The Spurs would be a playoff contender in the weaker East

The Spurs would have a legitimate chance of making the postseason in the weaker conference, but the West might be too stacked for San Antonio to get to the playoffs.

The Spurs’ current record would have them in the playoff hunt in the East. Do you think they would make the postseason if they were in the weaker conference?

Marilyn Dubinski: They certainly would have a much better chance in the East, but then again, that could be said almost every year. For whatever reason, despite having more “free agent destination” teams, the East just never lives up to its billing like the West does. You’d think that a conference as deep as the West would be the one that beats up on itself and lowers the overall win totals, but instead they just feast on the East to bring up the rear, while I guess the bottom ²⁄₃ of the East is the group eating itself, making it top-heavy but weak in depth. Any fringe West team would probably love to spend just one season East.

Mark Barrington: When I looked at the league before the season started I thought it would be a down year for the west and that the east would be resurgent. Boy, was I ever wrong. The Spurs are near a .500 record and they’ve only played one team from the Eastern Conference so far, so it’s not implausible that they’d have a winning record against competition from the east. That kind of record would put the Silver and Black right in the middle of the playoff hunt.

Jesus Gomez: It looks that way. At least the healthy version of them could. San Antonio has hovered around .500 even after dropping a very winnable game against the Jazz. There are only four teams in the East at or above .500 right now. Even if the 76ers and Bucks climb up the standings, the Spurs could definitely be in the play-in race. It’s still early in the season and other East teams could go on a run or make trades to improve, plus there’s always the chance that the Spurs take a step back, but as things stand now, San Antonio would be a strong playoffs contender in the weaker conference.

Bill Huan: The Spurs definitely wouldn’t have a better record than the Celtics, Cavs, Magic or Knicks. After that, it remains to be seen if the Sixers and Bucks can get their you-know-what together, but I’m sure that they’ll make the play-in at the very least. Given that the Heat and Pacers are still around and with the Pistons and Hawks being friskier than expected, I think San Antonio’s likeliest placement in the East would be a play-in berth.

Devon Birdsong: All I’ll say is there’s a reason LeBron made the Finals 9 times in the East versus 1 in the West, and it’s not just Father Time. In the current format I’m confident the Spurs would land a 7th or 8th seed in the East, mostly because I think there’s a pretty good chance they end up 9th or 10th in the West if they can get healthy. A 10 seed in the West is pretty much the equivalent of an 8th seed in the East.

The West has 11 teams at or above .500 and the East only has four. Should the NBA reconsider doing away with conferences and having the teams with the best record make the postseason?

Dubinski: They should have done away with conferences a long time ago since this has been a running theme this entire century. The problem is they’ll probably never get the votes to do it, especially from perennially bad East teams that would otherwise never stand a chance. There’s also the whole issue of figuring out a schedule that makes sense, doesn’t cut back on the number of games by too much since they have TV deal obligations to fill, and maintains reasonable travel. (Understandably, East coast teams probably don’t want to be playing more 10 PM games on the West coast than they already do.) That being said, I wouldn’t be against keeping conferences for scheduling purposes but removing them from the standings, because as we already pointed out, despite the West being deeper, it’s not stopping those teams from having the better records.

Barrington: I don’t think so, because rivalries are important in sports. Fans look forward to games against their rivals, even when the opponent is having a down year. Maybe even more in a down year, since what is best in life is “… [t]o crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of their women.” [according to Conan the Barbarian] That doesn’t mean that there shouldn’t occasionally be realignments, like when the Spurs were moved into the Western Conference in 1980. The NBA should eventually expand to 32 teams and after that expansion the league should reconfigure the divisions.

Gomez: It’s something to consider, but doing it because of how this season is going would be an overreaction. In the recent past, the East has had as many good teams as the West, at least in terms of record, a few times. I do think it would be interesting to have the in-season tournament have mixed groups, with teams from both conferences. It might be tricky to make it work schedule-wise but it would be a fun experiment.

Huan: Funny enough, Zach Lowe just tweeted about this and pointed out that some West team will be moving East due to expansion. If that happens, the West will naturally get watered down, especially since the expansion franchises are likely going to be quite weak.

With that said, this question brings up a larger point of contention for me, which is the length of each season. I’ve long thought that the NBA should consider shortening the season to 58 games so each team plays everyone else twice, and that would naturally take away the need for conferences and allow the league to go with a 1-16 format.

Birdsong: With the exception of a stretch between ‘84 and ‘98 (Celtics, Pistons, Bulls), the East has been the weaker conference since the NBA-ABA merger, so it’s not all that surprising to see it happening again this season. Personally, I think the NBA postseason would benefit more from a smaller pool of teams, by going down to 6 teams per conference, which would almost certainly eliminate teams with losing records from qualifying, and keep teams from coasting into a low seed (looking at you, Miami Heat/Los Angeles Lakers). However, both of these issues are going to be determined by ownership, and there’s about a boulder’s fart of a chance that Eastern Conference Governors are going to vote for an increased chance of them losing playoff game revenue. Can’t see it being popular with Eastern Conference players either. Like Mark, I think the only likely scenario is realignment with expansion (which is coming), but I wouldn’t be mad if only the best of the best made the postseason.

The Spurs lost their first game of the NBA Cup group game against the Lakers. Considering the quality of the other teams in their group, do you think they have a realistic chance of advancing to the knockout stage?

Dubinski: They don’t have much of a chance when also factoring in the state of the team injury-wise. They’re entering their second Cup game against OKC shorthanded (no Jeremy Sochan, likely no Victor Wembanyama) with pretty decent odds of coming out of it 0-2 in Cup play. That would be a nearly impossible hole to come back out of and win their group. They’re definitely a better team than last season and came into Cup play with a chance, it’s just bad timing that Wemby banged knees when he did and will miss a key game. (Of course, starting off with a win against the Lakers would have helped.)

Barrington: They don’t have any chance. They’re in a tough group and they’ve already lost a game. The Thunder should win the group, and if a second team advances to the knockout rounds as a wild card from West Group B, it’ll be the Lakers. I just hope the Spurs can win at least one NBA Cup game this season, as they’re 0-5 so far in the short history of the tournament.

Gomez: As soon as the group was announced it seemed like a long shot for them to make it past the group stage. As we’ve been saying, the West is deep and San Antonio didn’t just get some strong teams. Three of their groupmates have championship expectations this year. The Spurs have been decent and short tournaments like this one allow for some flukes but it doesn’t seem likely at all for the Silver and Black to make it to the knockout games.

Huan: Realistically? No. But remember, this isn’t a full 82-game slate, so one unexpected result could change anything. However, with the news that Wemby will miss Tuesday night’s game, things aren’t looking too hot for the Spurs.

Birdsong: Do they have a chance? Absolutely. They and Lloyd Christmas are real contenders in the tournament of hope. If we’re talking about the NBA Cup (which really needs a better name), I’d say their chances are about the same as a full second term for Abraham Lincoln.