i see several problems with head to head:
- you have to manage your power during a season, and when you don't know in advance who finish with you on the same place, head to head would be biased to by the schedule and not optional lineup and enthusiam standing. Over a season, this balance out better against each other in my eyes.
- interconference games have just one game, with a huge home court advantage on one side.
- a team winning an head to head is also not necessary better, and deserved hc because of it. Properly it fit better against other teams in the league, then the team which head to head is important since they finished the same.
Just had one annoying case in my league where the HC in the first playoff round was determined by the higher win against tanking teams.
it was still a close race at the last game day, but also the other wins counted too. So it wasn't just determined from the higher win against the tanking teams.
(46112692) - taking this game as deciding factor, which was placed on the first game day. Where northener concentrated on his other game, and building up enthusiam, while vampirfrösche played against the weakest team of the conference and a bot in cup. would that be a more fair measurement?
You also could say, if this game was close northeners would finished second, cause they had a better PD differential then the Vampirfrösche then.