Rumor: NBA Expansion?

[SchoolboyC]

You've said nothing to refute my point.


"yeah there's a problem. expansion will surely make the existing problem worse, but it won't make it THAT much worse so "kinda shyt is that? From a fan's perspective, what is their to gain from adding a team that makes up for the obvious issue? I just want somebody to make it make sense is all.

I don’t think it will make a difference really. I don’t foresee myself suddenly enjoying the NBA less because two teams will be added within the next 10 years or so.

Even if the NBA got rid of the 10 teams you mentioned and distributed their talent out onto the remaining 20 teams you think suddenly everyone would be equal? That’s not how it works. The goalposts would move and those teams at the bottom would just get replaced with new ones. What sports league in the world is there where every team is on an even playing field in terms of personnel?

 

[Kaydigi]

Leave Julius Randle unprotected … that is all

 

[RickyGQ]

Leave Julius Randle unprotected … that is all

Lol definitely.

 

[RickyGQ]

On one hand adding teams is always fun and exciting but on the other hand I don't think we need further dilution of talent on teams when the Magic, Hornets, Kings, Thunder, Pistons, Raptors, Rockets, Knicks, Wizards, Pacers, and Spurs exist. I ain't bullshyttin, go look at those rosters right now and tell me we need more teams because of all the talent already in the league.


It doesn't make sense to add teams just for the hell of it. if the argument is that the league used to have 6 and grew to 29 in 30 years, then we need to realize that obviously the league needed more than 6 teams, but to continue to add 29 teams every 30 years would be nonsensical.

Aside from maybe the spurs, all those teams have exciting young talent. And there are plenty of NBA level players without jobs right now. There’s more than enough talent

 

[RickyGQ]

that would be a fun exercise if everyone repped their team here and did a mock expansion draft.

you'd be surprised at how worthless the new teams would look

Let’s do it.

 

[BBG]

I don’t think it will make a difference really. I don’t foresee myself suddenly enjoying the NBA less because two teams will be added within the next 10 years or so.

Even if the NBA got rid of the 10 teams you mentioned and distributed their talent out onto the remaining 20 teams you think suddenly everyone would be equal? That’s not how it works. The goalposts would move and those teams at the bottom would just get replaced with new ones. What sports league in the world is there where every team is on an even playing field in terms of personnel?

Lotta juelzing going on here breh, you having a hard time staying in the pocket. The bold is also a shameless straw man that I won't even entertain. However, every single year in the NFL there's at least 8-10 teams that have a legitimate chance of winning the super bowl. Every. Single. Year. Now of course I believe that because it's by nature a much more team oriented sport, and with so many players parity comes more natural. Still, my point is not for every single team to have an equal chance of winning the sb by having equal rosters, I'm saying if you have less teams you have less jobs available meaning the average talent level will rise.


So, to answer the question you didn't ask and instead asked another retarded one I also won't entertain, yes I wholeheartedly believe that by cutting 10 teams the average talent level will rise, and a byproduct of that would be more teams in championship contention. I am not advocating we get rid of teams. I'm just trying to get you to understand that your arguments are trash and I'm still looking for someone with some damn sense to argue the league expanding being good for the fans. It's obviously good for the owners and whoever lives in the cities they expand to, but..I will say this one last time. I don't see how adding another team would make an already diluted product better.

Aside from maybe the spurs, all those teams have exciting young talent. And there are plenty of NBA level players without jobs right now. There’s more than enough talent

nikka what? Do we wanna just watch good hoops or actually have real competition at the top? If all y'all wanna see is more ball being played then cool, I get it. But part of the reason I prefer the NFL is just because it's so many good teams you never know who's gonna win every year. NBA you got at best 3-4 contenders every year, and almost always it's really only 2 teams that somebody would feel confident betting on. I mean you can literally go back at least the past 15 years and see that besides the raptors win we could pretty much determine the outcome of those seasons with two choices. And the year the raptors won I mean come on, that was quite obviously gonna be another warriors ring if the bball gods didn't smite KD/Klay

 

[RickyGQ]

Shouldn’t New Orleans be headed East first? But I think all of them belong in the East.



This works for the NFL because they have 2 different conferences that each have the same divisions (North/South/East/West)

This is harder for the NBA because there’s an Eastern and Western Conference and divisions are purely geographic. The teams aren’t evenly distributed geographically which is how you end with shyt like OKC and Minnesota in the Northwest, and Memphis and New Orleans in the Western Conference.

The NBA should do what MLB did in the ‘80s and ‘90s and have some divisions with an uneven amount of teams.

