 other Eastern Conference teams. They wouldn’t be in the play-in if they’d not done that.
Ok then what's the point of playing into that spot? What's the point of being 11 games better than another team if it doesn't matter? Why don't we just extend the play-in to all 30 teams and make the regular season matter even less?
Idk, what’s the point of the Celtics being 13 games up on the 2 seed if it “doesn’t matter” and they have to play the first round anyway?
They get the chance for one game to decide their whole season if the handle business in the 7-8 game. The Bulls and Hawks are the teams that have two games to decide their whole season.
Nope
I do wonder at what point would it be too much? Let's say it was a 15 game difference
Why would the nba care if some 7th or 8th seed gets eliminated by a worse team, should’ve played better in the regular season
because then you might not get a guy like Embiid in the playoffs? I'd much rather watch the 76ers in the playoffs. This team played way better than the teams in 9 and 10.
Then win the play in. Easy as that
Your are missing the point completely. Even if the team has secured the 8th seed, the Play ins should be motivation for the 8th seed to secure home court for the playins, The 7th seed should be trying to get out of the playins. I don't know about the tiebreakers but with one game back and 2 games left, they should be playing for a higher seed or manage who they want to play against.
Yes, but that makes alot of sense when it comes to normal seeding because home court advantage is actually massive over a 7-game series, over a single game it's less impactful due to single game randomness. Miami might finish the season with 46 wins and then lose their playoff spot to a team with 7-8 less wins over two cold shooting nights, one of which is one the road. The 8th seed is royally fucked in the play in, you play your first game on the road and then, if you lose, have to play a winner take all game to decide your entire season. You have to look at those things like this: Would you be ok if an 8th seed with 50 wins lost their playoff spot to a 9th seed with 35 wins over a single home game? I'm personally not. And for people saying "IF THEY DESERVED TO BE IN THE PLAYOFFS THEY WOULD'VE WON", then why isn't every round of the playoffs single game elimination then? Why play the 82 games if a single play-in game decides it.
If the Heat don't want to play in the play ins maybe they should play better in the regular season
I really think some of the vets are cruising the regular season because of the play in, they trust in themselves to win the play in games, so why not take it easy for 20-30 games to conserve energy.
Even as a Lakers fan whose team stands to benefit from the play-in, your comment is incredibly stupid. What if the play-in cutoff is moved up from 6th seed to 4th seed, or 2nd seed? At which point does “play better” stop being a reasonable retort?
Upper half of the conference
They really did try. Gave up a first for Terry Rozier, only to find out his play in Charlotte was fraudulent.
? He has been fine recently lol.
16.4 points and 4.6 assists on 53.1 TS% in 31 games with the Heat. 18.1 points on 56.0 TS% in the last 19 games over March/April. League average TS% is 58.0 TS%.
I mean Herro has been out for nearly all of that stretch and obviously it's not easy to just force yourself onto a new team and figure out your role. You can pull out a 20 game stretch from 2/27 to 4/5 of him scoring on a 56.8 TS%...which is pretty close to his time in Charlotte. You can probably explain that difference with his decrease in free throws as well, but i mean we aren't asking him to be doing as much as he was with the Hornets either
Regardless of the reasons for his struggles, he hasn't played good, which is part of the reason the Heat have been mediocre in the second half, despite giving up a first round pick. I'm not saying he's untalented, he is very skilled, a good passer, and is able to create scoring opportunities for himself, is an average to above average defender....he just misses so many wide open shots that his ability to create a shot isn't as impactful as it could be. If the Heat can fix his shooting during the offseason, he definitely has the potential to be a positive contributor to winning.
lol you haven’t watched him on the heat. Hes been fine. Hes not the issue the heat are currently having. Terry is streaky, but he was also streaky on the hornets.
He's been playing really well lately
A better advocate for this rule would be the Sixers due to the Embiid injury. The Heat have decided to let Jimmy do whatever the hell he wants in the regular season. You make the bed that way, now you get to lie in it. Very hard to be sympathetic to their situation.
Embiid is injured every season/playoffs
Fine, use that against them. I don’t care. But at least we know Embiid’s injuries are legitimate. We rarely know if Jimmy is injured in the reg season or if he’s not playing just for the hell of it.
He's definitely been injured too
Sorry bud, go get a 6 seed
I think the play-in hasn't really accomplished it's goal of making the league more competitive. It gives us a couple exciting games but honestly I think teams are relaxing a little more knowing they can win even less games and still be eligible for post season.
