Poll: Which conference is deeper

[celticsclay]

Of the top 16 teams in the league:

The West has the following teams:

#1
#2
#3 tie
#9
#14
#15

The East has the following:

#3 tie
#5
#6
#7
#8
#10
#11
#12
#13
#16

The West has 6 of the top 16 teams, the East 10. This shows that not only is the East deep, it clearly is and really can't be refuted, but is deeper than the West....currently. That could change before season's end.

Or 7 if you break the tie for the West and because they are so close it could pretty easily be 8 and 8 after tonight and the west theoretically could have 9 after tonight depending on how the games all go.

Someone must have missed the word "currently" in my post.

well currently 7 of the top 16 are in the west.

I have been on forums since the AOL days of the internet covering a variety of topics and I have honestly never interacted with someone that acts quite like you. I will give you a tommy point for the uniqueness.

[nickagneta]

Of the top 16 teams in the league:

The West has the following teams:

#1
#2
#3 tie
#9
#14
#15

The East has the following:

#3 tie
#5
#6
#7
#8
#10
#11
#12
#13
#16

The West has 6 of the top 16 teams, the East 10. This shows that not only is the East deep, it clearly is and really can't be refuted, but is deeper than the West....currently. That could change before season's end.

Or 7 if you break the tie for the West and because they are so close it could pretty easily be 8 and 8 after tonight and the west theoretically could have 9 after tonight depending on how the games all go.

Someone must have missed the word "currently" in my post.

well currently 7 of the top 16 are in the west.

Not according to the standings:

https://www.espn.com/nba/standings/_/group/league

#16 is Atlanta at 12-12. There are .500 teams but at 11-11 so the 12 win teams get that tiebreaker.

GSW, PHX, Utah, Memphis, LAL and LAC are the only teams from the West I see in the top 16.

[Moranis]

Of the top 16 teams in the league:

The West has the following teams:

#1
#2
#3 tie
#9
#14
#15

The East has the following:

#3 tie
#5
#6
#7
#8
#10
#11
#12
#13
#16

The West has 6 of the top 16 teams, the East 10. This shows that not only is the East deep, it clearly is and really can't be refuted, but is deeper than the West....currently. That could change before season's end.

Or 7 if you break the tie for the West and because they are so close it could pretty easily be 8 and 8 after tonight and the west theoretically could have 9 after tonight depending on how the games all go.

Someone must have missed the word "currently" in my post.

well currently 7 of the top 16 are in the west.

Not according to the standings:

https://www.espn.com/nba/standings/_/group/league

#16 is Atlanta at 12-12. There are .500 teams but at 11-11 so the 12 win teams get that tiebreaker.

GSW, PHX, Utah, Memphis, LAL and LAC are the only teams from the West I see in the top 16.

I put Denver ahead of Atlanta and Dallas because Denver beat Atlanta and split with Dallas, but Dallas lost to Atlanta.  The Lakers haven't played any of the teams other than a loss to the Clippers and the Clippers only have a split with Dallas and the win over the Lakers.  So I had them Nuggets, Clippers, Lakers, Hawks, Mavericks.    I guess the tiebreakers don't work that way in the NBA though, like they do in the NFL.

Either way when you have 5 teams that are .500 I think it is silly to differentiate them at all.  Just call it a 5-way tie, though then you need to go to 18 teams, 8 of which are in the West and 10 of which are in the East.

[Moranis]

Pistons blew a huge lead against the Thunder and ended up losing at home by double digits.  Solidifying themselves as the worst team in the sport.

[celticsclay]

Pistons blew a huge lead against the Thunder and ended up losing at home by double digits.  Solidifying themselves as the worst team in the sport.

Didn't the Thunder just lose by 75 points to someone?  Nobody at any point on this thread, or any other threads has said the piston, or the thunder were good teams and has basically nothing to do with this thread. I have asked you politely a few times to stop trying to hijacking threads with this stuff. If you want to make a separate poll on what team is the worst in the league, I am sure both pistons and Thunder would get some support. If you want to do a summary and say the leagues are breaking even cause the hawks and bulls are winning and the pistons and heat lost/are losing that would at least be on topic.

[Moranis]

Pistons blew a huge lead against the Thunder and ended up losing at home by double digits.  Solidifying themselves as the worst team in the sport.

Didn't the Thunder just lose by 75 points to someone?  Nobody at any point on this thread, or any other threads has said the piston, or the thunder were good teams and has basically nothing to do with this thread. I have asked you politely a few times to stop trying to hijacking threads with this stuff. If you want to make a separate poll on what team is the worst in the league, I am sure both pistons and Thunder would get some support. If you want to do a summary and say the leagues are breaking even cause the hawks and bulls are winning and the pistons and heat lost/are losing that would at least be on topic.

you literally said on the last page that the Pistons had more talent than the Thunder and weren't the worst team in the sport.  seems pretty relevant to the conversation that the Thunder beat the Pistons. 

