It doesn't matter now, because the playoff seedings have been set. Yet not long ago in the NBA, there was considerable buzz as to whether some NBA teams were "tanking it" for various reasons. In other words, losing games they might well have won had they put forth their best effort.
A lot of this conversation centered around teams that weren't contenders in their "race for the bottom" to improve their chances regarding the draft lottery. The worse their record, the more ping-pong balls they get, and their odds go up to get a higher pick. Even if true (which is extremely hard to prove, because head coaches are definitely free to play anybody on their rosters and call strategies as they see fit), sometimes it works out -- and sometimes it backfires.
Just because someone has the odds in their favor, in a game of chance that hardly guarantees a win. And as a team loses game after game, they're also likely eroding their home fan base. Besides the Chicago Cubs and the Detroit Lions, most fans are only going to tolerate perennial losers for so long, before they turn their backs on them. The Detroit Pistons have found this out of late. Despite umpteen shameless promotions, they have struggled mightily to lure people into the seats at their Palace. Such are the not-so-good spoils of being a loser.
But what about the winners? A case could be made that some of them have tanked as well towards the end of the regular season. This gets into another hard to prove shady area as well. With berths in the playoffs already locked up, it's understandable a team might want to rest their starters more than usual so they can be fresher for the grind of the playoffs. But when losing a game or two they would likely otherwise win might cost them home court advantage in a future series -- why would they do it? Home court advantage is supposed to be a big deal -- right?
Probably so, but yours truly would submit other forces are at work as well. The top two seeded teams in both conferences know they will basically have walk-overs in the first round. #1 faces #8, and #2 faces #7. An upset is always remotely possible, but highly unlikely. And that's where the plot thickens.
High caliber teams are looking ahead to the next likely match-up in the second round. They're projecting who's going to win in other opening round series' as well. Perhaps by semi-intentionally falling to the #2 seed when they could have been #1, the second round will be against a team they better match up with, and are confident they can beat to move on to the conference finals. A calculated risk to be sure, but don't think for a minute people in NBA front offices don't discuss such things.
Consider what's at stake. Moving on to another series guarantees ownership some mega cha-chings from packed houses at astronomical playoff ticket prices. Throw in the continued TV exposure with all the money that comes with it, add in the bump in sales of team paraphernalia that will also result -- and next thing you know -- we're talking about almost as much dough as my editor rakes in every year.
Yet in the end, to be victorious, whether it be the conference finals or the NBA Finals, a team is going to have to eventually square off and prevail against the best competition anyway. Home court is nice, but true champions are road warriors when they have to be and it counts the most.
But jockeying for position and/or doing a little strategic tanking along the way might just have its advantages as well.
No comments:
Post a Comment