Anonymous
Last year

What would the 9-team finals format be?

You could keep the top 4, but my preference would be top 6:

1 and 2 go to semis

3-6 and 4-5 single game elimination, with winners advancing to semis

Semis as per normal

6/9 is probably too much from a percentage point of view but at the same time 4/9 is probably too few. 50% is the magic number but you can't get that with 9 so which is it? 6 would work with 10 and 11 teams too so from a consistency stand point may be good.

As a reference, in NBA greater than 50% make playoffs but in AFL less than 50% make it.

Your thoughts?

Topic #44061 | Report this topic


koberulz  
Last year

It was top four when there were nine teams in 2011 and 2012.

Reply #709080 | Report this post


Jack Toft  
Last year

You would only go top 5 if the #1 team got a week off.

Week 1: 1: bye, 2 v 3 Qualifying; 4 v 5 Elimination
Week 2: 1 v Winner 2/3, Loser 2/3 v Winner 4/5, Loser 4/5 out
etc etc

Reply #709082 | Report this post


Zodiac  
Last year

You would only go top 5 if the #1 team got a week off.

Week 1: 1: bye, 2 v 3 Qualifying; 4 v 5 Elimination
Week 2: 1 v Winner 2/3, Loser 2/3 v Winner 4/5, Loser 4/5 out
etc etc


Agreed this SANFL Top 5 finals format works well.

Reply #709083 | Report this post


Hogwash  
Last year

That SANFL model looks OK.
Week 1 both one off games.
Week 2 both best of 3
Grand final best of 5.

Reply #709084 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Last year

Top 5 with a single elimination game between 4/5 could work.

Reply #709085 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Last year

Yes, as long as there are no lucky loser shenanigans. Playoffs should be win or go home.

Reply #709094 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Last year

6 out of 9? what next - honour certificates for the other 3 as well?
Keep it at a top 4 please. 5 absolute max. adding 1 team to the league but 2 teams to the playoffs would be ridiculous.

Reply #709095 | Report this post


PlaymakerMo  
Last year

Why does the format need to change with 9 teams?

Reply #709097 | Report this post


GordonG  
Last year

With 4 of the top 8 currently in the finals, 50% of the field has a chance. Add another team and make it top 6, 66+% of the field are in the finals. Why? Let's talk again when we get to 10 teams...

Reply #709099 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Last year

no change - 1v4, 2v3. Simple

Reply #709103 | Report this post


XY  
Last year

There were a couple of disgraceful years where the NBL was top 8 out of an 11 team comp or something. There is a very small asterisk against the Wildcats' 31 year finals streak as they benefitted from this in one of the years coming, if I recall correctly, 6th or 7th out of 11 teams, with a losing record.

Reply #709106 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Last year

"Why does the format need to change with 9 teams?"

Because 4/9 means less than 45% of the teams make it, which might be considered too low. Generally around 50% feels about right.

But the top 5 scenario sounds good.

Reply #709107 | Report this post


PlaymakerMo  
Last year

"Because 4/9 means less than 45% of the teams make it... Generally around 50% feels about right."

You're trolling, right?

Reply #709111 | Report this post


proud  
Last year

Ok lets be honest here, an extra team still using the 2+2 home and away season games vs each team means we may eat into where the playoffs are maybe a week or 2 later so why fiddle with the 3 game series semis and 5 game grand final series.

Give us more games during regular season but keep playoffs as is... just play them on better days (Friday and Sunday instead of Thursday and Saturday) like we have had in the past.

Reply #709126 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Last year

4th vs. 5th play-in I like it. We need more playoff games.

Reply #709127 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Last year

Top 10 to be safe

Reply #709137 | Report this post


NBL Lover  
Last year

Week 1 4 v 5 Best of 3 (1,2,3 bye)
Week 2 Semi Finals 1 v 4/5, 2 v 3 Best of 3
Grand Final Winner Semi Finals Best of 5

Reply #709152 | Report this post


Hogwash  
Last year

Same as above but with 4 v 5 being a one off game.

Reply #709154 | Report this post


PeterJohn  
Last year

Personally, I don't fancy the notion of a team that wasn't good enough to win at least half of its regular season games making playoffs. I reckon the 6th placed of 9 teams would have a losing record more than 80% of seasons. I also think 5th placed team would have a losing record in about a quarter of seasons.

Here's NBL number of teams and Win-loss record of sixth placed team for each season since 2001:

2000-01 11 16-12
2001-02 11 16-14
2002-03 11 15-15
2003-04 12 16-17
2004-05 11 17-15
2005-06 11 17-15
2006-07 12 17-16
2007-08 13 16-14
2008-09 10 15-15
2009-10 8 11-17
2010-11 9 13-15
2011-12 9 11-17
2012-13 8 11-17
2013-14 8 12-16
2014-15 8 11-17
2015-16 8 12-16
2016-17 8 13-15
2017-18 8 11-17

Shows that the 6th placed team has needed at least 5 more teams below it to achieve a winning record. It needed at least 4 below it to break even. Less than that and it had a losing record.

