At the Allstar break, it's clear that West is Best and East is Least

[nba is the worst]

Head to head, West leads 187-138.

9 east teams have losing records to the West, the West just three to the east.

10 West teams are .500+, 6 east.

7 east teams are below the generally accepted differentiator between merely mediocre and crappy (.400), only 3 in the West.

Avg victory margin also favors the West, with 9 teams positive to just 7 from the east...

No wonder the West champ usually wins the title - and IMO it's not likely to change this year!

[wdleehi]

They do?



And who cares about the entire league.  There are 3 (maybe 4) teams that matter in the East.  (Boston, Miami, Orlando, Chicago) and 3 teams out West (SA, LA, Dallas)  The rest is just junk to wannabes. 


How do those team do against each other?

[Donoghus]

As a whole, I do think the West is deeper than the East. 

However, I think the quality at the top of the East (BOS, MIA, CHI) is better than the top of the West (SA, DAL, LAL).

[Roy H.]

As a whole, I do think the West is deeper than the East. 

However, I think the quality at the top of the East (BOS, MIA, CHI) is better than the top of the West (SA, DAL, LAL).

Yep, this.  I also think that Orlando is a stronger fourth contender out of the East than anybody in the West.

[Fafnir]

This assumes you give equal weight to all teams in the conference when you judge quality.

I think its more important to look at playoff teams, the East has a better top 4 teams and the West has superior depth. The West only has two teams above 4 in differential, the East has 4.

http://espn.go.com/nba/standings/_/group/2

I find your ranting about the West's dominance, especially when it comes to the title kind of humorous. The east dominated the late 80s, 90s after all. Historically its pretty even, it all depends on which endpoints you want to choose.

[CelticG1]

There are 7 All-stars on the top 2 teams in the East.

[nba is the worst]

This assumes you give equal weight to all teams in the conference when you judge quality.

I think its more important to look at playoff teams, the East has a better top 4 teams and the West has superior depth. The West only has two teams above 4 in differential, the East has 4.

http://espn.go.com/nba/standings/_/group/2

I find your ranting about the West's dominance, especially when it comes to the title kind of humorous. The east dominated the late 80s, 90s after all. Historically its pretty even, it all depends on which endpoints you want to choose.

Glad I can be regarded as humorous, even if I disagree with the "ranting" characterization.

How do you think that somehow the east's top 4 teams' avg margin of victory isn't inflated by all those extra games vs the 47% sub-400 teams?

That's humorous!

East vs west details:

Boston: 11-7 vs. West
Miami: 13-7 vs. West
Chicago: 17-7 vs. West
Orlando: 12-10 vs. West
Atlanta: 10-9 vs. West

Spurs 17-5 (2 games better than the (east's best vs west)Bulls, 8 better than the C's)
Mavs 17-8 (+5 over C's)
Lakers 17-8 (+5)
OKC 14-5 (+1)
Portland 12-9 (-1)
Hornets 17-7 (+6)
Nuggets 13-8 (+1)
Jazz 15-7 (+4)
Grizzlies 14-10 (even)
Suns 10-10

[Junkyard Dawg]

As a whole, I do think the West is deeper than the East.

However, I think the quality at the top of the East (BOS, MIA, CHI) is better than the top of the West (SA, DAL, LAL).

Yep, this.  I also think that Orlando is a stronger fourth contender out of the East than anybody in the West.

Absolutely.

The west is fairly mediocre after the 3rd seed.  Everyone seems so eager to throw OK city in there, but they have no bigs, in my opinion.

[wdleehi]

This assumes you give equal weight to all teams in the conference when you judge quality.

I think its more important to look at playoff teams, the East has a better top 4 teams and the West has superior depth. The West only has two teams above 4 in differential, the East has 4.

http://espn.go.com/nba/standings/_/group/2

I find your ranting about the West's dominance, especially when it comes to the title kind of humorous. The east dominated the late 80s, 90s after all. Historically its pretty even, it all depends on which endpoints you want to choose.

Glad I can be regarded as humorous, even if I disagree with the "ranting" characterization.

How do you think that somehow the east's top 4 teams' avg margin of victory isn't inflated by all those extra games vs the 47% sub-400 teams?

That's humorous!

East vs west details:

Boston: 11-7 vs. West
Miami: 13-7 vs. West
Chicago: 17-7 vs. West
Orlando: 12-10 vs. West
Atlanta: 10-9 vs. West

Spurs 17-5 (2 games better than the (east's best vs west)Bulls, 8 better than the C's)
Mavs 17-8 (+5 over C's)
Lakers 17-8 (+5)
OKC 14-5 (+1)
Portland 12-9 (-1)
Hornets 17-7 (+6)
Nuggets 13-8 (+1)
Jazz 15-7 (+4)
Grizzlies 14-10 (even)
Suns 10-10

Which is what you would expect when the West is deeper and the East has more weak teams. 


Somehow, I am not convinced of your first statement. 


This does little (OK nothing) to my belief the Celtics are going to win a title this year. 

[Fafnir]

This assumes you give equal weight to all teams in the conference when you judge quality.

I think its more important to look at playoff teams, the East has a better top 4 teams and the West has superior depth. The West only has two teams above 4 in differential, the East has 4.

http://espn.go.com/nba/standings/_/group/2

I find your ranting about the West's dominance, especially when it comes to the title kind of humorous. The east dominated the late 80s, 90s after all. Historically its pretty even, it all depends on which endpoints you want to choose.

Glad I can be regarded as humorous, even if I disagree with the "ranting" characterization.

How do you think that somehow the east's top 4 teams' avg margin of victory isn't inflated by all those extra games vs the 47% sub-400 teams?

That's humorous!

East vs west details:

Boston: 11-7 vs. West
Miami: 13-7 vs. West
Chicago: 17-7 vs. West
Orlando: 12-10 vs. West
Atlanta: 10-9 vs. West

Spurs 17-5 (2 games better than the (east's best vs west)Bulls, 8 better than the C's)
Mavs 17-8 (+5 over C's)
Lakers 17-8 (+5)
OKC 14-5 (+1)
Portland 12-9 (-1)
Hornets 17-7 (+6)
Nuggets 13-8 (+1)
Jazz 15-7 (+4)
Grizzlies 14-10 (even)
Suns 10-10

Take a look at SRS and schedule adjusted offensive/defensive ratings.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=8856

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2011.html

Both adjust for strength of schedule, which would account for the superior depth of the west. They both reflect exactly what I pointed out, that the East has 4 of the clear top 6 teams in the NBA. And that there is a clear gap between Celtics/Spurs/Lakers/Bulls/Magic/Heat and the field. Though you can argue that Dirk's injury pulls them out of the elite territory. But my view is that's just part of the season.

[BballTim]

Head to head, West leads 187-138.

9 east teams have losing records to the West, the West just three to the east.

10 West teams are .500+, 6 east.

7 east teams are below the generally accepted differentiator between merely mediocre and crappy (.400), only 3 in the West.

Avg victory margin also favors the West, with 9 teams positive to just 7 from the east...

No wonder the West champ usually wins the title - and IMO it's not likely to change this year!

  So you're saying the West generally wins the title because the worst teams in the West are better than the worst teams in the East? I thought it was due to players like Shaq and Duncan out west.

[nba is the worst]

They do?



And who cares about the entire league.  There are 3 (maybe 4) teams that matter in the East.  (Boston, Miami, Orlando, Chicago) and 3 teams out West (SA, LA, Dallas)  The rest is just junk to wannabes. 


How do those team do against each other?

Glad you asked.

Boston is 8-4: 1-0 vs Spurs, 0-2 vs Mavs, 1-1 vs LA, 3-0 vs heatles, 1-1 vs Bulls, and 2-1 vs Magic (who don't deserve to be in this list IMO).  

