List of NBA G League yearly standings

These are regular season standings and playoff results for the NBA G League. The NBA G League is the official minor league basketball organization owned and run by the National Basketball Association (NBA). The league was formed in 2001 as the National Basketball Development League (NBDL). The league was renamed to NBA Development League (NBA D-League) in 2005 to reflect its close affiliation with the NBA. In 2017, it was renamed NBA G League, as part of a sponsorship deal with Gatorade.

2001–02

Team	W	L	Win %	GB
North Charleston Lowgators	36	20	.643	—
Greenville Groove	36	20	.643	—
Columbus Riverdragons	31	25	.554	5
Mobile Revelers	30	26	.536	6
Huntsville Flight	26	30	.464	10
Asheville Altitude	26	30	.464	10
Fayetteville Patriots	21	35	.375	15
Roanoke Dazzle	18	38	.321	18

	Semifinals (Best-of-3)					NBDL Championship (Best-of-3)
	2	Greenville	2
	3	Columbus	1
						2	Greenville	2
						1	North Charleston	0
	1	North Charleston	2
	4	Mobile	1

2002–03

Team	W	L	Win %	GB
Fayetteville Patriots	32	18	.640	—
North Charleston Lowgators	26	24	.520	6
Mobile Revelers	26	24	.520	6
Roanoke Dazzle	26	24	.520	6
Asheville Altitude	23	27	.460	9
Columbus Riverdragons	23	27	.460	9
Greenville Groove	22	28	.440	10
Huntsville Flight	22	28	.440	10

	Semifinals (Best-of-3)					NBDL Championship (Best-of-3)
	1	Fayetteville	2
	4	Roanoke	0
						3	Mobile	2
						1	Fayetteville	1
	3	Mobile	2
	2	North Charleston	0

2003–04

Team	W	L	Win %	GB
Asheville Altitude	28	18	.609	—
Charleston Lowgators	27	19	.587	1
Huntsville Flight	24	22	.522	4
Fayetteville Patriots	21	25	.457	7
Roanoke Dazzle	20	26	.435	8
Columbus Riverdragons	18	28	.391	10

	Semifinals					NBDL Championship
	1	Asheville	116
	4	Fayetteville	111
						1	Asheville	108
						3	Huntsville	106
	3	Huntsville	108
	2	Charleston	100

2004–05

Team	W	L	Win %	GB
Columbus Riverdragons	30	18	.625	—
Asheville Altitude	27	21	.563	3
Huntsville Flight	27	21	.563	3
Roanoke Dazzle	26	22	.542	4
Fayetteville Patriots	17	31	.354	13
Florida Flame	17	31	.354	13

	Semifinals					NBDL Championship
	1	Columbus	96
	4	Roanoke	89
						2	Asheville	90
						1	Columbus	67
	2	Asheville	90
	3	Huntsville	86

2005–06

Team	W	L	Win %	GB
Fort Worth Flyers	28	20	.583	—
Albuquerque Thunderbirds	26	22	.542	2
Florida Flame	25	23	.521	3
Roanoke Dazzle	25	23	.521	3
Arkansas RimRockers	24	24	.500	4
Austin Toros	24	24	.500	4
Tulsa 66ers	24	24	.500	4
Fayetteville Patriots	16	32	.333	12

	Semifinals					D-League Championship
	2	Albuquerque	80
	3	Florida	71
						2	Albuquerque	119
						1	Fort Worth	108
	1	Fort Worth	87
	4	Roanoke	78

2006–07

Regular season

Notes

• x indicates a team that had qualified for the playoffs
• Number in parentheses indicates the team's seeding for the playoffs.

Playoffs

Three teams with the best regular season records in each division qualified for playoffs. The playoffs consist of three rounds with single elimination format. Teams with the better regular season record holds home-court advantage in the first and second rounds, while teams with higher seed holds home-court advantage in the Finals. The division winners received a bye from the first round. The remaining teams faced each other in the first round.

	First round (April 17–18)					Second round (April 20–21)					D-League Championship (April 29)
						1	Dakota	115
	Eastern Division
						2	Sioux Falls	113
	2	Sioux Falls	128
	3	Fort Worth	105
											E1	Dakota	129*
											W2	Colorado	121
						1	Idaho	91
	Western Division
						2	Colorado	94*
	2	Colorado	130
	3	Albuquerque	100

Notes

• The numbers to the left of each team indicate the team's seeding.
• An asterisk (*) denotes overtime period(s).
• Teams in bold advanced to the next round.
• Teams in italics have home-court advantage in that round.

