Is there a realistic way that the teams can be reduced from 16 without losing money? I think too many teams make the playoffs. Currently both conferences have teams with losing records slated to make the playoffs. There are only 3-4 teams that really have a chance to win the whole thing.

Is it really that exciting to get the 7th or 8th spot in the playoffs? This isn't like MLB or the NFL where anyone can get hot and win.

It seems like it would be more exciting if less teams made the playoffs. However you can't do a first round bye because each round in the playoffs takes FOREVER. Is there a solution or do most people like the current format?

It's mid-February and I feel like the rest of the regular season is pretty meaningless because we already know who the contenders are.

Quote:

---

Is there a realistic way that the teams can be reduced from 16 without losing money? I think too many teams make the playoffs. Currently both conferences have teams with losing records slated to make the playoffs.

---

No, there isn't. The league makes stupid money from the playoffs, and it is part of their basketball related income calculation which determines the salary cap. Make the playoffs shorter, and the league collects less money, which means the salary cap drops, which means less money for the players. If the teams are going to make less money, and the players are going to less money, you can be sure that neither side will ever agree to it.

Quote:

---

There are only 3-4 teams that really have a chance to win the whole thing.

---

You're right. There was a pretty good report done on this, and it basically shows that the season is more or less decided within the first 40-50 games. Teams in the top couple of playoff spots around the All-Star break tend to keep those same spots through the rest of the season, and the top seeds typically win championships. Put those two together, and you can guess which 3-5 teams will win the title.

The schedule won't be reduced because it will lower income. See above. Less money for players, less money for teams. Why would either side agree to that?

Quote:

---

Is it really that exciting to get the 7th or 8th spot in the playoffs? This isn't like MLB or the NFL where anyone can get hot and win.

---

Ask Rockets/Mavs fans They have lots of experience being in the bottom tier of playoff teams.

Quote:

---

It seems like it would be more exciting if less teams made the playoffs. However you can't do a first round bye because each round in the playoffs takes FOREVER. Is there a solution or do most people like the current format?

---

You sort of answered your own question here. You can't reduce the number of teams because of how much money the league would lose, and you can't do BYE rounds for top seeds, both because you would screw those teams up giving them upwards of two weeks off, and because the schedule would flex entirely too much. Some teams would finish their series in 4 games, some in 7. Those three extra games equals a week worth of time.

Quote:

---

It's mid-February and I feel like the rest of the regular season is pretty meaningless because we already know who the contenders are.

---

Correct. But people still watch. The NBA has this **** down to a science. They wouldn't trot **** out there that people won't watch. If there is money to be made, they will capitalize on it. If it's a money losing proposition, they get rid of it.

I wished they'd just go back to the old way they did the first round - best 3 out of 5, four games a night, get it over in less than a week in most cases.

I agree that the first round needs to be quicker.

Frok said:

---

It's mid-February and I feel like the rest of the regular season is pretty meaningless because we already know who the contenders are.

---

To your point, ESPN's Tom Haberstroh did a story on how little the standings change after Jan. 20th.
Look, in the end, it's probably going to be the Warriors over the Cavs anyways, but everything picks up here at all star break.

A few weeks ago, almost all the teams that were in the playoffs last year (except the Warriors) were having 4-6, 5-5, or 6-4 records in their last 10 games. It was when LeBron did his rant that the Cavs weren't playing good enough. Which was true, but the majority of teams from last year's playoffs weren't playing well.

It has slowly picked up, and although I expect the top 3 WC teams to stay slotted where they are, I wouldn't be surprised if a small race develops between the Rockets and Spurs (unlikely though).

There is congestion at 4-6 that will be competitive, and now there are 3-6 teams playing for that 8th spot, I expect the team that gets 8th to be above .500.