Every year around this time, the idea of adding some sort of tournament to the NBA season catches fire. Bill Simmons is the progenitor of the idea in the mainstream, and the league appears to be flirting with the concept.
The latest proposal, as reported by ESPN's Zach Lowe, would feature four-team tournaments in each conference to decide the final two playoff spots in the West and East.
The Nos. 7 and 8 teams would face off, with the winner of that game earning the No. 7 seed. The loser of that game would face the winner of a game between the Nos. 9 and 10 seeds, with that winner grabbing the No. 8 seed. Then you'd have your normal two-month NBA Playoffs.
To be clear, nothing like this is imminent, and it may never happen. But it is being discussed.
Would this reduce tanking? It's hard to say.
In the West this season, the Nos. 9 and 10 seeds are actually in the playoff race, and No. 11 (the LA Lakers) have no reason to tank because they don't have their own first-round pick. The teams No. 12 and beyond are so far back that fighting for a chance to lose to an actual good team in the play-in tournament might not be terribly attractive given the stakes of the lottery chase.
We also don't know how the NBA's already approved lottery reform will affect the tanking paradigm. Remember, that reform drops the incentive to be really bad by evening out odds among the worst seven teams substantially. That reform could lead teams in the Nos. 9-10 range in each conference to tank out in March and April, perhaps necessitating the play-in tournament! (Is the NBA thinking ahead to the unwanted ramifications of lottery reform here?)
In the East, as of Thursday, you'd have the Bucks and Heat lining up for a shot at No. 7 and the Pistons and Hornets facing off in the other play-in game. If chalk holds, you'd then have Miami and Detroit facing off for the No. 8 seed and a shot at the Raptors.
That flavor of play-in tournament does not sound particularly enticing.
If the NBA is going to do this, they need to be reasonably assured to make money off it. The Pistons, Bucks, and Hornets have among the worst draws in the league this season. Without the playoff stakes, these are not necessarily games that ESPN or TNT would be interested in showing.
The story is different in the West because that conference is competitive down through 10 teams. But in many years, that won't be the case.
Getting hardcore NBA fans to watch these games won't be an issue: hardcore NBA fans watched the Heat get kneecapped by the moribund Kings in overtime on Wednesday. But there needs to be a way to draw the more casual fans in to make this worth the NBA's effort. Even a game like Clippers-Jazz or Spurs-Nuggets with playoff bids on the line — is that enough to make this a thing?
Part of what makes March Madness special is the wide canvas and opportunity for serendipity. During the first four days of the NCAA Division I tournament, there are up to four games going on at any given time. These games often feature teams that casual fans will have seen no more than once in that season. There are unfamiliar players, unfamiliar styles, pleasant fan sections — a huge opportunity for serendipity.
(This is why those nights with 8-15 NBA games are invariably more entertaining than the big national TV evenings with like four games. There is simply more opportunity for crazy things to happen, and in a streaming world, fans can flock to the special moments.)
Watching the Milwaukee Bucks in an NBA play-in tournament has Giannis Antetokounmpo, yes. But that's roughly the 83rd opportunity to watch Antetokounmpo in that NBA season. Hardcore fans will love it. Some casual fans might sign on for the experience. But the masses? It seems unlikely.
There is no scarcity of competitive, mildly intriguing NBA basketball. A minor play-in tournament isn't really selling anything the market demands.
What would be more entertaining than this six-game sojourn?
An hour-long show in which the top three seeds in each conference pick their opponents from among the bottom four teams in each bracket. Imagine the heat that would reign upon the internet when the Rockets declared that they want to face the Clippers. Stay glued to Twitter as the Cavaliers decide to face the Sixers instead of the Wizards. Not only would that event get immense amounts of attention, but it would add intrigue to the first-round series.
But this is all beside the point of what the NBA is chasing here. The league knows there are a lot of meaningless games in March, and wants to bring meaning to them. Shrinking the season by 15 or so games is probably the right answer, but that would chop down revenue. So it's not going to happen.
Alas, the NBA is left with far less perfect solutions like a play-in tournament that won't move the needle.
0 Response to "March Madness in the NBA? A play-in tournament doesn't actually ... - SB Nation"
Post a Comment