Finals

2007–08

Regular season

Western Division

Team	W	L	PCT	GB	Home	Road
x-Idaho Stampede (1)	36	14	.720	–	21–4	15–10
x-Los Angeles D-Fenders (4)	32	18	.640	4	19–6	13–12
Utah Flash	24	26	.480	12	14–11	10–15
Anaheim Arsenal	23	27	.460	13	14–11	9–16
Bakersfield Jam	11	39	.220	25	9–16	2–23

Notes

• x indicates a team that had qualified for the playoffs
• Number in parentheses indicates the team's seeding for the playoffs.

Playoffs

The three division winners, along with the next three teams with the best regular season records regardless of division, qualified for the playoffs. The playoffs consist of three rounds with single elimination format for the first two rounds and best-of-three format for the finals. Teams with the better regular season record holds home-court advantage in every rounds. The three division winners were seeded from 1 to 3 based on their regular season records, while the remaining teams were seeded from 4 to 6 based on their regular season records. The two division winners with the best regular season records received a bye from the first round. The remaining division winners faced the lowest seeded teams, while the two remaining teams faced each other.

	First round (April 15)					Second round (April 19–20)					D-League Championship (April 21–25)
						1	Idaho*	1
						4	Los Angeles	0
	4	Los Angeles	1
	5	Colorado	0
											1	Idaho*	2
											2	Austin*	1
						2	Austin*	1
						6	Sioux Falls	0
	3	Dakota*	0
	6	Sioux Falls	1

Notes

• The numbers to the left of each team indicate the team's seeding.
• The numbers to the right indicate the number of games the team won in that round.
• The division winners are marked by an asterisk (*).
• Teams in bold advanced to the next round.
• Teams in italics have home-court advantage in that round.

Finals

2008–09

Regular season

Complete rosters for each of the 16 2008–09 NBA D-League teams will consist of the ten players drafted November 7 along with seven returning, allocation, and local tryout players. Rosters will be reduced to 12 players on November 20 and opening-day 10-man rosters must be set by November 26 in anticipation of the November 28 tip off of the NBA D-League's eighth season. Each team will play one preseason game between November 19 and 25.

Western Division

Team	W	L	PCT	GB	Home	Road
x-Utah Flash (2)	32	18	.640	–	17–8	15–10
x-Idaho Stampede (5)	31	19	.620	1	20–5	11–14
x-Bakersfield Jam (8)	26	24	.520	6	16–9	10–15
Reno Bighorns	25	25	.500	7	18–7	7–18
Los Angeles D-Fenders	19	31	.380	13	11–14	8–17
Anaheim Arsenal	15	35	.300	17	9–16	6–19

Notes

• x indicates a team that had qualified for the playoffs
• Number in parentheses indicates the team's seeding for the playoffs.

Playoffs

The three division winners, along with the next five teams with the best regular season records regardless of division, qualified for the playoffs. The playoffs consist of three rounds with single elimination format for the first two rounds and best-of-three format for the finals. Teams with the better regular season record holds home-court advantage in every rounds. The three division winners were seeded from 1 to 3 based on their regular season records, while the remaining teams were seeded from 4 to 8 based on their regular season records. The three division winners had to choose their opponents in the first round from among the four lowest seeded teams. The fourth seeded team would be paired with the remaining team that is not chosen as an opponent by the three division winners .

	First round (April 14–16)					Second round (April 18–20)					Finals (April 22–24)
	1	Colorado*	1
	7	Erie	0
						1	Colorado*	1
						4	Austin	0
	4	Austin	1
	5	Idaho	0
											1	Colorado*	2
											2	Utah*	0
	2	Utah*	1
	8	Bakersfield	0
						2	Utah*	1
						6	Dakota	0
	3	Iowa*	0
	6	Dakota	1

Notes

• The numbers to the left of each team indicate the team's seeding.
• The numbers to the right indicate the number of games the team won in that round.
• The division winners are marked by an asterisk (*).
• Teams in bold advanced to the next round.
• Teams in italics have home-court advantage in that round.

Finals

2009–10

Regular season

Notes

• x indicates a team that had qualified for the playoffs
• Number in parentheses indicates the team's seeding for the playoffs.

Playoffs

The Eastern and Western Conference winners, along with the next six teams with the best regular season records regardless of conference, qualified for the playoffs. The playoffs consist of three rounds with best-of-three format. Teams with the better regular season record holds home-court advantage in every rounds. The teams were seeded from 1 to 8 based on their regular season records. The top three seeds had to choose their opponents in the first round from among the four lowest seeded teams. The fourth seeded team would be paired with the remaining team that is not chosen as an opponent by the top three seeds.

