NBA Expansion!

[Hackett]

Just look at that core!

Shareef was actually good and Bibby wasn't bad but they missed on so many better players with those picks. Raptors drafted Stoudamire, McGrady, and Carter after the Grizzlies picked in three of those drafts.

When the grizz came into the league, they were not allowed to draft 1st overall for the first few years of their existence (I assume their expansion cousins in Toronto had to play by the same rules). Had this rule not been in effect, I'm pretty sure Vancouver had the best odds to land Tim Duncan #1 overall a couple years into their existence.

I also wonder if they ever really tried grabbing steve Nash from the suns back in the 90s. I mean, he wasn't traded for much when he moved to Dallas other than a 1st round pick which ended up being Shawn Marion. It seemed like a no brainer move to at least kick tires on the prospect of bringing this local kid into the market.

Anyways, we can make a whole other thread of bad moves made by stu Jackson.

 

[Fish on The Sand]

NBA has weird rules about trading picks on draft day. Most of the time teams already have a trade agreed to and are picking for each other. So while the Warriors technically drafted Carter, it's almost a certainty they were picking him for Toronto.

This is true.

 

[GKJ]

Man, if there's one league on earth that doesn't need to expand, it's the NBA. In the NBA it's watered down to the point where only 4 or 5 teams are any good and the other 25 stink. At least in the NFL or NHL, you can make the case that watering it down makes the entire league more competitive such that you can go from being really bad to really good really fast. In the NBA, some teams are looking 10 years down the line for when LeBron and Steph Curry are gone, and if you're lucky, one draft will produce 2 or 3 franchise players. Maybe. It's not like their gate is that impressive, or that they even rely on it.

 

[sjsharks92]

Man, if there's one league on earth that doesn't need to expand, it's the NBA. In the NBA it's watered down to the point where only 4 or 5 teams are any good and the other 25 stink. At least in the NFL or NHL, you can make the case that watering it down makes the entire league more competitive such that you can go from being really bad to really good really fast. In the NBA, some teams are looking 10 years down the line for when LeBron and Steph Curry are gone, and if you're lucky, one draft will produce 2 or 3 franchise players. Maybe. It's not like their gate is that impressive, or that they even rely on it.

Really good point. The NBA as it is, is far too lopsided. Always has been and probably always will be. Last thing we need is to add another tanking team or 2.

 

[Melrose Munch]

Seattle
Louisville
Mexico City
Las Vegas
Vancouver

https://16winsaring.com/sources-nba...th-two-new-franchises-a4dd52b563d6#.uxlmp5f0c

 

[BigMac1212]

Out of those five, Seattle and Louisville just to balance the two conferences.

 

[McDeepika]

Man, if there's one league on earth that doesn't need to expand, it's the NBA. In the NBA it's watered down to the point where only 4 or 5 teams are any good and the other 25 stink. At least in the NFL or NHL, you can make the case that watering it down makes the entire league more competitive such that you can go from being really bad to really good really fast. In the NBA, some teams are looking 10 years down the line for when LeBron and Steph Curry are gone, and if you're lucky, one draft will produce 2 or 3 franchise players. Maybe. It's not like their gate is that impressive, or that they even rely on it.

The NBA needs to get rid of the max contract. Players like Lebron/KD should be 60+ million players that cripple the rest of the teams cap. The fact that they can only make so much allows them to be surrounded with other stars to create these unbeatable teams.

 

[HisIceness]

Out of those five, Seattle and Louisville just to balance the two conferences.

Agreed. Pittsburgh if Louisville is a no go (they at least have an arena in place and would be in the East). Ditto Vancouver if Seattle still doesn't have an arena in place. And even though it isn't listed, Kansas City should at least be looked at if all else fails. The Sprint Center is almost 10 years old and still has no permanent tenant.

I can't believe Mexico City is a front-runner according to that article Melrose Munch posted. That one is a step above the NFL wanting a team in London but it's still a terrible idea.

 

[Peter Griffin]

That's what killed the team more than anything.

This guy played a big part in it.

 

[Terry Yake]

seattle is the only place the NBA should be looking to expand to

but even then, is expansion really something the NBA needs? there is zero parity in today's NBA and expanding would only make it worse

 

[No Fun Shogun]

Seattle
Louisville
Mexico City
Las Vegas
Vancouver

https://16winsaring.com/sources-nba...th-two-new-franchises-a4dd52b563d6#.uxlmp5f0c

Hmmm.... if I were a betting man, I'd say that the NBA might very well try to internationalize the game. Mexico City and Vancouver could do just that.

Louisville makes a lot of sense, but it's also college town and I'm not sure there's an interested buyer.

Vegas is getting awfully crowded these days....

Seattle makes sense, but I think that they'll drag the foot on that market until they absolutely have a new arena ready.

 

[Peter Griffin]

The Aqualini's, guys that own the Canucks, were reportedly interested in bringing a team back to Vancouver a few years ago so I wouldn't be surprised if that is still the case.

 

[kurt]

What about Kansas City or St. Louis?

Nashville? Columbus?

 

[HisIceness]

What about Kansas City or St. Louis?

Nashville? Columbus?

Of the two Missouri cities, KC would be the more likely candidate. St. Louis was one of the cities interested in the Hornets/Grizzlies 15 years ago, I think their ship has sailed for now.

Nashville would be a no, especially w/ a team down the road in Memphis. Ditto Columbus w/ a team in Cleveland.

 

[SpookyTsuki]

Only one I like there is pitt on the op and van if they can support it

Seattle (sort of was there 2)

 

[Jared Dunn]

They weren't allowed to get the first overall for 3 years. That's what killed the team more than anything.

Only quoting this because I dig the profile photo big time.

Anyways on topic, I'd love to see Vancouver get a team back but at the same time, a big part of the Raptors' marketing is the whole Canada's team idea, so I'm worried it could do some damage to them

 

[worstfaceoffmanever]

Of the two Missouri cities, KC would be the more likely candidate. St. Louis was one of the cities interested in the Hornets/Grizzlies 15 years ago, I think their ship has sailed for now.

Nashville would be a no, especially w/ a team down the road in Memphis. Ditto Columbus w/ a team in Cleveland.

A hypothetical NBA team in Nashville has a marginal impact on the Grizzlies, and that's being generous. Nashville and Memphis might as well be on different planets culturally and in terms of cross-market media presence; the Grizzlies get very little press in Middle Tennessee, and very few (if any) folks make the 3+ hour hike from metro Nashville to Memphis for games on a regular basis. That said, I don't think the NBA would go to Nashville if given the chance in the next 5 years. The demographics favor soccer as the next sport in Nashville over basketball. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if it happened eventually, though.

Seattle is a natural choice. I think Vancouver would be a good fit, but I'd slow the roll on Vegas if I were Adam Silver, just to see how the NHL works out in that market. Mexico City is an interesting option; I don't think security would be an issue there, and it's a world-class city with a ton of potential to expand the NBA's brand and revenue sources (and an eager fan base to boot). It's just a matter of convincing players to go there.

As for the rest, KC isn't going to bend over backwards for a team and makes money on the venue as-is, so I don't expect either side to be in a big hurry to bring the NBA to the market, and I'm on the fence about St. Louis. Louisville would be a disastrous mistake; the money isn't there in the market for a healthy franchise, especially when you're running head-to-head against one of the nation's premier collegiate programs right there in the city.