You could still do it, it won’t be perfect in some divisions but it’s solid:

Western Conference
WC North Division- Seattle, Portland, Sacramento, Golden State
WC West Division- LAL, LAC, Phoenix, Vegas
WC East Division- Utah, Denver, OKC, Memphis
WC South Division- Dallas, Houston, San Antonio, New Orleans

Eastern Conference
EC North Division- Toronto, Cleveland, Indiana, Washington
EC West Division- Minny, Milwaukee, Chicago, Detroit
EC South Division- Atlanta, Charlotte, Miami, Orlando
EC East Division- NY, Brooklyn, Philly, Boston

 

[RickyGQ]

Lotta juelzing going on here breh, you having a hard time staying in the pocket. The bold is also a shameless straw man that I won't even entertain. However, every single year in the NFL there's at least 8-10 teams that have a legitimate chance of winning the super bowl. Every. Single. Year. Now of course I believe that because it's by nature a much more team oriented sport, and with so many players parity comes more natural. Still, my point is not for every single team to have an equal chance of winning the sb by having equal rosters, I'm saying if you have less teams you have less jobs available meaning the average talent level will rise.


So, to answer the question you didn't ask and instead asked another retarded one I also won't entertain, yes I wholeheartedly believe that by cutting 10 teams the average talent level will rise, and a byproduct of that would be more teams in championship contention. I am not advocating we get rid of teams. I'm just trying to get you to understand that your arguments are trash and I'm still looking for someone with some damn sense to argue the league expanding being good for the fans. It's obviously good for the owners and whoever lives in the cities they expand to, but..I will say this one last time. I don't see how adding another team would make an already diluted product better.





nikka what? Do we wanna just watch good hoops or actually have real competition at the top? If all y'all wanna see is more ball being played then cool, I get it. But part of the reason I prefer the NFL is just because it's so many good teams you never know who's gonna win every year. NBA you got at best 3-4 contenders every year, and almost always it's really only 2 teams that somebody would feel confident betting on. I mean you can literally go back at least the past 15 years and see that besides the raptors win we could pretty much determine the outcome of those seasons with two choices. And the year the raptors won I mean come on, that was quite obviously gonna be another warriors ring if the bball gods didn't smite KD/Klay

This would literally lead to more parity, wtf are you talking about?

 

[Diondon]

Hmmm playing in a watered down, expansion era. Not good for GOAT case

 

[BBG]

This would literally lead to more parity, wtf are you talking about?

Tell that to nikkas who had to defeat Jordan in the 90s

 

[BigMoneyGrip]

I say Memphis and New Orleans.

Yeah geographically NO and Memphis more on the east coast

 

[RickyGQ]

Tell that to nikkas who had to defeat Jordan in the 90s

That was a different time. All you gotta do is give each team a cap of contracts they can keep and you’ll break up some of the top teams.

 

[SchoolboyC]

Lotta juelzing going on here breh, you having a hard time staying in the pocket. The bold is also a shameless straw man that I won't even entertain. However, every single year in the NFL there's at least 8-10 teams that have a legitimate chance of winning the super bowl. Every. Single. Year. Now of course I believe that because it's by nature a much more team oriented sport, and with so many players parity comes more natural. Still, my point is not for every single team to have an equal chance of winning the sb by having equal rosters, I'm saying if you have less teams you have less jobs available meaning the average talent level will rise.


So, to answer the question you didn't ask and instead asked another retarded one I also won't entertain, yes I wholeheartedly believe that by cutting 10 teams the overall talent level will rise, and a byproduct of that would be more teams in championship contention. I am not advocating we get rid of teams. I'm just trying to get you to understand that your arguments are trash and I'm still looking for someone with some damn sense to argue the league expanding being good for the fans. It's obviously good for the owners and whoever lives in the cities they expand to, but..I will say this one last time. I don't see how adding another team would make an already diluted product better.





nikka what? Do we wanna just watch good hoops or actually have real competition at the top? If all y'all wanna see is more ball being played then cool, I get it. But part of the reason I prefer the NFL is just because it's so many good teams you never know who's gonna win every year. NBA you got at best 3-4 contenders every year, and almost always it's really only 2 teams that somebody would feel confident betting on. I mean you can literally go back at least the past 15 years and see that besides the raptors win we could pretty much determine the outcome of those seasons with two choices. And the year the raptors won I mean come on, that was quite obviously gonna be another warriors ring if the bball gods didn't smite KD/Klay

Even beyond one player being capable of having a much bigger impact in basketball than in football, the NFL has a single elimination playoff, and that aspect alone gives more opportunities for teams to win. What’s harder? Having to beat the Warriors once to advance to the next round or four times?

You don’t get it. If you have less teams then yes the skill level of the average player will naturally increase. But what I’m saying is that also means that the teams that are already the best would be able to be more talented than they already are.

If hypothetically speaking, the 10 teams you named were all contracted and their players were distributed out to the 20 remaining, then yes that means the Hawks & Bulls would be able to get better by adding more talent but the Celtics & Bucks who are already much better would be able to as well. Even if the average talent level increases, you are still going to have the haves and the havenots. My point is that I don’t believe there is a correlation between the number of teams in the league and the parity around the league. You seem to think otherwise and that’s fine.

 

[UberEatsDriver]

Just read the article and it looks like it’s Seattle and Vegas. If so Memphis and Timberwolves should move east.

Timberwolves are the only Midwest team that plays for the western conference.

Memphis is the only southeast team that plays for the west.

Easy decision to move both of these teams to the eastern conference

 

[ISO]

More than enough talent globally to expand. There is no case against expansion. It would only be positive.