Heatles are 3-6: 0-0 Spurs, 0-2 Mavs, 1-0 LA, 0-3 Celts, 0-1 Bulls, 2-1 Magic

Bulls are 7-6: 1-1 Spurs, 2-0 Mavs, 1-1 LA, 1-0 heatles, 1-2 Celts, 1-2 Magic

Magic are 6-7: 1-1 Spurs, 1-1 Mavs, 1-0 LA, 1-2 Celts, 1-2 heatles, 1-1 Bulls

Spurs are 5-4: 1-1 Mavs, 2-0 LA, 0-1 Celts, 0-0 heatles, 1-1 Bulls, 1-1 Magic

Mavs are 7-4: 1-1 Spurs, 1-0 LA, 2-0 Celts, 2-0 heatles, 0-2 Bulls, 1-1 Magic

LA is 2-7: 0-2 Spurs, 0-1 Mavs, 1-1 Celts, 0-1 heatles, 1-1 Bulls, 0-1 Magic (only reason they belong on this list is the B2B titles)

Celtics do lead the list:

Celts 8-4
Mavs 7-4
Spurs 5-4
Bulls 7-6
Magic 6-7
heatles 3-6
LA 2-7  

[Fafnir]

They do?



And who cares about the entire league.  There are 3 (maybe 4) teams that matter in the East.  (Boston, Miami, Orlando, Chicago) and 3 teams out West (SA, LA, Dallas)  The rest is just junk to wannabes. 


How do those team do against each other?

Glad you asked.

Boston is 8-4: 1-0 vs Spurs, 0-2 vs Mavs, 1-1 vs LA, 3-0 vs heatles, 1-1 vs Bulls, and 2-1 vs Magic (who don't deserve to be in this list IMO).  

Heatles are 3-6: 0-0 Spurs, 0-2 Mavs, 1-0 LA, 0-3 Celts, 0-1 Bulls, 2-1 Magic

Bulls are 7-6: 1-1 Spurs, 2-0 Mavs, 1-1 LA, 1-0 heatles, 1-2 Celts, 1-2 Magic

Magic are 6-7: 1-1 Spurs, 1-1 Mavs, 1-0 LA, 1-2 Celts, 1-2 heatles, 1-1 Bulls

Spurs are 5-4: 1-1 Mavs, 2-0 LA, 0-1 Celts, 0-0 heatles, 1-1 Bulls, 1-1 Magic

Mavs are 7-4: 1-1 Spurs, 1-0 LA, 2-0 Celts, 2-0 heatles, 0-2 Bulls, 1-1 Magic

LA is 2-7: 0-2 Spurs, 0-1 Mavs, 1-1 Celts, 0-1 heatles, 1-1 Bulls, 0-1 Magic (only reason they belong on this list is the B2B titles)

Celtics do lead the list:

Celts 8-4
Mavs 7-4
Spurs 5-4
Bulls 7-6
Magic 6-7
heatles 3-6
LA 2-7  

So I guess you come in on the side that beating other elite teams tells you something? http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=8811

[jasail]

East vs Elite Teams: 51%
West vs Elite Teams: 48%

East vs West Elite Teams: 52%
West vs East Elite Teams: 48%

So who really cares if the bottom tier of the West is better than the bottom tier of the East if the East's elite post better numbers against elite teams from both conferences? When it comes time for playoff basketball no one cares if Phoenix had a higher winning % than Milwaukee or Houston was far superior to New Jersey?

The NBA is generally 5 or 6 teams and a bunch of filler. The West's filler is much better than the East's this year and in most years recently, but the elites generally play each other to a combined .500 record. 

[nba is the worst]

East vs Elite Teams: 51%
West vs Elite Teams: 48%

East vs West Elite Teams: 52%
West vs East Elite Teams: 48%

So who really cares if the bottom tier of the West is better than the bottom tier of the East if the East's elite post better numbers against elite teams from both conferences? When it comes time for playoff basketball no one cares if Phoenix had a higher winning % than Milwaukee or Houston was far superior to New Jersey?

The NBA is generally 5 or 6 teams and a bunch of filler. The West's filler is much better than the East's this year and in most years recently, but the elites generally play each other to a combined .500 record.  

So was this with Fafnir's (slanted in favor of the east) definition of elite?