#3 Seed Spurs Home Court over the #2 Seed Lakers???

[SimonSezs]

I know it is a bit late, but curious on how this happened?

Lakers won their division and ended up with a #2 seed plus took the season series 3-1 with a 56-26 .683, Spurs lose their division, lose the season series 3-1 and finish at 57-25 .695 with a few winning percentages higher this team ends up with the home court? Does it turn to conference play or something.

There is something wrong here. The Lakers should have ended up with home court IMO.

 

[ezpickin]

You answered your own question...home court decided by regular season record...

 

[SimonSezs]

I figured that, but still don't like it.

What is the added incentive of winning your division? Beating your opponent in your regular season series? Hey you have the #2 seed, but if you play the #3 seed take a back seat since they won one more game than you even though you won 3 out of 4 from them. I can understand if the season series was tied, but major flaw in the rules IMO.

Football has this down, NBA needs to reevaluate this.

 

[Simply In The Red]

You answered your own question...home court decided by regular season record...

So, if the winner of the Pacific Division had a fourth or fifth ranked percentage in the Western Conference, they deserve homecourt over Midwest teams that did better in the regular season against all opponents. I don't see a problem with the schedule on standing right now, unless your team didn't get the homecourt advantage you wanted them to have.

 

[KsYaS]

I don't see a problem with the schedule on standing right now, unless your team didn't get the homecourt advantage you wanted them to have.

and viceversa!

 

[SimonSezs]

I hearz ya. Regular season record reigns supreme.

Then correct it and give the Lakers a 3 seed. Keep that part consistent with their current rules.