Division Realignment

daoneandonly · Post #1 » by **daoneandonly** » Thu Apr 17, 2008 4:43 pm

Judging from this NBA team map someoen posted, the NBA should realign the divisions to reflect this (of course this assumes Sea moves to OKC):

http://cbs.sportsline.com/images/nba/teams_map.jpg

East:

Atlantic:
Boston
New Jersey
New York
Philadelphia
Washington

Northcentral:
Chicago
Cleveland
Detroit
Indiana
Toronto

Southeast:
Atlanta
Charlotte
Miami
Orlando
New Orleans

West

Southwest:
Dallas
Houston
Memphis
Oklahoma City
San Antonio

Mountain
Denver
Phoenix
Milwaukee
Minnesota
Utah

Pacific
Golden State
LA Lakers
LA Clippers
Portland
Sacramento

I personally like this breakdown alot better, it aligns the boundaries alot better as Washington should really be in the Atlantic, and Milawaukee is slightly farther west than New Orleans. Toronto is more along the lines of North-central than Atlantic. I know the last comment is short sighted, but it also gives the East another legitimate title threat in New Orleans.

Post #2 » by **CBS7** » Thu Apr 17, 2008 4:45 pm

The Bucks will sure love being moved to the West and the Hornets would hate being moved East.

But yes. If the Sonics do move a realignment might be in order.

Huskies1947 · Post #3 » by **Huskies1947** » Thu Apr 17, 2008 4:58 pm

Toronto can be either or... closer proximity to detroit, but not too much of a difference to NY.

GreenWithEnvy · Post #4 » by **GreenWithEnvy** » Thu Apr 17, 2008 4:59 pm

But....Phoenix is in the desert.

RobertGlory · Post #5 » by **RobertGlory** » Thu Apr 17, 2008 5:02 pm

why would we hate the east????????

just think

56 wins would probably become 66+

wawaweewa · Post #6 » by **wawaweewa** » Thu Apr 17, 2008 5:04 pm

RobertGlory wrote:why would we hate the east????????

just think

56 wins would probably become 66+

i think he was joking

Post #7 » by **Rooster** » Thu Apr 17, 2008 5:19 pm

I was thinking something similar but look at that map... you can't have Milwaukee and Chicago in different divisions. They're 45 minutes apart.

The divisions work really well now except for the Northwest, which seems like the "everyone else" division. Seattle moving would upset things but the divisions seem fine as they are.

Something on that map that surprised me is how far east Texas is. It's not really Southwest at all, it's due south.

ToffKobe · Post #8 » by **ToffKobe** » Thu Apr 17, 2008 5:28 pm

RobertGlory wrote:why would we hate the east????????

just think

56 wins would probably become 66+

He was definitely joking, relax.

Duiz · Post #9 » by **Duiz** » Thu Apr 17, 2008 5:30 pm

How about the 5 European teams that will be added in 5 years?

elbowthrower · Post #10 » by **elbowthrower** » Thu Apr 17, 2008 5:52 pm

I'm sure it's a good business practice for the NBA to hijack teams to small markets every few years and then have to realign the divisions as a result.

Good luck with that.

farzi · Post #11 » by **farzi** » Thu Apr 17, 2008 5:53 pm

I don't think its a good thing to break up the current NW division. Every team except denver is young and has either a talented core, or a few really good players with a high draft pick.

It should become one of, if not THE best division in 2-4 years

Supersonic · Post #12 » by **Supersonic** » Thu Apr 17, 2008 6:16 pm

We have two years left on our lease. Instead of drawing maps of our demise, how about you join the fight to stop this thivery and corruption? If it can happen to us, and can happen to your team too. We must stand up to David Stern now! Call or email your team's owner and urge them to vote against the Oklahoma City move.

farzi · Post #13 » by **farzi** » Thu Apr 17, 2008 6:18 pm

Supersonic wrote:We have two years left on our lease. Instead of drawing maps of our demise, how about you join the fight to stop this thivery and corruption? If it can happen to us, and can happen to your team too. We must stand up to David Stern now! Call or email your team's owner and urge them to vote against the Oklahoma City move.