That win also drew the conferences even on the season.  With the Grizzlies win, the West now has a winning record against the East, though it will be short lived unless the Nuggets mount a big comeback against the Bulls or the Wolves mount a big comeback against the Hawks.  Warriors should beat the Magic though which would again have the conferences even on their record against each other.

[celticsclay]

Pistons blew a huge lead against the Thunder and ended up losing at home by double digits.  Solidifying themselves as the worst team in the sport.

Didn't the Thunder just lose by 75 points to someone?  Nobody at any point on this thread, or any other threads has said the piston, or the thunder were good teams and has basically nothing to do with this thread. I have asked you politely a few times to stop trying to hijacking threads with this stuff. If you want to make a separate poll on what team is the worst in the league, I am sure both pistons and Thunder would get some support. If you want to do a summary and say the leagues are breaking even cause the hawks and bulls are winning and the pistons and heat lost/are losing that would at least be on topic.

you literally said on the last page that the Pistons had more talent than the Thunder and weren't the worst team in the sport.  seems pretty relevant to the conversation that the Thunder beat the Pistons. 

That win also drew the conferences even on the season.  With the Grizzlies win, the West now has a winning record against the East, though it will be short lived unless the Nuggets mount a big comeback against the Bulls or the Wolves mount a big comeback against the Hawks.  Warriors should beat the Magic though which would again have the conferences even on their record against each other.

Again, if you want to get into a separate debate about which team is the worst in the league or has the least talent, please make a separate thread (I will even participate). For the topic on hand, there are a lot of games this week. Hopefully the Celtics have a strong west coast swing cause we really need the wins for our own playoff push. A sweep in LA would be very sweet for us and the East.

[Moranis]

How about this to get us back on track. 

How would you counter the argument that because the two best teams in the sport (both 19-4) are in the West that they have depreciated the win totals of the middle of the conference, which is also compounded by having the two worst records in the sport be in the East.  Therefore, the mid-tier teams in the West have a lower record than their talent would suggest because they play more games against the two best teams and less games against the two worst teams.  Thus, the Suns and Warriors being so good actually gives the illusion that the West is weaker than it is.

[celticsclay]

How about this to get us back on track. 

How would you counter the argument that because the two best teams in the sport (both 19-4) are in the West that they have depreciated the win totals of the middle of the conference, which is also compounded by having the two worst records in the sport be in the East.  Therefore, the mid-tier teams in the West have a lower record than their talent would suggest because they play more games against the two best teams and less games against the two worst teams.  Thus, the Suns and Warriors being so good actually gives the illusion that the West is weaker than it is.

That is actually a fair and relevant point, that very well could be true. So I will give you credit for it. My response would be that I don't actually think the Suns are significantly better than the Nets or Bucks. The bucks in particular got of to an awful start because of a series of injuries (they were missing 3 starters for a lot of games) and I believe until the last game or two the Suns had been the healthiest in the league. The Nets have also been playing better winning something like 15 out of 19. If the Suns really are a 65 win team, that would depress the middle wins for some of the team decent teams in the West. But I expect those three teams to all be pretty similar by end of year.

The warriors are harder to gauge because they are theoretically adding an all-star to what they are doing, but who knows what he looks like after 2 years. Even if those two teams do stay this dominant and the nets and bucks stay a level below, I need to see more from the Nuggets, Mavs, Lakers, Clippers (hopefully not the LA teams this week) if we want to talk about the west being deep. The clippers, blazers, nuggets, mavericks and Lakers have all been degrees of disappointing. The blazers basically need to try something new around Lillilard who supposedly requested they add ben simmons today. I think the Lakers need to find a way to get rid of Westbrook and add a few better defenders. The nuggets can probably not really do anything to get back to how good they were in years past with no murray or MPJ. The clippers have really aged/eroded talent around George over the last few season (which a big part of it being Leonard who we haven't even heard an update on) Players like Ibaka and Batum are just ancient now and Mann seems to be their only solid young guy. How far are they going with Reggie Jackson as their second best player?  Dallas needs to trade Porzgingas and try a different number 2. I am impressed with Memphis, but  have a hard time picturing them continuing this without morant.

I see more natural opportunities for the teams in the east to be, or continue to be good teams. Boston is playing better already. Philly needs to not have their entire team wiped out by Covid. Atlanta is already playing better. I take the Bulls as a legit good team with Ball, Lavine, Vucevic and Demar. I continue to be very impressed by Cleveland who I admit I was dead wrong about over the summer (they probably should have won in Utah last night).

