Instead of 2-3-2 NBA Finals, How about this format:

[infyrno23]

i was talkin about this with my friend, and i said the current format is kinda unfair to the team with home court advantage, because of the 3 games in the middle. I understand the change because of travel, but i think it makes the hme court advantage irrelevant.

this is my proposal...  3-3-1
I think this is the most fair to the home court team because, you get 3 home games in a row... the possibility of going up 3-0 before going on the road, is what should be home court advantage IMO... going on the road with a 2-0 lead and possibly coming back hom down 3-2, for games 6 or 7... that doesnt seem fair. I also feel it would be just as easy on traveling if not better.

i think the only disadvantage of this format would be possibility of alot of sweeps. but at the point of the NBA finals, the two teams should be able to handle the pressure of road games. what do you guys think?

 

[notorious 858]

The 2-3-2 format is really suited for the team with home court advantage. Because not to many teams win the 3 middle games in a row in the Finals.

Yes I know Detroit did it in 04, Miami in 06.

But having game 6 & 7 for the team with home advantage is HUGE.

Even if a team steals game 1 or 2 from the team with home court advantage the odds of the road team taking the next 3 games on their home court is not good.

 

[rook]

I Don't really feel it, why fix something thats not broken?

 

[dland24]

Originally Posted by Infyrno23

this is my proposal...  3-3-1
I think this is the most fair to the home court team because, you get 3 home games in a row... the possibility of going up 3-0 before going on the road, is what should be home court advantage IMO... going on the road with a 2-0 lead and possibly coming back hom down 3-2, for games 6 or 7... that doesnt seem fair. I also feel it would be just as easy on traveling if not better.

So lets say the home team wins games 1 and 3 in your proposal.  Is it then fair that the team that DIDNT win homecourt advantage can then have 3 games in a row to try to win the series?  What if the team wins games 4 and 5?  Is it now fair that the team that clinched home court now has to battle for their life in game 6 on the road to avoid losing the series?
Your proposal is no more fair than the current format.  

 

[frenchblue23]

Current format is fine.

 

[4wrestling]

I've never understood why the Finals have a different format from the rest of the playoffs.

 

[joesarge]

^^ I've heard it's an old rule that helped the media. Since the Finals are East/West the media had to travel further which was more expensive. So with this format they only had to travel twice.

Not saying it's true, just what I read years ago.

 

[cedric ceballos 1995 lakers]

just do 2-2-1-1-1

 

[notorious 858]

Originally Posted by joesarge

^^ I've heard it's an old rule that helped the media. Since the Finals are East/West the media had to travel further which was more expensive. So with this format they only had to travel twice.

Not saying it's true, just what I read years ago.

thats true

 

[AIR J XIII]

the team with the three middle home games has only won all three twice since 84 or whenever they went to it.

looks fair to me.

 

[durden7]

A 3-3-1 series would basically elimiate the team with home court advantage from winning the title on its home court.

No need to change.

 

[do be doo]

Its fair for the home team...

LA chock in 04

 and so did the MAVS in 06

You can't blame that on the format...


  

 

[billy hoyle]

or do

1-1-1-1-1-1-1

 

[frenchblue23]

Originally Posted by Billy Hoyle

or do

1-1-1-1-1-1-1

That kinda negates the purpose of the format to begin with.

 

[bangdak]

These threads pop up so often its not even funny. unfortunately for you, you need a better idea.

 

[twozerosix]

Originally Posted by 4wrestling

I've never understood why the Finals have a different format from the rest of the playoffs.

 

[frenchblue23]

Originally Posted by twozerosix

Originally Posted by 4wrestling

I've never understood why the Finals have a different format from the rest of the playoffs.

It has been mentioned, to help reduce travel time in between games, something to this nature

^^ I've heard it's an old rule that helped the media. Since the Finals are East/West the media had to travel further which was more expensive. So with this format they only had to travel twice.

Not saying it's true, just what I read years ago.

 

[xxtowrxx]

Infyrno23 wrote:

this is my proposal...  3-3-1
I think this is the most fair to the home court team because, you get 3 home games in a row... the possibility of going up 3-0 before going on the road, is what should be home court advantage IMO... going on the road with a 2-0 lead and possibly coming back hom down 3-2, for games 6 or 7... that doesnt seem fair. I also feel it would be just as easy on traveling if not better.


So if the team with home court wins the first 3, is it fair for the other team's franchise and fans to possibly only have one game at home? I think they do the current format so it allows each team's fans to have at least 2 games at home ... The Finals is something special for the fans and with this format, it allows them to goto the games and feel that their team has a chance to win it ... If the Cavs were up 3-0 on the Lakers coming home, there's no way I'd attend the game, but 2-0, I'll be there ...

 

[lb510]

I wouldn't mind a 2-2-1-1-1.

 

[scotthallwithapick]

It's not just more expensive with travel it takes a toll on the players. So if you do all this 2-2-1-1-1 or whatever you gotta take into the fact that these professional athletes are doing a lot of travel and that can lower performance.

And to OP 3-3-1 would never work. It's unfair to the 2nd time. Winning the 1st 2 games then having momentum and winning the 3rd on the road it's a wrap for the finals.

 

[inine5]

the 2-3-2 slightly benefits the road team if they steal game 1 or 2 because assuming they win 2 of 3 at home, they can go into game 6 up 3-2. for whatever reason, this hasn;t happened much. I think it's mainly due to the home team being superior most of the time anyways regardless of format.....

 

[licensed to ball]

Originally Posted by iNiNe5

the 2-3-2 slightly benefits the road team if they steal game 1 or 2 because assuming they win 2 of 3 at home, they can go into game 6 up 3-2. for whatever reason, this hasn;t happened much. I think it's mainly due to the home team being superior most of the time anyways regardless of format.....

True.
However if the Lakers/Magic meet in the finals for example, i think its highly possible for the lakers to steal at least one in Orlando is it not? 

So imo, as weird as it may sound, i would be happy either way, not having homecourt advantage could be a benefit because it can give us a much better chance of striking while the iron is still hot. Im fairly confident we would steal at least one game, imo.

This all of course is hypothetical, there are still plenty of games to be played.

 

[bjm5295]

Originally Posted by Billy Hoyle

or do

1-1-1-1-1-1-1

I was coming in to say that.. Beat me to it.

 

[noblekane]

2-2-1-1-1 would be cool

 

[infyrno23]

i dont think the 3-3-1 would be fair for the 2nd team.... and thats the point. Home court advantage should be a major reward for having the best record in the regular season.
the 2nd best team should be able to win 1 of the games at home... meaning they could go back home down 2-1 and have a chance to wrap it up.. .or the other team steals a game and the finale is game 7 on the home court....

idk maybe my idea isnt all that great... i just feel it would be more exciting and challenge the teams more to play harder,
i just really really would like that the team with home court advantage to have a very major advantage as a reward for their regular season record.


LiCeNseD To BaLL
i agree i think the same, if Lakers/Orlando played... LA would certainly win one of the 1st 2 games.... and its really hard to say they couldnt win all 3 in the middle but it rarely happens... i like that the Lakers dont have Home court