NBA Expansion
-
I believe it is time for the NBA to expand from 30 to 32 teams. The sport is popular enough, and there are sufficient markets out there that can support an expansion of 2 teams. That would put them on par with the NFL in number of teams. And, no.....I don't think any should be located in Europe or the like.
Here are the largest TV markets in the US that currently do not have an NBA team:
1. Tampa-St. Pete. But with them, the Orlando market and they are nearly one as they are only 85 miles apart. In essence the Magic are the Orlando/Tampa-St. Pete Magic...so no need for one there.
2. Seattle. Clearly should be the frontrunner, given what the OKC owner and the league did to them.
3. St. Louis. Should be a ripe spot now that the NFL has abandoned that city. Any corporate money could transfer to the NBA. It was once a good NBA town in the 50s when the Hawks were there. And the closest markets with NBA teams: Chicago and Indy are 300 and 250 miles away. Plenty of distance.
4. Pittsburgh. has 3 teams, likely not large enough to support a 4th.
5. Raleigh-Durham...really Hornets territory.
6. Baltimore....but has the Bullets within like 30 miles...so not likely
7. San Diego. To me, also a prime target. Clippers probably should never have left. I don't know if the league thinks of them as LA leftovers
8. Nashville....NBA wants them to support Memphis team
9. Hartford....big enough...but because of location between NYC and Boston not considered major league market
10. Columbus. Yea, right. NBA considers this Cavs country
11. Kansas City. Also once had the Kings who left. If not St. Louis, perhaps here would be fine?
12. Cincinnatt. Another city long ago abandoned by the NBA. (Royals left for KC in 60s).
13. Greeneville/Spartanburg. Another growing area not considered ready for prime time....Hawks/Hornets battleground
14. West Palm Beach.....considered adjunct to Miami...South Florida's team
15. Las Vegas? Well, even if the Raiders don't
As for Canadian markets. Toronto is actually the 5th largest US/Can. market behind NY/LA/Chic and Philly. Even bigger than Dallas/Houston/ATL/Boston.
Montreal has over 4 million people and is every bit as big a market as say Detroit or Seattle. Vancouver has recently been abandoned by the NBA, but is still as large as Charlotte or Portland. It is much larger than Memphis to where the Grizzlies ran. But if Seattle got a team, I doubt Vancouver would. They like soccer too much up there.
No, to me top 4 are Montreal. Seattle, St. Louis or San Diego. They are large enough markets with currently only 2 major league teams (Montreal just one) (and even only Seattle has an MLS team....an not quite ready for major league status sport). Many smaller markets than these have 3 teams....including Cleveland and Pittsburgh.
Now...if the NBA were really to go for population, then they would put a team in Mexico City....which is larger even than the NYC metro area. But I don't think that area has the passion for basketball...or the financial resources that the NBA wants.
-
But, here is another note on NBA expansion....they LOVE to go into "one horse towns"....places where they are the only game in town like these:
Portland
Sacramento
Salt Lake
Memphis
San Antonio
Orlando
Oklahoma City
So, what is the largest US market currently without a team in any sport? Well, it would be Las Vegas and Hartford...but note what I say about those above. No, it is the Virginia Beach/Norfolk area. The population of that area is actually somewhat near that of like Indy or KC.
It is actually bigger than Memphis or OKC. It is over 200 miles from the nearest NBA Market...Washington DC.
So, if they are looking for a one horse town, there is a prime spot. And it is very basketball oriented. Moses Malone, Alan Iverson, Dell Curry, Alonzo Mourning and many others come from that vicinity.
-
I agree on norfolk.
-
St Louis would be awesome!
-
They would likely have to put one team in each conference. Seattle or San Diego would obviously go out west. St. Louis could fit into the east in the Cavs division with Chicago and Milwaukee.
Montreal would go in the Atlantic Divison......Norfolk in the Southeast Div.
-
-
Contraction is best in all professional sports
Contraction is best in all professional sports
BS.
-
Seattle will probably get another team eventually, they (almost) already have all the groundwork in place for a brand new stadium project - if they got a team they'd start construction the same day probably.
-
Contraction is best in all professional sports
BS.
