The race for the No1 seed

[Donoghus]

My prediction: No matter what seed we end up with, we're going to get stuck with Miami in the first round.

Mike

Bill Simmons said on his podcast Sunday that either Miami or Atlanta will be the 6 seed because one of them has to win the division. Is it true that a division winner can't fall below 6? Miami is technically a 7 seed now, but if the above is true it looks like they'll be 6. Which would almost certainly make it much harder to see them in the 1st round.

My memory is rusty but winning the division used to give you a top four seed until somewhat recently (2016?). I can't find a rule that says winning your division keeps you out of the play-in, but that seems to be what Simmons is alleging.

Shockingly, Simmons is wrong.  Division winner doesn't guarantee a top 6 seed unless you had a division winner tied with another non-division winner team for the 6 seed and they need to go to the 2nd tiebreaker (1st is H2H).

[kraidstar]

My prediction: No matter what seed we end up with, we're going to get stuck with Miami in the first round.

Mike

Bill Simmons said on his podcast Sunday that either Miami or Atlanta will be the 6 seed because one of them has to win the division. Is it true that a division winner can't fall below 6? Miami is technically a 7 seed now, but if the above is true it looks like they'll be 6. Which would almost certainly make it much harder to see them in the 1st round.

My memory is rusty but winning the division used to give you a top four seed until somewhat recently (2016?). I can't find a rule that says winning your division keeps you out of the play-in, but that seems to be what Simmons is alleging.

I've been scouring the internet and I can't find a credible answer to this question.

Currently the Heat and Hawks are ranked 7th and 8th, respectively,  on NBA.com. My best guess is that they would be, in fact, play-in teams.

There is also a distinction between  "postseason"  and "playoffs." The play-in is part of the postseason,  but is not part of the 16-team playoff tournament.

Perhaps each division winner automatically qualifies for the postseason,  but not the playoffs? Or maybe there is no guarantee at all anymore.

[kraidstar]

My prediction: No matter what seed we end up with, we're going to get stuck with Miami in the first round.

Mike

Bill Simmons said on his podcast Sunday that either Miami or Atlanta will be the 6 seed because one of them has to win the division. Is it true that a division winner can't fall below 6? Miami is technically a 7 seed now, but if the above is true it looks like they'll be 6. Which would almost certainly make it much harder to see them in the 1st round.

My memory is rusty but winning the division used to give you a top four seed until somewhat recently (2016?). I can't find a rule that says winning your division keeps you out of the play-in, but that seems to be what Simmons is alleging.

Shockingly, Simmons is wrong.  Division winner doesn't guarantee a top 6 seed unless you had a division winner tied with another non-division winner team for the 6 seed and they need to go to the 2nd tiebreaker (1st is H2H).

Yeah, it looks like there is no guarantee at all, going back to 2015.

https://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/5-things-to-know-nba-division-winners-not-guaranteed-playoff-spot/

[Donoghus]

My prediction: No matter what seed we end up with, we're going to get stuck with Miami in the first round.

Mike

Bill Simmons said on his podcast Sunday that either Miami or Atlanta will be the 6 seed because one of them has to win the division. Is it true that a division winner can't fall below 6? Miami is technically a 7 seed now, but if the above is true it looks like they'll be 6. Which would almost certainly make it much harder to see them in the 1st round.

My memory is rusty but winning the division used to give you a top four seed until somewhat recently (2016?). I can't find a rule that says winning your division keeps you out of the play-in, but that seems to be what Simmons is alleging.

Shockingly, Simmons is wrong.  Division winner doesn't guarantee a top 6 seed unless you had a division winner tied with another non-division winner team for the 6 seed and they need to go to the 2nd tiebreaker (1st is H2H).

Yeah, it looks like there is no guarantee at all, going back to 2015.

https://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/5-things-to-know-nba-division-winners-not-guaranteed-playoff-spot/

Yup. It'd also be almost virtually impossible for a division winner not to make the play-in tournament, though.  Right now, you'd have to have all 5 division teams also be the worst 5 teams in the conference to make it happen.   Based on scheduling, I'm not sure how mathematically possible that would even be.

[Kernewek]

Correct - my problem (aside from looking this up while I should be working) is that most of the articles that talk about the changes to the division guarantee rule predate the play-in tournament. I'm inclined to think that Simmons misspoke though, based on Don's post.

[Vermont Green]

I can't find a specific statement about the division winners but ESPN has a page where they show the current playoff match ups based on the 7 and 8 seeds winning the play in round (I guess).  This pages shows MIA as the 7 seed playing Boston (2) in the first round and ATL as the 8 seed playing MIL (1) in the first round.  PHI (3) gets BKN (6) and CLE (4) gets NYK (5).

