Yeeeeorrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrssssssssss!!

Fantastic news!!!!!

"Bowing to pressure from Hoops.com.au posters, the NBL has expanded this season's Grand Final Series to 5 games".

LK is the man.

Listen to the fans!!

Well, there you go sports fans...

Of course they would have, what is your point?

Roger...

5 games adds so much more drama and interest.

With how close the league is I'd be surprised if we didn't get an epic 5 game series.

Great decision

Great news, but I suspect they'll come to regret that decision when it's CNS vs ILL in the GF.

"Bowing to pressure from Hoops.com.au posters, the NBL has expanded this season's Grand Final Series to 5 games".

No need to worry about the horrid NSEC, Breakers are no chance.

Agree, for it to be epic, it must involve at least one of PER/SYD/MEL/ADE.

It is nice to see that Larry K and I are on the same page for some important matters...

If Perth beats Adelaide, does that make them the team to beat until they're beaten and so on so forth?

"Great news, but I suspect they'll come to regret that decision when it's CNS vs ILL in the GF. "

Best post today..

The team to beat is the one with any player who takes the first shot on social media, and gets a $3.75 fine (suspended) in the days leading up to the game.

Great announcement, but I'd like to know the format...

1-1-1-1-1
2-3-2
2-2-1-1-1

Well obviously the second and third examples are secen-game series, but you get the gist.

I like H-A-A-H-H

Yes, if you go 3-0 you play away in the final, but the way this season has gone it is almost impossible to guarantee home court as an advantage.

The other reason I like this format is that it is most likely to give the best team that little edge and lessen any excessive travel burdens people have concerns about.

Finally, if it does go according to seeding, it would be the best possible outcome for excitement and promotion to have the home/highest seeded team play a final game after coming back from 1-2 down!

Listening Larry?

And, if you do go W-L-W-W with this format you still get that home town win in four...

Not a fan of any format where the lower-ranked team plays more home games than the higher-ranked team at any point in the series.

Ifs, buts and maybes or the logic that holds back a good idea only because of one variable isn't logical!

This is fantastic

For those saying they don't like it...venue availability might be an issue perhaps.

But overall, don't tell me the Grand Finals of the past few years have been as good as the GF's of 2004-2009! Nothing beats a good 5 game- or 7 game series. More exciting than 3 games IMO.

It has to be

H-A-H-A-H

or

H-H-A-A-H

Those are the only two serious possibilities IMO.

The only other possibilities are to start with Away, or to go Home-Away-Away-Home-Home

Both are unfair on the higher seeded team who earned and deserves home court advantage. Hence, they shouldn't even be considered.

But overall, don't tell me the Grand Finals of the past few years have been as good as the GF's of 2004-2009

LV, you're right about those two being the best options.

In fact, I'd go so far as to say that it's those two then daylight.

LOL then daylight.

FWIW. I favour H H A A H

If you look at the series from the past 20 years for entertainment value by GF standards:

1996 - 3-game SE Melbourne win. Good
1997 - 3 game Melbourne win. Good
1998 - 2-game Adelaide win. Boring
1999 - 3-game Adelaide win. Solid
2000 - 2-game Perth win. Boring
2001 - 3-game Hawks win. Good
2002 - 3-game Adelaide win. Solid
2003 - 2-game Sydney win. Boring

2004 - 5-game Sydney derby. Solid
2005 - 3-game Sydney blowout. Boring
2006 - 3-game Melbourne sweep. Solid
2007 - 4-game Brisbane win. Solid
2008 - 5-game Melbourne win. Epic
2009 - 5-game Dragons win. Full of blowouts. Boring

2010 - 3-game Perth win. Solid
2011 - 3-game NZ win. Boring
2012 - 3 game NZ win. Epic
2013 - 2-game NZ win. Boring
2014 - 3-game Perth win. Solid
2015 - 2-game NZ win. Solid
2016 - 3-game Perth win. Boring

Really, it's just a mixed bag. I don't think the number of games played really decides it.

