NBA Expansion
-
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