Eliminating NBA conferences is a bad idea

The NBA is planning to add two new expansion teams, targeting the 2027-28 season for their move to 32 teams. Las Vegas and Seattle are widely considered the leading candidates, which would create a regional imbalance. One Western Conference team will have to move to the East — we think it should be the Minnesota Timberwolves — to preserve the 16-team conferences.

But ESPN's Brian Windhorst reports that some frustrated NBA executives from the West think expansion should push the NBA to rethink the playoffs and seed teams 1-16 based on their records "regardless of geography." That idea has come up in the past but may be gaining momentum this season, as only four Eastern Conference teams have winning records one month into the season.

But there's a straightforward reason why disregarding geography for the playoffs is a bad idea: Time zones.

Right now, the NBA can guarantee that it has games that fit into two windows for playoff games. The East teams are in one of two time zones, meaning their start times range from 7 p.m. to 8:15 p.m. Eastern. There's a natural fit for doubleheaders with games starting at 7-7:30 Pacific.

Seeding games 1-16 is going to make playoff scheduling convoluted, as well as adding extra travel for many teams who'd find themselves flying cross-country between first-round games. All to make slight changes to a playoff system that's already working really well.

It simply doesn't make a big difference in what teams make the playoffs. 

In 2014-15, the 45-37 Oklahoma City Thunder would have replaced the 38-44 Brooklyn Nets. In 2015-16, the 42-40 Detroit Pistons would have taken the spot of the 41-41 Houston Rockets. The Denver Nuggets (46-36) would have pushed out the Washington Wizards (43-39) in 2017-18, and the Memphis Grizzlies (34-39) would have aced out the Orlando Magic (33-40) in 2019-20. 

The NBA expanded the play-in tournament to 10 teams for the 2020-21 season, so in 2021-22, the New York Knicks (37-45) would have replaced the San Antonio Spurs (34-48) and last season, the Houston Rockets (41-41) would have made the play-in over the Atlanta Hawks (36-46). (via Basketball-Reference)

Those are six changes to the playoff teams in a decade, with four West teams and two East teams benefiting. Three of the benefiting teams didn’t even have winning records. It’s not worth upending the entire structure of the NBA playoffs.

The play-in tournament makes things more complicated, but if the NBA truly cared about keeping bad teams out of the postseason, they wouldn't have set up a play-in tournament that gives two-thirds of the league a shot at the playoffs, after an 82-game regular season.

Plus, the NBA would lose one of the biggest things that makes the playoffs great: Rivalries. LeBron James has an intense rivalry with the Boston Celtics that stems from facing them in the playoffs seven times. The Celtics have had four intense matchups with the Miami Heat in five years, leading to some very memorable series. Games between the Golden State Warriors and Houston Rockets still mean a lot after they played four playoff series in five seasons from 2015-19, even though no Rockets remain from those rosters.

Plus, Western teams only need to finish in 10th place to get a shot in the play-in. It's hard to feel like a team is getting screwed over by the playoff format if they can't finish better than 11th in a group of 15 teams. And who's to say the West remains the superior conference into the future?

The NBA is always tempted to tinker, but the playoffs are working fine. Getting rid of conferences makes everything more logistically difficult and confusing for fans — imagine explaining that 1-16 geography-free bracket to a casual basketball watcher, or your grandparent — without much discernable upside. Let's hope the Western executives are simply complaining and blowing off steam because eliminating conferences will also eliminate some fan interest.