Can the city of Chicago Sustain Two NBA Teams?

Moderators: bwgood77, zimpy27, infinite11285, Clav, Domejandro, ken6199, bisme37, Dirk, KingDavid, cupcakesnake

Ice Man
Forum Mod - Bulls
Forum Mod - Bulls
Posts: 26,873
And1: 15,919
Joined: Apr 19, 2011

Re: Can the city of Chicago Sustain Two NBA Teams? 

Post#121 » by Ice Man » Mon Jun 16, 2025 3:05 pm

Percentsign wrote:Chicago is declining in population.


No, it's not. The city proper has fewer residents than in the past, but the metro area is (modestly) growing.

As a side note, the popular meme that the major cities are "dying" because their population is declining is 100% wrong. Their population is declining not because the cities are struggling, but rather because they are more prosperous and desireable then ever before. As a result, they are attracting wealthy residents who have smaller family sizes and/or who don't need to take on roommates to cover the rent. Thus, the same number of properties now houses a smaller number of people. The people who were displaced still live in the area, by and large, but have moved outside of the city itself.

For example, the city of Chicago's residential vacancy rate is much lower today than it was 20 years ago, while New York City's is at an all-time low.

Just another example of how statistics, aided by unscrupulous politicians, can deceive.
User avatar
Hoop Hunter
Starter
Posts: 2,237
And1: 2,999
Joined: Feb 19, 2002
   

Re: Can the city of Chicago Sustain Two NBA Teams? 

Post#122 » by Hoop Hunter » Mon Jun 16, 2025 6:25 pm

New York and LA both have 2, so that's that. I don't think any city should ever have 2 again. Spread the teams around.
“He’s not afraid of the moment, he is The Moment!” — Richard Jefferson on Tyrese Haliburton
Percentsign
Senior
Posts: 679
And1: 687
Joined: Jun 01, 2014

Re: Can the city of Chicago Sustain Two NBA Teams? 

Post#123 » by Percentsign » Mon Jun 16, 2025 7:42 pm

Ice Man wrote:
Percentsign wrote:Chicago is declining in population.


No, it's not. The city proper has fewer residents than in the past, but the metro area is (modestly) growing.

As a side note, the popular meme that the major cities are "dying" because their population is declining is 100% wrong. Their population is declining not because the cities are struggling, but rather because they are more prosperous and desireable then ever before. As a result, they are attracting wealthy residents who have smaller family sizes and/or who don't need to take on roommates to cover the rent. Thus, the same number of properties now houses a smaller number of people. The people who were displaced still live in the area, by and large, but have moved outside of the city itself.

For example, the city of Chicago's residential vacancy rate is much lower today than it was 20 years ago, while New York City's is at an all-time low.

Just another example of how statistics, aided by unscrupulous politicians, can deceive.


To clarify -- the population in Chicago is not declining in the sense that the population is going down in numbers. It's declining in the sense that it's rate of growth is not amongst the top, as it once was. The fastest growing cities in the United States are in the sun belt. The Midwest and Northeast cities don't have the clout that they once did
magee
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 4,417
And1: 2,394
Joined: Jun 22, 2005
Location: San Diego, CA

Re: Can the city of Chicago Sustain Two NBA Teams? 

Post#124 » by magee » Mon Jun 16, 2025 8:04 pm

Financially, yeah, the city could. It would have to be on the outskirts that is easier for the folks who come in from out of state to reach the arena.

Personally, I'd rather see a team in Mexico City before a second team in Chicago. MC would be the 33rd or 34th team, after Seattle and Las Vegas get the 31st and 32nd franchises in a few years.
Blame Rasho
On Leave
Posts: 42,059
And1: 9,737
Joined: Apr 25, 2002

Re: Can the city of Chicago Sustain Two NBA Teams? 

Post#125 » by Blame Rasho » Mon Jun 16, 2025 8:10 pm

Ice Man wrote:
Percentsign wrote:Chicago is declining in population.


No, it's not. The city proper has fewer residents than in the past, but the metro area is (modestly) growing.

As a side note, the popular meme that the major cities are "dying" because their population is declining is 100% wrong. Their population is declining not because the cities are struggling, but rather because they are more prosperous and desireable then ever before. As a result, they are attracting wealthy residents who have smaller family sizes and/or who don't need to take on roommates to cover the rent. Thus, the same number of properties now houses a smaller number of people. The people who were displaced still live in the area, by and large, but have moved outside of the city itself.

For example, the city of Chicago's residential vacancy rate is much lower today than it was 20 years ago, while New York City's is at an all-time low.

Just another example of how statistics, aided by unscrupulous politicians, can deceive.


People need to look at metro sizes instead of city population. San Antonio and Jacksonville are among the biggest cities in the US but their Metro sizes are small.

I think San Antonio is a big city and growing endlessly along with Austin but it isn’t Houston nor the DFW metroplex.

Return to The General Board