It doesn't appear that the division winner gets any seeding preference.  Of course, TOR (9) and CHI (10) may have something to say about MIA or ATL surviving the play in round.

http://www.espn.com/nba/playoffs/matchups

[kraidstar]

So why does the nba bother to have divisions at all?

 In baseball and football winning your division is of critical importance.  I think it works to the benefit of both sports.

 The nba regular season just doesn't feel that meaningful.

 I think it would be delicious if the top seeds got to choose who they play out of the lower bracket. So Milwaukee could pick between Atlanta,  Miami,  Brooklyn, and NYK. Then Boston picks, etc.

Not only would it give the top teams far more incentive to get a high seed, but it would create a lot of drama.  Imagine some of the storylines of teams feeling that they were disrespected for getting picked by a high seed. It would be a lot of fun.

[Vermont Green]

It is interesting that if they let the division winners be the top seeds, the seeding would be:

MIL
BOS
MIA

PHI
CLE
NYK

BKN
ATL
TOR
CHI

PHI ends up the 4 seed instead of the 3 (probably an easier first round opponent) and BKN ends up in the play in due to MIA winning the division.  Things are not different for most teams and MIA may still beat out BKN anyway and get out of the play in (they are currently tied).

As things stand currently, the divisions mean nothing.  It is probably more fair to seed teams based on record, irrespective of division winners, but it does render the divisions meaningless.  In the West, the 3 division winners are slotting as the 1-3 seeds just fine.

[ozgod]

Now 2.5GB...I will update the table until the end of the season so we can see how far off we were from the No1 seed 

[timpiker]

I'm already sick of the #1 seed BS.  Lose to the Wizards?  Give me a break.  If the C's don't give a crap about why should I?  Enuff.

[Phantom255x]

Even if the C's win out, they need the Bucks to go 3-3 to overtake them for the 1 seed.

That's not happening. Just prioritize health the rest of the way. We're basically locked into the 2 seed anyways, PHI isn't overtaking us especially since we have the tiebreaker (and I doubt PHI wins out)

[johnnygreen]

Tomorrow night's game is essentially meaningless now. I know personal recognition is extremely important to some of the players on this team, so Coach Mazzula should recognize it to end the regular season. I believe Tatum locked up first team All NBA and is out of the running for MVP. With that in mind, Tatum's priority should be playing reduced minutes and sitting games. For Jaylen, play him like a #1 option, so he can get All NBA recognition and his supermax contract. Something as simple as that could go a long way in Jaylen signing that extension. On another note, reduced minutes and sitting out some games should be in the cards for Horford.

[RMO]

I wonder if Milwaukee would just blow this game off and rest a few key guys.  I doubt it because a Bucks win pretty much ends any chance even if chances are still slim if the Celtics win.

From the Bucks perspective though the only thing the Celtics can really get out of this is feeling good with a win and having confidence in a series.  Resting key guys though and it can be claimed as an empty win for the Celtics.  Not to mention what a Celtics loss in this scenario could do.

[Phantom255x]

I wonder if Milwaukee would just blow this game off and rest a few key guys.  I doubt it because a Bucks win pretty much ends any chance even if chances are still slim if the Celtics win.

From the Bucks perspective though the only thing the Celtics can really get out of this is feeling good with a win and having confidence in a series.  Resting key guys though and it can be claimed as an empty win for the Celtics.  Not to mention what a Celtics loss in this scenario could do.

I wouldn't be surprised if MIL played everyone and went all-in tonight. Then rest some guys tomorrow and take the loss. Because like you said, it wouldn't really matter since BOS would still need to overcome MIL by 2 games and I doubt MIL is finishing the season worse than 3-2 after the Boston game. And that's also assuming we win out, which with this group is far from a guarantee even if we win tomorrow night.

It only becomes a bit tricky for MIL if they lose tonight and tomorrow. Otherwise, they basically have it in the bag

[Vermont Green]

I wonder if Milwaukee would just blow this game off and rest a few key guys.  I doubt it because a Bucks win pretty much ends any chance even if chances are still slim if the Celtics win.

From the Bucks perspective though the only thing the Celtics can really get out of this is feeling good with a win and having confidence in a series.  Resting key guys though and it can be claimed as an empty win for the Celtics.  Not to mention what a Celtics loss in this scenario could do.

I think it is valuable for both teams make a statement.  Both teams want to get momentum from this game.  I am sure the Bucks will play whoever can play and will try to blow out the Celtics.  Same for the Celtics.  If the Bucks are able to get a convincing win over the Celtics, that will be in the Celtics head, and vice versa.