	First round (April 7–13)					Second round (April 16–21)					Finals (April 25–27)
	1	Iowa*	2
	7	Utah	1
						1	Iowa*	1
						8	Tulsa	2
	4	Sioux Falls	1
	8	Tulsa	2
											8	Tulsa	0
											2	Rio Grande Valley*	2
	2	Rio Grande Valley*	2
	6	Reno	1
						2	Rio Grande Valley*	2
						3	Austin	1
	3	Austin	2
	5	Dakota	1

Notes

• The numbers to the left of each team indicate the team's seeding.
• The numbers to the right indicate the number of games the team won in that round.
• The conference champions are marked by an asterisk (*).
• Teams in bold advanced to the next round.
• Teams in italics have home-court advantage in that round.

Finals

2010–11

Regular season

Notes

• x indicates a team that had qualified for the playoffs
• Number in parentheses indicates the team's seeding for the playoffs.

Playoffs

The Eastern and Western Conference winners, along with the next six teams with the best regular season records regardless of conference, qualified for the playoffs. The playoffs consist of three rounds with best-of-three format. Teams with the better regular season record holds home-court advantage in every rounds. The teams were seeded from 1 to 8 based on their regular season records. The top three seeds had to choose their opponents in the first round from among the four lowest seeded teams. The fourth seeded team would be paired with the remaining team that is not chosen as an opponent by the top three seeds.

	First round (April 6–14)					Second round (April 15–20)					Finals (April 24–29)
	1	Iowa*	2
	7	Utah	1
						1	Iowa*	2
						4	Tulsa	0
	4	Tulsa	2
	8	Texas	0
											1	Iowa*	2
											3	Rio Grande Valley	1
	2	Reno*	2
	5	Erie	1
						2	Reno*	0
						3	Rio Grande Valley	2
	3	Rio Grande Valley	2
	6	Bakersfield	1

Notes

• The numbers to the left of each team indicate the team's seeding.
• The numbers to the right indicate the number of games the team won in that round.
• The conference champions are marked by an asterisk (*).
• Teams in bold advanced to the next round.
• Teams in italics have home-court advantage in that round.

Finals

2011–12

Regular season

Notes

• x indicates teams that have qualified for the playoff

Playoffs

The Eastern and Western Conference winners, along with the next six teams with the best regular season records regardless of conference, qualified for the playoffs. The playoffs consist of three rounds with best-of-three format. Teams with the better regular season record holds home-court advantage in every rounds. The teams were seeded from 1 to 8 based on their regular season records. The top three seeds had to choose their opponents in the first round from among the four lowest seeded teams. The fourth seeded team would be paired with the remaining team that is not chosen as an opponent by the top three seeds.

	First round (April 11–16)					Second round (April 19–22)					Finals (April 24–28)
	1	Los Angeles*	2
	8	Iowa	0
						1	Los Angeles*	2
						6	Bakersfield	0
	4	Dakota	0
	6	Bakersfield	2
											1	Los Angeles*	1
											3	Austin	2
	2	Springfield*	1
	7	Canton	2
						7	Canton	1
						3	Austin	2
	3	Austin	2
	5	Erie	1

Notes

• The numbers to the left of each team indicate the team's seeding.
• The numbers to the right indicate the number of games the team won in that round.
• The conference champions are marked by an asterisk (*).
• Teams in bold advanced to the next round.
• Teams in italics have home-court advantage in that round.

Finals

2012–13

Regular season

Western Conference

Team	W	L	PCT	GB	Home	Road
x-Bakersfield Jam (1)	36	14	.720	–	21–4	17–8
x-Santa Cruz Warriors (3)	32	18	.640	4	19–6	13–12
Los Angeles D-Fenders	21	29	.420	17	13-12	8–17
Idaho Stampede	19	31	.380	17	10–15	9–16
Reno Bighorns	16	34	.320	20	11–14	5–20

Notes

• x indicates teams that have qualified for the playoff

Playoffs

The three conference winners, along with the next five teams with the best regular season records regardless of conference, qualified for the playoffs. The playoffs consist of three rounds with best-of-three format. Teams with the better regular season record holds home-court advantage in every rounds. The teams were seeded from 1 to 8 based on their regular season records. The top three seeds had to choose their opponents in the first round from among the four lowest seeded teams. The fourth seeded team would be paired with the remaining team that is not chosen as an opponent by the top three seeds.

