This is just logical. Make that tournament mean something towards the end of the year since the players are playing an extra game that doesn’t get factored into their statistics. For instance, AD actually played 77 games this year and is about to play at least 78 games before the playoffs start. That’s a physical toll and sacrifice on his body that affects what he can do in these situations. I get they get paid, but from a competitive standpoint this just makes too much sense to me.
​
https://x.com/ShamsCharania/status/1780301350854894021
by nottherealstanlee
17 Comments
I think doing it by which round the team makes it to is too much. It really should just be the winner of the IST gets first tiebreaker.
Here’s more context: [https://x.com/ShamsCharania/status/1780303303047553178](https://x.com/ShamsCharania/status/1780303303047553178)
“GMs will choose among options, per sources: 1) NBA Cup as first postseason tiebreaker, 2) NBA Cup as second tiebreaker (after head-to-head) and third in ties involving more than two teams, 3) advancement to NBA Cup as first tiebreaker and further advancement as third/fourth.”
The whole point of the IST is in the name..it’s a “in season” tourney.
But I get Americans aren’t used to having this type of concept where you don’t really get a reward other than a trophy for something you win. In soccer their in season tournaments are decade’s long and that in itself is a prestigious honor. You don’t get a tiebreaker for the rest of the season.
I said it at the time.
The tournament winner should get to ‘trade’ one loss for a win. So we officially finished 47-35. Nah, since we won the IST we get to trade out one loss for that IST final win so we instead have a 48-34 record.
We’d still have finished the 8 seed anyway but if you win a game it should mean something so let it count in the win/loss record.
After the Lakers’ collapse in December, teams who want to contend won’t try in IST unless there’s a season-wide reason to. Tanking teams with cheap players will try for the cash prize.
I think it should be head to head first if it’s between two teams. But in any multi-team scenario it goes to IST first.
That would be a great idea. Make the IST have more weight than cash and bragging rights.
I mean we won an extra game so that should give us the edge in the tiebreaker
They should count the championship game in the regular season too
IST winner should move up one seed or have the option to move up one seed. Besides the money, this would be huge for a lot of teams and make them play harder esp if that’s the goal of the IST. The only scenario where it could too much is in a scenario like the second seed in the east jumping Boston where the win differential between the two is so significant
just imagine if the tournament winner would get play in guaranteed or even play off guranteed lol
you could have trully playoff nba on regular season.
The match-ups for non tournament teams during the knockout round are awful too. The Sun’s reward for making the knockout round were losses to the Lakers and Kings. Knicks similarly got losses to the Bucks and Celtics.
Meanwhile, Wolves got free wins against the Spurs and Grizz, Mavs got games against Jazz and Blazers, and 76ers got games against the Wizards and Hawks. Many other teams got at least one easy game after missing the knock-out round. Why would any team put in effort for the point differential tie-breaker after seeing the “reward” for making the knock-out round the Suns and Knicks got?
1 year too late.
I just wish they’d get rid of the play in games…look at the east, Miami finished 8th and theres a chance a team that won 10 less games could have a chance to knock them out lol…Just have everyone fight for those 8 spots on each side, this shit is stupid lol.
I think the winner should be placed no lower than 6th….guaranteeing a playoff spot. From there, they are placed based off record. Lakers went 3-10 right after winning the thing. Pacers went 2-6 after losing. It’s not just coincidental that both the finalists cratered after that thing. People can mock the IST all they want but to the Pacers and Lakers it meant something. You saw the exhilaration on their faces with each advancement in the tournament. And it was a lot of fun. I wouldn’t rule out both finalist getting locked in at 6th.
Because not only was it a come down after that for resuming the regular season, you also got an even bigger target than normal by participating in that thing. Lakers felt like they were back and Pacers were the talk of the league (Haliburton MVP talk). I am sure they won’t go this way for next year but if we see the same thing play out next year…I think the league should seriously consider locked in playOFF spots.
If need be, there could be a kicker to ensure that a truly fluke team (or major injuries) doesn’t ruin the integrity of the playoffs. Something like team needs to be .500+1 in order to secure guaranteed 6th spot. I don’t think anyone would argue this year if the Lakers were gifted 6 spot over teams that won just 2 more games than them.
The IST needs a major incentive if they want the players, especially veterans, to give it more respect. Winners should be awarded home court advantage in any playoff series that they play in, including the championship. Their seeding should not change, they would just “steal” home court in any series where they are the lower seed.
1. Stealing home court from the higher seed in every series you play is a major incentive. This forces all teams to compete intensely for the IST.
2. IST winner still wants to finish with highest regular season seeding, in order to play lowest competition/possible sweeps.
3. If you went through some injuries and lost that seeding, it can be the difference between a saved season and a tossed one.
Or just count the last game lmaoo and they should get a tiebreaker over whatever team they beat in the semifinal