RealGM

I'm not talking about how good the team is here. I'm asking from the point of view of the average player, what city would they least like to live in all else being equal.

You get 3 votes.

POR and TOR need to be up there for weather and taxes.

UTA for alll the UTA things.

Memphis and Portland for reasons.... and Tor for taxes and cold.

I feel like there can be a valid discussion about why certain teams are/aren't on this.

Cleveland and Detroit for instance are often perceived as undesirable cities in a general sense, so one might wonder why they aren't here.

Snakebites wrote:I feel like there can be a valid discussion about why certain teams are/aren't on this.

Cleveland and Detroit for instance are often perceived as undesirable cities in a general sense, so one might wonder why they aren't here.

Because I can only list 9 teams. Teams like those, along with Sactown and Indiana, were tough cuts.

The truth is there are about 6 teams that have pull with stars, another 3 fairly desirable locations, a few more perceived as 'just ok', and then more than half the league plays in cities that the average player doesn't want to live in.

One_and_Done wrote:

Snakebites wrote:I feel like there can be a valid discussion about why certain teams are/aren't on this.

Cleveland and Detroit for instance are often perceived as undesirable cities in a general sense, so one might wonder why they aren't here.

Because I can only list 9 teams. Teams like those, along with Sactown and Indiana, were tough cuts.

The truth is there are about 6 teams that have pull with stars, another 3 fairly desirable locations, a few more perceived as 'just ok', and then more than half the league plays in cities that the average player doesn't want to live in.

I think you just identified why it's hard to really have this be a poll question. There's too many possible options given most cities are about the same in terms of desirability.

Snakebites wrote:

One_and_Done wrote:

Snakebites wrote:I feel like there can be a valid discussion about why certain teams are/aren't on this.

Cleveland and Detroit for instance are often perceived as undesirable cities in a general sense, so one might wonder why they aren't here.

Because I can only list 9 teams. Teams like those, along with Sactown and Indiana, were tough cuts.

The truth is there are about 6 teams that have pull with stars, another 3 fairly desirable locations, a few more perceived as 'just ok', and then more than half the league plays in cities that the average player doesn't want to live in.

I think you just identified why it's hard to really have this be a poll question. There's too many possible options given most cities are about the same in terms of desirability.

I don't agree. There are degrees of undesirable. Utah is easily my first vote, and I don't think it's even close. On mature reflection I have switched out Boston for Cleveland though.

Snakebites wrote:I feel like there can be a valid discussion about why certain teams are/aren't on this.

Cleveland and Detroit for instance are often perceived as undesirable cities in a general sense, so one might wonder why they aren't here.

I suppose they are, but they have drafted a lot of the best talent in their current rosters.

Utah and Toronto are clearly the top two for me. I think San Antonio may be third for me, as I group all the Rust Belt cities together.

How is SA rust belt?

ReggiesKnicks wrote:Utah and Toronto are clearly the top two for me. I think San Antonio may be third for me, as I group all the Rust Belt cities together.

SA is one of the smallest markets (and stats that say otherwise are using dubious population stats that include a bunch.of areas way outside the metro). There is no money or lifestyle there compared to most NBA cities. That said, it has no taxes and it's hot. Both those seem to be big pull factors for players, which keeps it (barely) outside of the bottom 9 for me.

I hated to select my home team, but I chose Minnesota. It is often portrayed as the frigid North Pole in the media, and some players that visit their ancient arena for a game in January aren’t dissuaded from that opinion. For the entire history of the franchise, the Wolves have always struggled to attract free agents - about their best one ever was freakin’ Kyle Anderson a couple years ago. They have generally had to overpay in years or money to even get rotation level players - often ones that had no other options. We just saw Kevin Durant turn down the WCF winners, with his biggest fan Ant, because .. oh it’s Minnesota.

Strangely though, once players get to MIN, many want to stay. For a midwestern city, it has a surprising urban nightlife (thanks Prince!), a strong, modern economy, and for players with families, great schools and neighborhoods. Under Tim Connelly, for perhaps the first time in franchise history, we had a few years where players took a little less to stay in MIN. Not being a perennial lottery team didn’t hurt.

For US players I think Toronto is high on that list but likely shouldn't be. I think Memphis and OKC are less desirable as locations than Utah, but if players care about racial diversity more than other things, Salt Lake has to be at the bottom.

Mitchell seems really happy in Cleveland FWIW. Love wanted to come back. Same with Nance. Kyrie later said he wish he had stayed.

jbk1234 wrote:Mitchell seems really happy in Cleveland FWIW. Love wanted to come back. Same with Nance. Kyrie later said he wish he had stayed.

I that the geographic location or the organization though?

Plenty of examples of quality organizations built in less desirable locations.

All current Piston (my team) players seem to love playing on this team. Doubt it has much to do with the city, which I also argued might warrant placement on the list.

Snakebites wrote:

jbk1234 wrote:Mitchell seems really happy in Cleveland FWIW. Love wanted to come back. Same with Nance. Kyrie later said he wish he had stayed.

I that the geographic location or the organization though?

Plenty of examples of quality organizations built in less desirable locations.

All current Piston (my team) players seem to love playing on this team. Doubt it has much to do with the city, which I also argued might warrant placement on the list.

I mean Mitchell posts pictures of the beaches in the summer. People have dated notions of what some of these rust belt cities are like. The economies are diversified. I remember going to a wedding in Pittsburgh a few years ago and being really impressed.

I do think franchise quality matters a significant amount. Not just how good the team is at the moment but their general reputation for how they treat their players and how competently they are run. So even an unfashionable location can be reasonably attractive if the franchise is well-run and liked by players while players may stay away from even fashionable locations if the franchise is considered poorly urn. Granted that can change with time and ownership.

Bottom 4 includes Cle, Det, Memphis, Minny

Probably in that order. Hard to overcome weather and being far from a real coast.

GoBobs wrote:Bottom 4 includes Cle, Det, Memphis, Minny

Probably in that order. Hard to overcome weather and being far from a real coast.

Utah is cold and also nowhere a coast... plus it has other unique issues that those 4 cities you named don't have.

GoBobs wrote:Bottom 4 includes Cle, Det, Memphis, Minny

Probably in that order. Hard to overcome weather and being far from a real coast.

I feel like people don't understand how big the Great Lakes are. The coast lines are hundreds of miles long.