Do you believe the NBA should expand to 32 teams?

[HDMAVS760CA]

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.

UN-UH! Nothing against vancouver, its probably a cool place to visit. When there aren't people publicly using drugs on the street & rioting when the chokanucks lose the stanley cup. Basketball big time failed there. Other than the team drafting poorly, nobody wanted to play there. Mike Bibby was depressed when he got drafted by the Grizzlies, he wanted the clippers 2 draft him. Terrible organization. Steve Francis woulda preferred to play for a terrible organization in the bulls than play for Vancouver. He said he wanted to try to fill Jordan's shoes, hardly anyone wants to do that. And the fans didn't sellout the place, Toronto did.
Its a sad state of affairs when a player would rather play for a crappy american team or organization than a playoff canadian team. Kenny Anderson refused to report to the raptors who was a playoff contender then. He had no problem playing for the sorry celtics instead Seattle & Vegas or Kentucky or St. Louis needs to be the new teams. There needs to be more western teams, & memphis needs to be moved to the south-east.

[IRISH56]

How about getting rid of 2 team cities or just moving the teams who's fans don't support them at all. Atlanta has been a pretty decent team for a long time and that arena is a ghost town!

[jimtxsanders]

A agree to getting rid of 2 teams. Question, do you think getting rid of 2 teams would lead to bigger TV deals due to nba team being more talented or woould it hurt TV revenues because now2 markets have lost their teams? Peronally I say you get rid of the bucks and kings. On the other hand if the league were to expan to 36 teams, which cities would get a team? 1. Seatle 2. Tampa Bay 3. Austin 4. Baltimore 5. Louisville 6. Vegas

[onetwothree]

This cut down teams, Charles Barkley crap, is utterly stupid.

In a business world, you simply DO NOT cut down 2 franchises worth around 1 Billion dollars (as the Clippers just got sold for 2 Billion). Who in the right state of mind, would just "CANCEL" 1 Billion dollars of valuation.

Charles Barkley, and every other analyst that gets a hard on from "the competitiveness of old basketball" are complete nonsense. Players are smarter, more athletic, and BETTER than they EVER were. If any of the old players were in teams right now, they might not even get the 15th spot on a roster.

The game of basketball is growing. Players are getting better. More players are playing and taking basketball up as a career. If anything we need to increase the number of teams or maybe do something like the soccer leagues where there are 2 leagues and teams can get relegated and promoted. That way every team will try to be as competitive as possible, as a last spot finish would mean you are out and you are losing tons of money playing in a less competitive league.

[Rated T By CBRA]

I would say yes, but under the condition that TANKING (or strategic rebuild as the new commish would put it..) be eliminated. There needs to be a system where the worst 2 teams in each conference are penalized somehow.

Take a look at any European basketball/soccer league: they get extra funds and benefits by qualifying for their respective TOP leagues. If they drop out, those perks get taken away. Plus higher level competitions such as Euroleague (it is not guaranteed to local teams, most have to qualify if they aren't first in their respective country leagues) bring in more funds, exposure, etc.

The NBA is just too stagnant...they reward top performers (champions of conference/NBA finals) but do not have penalties for **** teams. If they can find a way to eliminate tanking and ensure that the regular season is more than a time for "old superstars" to rest...then 2 extra franchises would be very welcome.

[ADDinChicago]

Isn't it watered down enough already? If anything, they should eliminate 4-6 teams.

[puja21]

Isn't it watered down enough already? If anything, they should eliminate 4-6 teams.

This

[draino231]

This cut down teams, Charles Barkley crap, is utterly stupid.

In a business world, you simply DO NOT cut down 2 franchises worth around 1 Billion dollars (as the Clippers just got sold for 2 Billion). Who in the right state of mind, would just "CANCEL" 1 Billion dollars of valuation.

Charles Barkley, and every other analyst that gets a hard on from "the competitiveness of old basketball" are complete nonsense. Players are smarter, more athletic, and BETTER than they EVER were. If any of the old players were in teams right now, they might not even get the 15th spot on a roster.

The game of basketball is growing. Players are getting better. More players are playing and taking basketball up as a career. If anything we need to increase the number of teams or maybe do something like the soccer leagues where there are 2 leagues and teams can get relegated and promoted. That way every team will try to be as competitive as possible, as a last spot finish would mean you are out and you are losing tons of money playing in a less competitive league.

