Before I start, welcome to the first article of the “What if?” series. I’m not completely sure where this series will go yet (and how often me and/or other authors will write around this), but I’m excited to find out.

Around the NBA Finals, NBA commissioner Adam Silver discussed the potential of amending the regular season schedule for years going forward. With the implementation of the play-in tournament (the seventh to 10th seeds in both conferences play for the final two playoff spots in each conference), and the idea of an in-season tournament in play, the idea of shortening the regular season has come up. When asked during a press conference, Silver was open to it, implying that he’d be willing to shorten the season if the numbers showed that it would mitigate the amount of injuries suffered league-wide.

With that in mind, I came up with a proposal for a reduced regular season schedule. While it will probably never come to fruition due to the potential loss in revenue, I decided on a 66 game schedule.

Why 66?

Two reasons:

1.) The number of games would be reduced by almost 20%, giving the NBA more days to space the schedule out.

2.) The NBA has already had a 66 game season. While it was a lockout year (which reduced the number of days the NBA could space the schedule out), the 2011-2012 season went for 66 games, and it was a pretty exciting season.

How Would This Play Out?

Divisions: 3 games per team (12 games)

Each NBA division has five teams. As a result, there’s no need to adjust this section. By playing three games, in the event of a division or seeding tiebreaker, a clear head-to-head tiebreaker is available for each team.

Non-Division Opponents: 2 games per team (50 games)

Once the four division opponents are taken out, 25 teams are left for each NBA team to play. Playing two games allows each NBA team to have a home-and-home schedule, giving them the ability to generate revenue for close to—if not more than—half of the entire schedule (when division opponent games are accounted for).

“Divisional Finish” Opponents: 1 game per conference opponent (2 games)

For this section, the NBA takes a play out of the NFL’s playbook. Every season, each NFL team has the bulk of their schedule based on where they finished in their respective division (division winner plays a “first place” schedule where they play other division winners, second-place finisher plays other second-place finishers, etc.).

For example, if the schedule was implemented this year, the Miami Heat would have faced the Boston Celtics and Milwaukee Bucks, who finished first in their respective divisions.

Final Two: Random “Third Game” Matchups

For this section, a third game would be attributed to a non-divisional opponent for each team. This would give the NBA the freedom to choose certain matchups. For example, if the Boston Celtics and Milwaukee Bucks are only set up for two games (this would be if they don’t fall under the “Divisional Finish” section), the NBA could decide to give them a third game for a potential seeding tiebreaker AND an exciting TV matchup.

If teams already fall under the “Divisional Finish” section, then this could be a little tricky. However, I believe the NBA would be able to work around this.

What do you think about the proposal? Would you reduce the schedule at all? How would you structure it? Share your thoughts in the comments below!