BS.
Talent is diluted in every sport. You'd think Browns fans would no this better than anyone. The Cavs won the lottery with Lebron. When he took his talents to South Beach they sucked. The Indians have had life a couple times in the past decade but haven't had a glut of talent. If every sport had 3-5 less teams and talent was easier to bring together, the product would be better.
-
BS.
Talent is diluted in every sport. You'd think Browns fans would no this better than anyone. The Cavs won the lottery with Lebron. When he took his talents to South Beach they sucked. The Indians have had life a couple times in the past decade but haven't had a glut of talent. If every sport had 3-5 less teams and talent was easier to bring together, the product would be better.
Talent is diluted in every sport. You'd think Browns fans would no this better than anyone. The Cavs won the lottery with Lebron. When he took his talents to South Beach they sucked. The Indians have had life a couple times in the past decade but haven't had a glut of talent. If every sport had 3-5 less teams and talent was easier to bring together, the product would be better.
I don't think there is a problem at all with the product....and there is plenty enough talent out there to go around. A couple of teams are mismanaged and thus put out a bad product....like the 76ers......but that has nothing to do with the talent pool. Just the management pool.
-
Talent is diluted in every sport. You'd think Browns fans would no this better than anyone. The Cavs won the lottery with Lebron. When he took his talents to South Beach they sucked. The Indians have had life a couple times in the past decade but haven't had a glut of talent. If every sport had 3-5 less teams and talent was easier to bring together, the product would be better.
I don't think there is a problem at all with the product....and there is plenty enough talent out there to go around. A couple of teams are mismanaged and thus put out a bad product....like the 76ers......but that has nothing to do with the talent pool. Just the management pool.
I don't think there is a problem at all with the product....and there is plenty enough talent out there to go around. A couple of teams are mismanaged and thus put out a bad product....like the 76ers......but that has nothing to do with the talent pool. Just the management pool.
It takes at least 2 top players and another really good piece or typically 3 really good players to be truly competitive for an NBA title. The quasi-solo title was Dallas in 2011 but that was a rarity. If the Anthony Davis, Demarcus Cousins, Paul George, etc. in the league were on teams such as Toronto, Atlanta, Portland, etc the league would have a better product. Going into the playoffs most analysts predicted Golden State vs Cleveland in the Finals. Most thought Spurs, OKC and the Clippers had an outside shot at knocking of GSW but no one in the East was going to beat the Cavs. So going into the playoffs 4 of the 16 teams had a shot.
NFL, MLB & NHL are all more wide open at playoff time then the NBA.
-
I don't think there is a problem at all with the product....and there is plenty enough talent out there to go around. A couple of teams are mismanaged and thus put out a bad product....like the 76ers......but that has nothing to do with the talent pool. Just the management pool.
It takes at least 2 top players and another really good piece or typically 3 really good players to be truly competitive for an NBA title. The quasi-solo title was Dallas in 2011 but that was a rarity. If the Anthony Davis, Demarcus Cousins, Paul George, etc. in the league were on teams such as Toronto, Atlanta, Portland, etc the league would have a better product. Going into the playoffs most analysts predicted Golden State vs Cleveland in the Finals. Most thought Spurs, OKC and the Clippers had an outside shot at knocking of GSW but no one in the East was going to beat the Cavs. So going into the playoffs 4 of the 16 teams had a shot.
NFL, MLB & NHL are all more wide open at playoff time then the NBA.
It takes at least 2 top players and another really good piece or typically 3 really good players to be truly competitive for an NBA title. The quasi-solo title was Dallas in 2011 but that was a rarity. If the Anthony Davis, Demarcus Cousins, Paul George, etc. in the league were on teams such as Toronto, Atlanta, Portland, etc the league would have a better product. Going into the playoffs most analysts predicted Golden State vs Cleveland in the Finals. Most thought Spurs, OKC and the Clippers had an outside shot at knocking of GSW but no one in the East was going to beat the Cavs. So going into the playoffs 4 of the 16 teams had a shot.
NFL, MLB & NHL are all more wide open at playoff time then the NBA.
