They'll play each other in the Western Conference semifinals, and many will believe that the winner can go ahead and start etching their name into the Larry O'Brien trophy (obviously, there will be those who disagree, including fans of the Mavericks, Pistons, Bulls ... in fact, fans of every team out there think their team is the best. Most of them are wrong, but that's OK).Is it fair? One of the NBA's best three teams will be going home in Round 2. Let's take a leap of faith and assume that the Warriors close tomorrow night against Dallas. That would leave the Warriors playing the winner of the Utah/Houston series, while San Antonio and Phoenix, the teams with, at the very least, the best pedigrees, battle it out in the other semi. Is it fair to let one of the "lesser" teams punch a ticket to the conference finals while one of the two "best" teams go home?
No, it's probably not fair ... but I'd still argue against re-seeding. The 1-seed deserves to be rewarded for their regular season by having the easiest possible road through the playoffs, so if an 8-seed like Golden State is able to rise up and take down the 1-seed, then they've wrestled that advantage away from them. At that point, they'd deserve any breaks they get. They still won't have home-court advantage, but if they get to play a 4-seed instead of a 2, I think they've earned it.
Less fair than sending the Spurs or Suns home early would be to make the Warriors (or any other hypothetical future 8-seed) keep playing the toughest road possible ... 8-seeds start this thing in enough of a hole. If they can climb the impossible hill in the first round, I don't think it makes sense to keep trying to make that incline steeper and steeper for them.