[Moranis]

As it sits today, the West now has 3 more wins than the East in the head to head.  So why does it look like the East has more better teams, I would hypothesize it is because the top 3 teams in the West are 10 wins better than the top 3 teams in the East.  If you were to redistribute those wins in the middle or bottom of the conference, the standings would look a lot different. 

[nickagneta]

As it sits today, the West now has 3 more wins than the East in the head to head.  So why does it look like the East has more better teams, I would hypothesize it is because the top 3 teams in the West are 10 wins better than the top 3 teams in the East.  If you were to redistribute those wins in the middle or bottom of the conference, the standings would look a lot different.

It can also be looked at that the reason the top three teams in the West have such better records is that they are playing inferior teams than those that are in the East. So, the East is actually deeper.

[celticsclay]

As it sits today, the West now has 3 more wins than the East in the head to head.  So why does it look like the East has more better teams, I would hypothesize it is because the top 3 teams in the West are 10 wins better than the top 3 teams in the East.  If you were to redistribute those wins in the middle or bottom of the conference, the standings would look a lot different.

It can also be looked at that the reason the top three teams in the West have such better records is that they are playing inferior teams than those that are in the East. So, the East is actually deeper.

Yeah I mean this is discussed on most national broadcasts that the east is a deep conference. Rian rusilo was the latest to discuss it one of this weeks Simmons podcast. There are also going to be ebs and flows in the head to head throughout the season as good or bad teams make their east west coast swings and injuries/rest crop up. There will also probably be a bit of a swing towards east coast teams late in the season as there will be more teams tanking in the west than the east.

[Moranis]

As it sits today, the West now has 3 more wins than the East in the head to head.  So why does it look like the East has more better teams, I would hypothesize it is because the top 3 teams in the West are 10 wins better than the top 3 teams in the East.  If you were to redistribute those wins in the middle or bottom of the conference, the standings would look a lot different.

It can also be looked at that the reason the top three teams in the West have such better records is that they are playing inferior teams than those that are in the East. So, the East is actually deeper.

Maybe that argument would have worked early in the year when the East had a big lead in the head to head, but the West now has the head to head advantage 25% of the way through the season.  I mean does head to head only work when the East is leading or is not still the biggest indicator of conference strength?  So if head to head is still the most important thing and the West is winning the head to head, the West must be the better conference.  And thus because the West is the better conference, the fact that their 3 top teams are so much better than the 3 top teams in the East has to be accounted for, especially when the two worst teams (by 5.5 wins) are in the East. 

[nickagneta]

As it sits today, the West now has 3 more wins than the East in the head to head.  So why does it look like the East has more better teams, I would hypothesize it is because the top 3 teams in the West are 10 wins better than the top 3 teams in the East.  If you were to redistribute those wins in the middle or bottom of the conference, the standings would look a lot different.

It can also be looked at that the reason the top three teams in the West have such better records is that they are playing inferior teams than those that are in the East. So, the East is actually deeper.

Maybe that argument would have worked early in the year when the East had a big lead in the head to head, but the West now has the head to head advantage 25% of the way through the season.  I mean does head to head only work when the East is leading or is not still the biggest indicator of conference strength?  So if head to head is still the most important thing and the West is winning the head to head, the West must be the better conference.  And thus because the West is the better conference, the fact that their 3 top teams are so much better than the 3 top teams in the East has to be accounted for, especially when the two worst teams (by 5.5 wins) are in the East.

This argument is irrelevant. We were discussing the top three teams out west having such good records because they are playing the majority of their games against inferior Western Conference competition. Stop trying to take that discussion elsewhere.

[celticsclay]

As it sits today, the West now has 3 more wins than the East in the head to head.  So why does it look like the East has more better teams, I would hypothesize it is because the top 3 teams in the West are 10 wins better than the top 3 teams in the East.  If you were to redistribute those wins in the middle or bottom of the conference, the standings would look a lot different.

It can also be looked at that the reason the top three teams in the West have such better records is that they are playing inferior teams than those that are in the East. So, the East is actually deeper.

Maybe that argument would have worked early in the year when the East had a big lead in the head to head, but the West now has the head to head advantage 25% of the way through the season.  I mean does head to head only work when the East is leading or is not still the biggest indicator of conference strength?  So if head to head is still the most important thing and the West is winning the head to head, the West must be the better conference.  And thus because the West is the better conference, the fact that their 3 top teams are so much better than the 3 top teams in the East has to be accounted for, especially when the two worst teams (by 5.5 wins) are in the East.

you are really just bordering on straight up trolling at this point. The East is an overturned buzzer beater last night and and the Celtics hitting an extra shot away from the East still winning. I also noticed you didn’t say anything when the Spurs beat the Knicks and the nets beat the mavs the night before. I have tried to give you reasonable debates on this and you don’t respond to the points or say what your opinion is. I get you are upset 90% or forum disagreed with you, but lets try and have a reasonable dialogue and not go the larbrd path here.