When we plop down in front of a giant screen to watch our favorite detective show, we know going in the perpetrator(s) will be apprehended within an hour or two. And we watch anyway. When we used to wake up early on Saturday mornings to watch Wile E. Coyote chase the Road Runner, we knew going in he’d be unsuccessful despite the many creative attempts, and we’d get confirmation within 10 minutes. And we watched anyway. Likewise, NBA fans–patient bunch that we are–know in advance the dim playoff outlook for lower seeds (specifically, seeds 7 and 8 in each conference) in their first round playoff series against the highest seeds. And even though it may take about ten days for completion, we watch anyway.
WAIT…WE MADE THE PLAYOFFS?
The National Basketball Association has experimented with several different playoff formats during its nearly 73-year existence. As the league continued to expand, so did the playoff field. In 1984, with the league’s franchise count at 23 teams, the playoff field was expanded from 12 to 16. (Stated differently, the league went through it’s usual grueling 82-game regular-season schedule just to eliminate seven teams from post-season contention, but that’s different soapbox material.) So you had to be pretty bad off not to qualify for the post-season.
Though it will never happen (for obviou$ rea$on$), one could look at the results of the first-round NBA playoff matchups of seeds one versus eight AND seeds two versus seven since the 1984 expansion, and make a strong case for reducing the playoff field by a couple of teams in each conference. As it stands now, more than half the teams in the NBA qualify for post-season play, which makes regular-season games less meaningful, especially after the All-Star break.
WITH RARE EXCEPTIONS, A TUNE-UP
When the playoff field expanded to 16 teams in 1984, the first-round series was a best-of-five format. That made sense because the top teams don’t need more than a couple of games to cement superiority over the last qualifiers–they certainly don’t need four wins.
The best-of-five format ran for 19 years through the 2002 playoffs. In the one versus eight pairing, the top-seeded squad won 36 of the 38 series (95 percent), including 112 of the 145 contests played (77 percent). This included 17 series sweeps.
Most of us old-timers remember the two exceptions. In 1994, the 8th-seeded Denver Nuggets managed a 3-2 series upset over the heavily-favored Seattle Supersonics (think of a jubilant Dikembe Mutombo sprawled out on the court holding the ball over his head) after losing the first two games. And in 1999 New York Knicks won over top-seeded Miami Heat in Game Five on the Allan Houston shot that decided to drop in after some indecision. To be fair, the Knicks had no business as the 8th-seed during that lockout-shortened season, and they proved it by advancing to the NBA Finals that June against San Antonio.
During that period, the 7th seeds didn’t fare much better against the 2nd seeds, winning only four of the 38 series played while the 2nd seed won 106 of the 156 contests (68 percent). So the sevens put up a better fight than the eights in terms of series length, but not by much.
2003 BEGINS THE EXTENDED CORONATIONS
Armed with this lopsided series data the league decided, of course, to lengthen the first-round series to a best-of-seven, making it even more difficult for the lowest-seeded teams to win a series and prolonging the inevitable early-round knockout.
Of the 32 best-of seven series completed through 2018, the top seed won 29 (91 percent) against the 8th seed and 122 of 166 games (73 percent), including 12 four-game sweeps. Those three upsets include the 2012 Philadelphia 76ers series win against 1-seed Chicago, who’d lost their best player and league MVP from the previous year, Derrick Rose, to a devastating knee injury. The memorable Golden State Warriors’ win over a 67-win Dallas Mavericks squad in 2007 is also included.
The 2nd seed won 31 series (97 percent) and 126 of the 169 games (75 percent), including nine sweeps. The only exception was the 2010 series where San Antonio defeated 2nd-seeded Dallas in six games.
ABOUT THAT EXTRA GAME
An unsuccessful playoff journey might not be the worst thing for a young squad in need of the experience, like this year’s version of the Orlando Magic or the Brooklyn Nets. Meanwhile, watching the 2019 Eastern Conference top seed, the Milwaukee Bucks, win Game Three of their first-round playoff series tonight against the 8th-seeded Detroit Pistons to take a 3-0 series lead could make one wonder if a veteran group like the Pistons still think it was worth it to fight so hard over the last few weeks of the regular-season just to qualify for the playoffs. And, despite what might be said in post-game interviews, do they really want to make another trip to Milwaukee for a Game Five?
A best-of-seven format for the first round is tough, because it puts the lower seed in the position of having to win four of five games should they, as expected, lose the first two games on the road. At this point–history shows us–the series is already over. In a five game series, the “inferior” team can make the series interesting by winning its first home game and can force a deciding game by winning both.
No longer the case.
FOR THE SAKE OF COMPARISON
The 3 versus 6 pairings are somewhat more competitive, with the 3rd seed winning 52 of the 70 first round series since the expansion to 16 playoff teams. This includes the four-game sweep by the New Orleans Pelicans in 2018 over Portland. As expected, the 4 versus 5 history is the most compelling of the bunch, with the 5th seed actually holding the advantage in series wins at 37 to 33 while winning 49 percent of the 349 games played from 1984 through 2018.i
And just to drive the point home, in the 35 years since the 16-team format was introduced, including the best-of-five AND best-of-seven series, the 1st and 2nd seeds have each won 65 of the 70 first round series against the 7th and 8th seeds, respectively, through 2018. Not exactly a fair fight.
THE SLOW-DEVELOPING STORY
Despite the staggering numbers, fans will have to continue the tradition of patiently waiting until May when the competition stiffens. In 2019 we already have a 3-0 lead in a 4 versus 5 series (Celtics over Pacers) in the Eastern Conference, and Houston won its two home games rather convincingly against Utah in the West. Now, one could see Utah–a tough home out–making this a series if it were best-of-five, but now they have to win four of the next five to win the series. Not likely.
While this is not to suggest that there aren’t one-sided series in the later rounds–there cetainly are–we’ll have to wait out these first-round series and hope no one with potential of playing a key role in a deep playoff run gets hurt in Game Four of a sweep.
