Hopscotch 55
Earlier this year

New Finals Format Options

10 teams in a competition can make it awkward in terms of the structure of the finals for the league. What do people think would be the best way to manage things?

To my mind - having a final 4, with 10 teams in the competition restricts things too much, with too many teams missing out on finals action, while expanding to 6 teams in the finals seems to reward teams too low in the ranking.

Making the finals still needs to be a special achievement and having 6 out of 10 just doesn't seem like that.

What I'd prefer.

Season ends. Teams 4 and 5 immediately play a small elimination round to determine the ultimate fourth seed lasting no more than 1 week (1 to 3 games).
This allows the other teams time to deal with any in season injuries, and prepare for finals, without their down period stretching on so long as to become a disadvantage.

Finals then proceed as they are now with the final 4.

So 5 in, 5 out, 4&5 play a brief qualifying/elimination round at the close of the season for the 4th seed.

Topic #48894 | Report this topic


Anonymous  
Earlier this year

They need to go to a top 5 I agree. Otherwise too many teams missing out.

Reply #859136 | Report this post


Giacontigers  
Earlier this year

I personally liked the top-6 finals format with all six teams playing against each other. Otherwise why can't we have elimination finals like the 2009 season.

Highest loser seed will go through to the semifinals.

Qualifying-finals:
1st vs. 6th, 2nd vs. 5th, 3rd vs. 4th. (best-of-3)
Or
Elimination-finals:
3rd vs. 6th, 4th vs. 5th. (best-of-3)

Semi-finals:
(best-of-3 or best-of 5)

Grand Final:
(best-of-5)

Reply #859138 | Report this post


Curtley  
Earlier this year

If you compare NBA playoffs to NBL, if all seven games are played in each series by one team there are 28 extra games on top of the normally 82 regular season games. That's 34% of all games being playoff games in theory.

The NBL should aim for the same. If there is a top 5, have three games to separate 4/5 then a best of 5 semis and best of 5 GF. There could be a playoff game every night for a 10 day period followed by a further 10 day GF series.

Reply #859140 | Report this post


Giacontigers  
Earlier this year

Not a bad way thinking. Extend the playoffs because I know in the LBA in Italy all their playoff games are best of 5 I think. Their grand final may be best of 7.

It just sucks we don't have enough teams to make a proper finals series. Quarter finals were the best format like the NBL use to have from 1992 to 1996 respectively.

Reply #859142 | Report this post


Perth fan.  
Earlier this year

I'm Not a fan of lucky loser but I do like
3v6 (best of 3)
4v5 ( best of 3)
1&2 Bye

Semis 1v 4or5 ( best of 5)
2v 3or6 ( best of 5)

Grand final (best of 7)

Reply #859144 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Earlier this year

1 v 4
2 v 3

11-12 teams change it, not with 10

Reply #859145 | Report this post


Giacontigers  
Earlier this year

10 teams was mostly top-6 Anonymous #859145?

Reply #859148 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Earlier this year

6 out of 10 teams make finals lol. 4 still imo.

4 out of 11
6 out of 12 Wellington + (Canberra? Tville?, newcastle? ws? Gc?, Geelong?)
6 out of 13
6 out of 14
6 out of 15
8 out of 16
8 out of 17
8 out of 20

Reply #859149 | Report this post


Giacontigers  
Earlier this year

They had top-8 from 1992 to 1996. 2004-2008 format was dumb. Single elimination finals were terrible.

Reply #859151 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Earlier this year

Fuck that, top-8 so then Perth can make the finals like the previous 35 consecutive seasons. 8D

Reply #859159 | Report this post


Perthworld  
Earlier this year

Keep it the way it is.

There was clear daylight between the top two and the next two. You don't want another dud being a playoff team.

Reply #859166 | Report this post


KET  
Earlier this year

Have elimination finals and top 5 or 6

Reply #859167 | Report this post


RobT  
Earlier this year

This year, there may have been 1 or 2 dud teams. That does not include the 5th, 6th and even the 7th team. Daylight between top 2 and the rest, I agree.

Reply #859169 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Earlier this year

Let's just wait till we have 12 teams. 5-8 years maybe?

Wellington tsb arena could really be ready in 22-23 season.

I think we have 20-25 players likely from nz this year, certainly another 4or so next season.

Reply #859170 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Earlier this year

With respect to the posters above, what's the measuring stick for comparing new options with the status quo?