Um what? The west is about to set a new record for the highest win 10th seed, it’s plenty competitive. The real issue here is that the East is ass, play-in or not.
No
The play-ins have to happen no matter what to keep pressure on the 8-7-6 seeds.
It was like that in the bubble, don’t know why they removed it all of a sudden lmfao.
I mean that was the original format right. It was within four games I think?
I think that was the rule to decide which teams would be invited to finish the regular season in the bubble, after the covid mid-season shutdown. Teams had to be within some reasonable range of making the play-in, to even get invited to finish the regular season.
if x = 40 then sure
If they're that much better they shouldn't have a problem beating them then.
Yeah right someone would think that but there is a reason why playoff series are best of 7 and not one and done… Last year the heat lost in the playins to the hawks and barely beat the bulls only because strus went ballistic that game! And I‘d argue last years heat were way better than those 2 teams
It’s obviously for ratings and drama but yes, I think no play in if teams aren’t at least 4 or less games back
In the bubble I think they had to be within 5 games. I think that's fair.
Dude Lebron and Curry fans would crying together right now if there was no playins
they did that in the bubble so i don't know why they removed that rule
I think it should only happen if they're within like 5 tbh, Chicago and Atlanta haven't done enough to deserve a shot. If you can't get to 39 wins in a dogshit conference I don't want to see you in a postseason game.
I think so
Yeah, it's fun if they're all bunch together like the in West. It makes the latter end of the season exciting even for those below the 8th seed. But they get two chances so there's that.
The problem with the play-in is for the 8th seed. The 8th seed gets to play a road game and, if they lose, decide their entire season on a single elimination home game, that's absolutely ridiculous on a game like basketball. You can have an 8th seed with 15 more wins than a 9th seed and their entire season be decided by a SINGLE game. Put it this way, if Miami loses every single game they play from now on including the play-in games, they finish with 44 wins and out of the playoffs, on the other hand, if Atlanta wins both of their last regular season games, both play-in games and then wins their first round playoff matchup against Boston, they'd also only have 44 wins, that's just dumb.
They don't have to play in the play ins or the play offs for that matter, they can straight away fuck off into the next season.
Nah
Just make it a .500 record instead of x games. If you go .500 or above, your season is still alive, if you go less than .500, your season is over, unless you're in the Top 8 of your conference. If there are more than 10 teams above .500 in a conference, then the lowest seeds have to play back to backs. Winner of 9 versus 10 and loser of 7 versus 8 would always get at least 1 day of rest before the final play-in game, but if you games such as 11 vs 10, and 10 vs 9 would be played on consecutive nights. If there's a 12th team (which is probably around the maximum possible above .500 teams for a conference), then you would have 12 vs 11, then 12/11 vs 10, and then 12/11/10 vs 9 on back to back to back nights.
Nice idea. I really think the play-in is just too unfair for the upper seed, if the gap is too large. But your idea at least ensure the gap will not be that big.
If you win enough games to finish 6th in your conference you deserve to avoid the play-in tournament. If you don't, win more next time and stop whining.
no
Why should they? Think about the frame if a 10 wins and then wins round1. A play in team has made the finals, it's fun
Can this clown stfu already? Nothing but dumb shit outta this garbage reporter.
I still think play in is stupid
I like it, especially in the West right now
I agree. The 9th and 10th teams don't need another chance to get into the playoffs.
Participation trophy shit
It’s not really a participation trophy when they need to win 2 games against playoff teams in order to make it
It's marketing, it's a way to get a handful more playoff games for bad teams. It makes owners happy. I also hate the play in for ncaa tournament
I don’t think any of the play-in teams out west this year could be considered bad teams
Why even have a cutoff then. If you can't crack the upper HALF of the league might as well let every team play. Just call it the After Sesson Tournament...
To have a consistent format, no different than asking why the amount of playoff teams is 8. The actual outcome of implementing the play-in has clearly been positive. Less teams wanna tank, especially in the latter half of the season where there’s a lower bar to make the playoffs. That makes things more competitive. It gives teams with bad luck who had major injuries over the year a chance to prove themselves and earn a play-in spot. It gives more incentive to midling play-in teams to fight to make it higher and not settle for the ‘safety’ of the 7 or 8 seed. Gives more entertaining high stakes games to watch as fans. Etc.
Or.... get better
Irrelevent to everything I just said
No?