Quote:
Originally posted by J Geoff:
Why do we need to even consider combined totals at all?
Because it's quite possible for someone to finish first in total points without finishing in the top three in either segment and having playing out both segments in full for the entire season.

And if we have seven fairly evenly matched players - say JG, PL, DM, JL, LZ, SP, and DB, it's more than just a theoretical possibility if everyone plays every day, no one misses any days, and the luck factors more or less even out.

Here.....
Code:
Player  Seg 1  Finish   Seg 2  Finish     Total   Finish
 A     10,900     1     7,420     7       18,320     7    
 B     10,800     2     7,540     6       18,340     6     
 C     10,700     3     7,700     5       18,400     5     
 D     10,680     4     7,940     4       18,620     1       
 E     10,500     5     8,000     3       18,500     4      
 F     10,400     6     8,150     2       18,550     3    
 G     10,300     7     8,280     1       18,580     2
In the example above, Player "D" has failed to finished in the Top Three in either segment, but has the most overall points.

Basing which of us gets how many points based on ESPN's arbitrary cutoff date seems silly.

If the segments had started or ended one week earlier or later, the entire standings for each segment could be completely different.

I've always said that overall points is the most important thing, because it's just a matter of luck, really, where you happen to be position-wise when the first segment ends and the second begins.

Why award points after the 17th week, or the 16th, or the 18th and then start up again?

Because that's when the NBA decides to have their All-Star break?

You wanna say that it's two separate games, OK, I'll give you that one, but to not count overall points at least equally with each of the first two segments makes no sense.

"Difficult....not impossible"