RebKell's Junkie Boards
Board Junkies Forums
 
Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index

Playoff format changed
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » WNBA
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66773
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 11/18/21 3:09 pm    ::: Playoff format changed Reply Reply with quote

https://www.wnba.com/news/wnba-approves-new-playoff-format/

Quote:
The reconfigured postseason structure will include three rounds of series-play using a best-of 3-5-5 format.





_________________
Let us not deceive ourselves. Our educational institutions have proven to be no bastions of democracy.
Coyotes



Joined: 28 Jan 2018
Posts: 1467



Back to top
PostPosted: 11/18/21 3:26 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Oooh! Really interesting that Games 1 and 2 will be hosted by the higher seed, with the Game 3 if necessary being hosted by the lower seed. Reduces travel, but gives home court advantage to the lower seed in the deciding game.

I think this change is long overdue and much needed.


mercfan3



Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 19725



Back to top
PostPosted: 11/18/21 3:38 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Coyotes wrote:
Oooh! Really interesting that Games 1 and 2 will be hosted by the higher seed, with the Game 3 if necessary being hosted by the lower seed. Reduces travel, but gives home court advantage to the lower seed in the deciding game.

I think this change is long overdue and much needed.


I actually was hoping they’d leave the first round as single game- but it’s a good sign that the W did this.



_________________
“Anyone point out that a Donald Trump anagram is ‘Lord Dampnut’”- Colin Mochrie
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66773
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 11/18/21 3:40 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I predict the 2-1 format won't last long. Lower seeded teams won't like getting in and then not getting a home game while higher seeds won't like playing a potential decisive game on the road.

The 1-1-1 will be too travel intensive with no conference playoffs, so they'll go back to the 1-2.



_________________
Let us not deceive ourselves. Our educational institutions have proven to be no bastions of democracy.
johnjohnW



Joined: 11 Aug 2020
Posts: 1828



Back to top
PostPosted: 11/18/21 3:44 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

This quite a turn around from the initial breason they changed it last time. So no more byes either? I kind of liked that aspect. Seeing two lower seeds fight to advance is a lot more compelling than a Sea or LV crush a Dallas or NY in a best of 3.


Stormeo



Joined: 14 Jul 2019
Posts: 4701



Back to top
PostPosted: 11/18/21 3:55 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
I predict the 2-1 format won't last long. Lower seeded teams won't like getting in and then not getting a home game while higher seeds won't like playing a potential decisive game on the road.

The 1-1-1 will be too travel intensive with no conference playoffs, so they'll go back to the 1-2.


But the higher seeded teams didn't feel that the 1-2 format was fair to them, which is why the League changed it to the 1-1-1 back then. As for lower seeded teams, why should they get a say? Any counterargument to their format-related complaint is simply, "Well, y'all should've earned that higher seed then"...

I've advocated for the 2-1 format before, because it makes the most sense in a best-of-3 round. The higher seed truly gets an earned advantage, and travel (cost) is the absolute most minimized in this format. Unless the # of playoff teams ever changes, I think this new format will stick, in large part because the players will all be content with it.


pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66773
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 11/18/21 4:04 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Stormeo wrote:
But the higher seeded teams didn't feel that the 1-2 format was fair to them, which is why the League changed it to the 1-1-1 back then.


Which is funny, because the 1-2 format was better for higher seeds. Higher seeds won 77% of three game series under the 1-2 compared to 67% under the 1-1-1.



_________________
Let us not deceive ourselves. Our educational institutions have proven to be no bastions of democracy.
Stormeo



Joined: 14 Jul 2019
Posts: 4701



Back to top
PostPosted: 11/18/21 4:17 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
Stormeo wrote:
But the higher seeded teams didn't feel that the 1-2 format was fair to them, which is why the League changed it to the 1-1-1 back then.


Which is funny, because the 1-2 format was better for higher seeds. Higher seeds won 77% of three game series under the 1-2 compared to 67% under the 1-1-1.


¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Either way, this new 2-1 format should without question keep the higher seed satisfied. We'll probably see people begging the League to bring back the single-elim. format – people rooting for (or playing for) lower-seeded teams, that is. Laughing


Randy



Joined: 08 Oct 2011
Posts: 10911



Back to top
PostPosted: 11/18/21 4:34 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

The seeding seems designed to make the 7 and 8 teams disappear before they have to play on a alternate court miles from their home arena before empty stands.


bryan_february_



Joined: 28 Aug 2015
Posts: 702
Location: USA


Back to top
PostPosted: 11/18/21 4:45 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Thank goodness, long overdue! I kind of didn't mind the single elimination games in the first round, but overall, I'm glad they are gone.



_________________
Indiana Fever
Hoopsmom



Joined: 05 Apr 2017
Posts: 680



Back to top
PostPosted: 11/18/21 5:00 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Finally! These talented ladies deserve these changes. Actually, they deserve a seven game playoff like the men have, but for now we will take what we can get!


johnjohnW



Joined: 11 Aug 2020
Posts: 1828



Back to top
PostPosted: 11/18/21 5:08 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Hoopsmom wrote:
Finally! These talented ladies deserve these changes. Actually, they deserve a seven game playoff like the men have, but for now we will take what we can get!


I would argue the men's rounds should only be 5 games. Lol


Bob Lamm



Joined: 11 Apr 2010
Posts: 5065
Location: New York City


Back to top
PostPosted: 11/18/21 7:02 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I will continue to advocate for a change that no professional sports league will ever accept because of the almighty dollar. No professional team that finishes with a regular-season record below .500 should ever be allowed into any postseason competition.

Imagine that under this new WNBA format team X ends up as the #1 seed while team Y wins the #8 seed with a record below .500. Team Y should have to forfeit and team X should advance to the second round without playing a first-round game.

Again, I realize this will never happen. But I find the notion of a sub-.500 team in the WNBA playoffs or any other to be repulsive. If it happens in 2022 to one of my teams (Liberty, Knicks, Mets), I will cheer for my team but I'll still say it's wrong for them to be in the postseason.



_________________
Remember Roe v. Wade. Work for and support legal abortion all over the world and full reproductive rights for everyone.
Queenie



Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 18013
Location: Queens


Back to top
PostPosted: 11/18/21 8:02 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

johnjohnW wrote:
Hoopsmom wrote:
Finally! These talented ladies deserve these changes. Actually, they deserve a seven game playoff like the men have, but for now we will take what we can get!


I would argue the men's rounds should only be 5 games. Lol


I am also in favor of this. Seven games is too many in basketball (and hockey).



_________________
All your Rebecca are belong to the Liberty.

(now with spelling variations)
Richyyy



Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 24326
Location: London


Back to top
PostPosted: 11/18/21 8:04 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Yeah, this is... odd. I can see what they're trying to do, with the best-of-three where the higher seed still gets two games, and minimalising potential travel, but the first time a deciding game ends up on the lower-seed's floor it's going to be weird. And even if Team X would beat Team Y, say, 80% of the time on their home floor - which is a pretty heavy favourite in basketball - they'd only go 2-0 64% of the time.

I still like my AFL-based semi-double-elimination system.



_________________
Independent WNBA coverage: http://www.wnbalien.com/
ChicagoAnnie



Joined: 04 Sep 2009
Posts: 9199
Location: St. Paul, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 11/18/21 9:01 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I'm assuming some of these games will not be nationally televised? Not sure if ESPN can fit all of these games in with football in full swing around Wnba playoff time.


huskiemaniac



Joined: 24 Nov 2004
Posts: 1049
Location: NE CT


Back to top
PostPosted: 11/18/21 9:05 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Good riddance to the 1 and done!


johnjohnW



Joined: 11 Aug 2020
Posts: 1828



Back to top
PostPosted: 11/18/21 11:13 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ChicagoAnnie wrote:
I'm assuming some of these games will not be nationally televised? Not sure if ESPN can fit all of these games in with football in full swing around Wnba playoff time.