I don't think "the NBA/Italy does it so the NBL should" is sufficient. There are probably substantial reasons why those leagues have landed on their chosen formats. Do those reasons make sense for the NBL?

Is it about more games for more teams just for the sake of it? Or rewarding the teams whose regular season performance were the best? Or giving more teams a chance of winning the championship? Or creating more finals' games to generate tv/streaming ratings? Or what?

Reply #859173 | Report this post


Perthworld  
Earlier this year

This year, there may have been 1 or 2 dud teams. That does not include the 5th, 6th and even the 7th team. Daylight between top 2 and the rest, I agree.

I meant duds in the context of being capable playoff teams once they're in the finals rather than the regular season. We're on the same page.

Reply #859174 | Report this post


Statman84  
Earlier this year

I am with Giacontigers, back in the '90s with the top 8 QF were the best.

I probably wouldn't go top 6 until we have 11 teams though.

6 out of 11
6 out of 12
6 out of 13 (maybe 8)
8 out of 14 and above

Finals need to be longer, best of 5 each round. Surely Larry is looking to expand on this once we get at least 1 more team.

Reply #859181 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Earlier this year

I agree, but we can't give teams easy participation for finals. A good example is when Perth finished 7th in 2003-04 with a 15–18 (.455) record.

The season before the NBL had top-6 with the qualifying finals format. Perth’s 35 consecutive years making finals would of been over if the NBL stayed with the previous finals format.

If we had top-6 this season then Sydney and Brisbane would of qualified.

Adelaide, New Zealand and Cairns do not deserve participation for finals. All three were awful all season.

Reply #859182 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Earlier this year

Perth were average during the mid-2000's. Not sure how they scraped through finals.

Remember when they finished 3rd in 2007 but lost in their first elimination final to Cairns...

Reply #859184 | Report this post


D2.0  
Earlier this year

4th vs 5th is a pointless waste of time.
You've got everyone sitting around for a week, waiting on the result of a game that will probably be irrelevant, and that nobody cares about.
That's a good recipe to get fans of 6-10 to switch off, take no further interest, and start watching the AFL pre-season.
Then the winning team is on a hiding to nothing, as they have to back straight up and play the number one team.
It's also pointless. To work you need 4th and 5th to be strong teams, either capable of taking to team 1. Highly unlikely.

If you have top 6, with 3-6 playing off, and 1 & 2 having a by.
You risk making it too easy for teams 1 & 2. A week off, plus HCA.

I will admit to certain level of OCD, but I like the current format. It's simple, it's clean, it's fair.

Upsets do happen, but they don't generally improve things. Wildcats got a couple of titles because 1st blew it against 4th, gifting Perth HCA against an easy opponent. Do we really want to watch the result if 6th manages to upset 1st?

This isn't pee-wees. The NBL isn't giving out participation trophies.
We all get to enjoy the season, but the idea is that the cream rises slowly to the top, and the finals need to have just enough teams to make it interesting. If you can't make it into the top half, you don't deserve to be there.
I would accept a final 5 just, if it worked, but I don't see how it can.

Reply #859190 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Earlier this year

Well if it's 4 then we need best-of-5 and a best-of-7 grand final series. Once NBL has 11 to 12 teams then consider top-6.

Reply #859191 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Earlier this year

Finals are already an expensive proposition for most fans, many people hold off on earlier games. If you extend out the early stages of finals Notthis will happen more. Nor a good look with half empty stadiums and financially difficult for teams who can't afford to make a loss at the end of the season.

Reply #859192 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Earlier this year

"4th vs 5th is a pointless waste of time.
You've got everyone sitting around for a week, waiting on the result of a game that will probably be irrelevant, and that nobody cares about."


You need to have a break between the last round and the semi-finals in order to get decent crowds, so having a 4v5 to help fill that gap might be a good solution.

Reply #859195 | Report this post


LV  
Earlier this year

Week 1
Wed/Thur
Game 1: 2 vs 3
Game 2: 4 vs 5

Loser of Game 2 eliminated

Sat/Sun

Game 3: 1 vs winner of Game 1 (2 vs 3)
Game 4: Loser of Game 1 (2 vs 3) VS winner of Game 2 (4 vs 5)

Week 2:

Winner of Game 3 vs Loser of Game 4- Best of 3

Loser of Game 3 vs Winner of Game 4- best of 3

Week 3 and 4:

Grand Final best of 5, home court based on seedlings established in playoffs

Reply #859196 | Report this post


LV  
Earlier this year

Seedings* not seedlings

Reply #859197 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Earlier this year

Means the top seed will have a bye*

Reply #859200 | Report this post


LV  
Earlier this year

My system has these advantages

- 5 teams. The right amount for a 10 team comp.

