Pivot Points: Is the Eastern Conference Worthy of Eight Playoff Spots?

If the NBA playoffs began today, in the Eastern Conference, you would have the No. 1 seed Boston Celtics taking on the eighth seed Charlotte Bobcats. In contrast in the West, you would see a pitting of the No. 1 seed Los Angeles Lakers against the eighth seeded San Antonio Spurs.

Which of these series would you propose to be the most entertaining? Which one would you think to be the more competitive? Which one offers any chance in hell of an upset?

If you picked the latter on all three questions, then you might as well apply that reasoning to the entire first round of games if the playoffs started today, because the Eastern Conference offers little to no chance of an upset for the lower seeds.

In fact, seeds six, seven, and eight would all enter the postseason with the added bonus of losing records, and none of those seeds look to improve astronomically before the end of the season.

Traditionally the most competitive first round matchup is the contest between the No. 4 and No. 5 seeds. Under my scenario, the Orlando Magic would pair up with Dwyane Wade and his Miami Heat.

This series would be long on star power with Wade, Vince Carter, and Dwight Howard, but it would more than likely not go more than five games out of seven, regardless of the Heat's victory last night.

The regular season is one thing, but Miami does not have the fire-power to match the defending Eastern Conference champions in a seven-game series.

On the other hand, in the West the four and five matchup would be between the Phoenix Suns and Portland Trail Blazers, respectively, a series in which it would be no big surprise if Portland upset Phoenix.

How about a Denver-Houston first round series that the East would match with Atlanta and Detroit? Really?

I'm pretty sure it's obvious what path I'm taking, and for those that don't get it then you are probably fans of Milwaukee, Detroit, Charlotte, Toronto, New York, or any of the other 10 teams in the East that probably don't deserve a playoff spot, but will earn one by default.

The basketball in the East has been so bad I wouldn't be surprised to see the top four seeds of Boston, Orlando, Atlanta, and Cleveland all finish with records that include wins that number upwards of 55.

That's pretty easy to do when your schedule contains a glut of inferior teams that beat each other up but have no real chance of competing with the top seeded organizations.

I know that parity is supposed to be good for the league, but in the case of the Eastern Conference, it's actually having the opposite effect from the one most desired.

It's turned the conference into one that includes teams that have it all, and teams that have nothing, while the Western Conference may be an example of parity at it's best.

In the west, all eight playoff teams would have winning records and no less than three teams are only two games out of the eighth position. That sounds like a tight chase to me.

The West could theoretically have a 50-win team that would be excluded from the playoffs, while the East could have a team that qualifies with less than 40 wins, and is really a lottery team in a postseason disguise.

Why not re-vamp the entire format and seed the best 16 teams from one through sixteen, and then let the chips fall where they may? There's no reason that it wouldn't work, considering the NBA already has a blueprint to follow.

The NCAA basketball tournament uses that format and although it is single-game elimination it is still highly effective and better yet it is fair for all teams involved.

The seeding in the NCAA's does leave room for argument, but in the NBA, that element would be removed because the seedings would be based purely on won-loss records with tie-breakers used when needed.

Fans of the Eastern Conference would surely be in conflict with this because it would reduce the number of teams receiving bids from eight to four, but so what? The best teams would be represented, and that's good for basketball.

Additionally, you would still see some pretty good matchups in the first round, and you would still get the Miami-Orlando pairing, and likely the Phoenix-Portland matchup also.

The only difference is that it would be in the No. 4 and 13 seedings, and the No. 8 and 9, instead of the previous four versus five.

In this format you would have a much more competitive postseason and the teams that really need help through the draft would be eligible to receive it, instead of getting shuffled to the bottom of the first round because of an un-deserved playoff spot.

This would all be rendered useless if teams like Toronto, Washington, and perhaps Detroit could start playing up to preseason expectations instead of resembling their more disparaged brethren in the East.

Unfortunately, this would never happen because commissioner David Stern seems pleased to send un-worthy teams in the east to the playoffs, and the fans of those teams seem to be okay with mediocrity.

Even the New York Knicks are only three games out of a playoff spot and can you imagine what an appearance by the NBA's biggest market would do for league revenue?

What does it matter if they get swept out of the playoffs, and along the way suffer a 60 point beat-down in the process? It's good for the bottom line, but for real fans of basketball it's a travesty in the first degree.