Yes, basketball can be dominated by a single player...or two than the other major sports. So the teams with super Superstars, like LeBron and Curry are going to win. Not that much different from NFL where teams with the best QBs usually win. Sorry, no, there is plenty of talent to go around and to expand a couple of teams.
-
Seattle and Montreal would make sense.
St. Louis lost the Rams, but I think it is more of a hockey town, like Pittsburgh, so I could see the NBA go international again.
Seattle is pretty much a given.
Zombo
Zombo said:
Seattle and Montreal would make sense.
St. Louis lost the Rams, but I think it is more of a hockey town, like Pittsburgh, so I could see the NBA go international again.
Seattle is pretty much a given.
Zombo
Yes. Makes sense. Only thing about Montreal is that the NBA, as I noted, likes to be the big fish in a smaller pond....and they will never be that in Montreal. Hockey will always rule there. Once upon a time there was a Virginia Squires team in the ABA. Not sure why they never transferred to the NBA with the Spurs, Nuggets., Nets, etc. That (Norfolk/Va. Beach) would be the one market left out there with no team that could seem a fit with what they do.
-
It takes at least 2 top players and another really good piece or typically 3 really good players to be truly competitive for an NBA title. The quasi-solo title was Dallas in 2011 but that was a rarity. If the Anthony Davis, Demarcus Cousins, Paul George, etc. in the league were on teams such as Toronto, Atlanta, Portland, etc the league would have a better product. Going into the playoffs most analysts predicted Golden State vs Cleveland in the Finals. Most thought Spurs, OKC and the Clippers had an outside shot at knocking of GSW but no one in the East was going to beat the Cavs. So going into the playoffs 4 of the 16 teams had a shot.
NFL, MLB & NHL are all more wide open at playoff time then the NBA.
Yes, basketball can be dominated by a single player...or two than the other major sports. So the teams with super Superstars, like LeBron and Curry are going to win. Not that much different from NFL where teams with the best QBs usually win. Sorry, no, there is plenty of talent to go around and to expand a couple of teams.
Yes, basketball can be dominated by a single player...or two than the other major sports. So the teams with super Superstars, like LeBron and Curry are going to win. Not that much different from NFL where teams with the best QBs usually win. Sorry, no, there is plenty of talent to go around and to expand a couple of teams.
Exactly- the Cavs went from a lottery team to the Finals when LeBron came back, and they added Love.
-
It takes at least 2 top players and another really good piece or typically 3 really good players to be truly competitive for an NBA title. The quasi-solo title was Dallas in 2011 but that was a rarity. If the Anthony Davis, Demarcus Cousins, Paul George, etc. in the league were on teams such as Toronto, Atlanta, Portland, etc the league would have a better product. Going into the playoffs most analysts predicted Golden State vs Cleveland in the Finals. Most thought Spurs, OKC and the Clippers had an outside shot at knocking of GSW but no one in the East was going to beat the Cavs. So going into the playoffs 4 of the 16 teams had a shot.
NFL, MLB & NHL are all more wide open at playoff time then the NBA.
Yes, basketball can be dominated by a single player...or two than the other major sports. So the teams with super Superstars, like LeBron and Curry are going to win. Not that much different from NFL where teams with the best QBs usually win. Sorry, no, there is plenty of talent to go around and to expand a couple of teams.
Yes, basketball can be dominated by a single player...or two than the other major sports. So the teams with super Superstars, like LeBron and Curry are going to win. Not that much different from NFL where teams with the best QBs usually win. Sorry, no, there is plenty of talent to go around and to expand a couple of teams.
Can't be dominated by one, never has and never will. Gotta have multiples
-
Yes, basketball can be dominated by a single player...or two than the other major sports. So the teams with super Superstars, like LeBron and Curry are going to win. Not that much different from NFL where teams with the best QBs usually win. Sorry, no, there is plenty of talent to go around and to expand a couple of teams.
Can't be dominated by one, never has and never will. Gotta have multiples
Can't be dominated by one, never has and never will. Gotta have multiples
To win a championship, sure. But to dominate games and come close....yes. LeBron did that last year....and also got the Cavs in the Finals in 2007 pretty much on his own.
