Wed. Mar. 5: Tiny Tas

, on March 5, 2014 , 2:01PM


Subscribe to The Starters on iTunes | Download the .mp3 directly


On Wednesday’s live episode of The Starters, “Tiny Tas” pays off last month’s Pick ‘Em loss while discussing with the guys: the Clippers and Rockets’ title chances, Klay Thompson’s game-winner, the Spurs’ ball movement, who’s third in the MVP race, basketball movies, fun players to watch, and the idea of adding a play-in tournament to determine the eight seed. Keep your head on a swivel.




Subscribe to The Starters on iTunes | Download the .mp3 directly

4 Responses to “Wed. Mar. 5: Tiny Tas”

  1. thewilymamooth says:

    Come on, bring on the play-in tournament. You guys arguing against it just need to open up a bit, I think. It’s a chance for some of the lowly teams to shine and I’d actually be interested in watching them in this context (wherease otherwise it’s a fate worse than death, shout out to grantland). I think a lot of people would. Good for the fans, good for the players. Good for the media! I’d love to see Anthony Davis fighting for his playoff life. Imagine Melo still had a shot at the playoffs this year. Can you imagine the number of increased talking points?

  2. BigNateDizzle says:

    Couldn’t agree more with this concept for a play-in tournament. This opportunity also would increase revenue for the lowly teams in each conference, showcase the talent of the entire league, provide some “March Madness” like hype around the NBA (which would only increase TV ratings for the games and TV shows like the Starters), and give these team a shot for the playoffs (although it probably won’t last long when they get bounced by the #1 seed in the playoffs). It’s a win-win for everyone. Let’s do this!

  3. Patrick H says:

    The Ultimate Win-Win Tournament!
    We know:
    1) Everyone hates tanking
    2) Fan’s hate cheap owners
    3) The worst place to be is the dreaded “middle”
    4) We love tournaments
    Replace the Draft with the NBA Draft Tournament! All non-playoff teams have a March madness type tournament for draft order with seeding set by most wins.
    1) absolutely no benefit to lose ever
    2) cheap owners can’t rely on high draft picks to turn their team around
    3) middle teams can truly become competitive with a high draft pick
    4) high draft picks aren’t punished by being sent to the worst teams
    5) fans get a tournament to root and the “trophy” joins your team next season!

  4. Ben says:

    I’m not sure I’m buying this elimination tournament, at least not for a playoff seed.

    One play-in game for the final playoff spot is one thing, especially if there was some stipulation that the 9th place team had to be within a game and a half in the standings or something like that so there wasn’t a team that was obviously better than the other who missed out because of a flukey result.

    In terms of a full single elimination tournament, unless it somehow replaced the entire first round of the current playoffs we would be adding even more time to one of the longest post seasons. Tas talks about basketball being the shortest of the major sports, but it feels like the longest time between the end of the regular season and the crowning of a champion. Not to mention that it would hardly change the results of the top teams meeting in the conference finals/championship game.

    However, this single elimination tournament sounds completely awesome, if they’re playing for ping-pong balls. That would be cool. You could have it going on alongside the first round action instead of holding it up. It would alleviate some of the woes of tanking because every team would want to be playing their best going into that tournament. If you did your same top three picks through the draft lottery (now with odds based upon winning games in this tournament), then awarded the rest of the picks based upon standings, so the really terrible teams would still be 4-6 or whatever they would have gotten if the lottery didn’t work out their way anyway, that would be pretty interesting.

Leave a Reply