Should the NBA allow the top 3 seeds to pick their 1st round opponent

[Moranis]

NBA radio was talking about this today.  So Milwaukee as the 1 seed gets to pick who they want to play in the 1st round.  I'd make it a caveat that it has to be a 5-8 opponent.  Milwaukee almost certainly would have picked either Atlanta or Brooklyn, and not Miami.  Boston then would have almost certainly selected the other of Atlanta and Brooklyn, leaving the Sixers to pick between the Knicks and Heat, with the Cavs getting whoever is left.

The West would have been really interesting.  I believe Denver would have picked the Wolves, but who does Memphis take between the Clippers (Kawhi was still there), Warriors, or Lakers.  Then who would the Kings take of the remaining teams.

It would also make seeding among the top 3 more interesting and make getting 4th more valuable as well.  So that might drive some interest in some years.

[Roy H.]

It's an interesting idea.  It might avoid potential situations like last year, where teams were jockeying to avoid Brooklyn (which looks silly in hindsight).  I don't think it's necessary, but I also wouldn't be opposed.

Another option that some other sports have is reseeding after the first round, so the highest remaining seed gets the lowest seeded opponent.

To throw out my own radical idea, I've been pondering whether a higher seeded opponent should be able to choose its home games (before the series starts).  It wouldn't happen for a variety of reasons, but it would allow all kinds of strategy.  Would some teams choose four straight home games?  2-3-2?  2-2-2-1?  The classic 2-2-1-1-1? 2-4-1?  I think there would be all kinds of second guessing and debate.

[kraidstar]

I've proposed this numerous times on these threads. Not only would it be great drama, but it would give the regular season more significance, something this league desperately needs.

[slamtheking]

It's an interesting idea.  It might avoid potential situations like last year, where teams were jockeying to avoid Brooklyn (which looks silly in hindsight).  I don't think it's necessary, but I also wouldn't be opposed.

Another option that some other sports have is reseeding after the first round, so the highest remaining seed gets the lowest seeded opponent.

To throw out my own radical idea, I've been pondering whether a higher seeded opponent should be able to choose its home games (before the series starts).  It wouldn't happen for a variety of reasons, but it would allow all kinds of strategy.  Would some teams choose four straight home games?  2-3-2?  2-2-2-1?  The classic 2-2-1-1-1? 2-4-1?  I think there would be all kinds of second guessing and debate.

that'd be too much of a scheduling nightmare for the league, the opposing team, the arenas and the fans trying to get tickets.   

[slamtheking]

not against the idea of the higher teams picking their opponents.  would probably make for good bulletin board material in the lockerroom of the lesser seeds --> say this year Milwaukee picked the 6 seed Brooklyn.  Brooklyn uses that snub of them being the easiest opponent as fuel to do whatever it takes to beat Milwaukee.

[Vermont Green]

I am all for creative thinking, that is the whole point of this forum.  But I don't understand what you are trying to fix with this.  If teams want to game the standings to try and get or avoid some opponent for some reason, they can do that.  I would not suggest it though and I don't think it happens very often.  To me, picking your opponent isn't very interesting at all and I don't think teams would want to do it.

The reseeding thing is something they do in other sports.  It makes a little sense if the top teams get a buy, like in Football, but I don't see the need in basketball.  Again, I don't think there is any problem that needs to be fixed.

[CelticsWhat35]

I definitely think it’s a good idea because there’s such a huge problem with load management that I believe there should be more of a benefit to getting the best record than just one additional home game.  Often times the seeding, particularly at 5-8, isn’t necessarily indicative of the level of talent.  A very good team could’ve been decimated with injuries but got healthy in time for the playoffs.  I think back to ‘99 when the Heat’s reward for the #1 seed was playing the Knicks who ended up making the finals.  Granted, I’m plucking something from 20+ years ago that’s an extreme, but there are plenty of situations just like this year when I would think the Bucks would’ve picked either Brooklyn or Atlanta to play rather than Miami; this would also avoid late season “tanking” by the playoff teams to try to get themselves a more favorable matchup

[Moranis]

I am all for creative thinking, that is the whole point of this forum.  But I don't understand what you are trying to fix with this.  If teams want to game the standings to try and get or avoid some opponent for some reason, they can do that.  I would not suggest it though and I don't think it happens very often.  To me, picking your opponent isn't very interesting at all and I don't think teams would want to do it.

