Expansion and Relocation

SnoBrdrRob · Post #1 » by **SnoBrdrRob** » Sun Apr 6, 2008 8:44 pm

Do you think the league needs a couple new teams to enhance revenues? If I could do it my way this is what I would do:

Sonics - Stay in Seattle
Grizzlies - Move back to Vancouver
Hornets - Move to OKC

Expansion teams-

Anaheim
St. Louis

Have Anaheim in the Pacific Division
Keep the Hornets in the SW Division
Move Grizzlies to the Northwest Division
St. Louis goes to the SW Division

Post #2 » by **DelaneyRudd** » Sun Apr 6, 2008 8:51 pm

YouveBeenZeked · Post #3 » by **YouveBeenZeked** » Sun Apr 6, 2008 8:54 pm

If the NBA expands, it might as well be to Europe, not Anaheim. Screw California. They already have the Warriors, Lakers, and Clippers. They don't need any more teams.

Texas Longhorns · Post #4 » by **Texas Longhorns** » Sun Apr 6, 2008 9:01 pm

Las Vegas...

Buckeye-NBAFan · Post #5 » by **Buckeye-NBAFan** » Sun Apr 6, 2008 9:02 pm

YouveBeenZeked wrote:If the NBA expands, it might as well be to Europe, not Anaheim. Screw California. They already have the Warriors, Lakers, and Clippers. They don't need any more teams.

Utah has 2,645,330 people. California has 36,553,215 people. So for every NBA team Utah has, California deserves 13.8 teams.

GMF · Post #6 » by **GMF** » Sun Apr 6, 2008 9:34 pm

Why would the Hornets move? They've been selling seats pretty well since the All-star break. If any team's moving it should probably be the Grizzlies.

I don't think the NBA needs to expand anymore. 30s a good number of teams.

rockymac52 · Post #7 » by **rockymac52** » Sun Apr 6, 2008 9:48 pm

YouveBeenZeked wrote:If the NBA expands, it might as well be to Europe, not Anaheim. Screw California. They already have the Warriors, Lakers, and Clippers. They don't need any more teams.

and the Kings. hahaha

Post #8 » by **DelaneyRudd** » Sun Apr 6, 2008 9:59 pm

Buckeye-NBAFan wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Utah has 2,645,330 people. California has 36,553,215 people. So for every NBA team Utah has, California deserves 13.8 teams.

It's about TV market now. That was the case when people could only go to games, like when NY had 3 baseball teams. There is no point to have a third team in the same TV market. Move the Clippers south, and all is good. I do think the league can have 2 more teams with out problem. There is plenty of talent in the world. OKC will get a team no what. I would say give NV a team too. I would like to see the Sonics just stay in Seattle, but the city and it's citizens are not intent on keeping them. That's fine, that's their prerogative. If they don't think arena funding is in their economic interest that's how it goes, but someone else feels like it is in their interest so that's capitalism. So that leaves one more place for a team and it's a toss up between KC which is a big traditional low growth city or Las Vegas which has issues (corporate base is a bigger issue than gambling) but continues to grow.

Dtown84 · Post #9 » by **Dtown84** » Sun Apr 6, 2008 10:04 pm

SnoBrdrRob wrote:Do you think the league needs a couple new teams to enhance revenues? If I could do it my way this is what I would do:

Sonics - Stay in Seattle
Grizzlies - Move back to Vancouver
Hornets - Move to OKC

Expansion teams-

Anaheim
St. Louis

Have Anaheim in the Pacific Division
Keep the Hornets in the SW Division
Move Grizzlies to the Northwest Division
St. Louis goes to the SW Division

Nah Personally I'd just move the Grizzlies to OKC, keep the Sonics in Seattle, keep the Hornets in NO (it actually looks like they're getting support now), and move the clippers to Anaheim.

The divisions stay the same, NO gets a chance to support a great team, Seattle keeps it's Sonics. The Grizzlies are given a market that seems to like basketball, and the Clippers finally have a chance to get out of the Lakers shadow.

akikan · Post #10 » by **akikan** » Sun Apr 6, 2008 10:46 pm

SnoBrdrRob wrote:
Expansion teams-

Anaheim
St. Louis

Have Anaheim in the Pacific Division
Keep the Hornets in the SW Division
Move Grizzlies to the Northwest Division
St. Louis goes to the SW Division

do you really want 3 teams in the LA area?

YouveBeenZeked · Post #11 » by **YouveBeenZeked** » Sun Apr 6, 2008 10:54 pm

It would actually be 5. I already forgot they have Sacramento too on top of the Warriors, Clippers, and Lakers.

Jemini80 · Post #12 » by **Jemini80** » Sun Apr 6, 2008 10:58 pm

if the NBA adds more teams they are pathetic. At least 4 teams need to be retracted right now. The talent pool is diluted too much now, which is why there is such an inferior product. This inferior product has caused the NBA to make certain rules (like the allowance of zone defense), in order to hide the fact that talent is stretched too thin. Nets, Clippers, Griz, and whatever 4th small market team you want should be eliminated.

Farsi Man · Post #13 » by **Farsi Man** » Sun Apr 6, 2008 11:04 pm

akikan wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

do you really want 3 teams in the LA area?

The LA area is huge plus there's alot of basketball fans there and there's no football team. Alot of people have been dying to get a team there.

legacyinthemakin89c · Post #14 » by **legacyinthemakin89c** » Sun Apr 6, 2008 11:19 pm

I'd actually be devastated if the Hornets left New Orleans anytime soon. Things are really looking up for that organization and their slowly rebuilding their lives down there and they deserve a team.

And a definite no to expansion. 30 teams is probably too much as it is, but its perfect in the sense of the numbers work for conferences and divisions, but no more teams should be added, ever, the leagues talent pool is diluted enough as it is.