So, I have to image this was ESPN'S call. They wouldn't do this just cause the fans complained. There had to be a push from a vested interest. Either ESPN wanted more games or the NBA dictated it for respectability. I know that's a bit cynical but the whole reason they went to single eliminations was due to tv and arena financials. I can't imagine this decision being made without the support or directive of ESPN. Unless ESPN thinks the W on ESPNEWS is a worthwhile venture.


awhom111



Joined: 19 Nov 2014
Posts: 4200



Back to top
PostPosted: 11/19/21 12:09 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Next year's schedule is going to be a mess unless they start really early.
Stormeo



Joined: 14 Jul 2019
Posts: 4701



Back to top
PostPosted: 11/19/21 12:13 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

awhom111 wrote:
Next year's schedule is going to be a mess unless they start really early.


Was thinking the same thing. Getting rid of the Commissioner’s Cup would probably help a marginal amount – or at least shelving it for a year to figure out how to make it make sense irl lmao. Razz


Richyyy



Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 24326
Location: London


Back to top
PostPosted: 11/19/21 7:21 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

awhom111 wrote:
Next year's schedule is going to be a mess unless they start really early.

There's just no good reason to play a 36-game regular season. It's going to mean cramming the games in, and there's really very little point. 32 is fine. Hell, 28 is fine. Most of the teams and League aren't making extra money per game anyway.



_________________
Independent WNBA coverage: http://www.wnbalien.com/
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66773
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 11/19/21 8:10 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

awhom111 wrote:
Next year's schedule is going to be a mess unless they start really early.


This format change will have a minimal impact on that. Replacing two rounds of single elimination games with one round of best of three series is an add of maybe two days.



_________________
Let us not deceive ourselves. Our educational institutions have proven to be no bastions of democracy.
RI_Sun_Fan



Joined: 16 Jan 2010
Posts: 858



Back to top
PostPosted: 11/19/21 9:20 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Can't say I'm a big fan of the new changes. I'm the person who likes to see no more than 50% of the league make the playoffs. I'd prefer 6 or 4 teams in.

I like the AFL system with top 4 getting two chances to advance to the final 4.

Odd idea for the 1st round: 2 game total point series. One game at home, one away and add the points for both, total points wins. If point totals are tied after the conclusion of the second game play an overtime period and then add more overtimes as necessary.

As far as the 1-2 system goes, I don't think it will have much staying power. I'm sure Seattle not winning their playoff game this year had a lot to with it.

I don't know how the league came up with 36 games with a 12 team league UNLESS the league knows about a 13th team coming next year (hint maybe!?!?) then you have a schedule where you play each team 3 times. If next season has 12 teams 33 games makes much more sense (3 games against the other 11). Another nice byproduct of playing every other team 3 times is that it makes tie-breakers easier if you use head to head.


Davis4632



Joined: 14 Jul 2014
Posts: 861



Back to top
PostPosted: 11/19/21 11:29 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

johnjohnW wrote:
Hoopsmom wrote:
Finally! These talented ladies deserve these changes. Actually, they deserve a seven game playoff like the men have, but for now we will take what we can get!


I would argue the men's rounds should only be 5 games. Lol


I would bet you that the WNBA will have a seven game finals series before the NBA will have a five game finals series.

I like the change. I would rather it 1-1-1 in the 1st round than 2-1 but it will do for me.


HomerCecil



Joined: 30 Nov 2005
Posts: 1201



Back to top
PostPosted: 11/19/21 11:53 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I wonder if it is a coincidence that these changes came out the same day that the NCAA women's tournament announced it was changing to 68 teams and moving the selection show from Monday to Sunday... Could they possibly be, dare I say it, coordinating?!


Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » WNBA All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.17 © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Template by Vjacheslav Trushkin