Post-game Reactions

There has been mass confusion all over the place, including here, about whether Boston or Atlanta holds the tie-breaker should the two teams finish tied for 3rd in the Eastern Conference. Boston is a division leader, but Atlanta swept the season series 4-0.

There is potentially a lot at stake. Both teams have tough schedules going forward, and there’s a not-too-small chance they actually finished tied. If you’re one of those folks who’d rather not face the Bucks in the 4-5 series, then you probably care about this tie-breaker.

And the C’s have it. Per the Globe:

As a division leader, the Celtics hold the first tiebreaker over Atlanta, which defeated Orlando, 86-84, last night. Meaning, the Hawks have to be a game better than the Celtics at season’s end to finish third.

It’s a system that even Celtics coach Doc Rivers wasn’t aware of until a few days ago.

“I didn’t even pay attention to it,’’ he said. “I actually did think if we tied, Atlanta would get it. I think Danny [Ainge] called me and he said, ‘Did you know?’ I said, ‘No.’ He said, ‘I didn’t either.’ No one knew.’’

A few words on this:

My gut reaction is that the Hawks are getting ripped off here. Don’t get me wrong—I’ll take the 3rd seed in the event of a tie and smile about it.

The background, for those unfamiliar: The NBA revamped the playoff seeding format after the 2006 season, when the Mavs and Spurs met in the Western Conference Semi-Finals despite having the two best records in the conference. They ended up being seeded 1st and 4th because of the league rule that the other two division winners, despite having worse records, should get the 2nd and 3rd seeds.

The series was epic, but fans felt it should have been the Western Conference Finals and not the semis.

So the NBA changed the seeding format. The league decreased the importance of winning one’s division by declaring that the teams with the two best records would get the top two seeds in a conference regardless of divisional placement or finish.

A lot of people believe—incorrectly, it turns out—that the rule change meant teams would be seeded 1 through 8 based on records alone, with a divisional championship holding no impact in terms of seeding.

But the league, for whatever reason, didn’t go that far. It almost went that far, but not quite.

Flash forward to this season: The Hawks would be seeded ahead of the C’s if they finish with a better record than Boston. That’s true even if the Hawks finish 2nd (to Orlando) in their own division.

To me, this is as it should be. You don’t want to give a 44-win division champion a higher seed than a 50-win runner-up just because the 44-win team happens to play in a crapola division.

But if Atlanta and Boston finish tied, the fact that Boston will win the Crapola Atlantic Division suddenly becomes relevant again. That division championship gives Boston the tie-breaker over the Hawks, despite the Atlanta’s season sweep of Boston.

Again, this is just my initial take—I still have some deep thinking to do on this. But my initial take is that this seems like a strange thing. If you’re going to de-prioritize divisional championships, then just go ahead and de-prioritize them completely. I realize doing that would make the divisions themselves irrelevant, and if you’re going to take that step, you might as well just eliminate the divisions entirely and create two conferences.

And I realize doing that would mean reworking the way the schedule is organized, which may take as much brain power as passing health care through Congress.

But even if you keep the divisions around, it just feels that head-to-head record should trump a divisional title in breaking a tie in the standings.

What do you think?

The following two tabs change content below.

Zach Lowe

Latest posts by Zach Lowe (see all)

Share →
  • Pingback: Swinging with Woods()

  • DRJ1

    Re your last question: It probably feels that way because it’s always been that way. But rules are mostly arbitrary anyway, so whatever’s decided up front should be acceptable so long as everybody accepted it. (I mean ACTUALLY acceptable.) And as you said, Divisions gotta count for something, or they have no reason for being.

    Here’s another aspect to the Divisions story–
    One of my pet theories this season has been that the Cs adopted a new paradigm after their strong start this year, once injuries started mounting up: Soft-pedal the entire regular season because they just don’t care very much about seeding or HCA. That wouldn’t have been decided formally – or even, necessarily, knowingly – but more by default as things got tough. Part of the theory is that the Cs are uniquely positioned among ALL NBA teams to do this, specifically because of their status as the best team in the NBA’s weakest Division, which practically assures them a playoff spot, even with mediocre play. So, the theory goes, why work too hard for every last win – thus increasing our risk of injury and exhausting our vets – when we can coast in and then just do our thing in the playoffs? (Real or not, I like this theory.)

    Btw… that 8 minute interview Doc gave last night was one of his best ever, imo. It didn’t all play on TV… only at that link. He divulged more information about the team, his opinions about various players, even his tactics and plans, than I remember ever hearing from him.

  • Rocci1212

    @DRJ1: What link is that Doc interview at?

  • Pingback: What has been you guys experience with home alarm systems. I'm a DIY type of person and notice they sell kits?()

  • Pingback: 14KT Solid White Gold CZ Round Belly Ring | Belly Button Rings()

  • DRJ1

    @Rocci1212–Here ya go: http://www.csnne.com/pages/celtics_video

    Find and click the “Doc Rivers Post Game 3.24.10? box.

  • Pingback: First week experiences | brain altering states()

  • Pingback: Privacy Policy | 10 Speed Blender()

  • Pingback: Today’s Celtics Links 3/26 « Flceltsfan’s Weblog()

  • aarongoil20100408

    Hell ya! Nice article!