Yes, it sucks, but there are 4-5 other threads about that on general alone from the past week

summary · Post #14 » by **summary** » Thu Apr 17, 2008 6:23 pm

It wouldn't go very far at dividing power divisions but Phoenix really seems like a southwest or pacific team. If you're going to call it mountain division then maybe you include Memphis for being by the Appalachians :-?

daoneandonly · Post #15 » by **daoneandonly** » Thu Apr 17, 2008 6:54 pm

^^Phoenix can stay in the Pacific then and Portland can be in the Northwest then, the idea mainly gets OKC in the same division as the texas triangle, NO in the East since they are fartehr east than chicago or milwaukee, and wahsington in the atlantic.

farzi · Post #16 » by **farzi** » Thu Apr 17, 2008 7:15 pm

Switch Portland and Phoenix and i like it more

Red Robot · Post #17 » by **Red Robot** » Thu Apr 17, 2008 7:42 pm

If you want to group them by distance but don't care about making logical conferences or the headache of re-aligning everyone, I'd go with:

MIN-MIL-CHI-DET-TOR
BOS-NYK-NJN-PHI-WAS
IND-CLE-MEM-ATL-CHA
MIA-ORL-NOR-HOU-SAS
DAL-OKC-DEN-PHX-UTH
POR-GSW-SAC-LAL-LAC

The best thing to do without modifying the conferences is to just swap Portland and Phoenix. It's much simpler:

POR-GSW-SAC-LAL-LAC
NOR-SAS-HOU-DAL-MEM
MIN-OKC-DEN-PHX-UTH

But that's only a small improvement over the way things are now. The league should probably just leave the divisons alone, because even if the Sonics move, the teams will still be in the second-best arrangement.

Post #18 » by **Scoot McGroot** » Thu Apr 17, 2008 7:49 pm

daoneandonly wrote:Judging from this NBA team map someoen posted, the NBA should realign the divisions to reflect this (of course this assumes Sea moves to OKC):

http://cbs.sportsline.com/images/nba/teams_map.jpg

East:

Atlantic:
Boston
New Jersey
New York
Philadelphia
Washington

Northcentral:
Chicago
Cleveland
Detroit
Indiana
Toronto

Southeast:
Atlanta
Charlotte
Miami
Orlando
New Orleans

West

Southwest:
Dallas
Houston
Memphis
Oklahoma City
San Antonio

Mountain
Denver
Phoenix
Milwaukee
Minnesota
Utah

Pacific
Golden State
LA Lakers
LA Clippers
Portland
Sacramento

I personally like this breakdown alot better, it aligns the boundaries alot better as Washington should really be in the Atlantic, and Milawaukee is slightly farther west than New Orleans. Toronto is more along the lines of North-central than Atlantic. I know the last comment is short sighted, but it also gives the East another legitimate title threat in New Orleans.

Why not keep Milwaukee in the "NorthCentral" and move Indy to the South East, much like it's in the AFC South for Football? Move Memphis to the Mountain Division in Milwaukee's place and then just slide New Orleans into the Southwest with the Texas Triangle and Oklahoma City? There's no need to move Milwaukee out west.

However, this current lineup of squads would really lend itself well to a lineup of 5, 6 team divisions, with no formal conferences.

Northeast:
Boston
Washington
New York
New Jersey
Philadelphia

Upper Midwest:
Cleveland
Detroit
Indiana
Chicago
Milwaukee
Minnesota

Southeast:
Charlotte
Memphis
Atlanta
New Orleans
Orland
Miami

West Coast:
Seattle
Portland
Sacramento
Golden State
LA Lakers
LA Clippers

South:
Dallas
San Antonio
Houston
Denver
Utah
Phoenix

Or, if Seattle moves to Oklahoma City, put them in the South Division and move Phoenix to the West Coast.

AxnJxn00 · Post #19 » by **AxnJxn00** » Thu Apr 17, 2008 8:26 pm

unrelated, but whoever made that map has no idea where charlotte is

drew881 · Post #20 » by **drew881** » Thu Apr 17, 2008 8:46 pm

North vs. South might be interesting. Or a similar deal that football and baseball have with nfc, afc - national american. I don't want to look into it, but you could base it off of the original nba and aba divisions.