- The buzz of one off games- playing to avoid elimination, or playing for playoff seeding and home court

- genuine advantage for the minor premier, then 2 and 3, then 4 and 5. This tiering of advantages within the playoffs structure seems fair

- Increases rivalries by meaning you can meet the same opponent multiple times in the same playoffs. If we had a dominant 1 and 2, they'd meet in Week 1 (with semi final and GF home court advantage on the line) and then again in the GF.

Reply #859201 | Report this post


Sebastian  
Earlier this year

Leave it at 4 until we expand more. Make getting to the playoffs mean something

Reply #859203 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Earlier this year

Leave it at four till the ten teams play out a season or two. Cairns and Tasmania look very ordinary for next season already. The other eight teams can battle it out.

Reply #859205 | Report this post


Hopscotch 55  
Earlier this year

"4th vs 5th is a pointless waste of time...To work you need 4th and 5th to be strong teams, either capable of taking to team 1. Highly unlikely."

We've seen a few seasons where there has been a team making a charge to fall just short.. arguably performing better, at the end of the season, than the team hanging on to 4th.
But yeah - otherwise I'd agree there'd be years when the team in 5th would be a dud.

For me I just hate overly complex structures, where you have multiple teams playing qualifiers. The way the AFL do things I can handle - just - but still think going up to 6 teams out of 10 sets the bar too low.. almost certainly taking on a team with a losing record further than they should go.

Reply #859206 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Earlier this year

LV - your format would honestly be the most convoluted in all of sporting history.

Total garbage and the right number for 10 teams is still 4.

Reply #859212 | Report this post


Senator11  
Earlier this year

Just have top 4, and if 5th/6th are close then have a play in tournament like the NBA, if they aren't close then they aren't good enough.

Reply #859236 | Report this post


LV  
Earlier this year

#212 not at all, it's an easy format. Was used in the VJBL when I was a junior. Great system. The rivalry thing would be huge for the NBL, has potential to add interest.

Reply #859240 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Earlier this year

Remember when we had a top 8 system in an 11 team league? Top 6 out of 10 would be fine, maybe do it in a play in tournament style.

3v4 - winner takes "3rd seed", loser plays on
5v6 - winner plays on, loser eliminated
Loser of 3v4 vs winner of 5v6 for the "4th seed".

Then play the rest as normal.

Reply #859259 | Report this post


Giacontigers  
Earlier this year

I like that idea. But instead of having a series for the play-in games they should only have two games which will be home, away and legged. Meaning every point counts.

Then whoever makes the top-4 you keep it the same format. But, I would personally like the semifinals to become a best of 5 series like the grand final series.

Reply #859311 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Earlier this year

I actually really like the two legged 4v5 idea, not too long but not just a single game, and allows for an appropriate one week gap between reg season and finals without fatiguing the winning team too much

Reply #859355 | Report this post


Giacontigers  
Earlier this year

I know the British Basketball League does legged games for their finals. It would be ideal for the first round of basketball. Much better then a single elimination final or best of 3 series which would be too long for the number 1 and 2 seeds.

Reply #859369 | Report this post


D2.0  
Earlier this year

It's obvious that with the league expanding back to 10 teams, there is no choice.

We simply must return to a final-8 system

Reply #860102 | Report this post


Giacontigers  
Two months ago

I agree, even though 8 seems crazy, but it's what the NBA does every year and it works.

I would love to attend all finals in Melbourne if that will be quarterfinals, semifinals and the Grand Final. Be great if an 8 seed, say like Cairns could knock off a top team like Perth, Sydney or Melbourne.

Top-6 is likely, but it makes no sense giving the top seeds advantage in the quarterfinals if they lose.

I don’t necessary agree giving teams byes to the semifinals either.

Most European leagues have a top-8 finals format. I know one European League I follow has 10 teams like the NBL does now. They always have a top-8 finals format. I remember my team lost to the 8 seed in the quarterfinals in 2019. It did suck, but it was amazing an 8 seed could knock off a top seed. Brings excitement to finals for every NBL team.