Completely agree. There were great players in the past, don't get me wrong, but the average NBA player is far superior. They can say the game was more physical all they want, but they would get pushed around by the much bigger, athletic people of today's game. And yes, would definitely need to have a system where tanking is penalized/not worth it.

[caronimo]

Seattle needs a franchise. How they lost the team is tragic and David Stern should be ashamed for letting it happen.

[Combs84]

Every year the NBA should hold a fantasy draft(including rookies) in which every team gets to spend 70 million(which increases). The order will be random with teams picking a player and then everybody bidding against each other on said player. In theory somebody could give Lebron 50 million if they wanted to.

You want NBA Parody? Then do that.

[fuller4379]

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.

4 team divisions is awful. There is always a crappy division where no team deserves to be in the playoffs. I would prefer that they do away with divisions completely.

[johnnyballgame]

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...

They're already talking about changing the draft lottery for this very reason. What you're going to find out though is that some teams will get stuck at the bottom with no way to get out. Firing GMs who do a bad job drafting won't help the next gm any. A few times through that and losing the top pick and you're stuck.

I don't think the draft is very relevant to expansion though. You can expand and change the draft, or expand and not change it.

Personally, I don't agree with the watered down argument. For the game to grow more you need more exposure. More teams more TV more TV more exposure more fans. Eventually more talent, if not right now or in the next few years. Otherwise you'd be arguing that only 15 people in the world are good enough to be NBA superstars. I put more faith in humanity than that.

[OrlandoMagiking]

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.

4 team divisions is awful. There is always a crappy division where no team deserves to be in the playoffs. I would prefer that they do away with divisions completely.

What about 8 team divisions? Just combine Minnesota and Indiana's divisions, Miami and New York's divisions, Golden State and Utah's divisions, and Oklahoma City and Dallas's divisions (Then just call the divisions North, South, East, and West)

[falcon107]

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...

They're already talking about changing the draft lottery for this very reason. What you're going to find out though is that some teams will get stuck at the bottom with no way to get out. Firing GMs who do a bad job drafting won't help the next gm any. A few times through that and losing the top pick and you're stuck.

I don't think the draft is very relevant to expansion though. You can expand and change the draft, or expand and not change it.

Personally, I don't agree with the watered down argument. For the game to grow more you need more exposure. More teams more TV more TV more exposure more fans. Eventually more talent, if not right now or in the next few years. Otherwise you'd be arguing that only 15 people in the world are good enough to be NBA superstars. I put more faith in humanity than that.

Yes you are right some teams will get stuck at the bottom, but isn't that true now also for some teams? Some teams have been competing at the play-offs for years, and some teams are competing to be the worst for some time. Some of them eventually rise to play-off level, but never becomes contenders. But this is the problem at any team sports' league. There are big teams always run for the cup, and there are smaller teams waiting years for success.

[johnnyballgame]

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...

They're already talking about changing the draft lottery for this very reason. What you're going to find out though is that some teams will get stuck at the bottom with no way to get out. Firing GMs who do a bad job drafting won't help the next gm any. A few times through that and losing the top pick and you're stuck.

I don't think the draft is very relevant to expansion though. You can expand and change the draft, or expand and not change it.

Personally, I don't agree with the watered down argument. For the game to grow more you need more exposure. More teams more TV more TV more exposure more fans. Eventually more talent, if not right now or in the next few years. Otherwise you'd be arguing that only 15 people in the world are good enough to be NBA superstars. I put more faith in humanity than that.

Yes you are right some teams will get stuck at the bottom, but isn't that true now also for some teams? Some teams have been competing at the play-offs for years, and some teams are competing to be the worst for some time. Some of them eventually rise to play-off level, but never becomes contenders. But this is the problem at any team sports' league. There are big teams always run for the cup, and there are smaller teams waiting years for success.

.

Fair enough, but the league is already working on changing the lottery to take away incentive to tank. Expansion wouldn't change that fact. IMO the league would gain more by y growing. All business need to grow. It what you do with a successful business. Why not expand when you have several more large cities that would support a team. In fact, there'd be more excitement regarding the whole league because of expansion. That would be good for business everywhere. Much like a grand opening sale at all our locations. Not enough talent is a contrived excuse. There's how many other leagues out there? No way any two new teams get any less talent than say Philly. Sure, not every team gets a Lebron but tats already the case. No one wants to contract down to 10 teams because there's only ten superstar's. Players come and go. There is always a best player I n the game, on our team, etc. They can expand as far as a fan bases support will allow as far as I'm concerned.