	First round (April 10–13)					Second round (April 17–21)					Finals (April 25–29)
	1	Bakersfield*	0
	6	Austin	2
						6	Austin	0
						3	Santa Cruz*	2
	3	Santa Cruz	2
	5	Fort Wayne	0
											3	Santa Cruz	2
											2	Rio Grande*	1
	2	Rio Grande*	2
	8	Maine	0
						2	Rio Grande	2
						7	Tulsa	0
	4	Canton	1
	7	Tulsa	2

Notes

• The numbers to the left of each team indicate the team's seeding.
• The numbers to the right indicate the number of games the team won in that round.
• The conference champions are marked by an asterisk (*).
• Teams in bold advanced to the next round.
• Teams in italics have home-court advantage in that round.

Finals

2013–14

Regular season

West Division

Team	W	L	PCT	GB	Home	Road
x-Los Angeles D-Fenders (2)	31	19	.620	–	17-8	14–11
x-Santa Cruz Warriors (6)	29	21	.580	2	16–9	13–12
x-Reno Bighorns (8)	27	23	.540	4	15–10	12–13
Idaho Stampede	24	26	.480	7	13–12	11–14
Bakersfield Jam	24	26	.480	7	13–12	11–14

• Idaho won the season series against Bakersfield, 3–2.

Notes

• x indicates teams that have qualified for the playoffs with seeding in (parentheses).
• If Los Angeles had not been involved in a three-way tie with Iowa and Sioux Falls, Iowa still would have won the Central Division championship. Iowa and Sioux Falls split their regular-season series, 3-3. Iowa was 13-14 (.481) against opponents with records of .500 or better compared with Sioux Falls's record of 12-13 (.480) in such games. If Sioux Falls had not been involved in a three-way tie with Iowa and Los Angeles, or if the league broke ties within divisions before interdivisional ties, Iowa would have been the #2 seed based on head-to-head record against Los Angeles, since Iowa won the only game the teams played.
• If the league broke ties for non-playoff teams in the same way as it does to determine playoff seeding, the tie among Texas, Tulsa, Idaho and Bakersfield would have been broken using a multiple-team tiebreaker by considering the teams' records in games they played against one another. Tulsa was 5-4 (.556), Bakersfield was 6-5 (.545), Idaho was 5-5 (.500) and Texas was 6-8 (.429) in such games. This would have given Tulsa fourth place in the Central Division, Bakersfield fourth place in the West Division, Idaho last place in the West Division and Texas fifth place in the Central Division.

Playoffs

The three division winners, along with the next five teams with the best regular-season records regardless of division qualified for the playoffs. The playoffs consist of three rounds with a best-of-three format. Teams with the better regular-season record hold home-court advantage in each round but play Game 1 on the road and Games 2 and 3 (if necessary) at home. The teams were seeded from 1 to 8 based on their regular-season records. Division winners were not given any special consideration in the seeding and could be the #8 seed. The three division winners, which may or may not be the three top seeds, had to choose their opponents in the first round from among the four lowest seeded wild-card teams. The top-seeded wild-card team was paired with the remaining team that was not chosen as an opponent by the three division winners. The two division winners which are not the top seed were placed in the lower half of the bracket which meant they would meet in the semifinals should they both advance. This would also result in the top two seeds meeting in the semifinals if they were from the same division and both advanced.

	Quarterfinals (April 8–15)					Semifinals (April 17–21)					Finals (April 24–28)
	1	Fort Wayne*	2
	8	Reno	0
						1	Fort Wayne*	2
						4	Sioux Falls	0
	4	Sioux Falls	2
	7	Canton	1
											1	Fort Wayne*	2
											6	Santa Cruz	0
	2	Los Angeles*	0
	6	Santa Cruz	2
						6	Santa Cruz	2
						5	Rio Grande Valley	1
	3	Iowa*	1
	5	Rio Grande Valley	2

Notes

• The numbers to the left of each team indicate the team's seeding.
• The numbers to the right indicate the number of games the team won in that round.
• The division champions are marked by an asterisk (*).
• Teams in bold advanced to the next round.
• Teams in italics have home-court advantage in that round.

Quarterfinals

Semifinals

Finals

2014–15

Regular season

Quarterfinals (April 8–15)

Semifinals (April 17–21)

Finals (April 23–27)

E1

Maine*

0

E4

Fort Wayne

2

E4

Fort Wayne

2

E3

Canton

0

E2

Sioux Falls*

1

E3

Canton

2

E4

Fort Wayne

0

W1

Santa Cruz

2

W1

Santa Cruz*

2

W4

Oklahoma City

0

W1

Santa Cruz

2

W2

Austin

1

W2

Austin*

2

W3

Bakersfield

1

2015–16

Regular season

References

General

External links

• Official site
• D-League at Basketball-Reference.com