Reply #866664 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two months ago

Top-8 finals format could work. Nothing better having the top-8 sides battling it out.

Reply #866689 | Report this post


KET  
Two months ago

Let's do a stupid structure where there are 5 conferences of 2 teams and the top 5 plus the next best three teams make it to the quarters and who plays who goes into a complicated lottery scenario.

Reply #866693 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two months ago

Most euro leagues have 18 teams. Nba has 30 teams.

Reply #866695 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two months ago

Spain, Italy and France have heaps of teams, but they have no limits on their imports which is stupid.

Work on your local talent even if that means having a smaller league.

Reply #866713 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two months ago

Surprised NBL hasn't announced anything yet. Be better if people would just get vaccinated so we can get back to sports.

Reply #866734 | Report this post


koberulz  
Two months ago

Announced anything about what?

Reply #866738 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two months ago

Most euro teams have a limit of six imports.

Reply #866745 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two months ago

I heard 6 imports is the usual. Anonymous means the new NBL finals format.

Reply #866759 | Report this post


koberulz  
Two months ago

What new finals format? There's no reason to believe there is one.

Reply #866767 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two months ago

8-()

Reply #866769 | Report this post


Not sure it’s not  
Two months ago

Reply #866779 | Report this post


Not sure it’s not  
Two months ago

Reply #866780 | Report this post


Not sure it’s not  
Two months ago

Reply #866781 | Report this post


Nachos95  
Two months ago

Will have to wait and see?

Reply #866782 | Report this post


proud  
Two months ago

What I want from my playoffs is firstly that they get called playoffs as this is basketball!

Secondly I don't care how many games we play, the more the better but I want it to remain affordable for those that want to attend the games. I'd welcome best of 5 series if the price isn't jacked up too much.

Thirdly and I'm sure this a,ready an contingency within NBL and teams but I don't want the travel to cost too much when the uncertainty of an extended game for a series happens and both teams need to travel (surely QANTAS being a league sponsor means this isn't an issue but I think we've had times in the past when the league was struggling where teams were struggling to pay for flights come end of season)

Lastly I would like the NBL to make serious money from their playoffs and I'd love to see more advertising absolutely everywhere to really get everyone excited and eyeballs on games and bums in seats. We as a league lose a lot of momentum when the AFL and NRL start and whilst having 5 and 7 game series in theory sounds epic, they mean nothing if the NBL itself isn't making money from the most important time of the season.

... who cares if the imports want to check out early and pick up a contract overseas, they get paid well here and let's keep them around and get the value out of them and continue to create a vibe that will have imports and locals wanting to play and stay here.

Any chance for an All-star game at all?

Reply #866832 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two months ago

Unfortunately proud, most have been brought up in an AFL culture where it's finals time - elimination final, semi final, grand final.
And speaking of finals, just looked at how the AFL had to rejig the final 8 playoffs and made it more of an advantage to be in top 4, which what the teams played for all season. Trouble with basketball is we have series and the travel. Do you let the lower place team have first game at home and maybe give them advantage going into game 2, but knowing if both teams hold serve that the higher ranked team gets the decider without the travel.
Could be controversial as happened in the NBA, but could a play in tournament work. Bottom 4 teams maybe, 1v4, 2v3, losers eliminated in one game series in designated and hopefully neutral venue and winners playoff for spot. Maybe have them play minor premiers. Would keep all the teams fans interested for all of season as they wouldn't be eliminated from contention. Maybe make reward for minor premiers is that their best of 3 games are all at home, if a bottom team somehow makes it through then they should be just grateful they're still in.
Hopefully all the press that Patty and the Boomers (great name for a band) has reignited interest in the sport. Especially with Delly coming back and Giddey going 6th. BBL seems to have fizzled a bit and AFL will never be challenged, now would be a great time to get a basketball boom going again.

Reply #866839 | Report this post




You need to be a registered user to post from this location. Register here.



Close ads
Dunk.com.au - Custom basketball uniforms
Beam Orders - a quick, simple order and payments site for your business.
Punch - insightful time tracking

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

Recent Posts



.


An Australian basketball forum covering NBL, WNBL, ABL, Juniors plus NBA, WNBA, NZ, Europe, etc | Forum time is: 3:40 am, Wed 27 Oct 2021 | Posts: 902,821 | Last 7 days: 589