In alt.s****ts.basketball.nba.denver-nuggets on Fri, 13 Apr 2007 09:13:16
-0600 BobInBoulder wrote:
>
>"BobInBoulder" <binb@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>news:131t1n01a8efm86@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> "Fistpout Trebuchet" <humehnity@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> news:nrts13lstbc9sa8f8msrk0v5ukusl3cadn@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> In alt.s****ts.basketball.nba.denver-nuggets on Thu, 12 Apr 2007
12:06:14
>>> -0600 BobInBoulder wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Fistpout Trebuchet" <humehnity@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>>news:shps139drkiqcrgdmlmuihrqhmt07me1ru@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>> In alt.s****ts.basketball.nba.denver-nuggets on Thu, 12 Apr 2007
>>>>> 10:56:38
>>>>> -0600 Howard Brazee wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>I was looking at the seeding in the west, and I'm confused.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>1. Dallas = best record in the West, best record in the Southwest
>>>>>>2. Phoenix = 2nd best record in the West, best record in the Pacific
>>>>>>3. San Antonio = 3rd best record in the west, 2nd best in the
>>>>>>Southwest.
>>>>>>4. Utah, = 5th best record in the West, best record in the Northwest
>>>>>>5. Houston = 4th best record in the West, 3rd best in the Southwest.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Why is Utah seeded behind San Antonio and above Houston?
>>>>>
>>>>> Because they lead their division. The three division leaders plus
the
>>>>> best
>>>>> record that doesn't lead its division are guaranteed the top 4
seeds.
>>>>> SA >
>>>>> HOU, but UTA gets HCA automatically. This is new for this season.
>>>>>
>>>>> http://s****ts.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2537369
>>>>
>>>>Oh, I didn't see this before I posted. I just heard on the radio last
>>>>night
>>>>that Utah is losing it's homecourt advantage over Houston (and I'm
glad
>>>>the
>>>>Nuggets were able to help in that regard) so I don't think you are
right
>>>>with that last point.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'm pretty sure I'm right. Take a look at the official NBA standings,
>>> which
>>> show UTA as having clinched the NW Div and holding on to the 4th seed:
>>>
http://www.nba.com/standings/team_record_comparison/conferenceNew_Std_Div.html
>>>
>>> Who you gonna trust, a random radio jock or an anonymous usenet poster
>>> with
>>> a funny handle?
>>
>> Good point. ;) But last year the Nugs were the 3rd seed by virtue of
>> winning their division but the Clippers had home court even though they
>> were a 6th seed because they had a better record.
>
>Just one more data point. I just heard on the radio this morning that
>Cleveland, locked into the 5 seed in the East, just clinched home court
over
>whoever ends up being the 4th seed.
>
I think we have a definitional issue here. A lower seed cannot have HCA
over
a higher seed -- that is the meaning of seeding, the HCA. I think what
they
may have been discussing on the radio is simple win/loss records, which is
only one thing under consideration in seeding.
In any case, the issue is not the 5th seed, but the 4th. In the past,
division winners took the top 3 seeds, and the best non-division winner
took
the 4th seed. It is my contention (backed up by the ESPN article
referenced
previously) that for this season the top 4 seeds (ie 3 division winners
plus
the best non-division winner) are seeded according to their records, even
if
that means the non-division winner gets to be seeded higher than a
division
winner. Seeds 5-8 get the same treatment as before, ie sorted according to
their records + tie breaks and having no HCA when facing a higher seed.
In the past, UTA (a division winner) would have been guaranteed a top 3
seed. This season, they are the 4th seed, because SAN, who trail DAL in
their division, have a better record than UTA. HOU, who also have a better
record than UTA, are seeded 5th because they trail SAN for the best
non-division winner record, and therefore do not qualify for the top 4
seeds, even though they have the 4th best record in the conference.
|
