Jump to content

Talk:2006 NBA playoffs

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:2006 NBA Playoffs)

Untitled

[edit]

Whoever said New Jersey clinched a playoff spot on March 29 needs to check their math. In order for the Nets to clinch, they have to win or Chicago has to lose.

Well now they have clinched the playoffs as of March 31. Cheesehead Fan 04:51, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First round tie-breakers

[edit]

Nice job, Cheesehead fan, on spelling out the tie-breakers for seeds 5-8 in the East. Funny that the NBA and ESPN do not bother to spell it out like that. --Mikebrand 01:34, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone know if the multi-team tie-breaker order remains the same as CBS has it laid out? RobertsMac 06:29, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Thanks! Yeah, even ESPN got it wrong at first, but I was able to sort it out. Cheesehead Fan 22:41, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Playoff rosters

[edit]

Can we hope to add team playoff rosters as soon as they become available?

We can just put up a link to the rosters on the team pages. That should be enoughDknights411 15:24, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seeding Controversy

[edit]

In the main NBA Playoffs article I removed the trivia regarding this year's seeding controversy and instead created a section for it while touching upon some major points. I was thinking about putting it into this article but considering the structure here I decided that any lengthy text will take away from the main function of this page as a reference to results. I'll link to it instead, and edit the section no playoff qualifying accordingly.

Bracket

[edit]

The page for 2006 Stanley Cup Playoffs has the brackets, i.e. the summary, first. On this page, you've got it last. It should be first. The summary should always be first, and the details to follow. I'll wait for a little while, and if no one else moves it, I'll do it. Wahkeenah 08:52, 2 May 2006 (UTC) Done. Wahkeenah 10:27, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Since, in the NBA, home-court advantage is based on regular season record and not seeding, I think it would be wise to put next to each team's name in the bracket the number of wins they recorded in the regular season in parentheses, so that the HCA information is expressed quickly and easily.
I'm going to go ahead and implement that idea, it'll be easy enough to delete if the consensus is against it.
Someone went and deleted it all without even commenting on the talk page.
Also, this person edited Miami as advancing to the next round 8 minutes before the conclusion of the game. Personally, I think there's no place in an encyclopedia for that kind of speculative editing. There's no need to show Miami as advancing until the clock reads 0:00.
How about italicizing the team with the homecourt advantage at the brackets? --Howard the Duck | talk, 14:49, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Shouldn't links for game recaps lead to the games' respective recaps @ nba.com rather than espn.com? That makes more sense to me...

Doesn't ESPN use the same recaps as those from NBA.com? Or is that Sportsline? bob rulz 20:33, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They do, however I question the time frame that these articles are maintained on ESPN.com. It appears NBA.com still serves recaps that have been posted on its website since its inception. I can't say whether or not this holds true for ESPN.com.

Summaries

[edit]

I think it would be prudent to include short summaries of each series. I know each MLB and NFL playoff article includes them, and these NBA playoffs articles do look kinda bare without some details from each series. First, I'm going to put in the series tables I've already put in the 1984 NBA Playoffs and 2003 NBA Playoffs articles, and hopefully eventually into every other article.--Highway99 04:20, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 05:32, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]