But there is STILL enough talent around for expansion. Rosters are only 15 players. You don't think that there are another 30 players out there that can play in the NBA? Sure there is. Most teams now are 2-3 good players and 12 supporting players. No dilution of talent would exist with 2 more teams.....especially with players from Europe and around the world playing.
-
Can't be dominated by one, never has and never will. Gotta have multiples
To win a championship, sure. But to dominate games and come close....yes. LeBron did that last year....and also got the Cavs in the Finals in 2007 pretty much on his own.
But there is STILL enough talent around for expansion. Rosters are only 15 players. You don't think that there are another 30 players out there that can play in the NBA? Sure there is. Most teams now are 2-3 good players and 12 supporting players. No dilution of talent would exist with 2 more teams.....especially with players from Europe and around the world playing.
To win a championship, sure. But to dominate games and come close....yes. LeBron did that last year....and also got the Cavs in the Finals in 2007 pretty much on his own.
But there is STILL enough talent around for expansion. Rosters are only 15 players. You don't think that there are another 30 players out there that can play in the NBA? Sure there is. Most teams now are 2-3 good players and 12 supporting players. No dilution of talent would exist with 2 more teams.....especially with players from Europe and around the world playing.
Sorry but the East sucks and that really helps Lebron get to the Finals. It's not about fielding teams it's about competitive balance. For the past decade in the NBA 4-5 teams start the season with a chance at the brass ring. The Giants win SuperBowls from out of nowhere. If the college game, or overseas, would be able to produce NBA ready talent I'd agree with expansion but the draft is 2, possibly 3, really good players and a bunch of who cares. You're lucky to have Lebron. Without Lebron the Cavs stink. You'd be Kyrie and 30 wins because there would be no big 3. As a Celtic fan I've seen it all dynasty, rebuilding and big 3. Rebuilding ain't what it used to be.
-
To win a championship, sure. But to dominate games and come close....yes. LeBron did that last year....and also got the Cavs in the Finals in 2007 pretty much on his own.
But there is STILL enough talent around for expansion. Rosters are only 15 players. You don't think that there are another 30 players out there that can play in the NBA? Sure there is. Most teams now are 2-3 good players and 12 supporting players. No dilution of talent would exist with 2 more teams.....especially with players from Europe and around the world playing.
Sorry but the East sucks and that really helps Lebron get to the Finals. It's not about fielding teams it's about competitive balance. For the past decade in the NBA 4-5 teams start the season with a chance at the brass ring. The Giants win SuperBowls from out of nowhere. If the college game, or overseas, would be able to produce NBA ready talent I'd agree with expansion but the draft is 2, possibly 3, really good players and a bunch of who cares. You're lucky to have Lebron. Without Lebron the Cavs stink. You'd be Kyrie and 30 wins because there would be no big 3. As a Celtic fan I've seen it all dynasty, rebuilding and big 3. Rebuilding ain't what it used to be.
Sorry but the East sucks and that really helps Lebron get to the Finals. It's not about fielding teams it's about competitive balance. For the past decade in the NBA 4-5 teams start the season with a chance at the brass ring. The Giants win SuperBowls from out of nowhere. If the college game, or overseas, would be able to produce NBA ready talent I'd agree with expansion but the draft is 2, possibly 3, really good players and a bunch of who cares. You're lucky to have Lebron. Without Lebron the Cavs stink. You'd be Kyrie and 30 wins because there would be no big 3. As a Celtic fan I've seen it all dynasty, rebuilding and big 3. Rebuilding ain't what it used to be.
There is plenty of talent out there, enough for a couple of more teams. Superstars dominate the league.....that's a fact be there 32, 30 or 12 teams. Back in the 60s when there were only 10-12 teams Bill Russell dominated....and you had shit teams then just like we had now. Do you propose going back to 10 or 12 teams.
Who were all the big stars on the Chicago Zephyrs? Perhaps the last team that was "contracted". They couldn't hardly win 20 games in a year. Do you think Chicago was worthy of getting another team.
If a fan base can support a team, get that city a team.
Sorry, but I am all for "job creation". Another 2-3 dozen millionaires would help our economy. Get them paying taxes.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login