The 2016 NBA playoffs are fast approaching, and the two brackets remain a mess and a mystery. So, Paul Flannery and Tom Ziller discussed how they hope the seedings come out to set up certain matchups in the first round and beyond. Enjoy.
Here’s what the best NBA Playoff matchups would look like
In this week’s Flanns & Zillz, we talk about how we hope the playoff seedings shake out to maximize our springtime fun.
Justin Ford-USA TODAY Sports
ZILLER: We have eight days left in the NBA regular season and while we know who most of the playoff participants will be, the specific brackets remain completely up in the air. In the East we only have certainty about the top two seeds (Cleveland and Toronto). In the West, the top four seeds are set but it’s a total jumble beyond that. Now’s our chance to bow before the Basketball Gods and advocate for our preferences. What would you like to see in the East? I’m really intrigued by Cleveland-Detroit in the first round, I must say.
The middle of the East is fascinating to me because there are four teams who are all pretty good and there is very little separation between any of them. There is so much focus on the end game, but think about the implications for those four franchises. Atlanta can prove last season wasn’t a fluke. Miami is at this weird crossroads. Boston has a chance to take that proverbial next step. How much do you think it would mean to Charlotte to win a playoff round? These are real, tangible goals that are up for grabs and any pairing of these four should lead to a quality first-round matchup.
For the record, I’d like to see Atlanta-Charlotte and Boston-Miami.
ZILLER: I have to admit I have such low confidence in my opinions of the East’s four second-tier teams that I mostly think about their order in terms of how I want to see the second round and East finals play out. To wit, Miami is the only team in that mix I think can push Cleveland, so I want the Heat in that 4-5 pairing. We deserve some closure on this team, at the very least, and the drama of that narrative would be great. I might favor pairing Miami up with an Atlanta team hitting its stride so we can see the winner of Boston-Charlotte face Toronto, though Atlanta could definitely beat Miami and Atlanta-Toronto (the Bebe Nogueira bowl!) could be fun, too. So, as you say, quality first-round matchups no matter what happens. (Dirk can explain the Pacers for you.)
I think Cleveland's easiest path would be Indiana, Atlanta and Boston. (You could flop the last two.) That result is certainly possible, though I do think Toronto is game so long as Kyle Lowry's elbow is fine. But given how bruising the West is expected to be -- we'll get to them in a minute -- a fortuitously breezy path could help the Cavs compete in the Finals against a quantitatively superior foe. If Cleveland instead draws Detroit-Miami-Toronto maybe that advantage isn't there.
FLANNERY: I want to see Miami play Cleveland too, but I think you may be overrating the Heat's chances just a bit in that one. I'm still curious to see if Atlanta can take a chunk out of the Cavs. I know what happened to the Hawks last year but this is a slightly different team and if everyone is healthy I think they can make it competitive.
Let me just say a word about the Celtics here since no outside of New England gives them much of a chance at doing any real damage in the postseason. I would not take them lightly. That goes the same for the Hornets who are really similar in a lot of ways -- great scoring lead guard, terrific team defense, strong coaching, lots of interchangeable bigs. I could see either of them getting as far as a conference finals or losing in the first round, and neither outcome would surprise me at all.
Before we move on to the West, what's your ideal conference finals scenario? I'll take Cleveland and Toronto because I would like to see Kyle Lowry have that big stage.
ZILLER: I likewise want to see Cleveland-Toronto in the end. The Raptors have gotten all the way up for their regular season matches with the Cavs and I think the Air Canada Centre would be electric for Games 3, 4 and maybe 6.
On Boston: I think lots of folks were underrating the C’s last April, before Cleveland totally waxed them. I strongly believe Boston was as good in the back half of last season and they’ve been this season. The roster or rotations haven’t changed much. The same applies to Cleveland. I really haven’t seen anything to suggest Boston stands more of a chance this time. (That isn’t to say Boston can’t beat any or all of the other East playoff teams. I think they might, including the Raps.)
Now the West: are you also rooting for the Grizzlies to fall all the way out in order to make way for a competitive, somewhat healthy team? Memphis is just not competitive. It's sad!
FLANNERY: I never root for failure, Tom. That's just too bleak and invites bad karma into your being. And it's not like the Rockets or Mavs are burning through their schedules either. (Funny how I don't hear from pissed off Dallas fans anymore.) If the Grizz can hold on, then they can serve as a sacrificial offering just as well as the others can. At least we'll know they'll compete.
The only thing I want to see in the first round is the Blazers. That’s it. Whoever gets them is going to have their hands full.
ZILLER: It appears it'll be the Clippers, and the Stotts-Doc war can rage on. The Blazers are ultra-fun, low-key the most enjoyable unexpectedly good team this season. Maybe they only get one round because the West top four is so solid, but there's high potential for fun there.
Memphis just makes me sad, and I think this team makes Memphians sad, too. Without Mike Conley, what’s the point? They’ll be back next year when everyone isn’t broken.
If the Grizz stick around, I just don't know which other West team falls out. Houston still has huge potential (as seen in the myriad fourth quarter comebacks), Utah gives Golden State all sorts of trouble and Dallas has been a perfectly average low seed. With apologies to my friends in Dallas, I think I want to see Utah-GSW and Houston-Spurs. Dallas-L.A. would be nice but that's mighty far fetched. If Memphis slips out, Dallas-OKC is fine.
FLANNERY: I keep forgetting about the Stotts-Doc feud. What a strange beef. We went on and on about the Clippers last week, but maybe the Blazers could give them a real run. That’d be neat.
Your matchups work for me. I don't have a terribly strong preference here, but there are some I'd like to avoid. The Spurs and Utah, for example. Golden State and Memphis is another. I don't think either would be competitive. Now, put the Jazz up against the Warriors and we'd have a pretty interesting contrast of styles. Houston and San Antonio could be decent, as well.
The real thing here is the second round. I think we're getting Warriors-Spurs in the final but that OKC-SA second round should be fantastic. How much are you expecting out of the Thunder in the postseason?
ZILLER: I really like OKC -- picked them to make the Finals! -- but Golden State and San Antonio are just utter buzzsaws. Beating the Spurs in round two would be a monumental surprise and triumph. It's just the wrong year to be the third-best team in a conference, you know? Maybe they can be the 2009 Magic to Golden State's Boston and San Antonio's Cleveland? (Does that even make sense?)
If we indeed get Golden State-L.A. and San Antonio-OKC in round two, I kinda don’t even care what happens. That’s just a great pair of battles. (I’m sure Portland has something to say about this.)
FLANNERY: That’s all I really want, too. I might even stay up late.
ZILLER: No better time to live on the West Coast than during the NBA playoffs. (Well, during y’all’s April snowstorms, too.)
FLANNERY: I don’t want to talk about it, Tom.
See More:
