Do you believe the NBA should expand to 32 teams?

Post #1 » by **RealGM Polls** » Thu Jul 24, 2014 4:19 pm

1. Yes
2. No

watpho71 · Post #2 » by **watpho71** » Thu Jul 24, 2014 4:46 pm

In regards to talent level, it appears the NBA has been playing with 5 or 6 expansion teams the past ten years.
Sure it would be nice for Seattle and Iowa to have pro teams, but at the expense of watering down the league?

If there were 32 teams would the league go back to two divisions in each conference, open it up to a whole conference or would the three divisions remain and one would have six teams?

chadm2423 · Post #3 » by **chadm2423** » Thu Jul 24, 2014 5:08 pm

Charles Barkley has even been saying for years. The NBA needs to cut the league by 4 teams to make the league more competitive.

The next CBA there might not even be a salary cap like the MLB. If so, small market teams don't stand chance

Id420 · Post #4 » by **Id420** » Thu Jul 24, 2014 5:17 pm

Expand and have a balanced schedule of 61 games. 16 best teams go to the playoffs.

Allion · Post #5 » by **Allion** » Thu Jul 24, 2014 6:14 pm

watpho71 wrote:In regards to talent level, it appears the NBA has been playing with 5 or 6 expansion teams the past ten years.
Sure it would be nice for Seattle and Iowa to have pro teams, but at the expense of watering down the league?

If there were 32 teams would the league go back to two divisions in each conference, open it up to a whole conference or would the three divisions remain and one would have six teams?

Seattle sounds great, but I would rather have a Vancouver team than an Iowa team. There's a large population in Vancouver and the people there miss the Grizzlies days.

OrlandoMagiking · Post #6 » by **OrlandoMagiking** » Thu Jul 24, 2014 6:29 pm

Yes, they should add the Seattle Supersonics and another team (Nashville, Louisville, Las Vegas, etc.) in this case let's use the Louisville Leopards as an example. The NBA would structure divisions like the NFL (8 divisions, 4 teams per a division) that would look like this.

EAST

Milwaukee
Minnesota
Chicago
Detroit

Indiana
Cleveland
Louisville
Toronto

New York
Brooklyn
Boston
Philadelphia

Miami
Orlando
Charlotte
Washington

WEST

Utah
Denver
Portland
Seattle

Phoenix
San Antonio
Dallas
Houston

Memphis
Atlanta
New Orleans
Oklahoma City

Golden State
Sacramento
LA Lakers
LA Clippers

For people complaining that there would be a lack of talent, look at all the players who are second round picks or not drafted and turned out to be quality players. Players would get more of a chance to shine quickly. Division winners are granted a top 6 slot in their respective conference. I think this would be good for the long run of the league.

kobe48306 · Post #7 » by **kobe48306** » Thu Jul 24, 2014 7:02 pm

Like it or not the team talent level would be greatly diminished. No matter if someone was selected in the 1st, or 2nd round or as a free agent, there still would be many lesser ability type players sticking on all teams. It would be thinned out even more so than it all ready is. So, absolutely NOT. NO NO & NO!

Embiid P · Post #8 » by **Embiid P** » Thu Jul 24, 2014 7:38 pm

I disagree strongly with expansion. In fact, I am in favor of contraction. There's too many teams as it is in the NBA and not enough talent to go around. Only 8 different teams (Spurs, Heat, Mavs, Lakers, Celtics, Pistons, Bulls and Rockets) have won a title in the last 30 years. Perhaps relocating a few perennially bad teams with low home attendance to Seattle, Vancouver, etc. would help as well.

There are other factors that need to be changed as well like doing away with guaranteed contracts to allow more league parity, but in my opinion, expansion won't help attain that parity.

luss54321 · Post #9 » by **luss54321** » Thu Jul 24, 2014 8:57 pm

OrlandoMagiking wrote:Yes, they should add the Seattle Supersonics and another team (Nashville, Louisville, Las Vegas, etc.) in this case let's use the Louisville Leopards as an example. The NBA would structure divisions like the NFL (8 divisions, 4 teams per a division) that would look like this.

EAST

Milwaukee
Minnesota
Chicago
Detroit

Indiana
Cleveland
Louisville
Toronto

New York
Brooklyn
Boston
Philadelphia

Miami
Orlando
Charlotte
Washington

WEST

Utah
Denver
Portland
Seattle

Phoenix
San Antonio
Dallas
Houston

Memphis
Atlanta
New Orleans
Oklahoma City

Golden State
Sacramento
LA Lakers
LA Clippers

For people complaining that there would be a lack of talent, look at all the players who are second round picks or not drafted and turned out to be quality players. Players would get more of a chance to shine quickly. Division winners are granted a top 6 slot in their respective conference. I think this would be good for the long run of the league.

No

Ring_Me · Post #10 » by **Ring_Me** » Thu Jul 24, 2014 10:04 pm

Seattle and another Chicago based team? Iowa probably won't have much fans is why I said Chicago. I'd be glad if it were to go down.

Stylin_on_You · Post #11 » by **Stylin_on_You** » Thu Jul 24, 2014 11:58 pm

They could bring back Vancouver. The facility is there, basketball is growing in Canada.

WiggOuts · Post #12 » by **WiggOuts** » Fri Jul 25, 2014 12:27 am

2 more teams means 30 more roster spots which mean 30 more NBA players thatll have an opportunity that isn't currently there. There are players in this league that have the talent to really be something and this gives them a chance. Gerald Wallace for example might not have become the player he once was if it wasn't expansion teams.

Saig · Post #13 » by **Saig** » Fri Jul 25, 2014 12:35 am

Vancouver and Seattle

bj2323 · Post #14 » by **bj2323** » Fri Jul 25, 2014 12:40 am

Yes, I feel like Milwaukee could use a 2nd team in that city, and the other team should be in Flint Michigan.

Sc0pe92 · Post #15 » by **Sc0pe92** » Fri Jul 25, 2014 3:05 am

Vegas needs a team and kentucky needs a team

totalrekall · Post #16 » by **totalrekall** » Fri Jul 25, 2014 4:38 am

no way. the NBA is so horribly watered down. the league has never been weaker. half the teams in the league suck so bad they shouldnt bother playing any games. make the NBA good again- contract 2-4 teams

MagicMatty · Post #17 » by **MagicMatty** » Fri Jul 25, 2014 4:39 am

Do us right NBA Flint Michigan Tropics!! :nod:

Fellow72 · Post #18 » by **Fellow72** » Fri Jul 25, 2014 4:44 am

Adding another two teams would only spread the talent thin across NBA teams even further. The Nba is already really predictable, adding more bad teams will not help. The only way this would be a good thing is if the league hd a lot more talent, but they don't and may never will. There are not enough superstars in the league to positively support further team expansion.

johnnyballgame · Post #19 » by **johnnyballgame** » Fri Jul 25, 2014 5:19 am

chadm2423 wrote:Charles Barkley has even been saying for years. The NBA needs to cut the league by 4 teams to make the league more competitive.

The next CBA there might not even be a salary cap like the MLB. If so, small market teams don't stand chance

How do you figure? Gilbert in Cleveland had payrolls over 80 million. Portland's owner has a few bucks. The Knicks had $120 million dollar payrolls and were still losers. Is San Antone a huge market?

Cuban would certainly TRY to buy it every year. But its not guaranteed.

falcon107 · Post #20 » by **falcon107** » Fri Jul 25, 2014 7:20 am

Half of the teams are really bad, not as there isn't enough stars, but as draft system rewards bad teams.

If bad teams are also given purposes to win, the picture will change. With the current draft system is you have 24 teams, or 48 teams, it won't matter, some teams will be bad on purpose...