The problem with the H-H-A-A-H format is if the home team loses with a first up bad game to start the series the home court advantage is more than lost, it is shattered. The away team doesn't need to leave home to win the season. A 3 game sweep with the lower ranked team having more home games that the higher ranked team is unpalatable.

In H-A-H-A-H you would lose home court advantage, but you still get another home game before it is all over. The other advantage is that it spreads out the games for attendees, so each home game will be at least half a week apart.

A-H-H-A-H is another interesting way to reduce travel costs, but it is still better if the higher ranked team plays home first.

My first example was supposed to read H-A-A-H-H. Dammit edit button.

I like A-H-H-A-H.

Well, at least I won't have to worry about the extra cost of buying tickets. :-(

I've always been in two minds over 5 game series.

Had we gone to 5 games, probably would have won in 93.

But could you imagine last season? Would have been like watching zombies by the 5th game.

Have they confirmed the format?
I think HHAAH works best, but you can't keep everyone happy.

It should be

H-A-H-A-H for the higher seeded team. If not that then:

H-H-A-A-H

would work also, but I don't see why anyone wouldn't want to go with the first format I brought. It givess the higher seed home court advantage and no team gets to play 2 home games in a row.

No way should a team work hard all season for top seed, but then be handed an away game first up, or two of the first 3 on the road.

A beer in the hand is worth two in the fridge. I don't like the idea of a lower seeded team being given the early home games and the chance to take an early lead when they didn't do anything to deserve that chance.

The only fair approach is to ensure that the number one seed has had at least as many home games as away at every point in time.

This is just common sense. Also how the NBA has always done things.

Except for the Finals for about 30 years.

If you don't like the thread then just f*ck off anon ^

With no specific format set we're allowed to speculate all we want. After all this is a basketball forum.

You're referring to HHAAAHH in 7 game series.

I was referring to when the NBA had 5 game playoff series, it was always HHAAH

I don't have an issue with HH-AAA-HH as much. I do much prefer the new HH-AA-H-A-H, but 2 of the first 5 isnt comparatively as unfair or disadvantageous as 1 of the first 3 (which is what is being suggested here).

It's officially H-A-H-A-H. Disastrous if it were to be a Perth vs NZ series. The amount of travel that would see...

Potentially 5 games in 14 days, Monday Feb 27 to Sunday March 12.

Part of me thinks it's too much travel, but part of me thinks that NBA guys have already played up to 30 (eg: Lakers, Pistons) games, and the season isn't even two months old... So 5 in 14 days isn't too much to ask.

Well, if it was Perth v NZ that would be a struggle

3 game is more tense in my view, every basket counts e.g. 1993 finals was awesome. I don't like 5 or 7 game series. In NBA I only watch game 6/7 of the grand final series. To me this is all about money 5 makes more money than 3. It's all about the money $.

Five in 14 isn't too bad. It could be Mon, Thur, Sun, Wed, Sun which gives enough time to recover in between. It's like playing five games in three rounds, which all teams are doing during the season.

I don't like it, but again the good news is I don't have to bother too much this season.
If my team were involved, I would find a GF series over 14 days to be painful.

HAHAH is definitely the "fairest" and most-balanced, also in terms of travelling.

Spreading it out over 14 days makes in manageable, but frankly less of a spectacle.

The problem seems to be lack of flexibility and the NBL guessing wrong. I think last season they banked on Melbourne hosting, and the resultant Cats-NZ series was too scrunched. That game 3 was just ugly. I think they need to aim for flexibility, so if you get a Sydney v Hawks, MU, or BB final, travel is less of a factor.

I can see why nbl are playing 5 game g/final series.It's because there will be no Perth and possibly Melbourne in playoff who draw crowds of 12k+.= less money for nbl but playing 5 games will even it out without the big drawing teams.I would love to see a Hawks v Melbourne/adelaide g/f.These teams are high scoring and up tempo.

I can see why nbl are playing 5 game g/final series.It's because there will be no Perth and possibly Melbourne in playoff who draw crowds of 12k+.= less money for nbl but playing 5 games will even it out without the big drawing teams.I would love to see a Hawks v Melbourne/adelaide g/f.These teams are high scoring and up tempo.