RealGM

I was just reading an article at foxsports.com by Charley Rosen he in short said Lebron started a troubling trend by going to Miami to create a "super" team and with Melo now wanting to go to a big market with Paul it could eventually lead the NBA to reducing the number of teams it has because the smaller markets can't attract the big names. I'm gonna put together a list of how I think a smaller NBA would look like give ur opinions and put together your own smaller NBA's.
Western Conference
Lakers, Rockets, Mavs, Spurs, Thunder, Warriors, Clippers (moving to San Diego and new owner), Portland, Utah, Phoenx
Eastern Conference
Knicks, Nets, Sixers, Celtics, Wizards, Heat, Magic, Bulls, Pistons, Bobcats.
What you guys think?

just cause small market teams cant get super stars to sign with them doesn't mean they CANT be profitable, contraction usually happens cause the team thats cut doesn't make money or loses substantially.

It's only a fad, once big name players see some of the "super" teams start to flop, they'll stop making them. Also, the NBA is set up for small market teams to do well with there soft cap system. These type of teams can only form in bizarre scenarios where a bunch of players are FAs at one time and the team has virtually no roster in the off-season and there are eligible veterans that want to play for them.


The new CBA may also have inclusions to prevent certain aspects of this off-season from occurring again.

Yeah, it was pretty much lightning in a bottle. If there was no salary cap, then it would definitely be a problem. But there have always been great players like Tim Duncan and David Robinson who couldn't give two ishts about market size or anything like that.

keep as is

LApwnd wrote:just cause small market teams cant get super stars to sign with them doesn't mean they CANT be profitable, contraction usually happens cause the team thats cut doesn't make money or loses substantially.

this. more or less.

There is no way the Raptors are contracted. As far as big markets go, they're right up there with LA, NY, Chicago, and Miami.

lol at Clippers going to San Diego. just because i is a big city doesn't mean they can afford it. they are about to lose the Chargers to OC and people think they can afford an NBA team as well.

I say the only team that needs to be taken off the NBA map is the Clippers. There best players should merge with the Lakers. Now there would be a special team. Lakers would get younger and better and win titles after titles.

I kept the Clippers because is there another western conference team anyone would keep. And the Clippers if they get a new owner and do the wat the Ravens did after they left Cleveland new home, new name, new colors that franchise will have a chance.

There will always be big names willing to go to a crappy team for $$ (Joe Johnson). Not everyone truly cares about winning the big cheese.

I don't see that happening. Great conversation piece though. However, I think if you can find more young stars like Durant and Jennings who just want to play ball to fill up the other teams.

Blame goes to the GM and owners who target superstars who they know mentally aren't going to be in it to win it. Don't draft a prima donna and fall in love with him. If you got a sense that he is going to leave trade his arse before your team gets shafted.

Back to your point I agree with Toronto being big market too. Also you forget the NBA is expanding into Las Vegas. Word on the net is that Vegas team could be the Hornets.

ock wrote:There will always be big names willing to go to a crappy team for $$ (Joe Johnson). Not everyone truly cares about winning the big cheese.

exactly. when a max contract is on the table, someone will jump at it, regardless if the team has a chance at winning or not

Sedale Threatt wrote:Yeah, it was pretty much lightning in a bottle. If there was no salary cap, then it would definitely be a problem. But there have always been great players like Tim Duncan and David Robinson who couldn't give two ishts about market size or anything like that.

The salary cap loses some of its effect when three of the best players in the league are willing to take a low-ball salary in order to get an easy path to a championship though.

KingLakers wrote:I was just reading an article at foxsports.com by Charley Rosen he in short said Lebron started a troubling trend by going to Miami to create a "super" team and with Melo now wanting to go to a big market with Paul it could eventually lead the NBA to reducing the number of teams it has because the smaller markets can't attract the big names. I'm gonna put together a list of how I think a smaller NBA would look like give ur opinions and put together your own smaller NBA's.
Western Conference
Lakers, Rockets, Mavs, Spurs, Thunder, Warriors, Clippers (moving to San Diego and new owner), Portland, Utah, Phoenx
Eastern Conference
Knicks, Nets, Sixers, Celtics, Wizards, Heat, Magic, Bulls, Pistons, Bobcats.
What you guys think?

Raptors should be on your list. Toronto IS a big market.

I would be strongly in favor if the Wolves (My 2nd favorite team) weren't a prime candidate for contraction

more like have an expansion draft and only allow teams to protect 2 players.

i think the NBA's profitable enough to support that...

although id like this maybe in 2-3 years, not now...

Charlotte Bobcats can never fill their stadium. So, I do not think they should survive.

Of course, MJ may have something to say about it.

G=K wrote:It's only a fad, once big name players see some of the "super" teams start to flop, they'll stop making them.

I disagree, first off, I doubt that team will flop, they are too talented, and the east with Boston ageing will be ripe in a few years for the picking. Melo is already planning to team up with Amare, and I think it will continue as players put more of a pro active approach to getting together a team that can win.