Reply #709156 | Report this post


NBL Lover  
Last year

4 v 5 shouldn't be a one off game. It makes a mockery of it. Plus 1 game won't hurt them physically. Needs to be 3 games so it's a test of the mind, body, and spirit and gives an advantage to those who finished higher.

Reply #709158 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Last year

Stick with top 4 until we get to 10 + teams

Reply #709159 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Last year

I agree with PeterJohn. If you can't finish in the top half of the field, you don't deserve a chance to play finals. 5th isn't the top half of a 9 team field, so don't bother with a 4v5 elimination game.

Reply #709186 | Report this post


Luuuc  
Last year

IMO, increasing it to a top 5 is largely pointless unless the 5th placed team gets a home game out of it, therefore I wouldn't bother doing a one-off 4-vs-5 game. Who benefits from that?
(Personally I'd keep it a top 4 until there are 10 teams anyway)

Reply #709187 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Last year

Totally agree with PeterJohn

Additionally, you start adding too many teams to the playoffs you risk reducing the competitiveness eg. top 6 could feature a Melbourne smash Brisbane game that no one really wants to see. Leave them in the regular season

Reply #709201 | Report this post


AD  
Last year

Well at least with "9-team finals" the Wildcats streak would be safe for a while

Reply #709220 | Report this post


AD  
Last year

But seriously, I would stick with 4, until we had at least 10 teams.
Especially when some of our teams continue to suck balls

Reply #709223 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Last year

You guys have short memories. It was only a couple of a seasons ago that the majority of the league were within 1-2 games of each other at the end of the season.

There are more than 4 quality teams in most years.

Reply #709234 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Last year

True, 2 season ago there were 6 teams of equal quality making finals interesting and yet, last year there was only 2 and they swept the semis.

Reply #709238 | Report this post


ME  
Last year

Shouldn't change. It's one extra team. We live in a bit of a "everyone gets a prize" era where you have to be seen to be exceedingly fair. But no, we shouldn't need to come up with mathematical magic to shoehorn more teams into finals when we have a league of 9.

Reply #709241 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Last year

the parity in the league was amazing a couple of seasons ago but the longer we go under Larry's system of the rich get richer and the poor can get stuffed it is unlikely to ever be that close again

Reply #709265 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Last year

"Shouldn't change. It's one extra team. We live in a bit of a "everyone gets a prize" era where you have to be seen to be exceedingly fair."

It's not all about fairness but keeping fans interested. Aussie fans don't like meaningless games so if you keep teams in the playoff hunt longer those fans are more likely to retain interest. Of course you need balance, because if it's too easy to make it then you have the same effect of meaningless games because everyone makes it.

Hence why 50% seems the right number. 5 would be the closest to that in a 9 team league.

Reply #709266 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Last year

"the parity in the league was amazing a couple of seasons ago but the longer we go under Larry's system of the rich get richer and the poor can get stuffed it is unlikely to ever be that close again"

It was still quite a tight league last year. And this year Cairns look like genuine top 4 contenders. Then you have Sydney coming up. The competition for top 4 spots will be hot this year.

Reply #709268 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Last year

The only thing stopping Sydney from turning into a juggernaut franchise is JVG. He is better for parity than any salary or points cap. Does he have a brother that Perth could hire? Gleeson alone is not quite enough.

Reply #709271 | Report this post


koberulz  
Last year

There's also the fact that the playoffs come and go so quickly, and more playoff games would be a good thing. Expanding the league is the way to get there though, and I think you need at least 11 teams before moving to a top six.

Reply #709280 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Last year

#709271 Perth have a placeholder GM now, that's why they did nothing in January to address their slide. Compliments Gleeson well but a JvG type with more hair brained ideas would be even better.

Reply #709311 | Report this post




 

Reply to this topic

Random name suggestion for anonymous posters: Juno 33

Rules:You must read the Terms of Use. No spam, no offensive material, no sniping at other clubs, no 'who cares?'-type comments, no naming or bashing under 18 players. Learn how to embed YouTube videos or tweets

Please proof-read your post before submitting as you will not be able to edit it afterwards.



Close ads
Westside Basketball Association
Dunk.com.au - Custom basketball uniforms
PickStar - The best place to book sports stars

Advertise on Hoops to a very focused, local and sports-keen audience. Email for rates and options.

Recent Posts



Invoicing clients? Stay productive with Punch, the insightful time tracker that earns you more.

Special offer: $30/month Pay $100 for lifetime access. Sign up now!

.


An Australian basketball forum covering NBL, WNBL, ABL, Juniors plus NBA, WNBA, NZ, Europe, etc | Forum time is: 6:35 am, Fri 20 Sep 2019 | Posts: 790,872 | Last 7 days: 1,755