The reseeding thing is something they do in other sports.  It makes a little sense if the top teams get a buy, like in Football, but I don't see the need in basketball.  Again, I don't think there is any problem that needs to be fixed.

A couple of things.  Under the current system, the 1 seed doesn't know who they are even going to play on Sunday until Friday.  That is a pretty big disadvantage for being the team with the best record.  Now I get, logistically it would be far more difficult to play games on Saturday if you had to wait until the play-in to know who was playing who, but that at least puts all teams on roughly the same footing and does not disadvantage the 1 seed (and I think they could do it ahead of time i.e. Milwaukee give us your order pending results, Boston give us yours, etc. so some of the match-ups could be decided earlier than Friday). 

Second, if you go through the season and earn the best record, there should be advantages for that.  That seems like a small advantage that is easy to implement.

Third, I do think it can, in certain years, provide for more teams at the top fighting for position.  Being the 1 would mean more than being the 2, etc.  That also means teams wouldn't be jockeying for position based on opponent.  Philly no longer lucks into playing Brooklyn.  Roy gave the example last year where teams seemingly wanted to avoid playing the Nets.  That is out the window under this.

[johnnygreen]

This idea is ridiculous, especially if this arose because of the Bucks-Heat series. If Giannis doesn't get hurt, this idea wouldn't have come up. When the play-in tournament was happening, all I heard around here was Miami was a push over and would be no problem in the first round.

[Roy H.]

This idea is ridiculous, especially if this arose because of the Bucks-Heat series. If Giannis doesn't get hurt, this idea wouldn't have come up. When the play-in tournament was happening, all I heard around here was Miami was a push over and would be no problem in the first round.

I think the idea itself has been debated before this season.

[tazzmaniac]

Some people just aren't satisfied with the status quo.  I see no reason to make this change.  If you were to make it, why limit it to the 1st round?  If the Bucks make it out of the 1st round and Embiid is going to miss at least a couple games, they might prefer to play the Sixers. 

[Moranis]

This idea is ridiculous, especially if this arose because of the Bucks-Heat series. If Giannis doesn't get hurt, this idea wouldn't have come up. When the play-in tournament was happening, all I heard around here was Miami was a push over and would be no problem in the first round.

I think the idea itself has been debated before this season.

absolutely.  There was talk of it last season when teams were trying to avoid Brooklyn in the 1st round.  I also think there has been a lot more talk about how much of a disadvantage it is for the 1st seed to not know who they are playing until Friday night when they play Sunday.  The 2nd seed knows Tuesday and the other two games are set by the prior Sunday.  Why give your best team that sort of disadvantage.

[johnnygreen]

A number 1 seed should never have to worry about an 8th seed. Like I said, if Giannis doesn't get hurt, this is not an issue. Other than last night, the Denver Minnesota series has barely been competitive.

[Vermont Green]

Being the #1 seed is a big advantage.  You not only get home court in the first round but also all the way through.

Even if you look at last year where BKN was a prototypical example of a team that was a low seed due to injuries but maybe a higher seed team would elect to play someone else.  The Celtics ended up sweeping BKN.  Can you imagine the motivation if the Celtics had passed on BKN and picked some other team, Toronto, for example?  Toronto ended up taking PHI to 6 games.  Teams are not going to want to do that.

Maybe give the #1 seed in each conference some ability to pick the schedule.  Like if there is a choice to start on Sunday vs. Saturday.  Something like that could be an advantage if a star player needs a extra day of rest.  I would be fine with something like that and it seems like something that could be implemented, if you want to give more advantage to the high seeds.

[Celtics2021]

This has always seemed like a solution in search of a problem. The majority of 1 seeds win in 4 or 5 games, and we haven’t had a 1-8 series go 7 games since 2014, so it’s not like 1 seeds have been wanting for an extra advantage.  2 seeds have been similarly successful. On top of that, it’s not even clear teams would like to be given the option to pick their opponent — there’s no desire to give a 1st round opponent extra motivation when you’re picking amongst teams you should be able to beat anyway.