View previous topic :: View next topic |
Which team wins, and in how many games? |
Mercury in 3 |
|
4% |
[ 2 ] |
Mercury in 4 |
|
14% |
[ 6 ] |
Mercury in 5 |
|
17% |
[ 7 ] |
Sky in 3 |
|
2% |
[ 1 ] |
Sky in 4 |
|
48% |
[ 20 ] |
Sky in 5 |
|
12% |
[ 5 ] |
|
Total Votes : 41 |
|
Author |
Message |
Stormeo
Joined: 14 Jul 2019 Posts: 4701
Back to top |
|
tfan
Joined: 31 May 2010 Posts: 9628
Back to top |
Posted: 10/10/21 8:57 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
undersized_post wrote: |
It's crazy to think about the fact that Sophie Cunningham singlehandedly saved PHX from being bounced in that first round single elimination game. |
Phoenix beat New York by one and Seattle (without Stewart) in overtime. Didn’t expect them in the finals after those two games.
|
|
johnjohnW
Joined: 11 Aug 2020 Posts: 1846
Back to top |
|
PicknLOL
Joined: 16 Jul 2019 Posts: 149
Back to top |
|
Rock Hard
Joined: 02 Aug 2010 Posts: 5377 Location: Chocolate Paradise
Back to top |
Posted: 10/11/21 8:36 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Many people on this board are obsessed with the idea that only teams with a winning record should make the playoffs. The only way to guarantee that every season is to only have the top four teams make the playoffs.
The only problem that I have with the current playoff format is to get rid of the single elimination games. The playoffs should be three rounds. The first round should be a three game series. The semifinal and finals should be a five game series. I believe this format is fair for both the coaches and players. The owners like the current format because it gives them a chance to make additional revenue.
_________________ You can win, as long as you keep your head to the SKY! Be OPTIMISTIC!
|
|
johnjohnW
Joined: 11 Aug 2020 Posts: 1846
Back to top |
|
tfan
Joined: 31 May 2010 Posts: 9628
Back to top |
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004 Posts: 66922 Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
|
PicknLOL
Joined: 16 Jul 2019 Posts: 149
Back to top |
Posted: 10/11/21 1:46 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
johnjohnW wrote: |
Why not just eliminate the playoffs and just crown the team with the most wins the de facto champions?
Bouncing top seeds is not a flaw in the format. The best team win on each day and PHX and CHI both earned their way into the final. Win by 2 or win by 20, you won and you advance. |
Zero issue with bouncing top seeds, nor with the eight seed participating in the playoffs and having a chance to become champion, or eliminate a would-be champion then being eliminated themselves in total humiliation in the next round. More than that, one should not be too concerned issue with there being flaws in the format, since you're always going to have something to complain about and your team still needs to win within that system. Flaws and “unfairness” are a given like imperfect officiating and injuries.
But the way single elimination games are set-up is somewhat glaring, especially when compared to the length of the season, in a way that makes me go “Why? ” no matter how I look at it. Less playoff basketball, a potentially fateful stretch of the post-season is short and less memorable, if you don't follow the season you get almost zero impression of the teams that didn't make the semis, and in return what do you get – the team that tore their asses for a whole season get beat by the eight seed who was slacking the entire time and won a game.
I mean, no, I am actually disappointed that didn't happen, inviting enough complaints to extend the play-offs. If the format is going to be like that, at least let it stir drama proportionally, please. I was quite content with both Phoenix and Chicago advancing, and they proved in the semifinals that was no fluke. Doesn't mean I would not have enjoyed, say, two more games with Minnesota.
|
|
|
|