How long until the NBA expands?

[Ugly0598]

Simple question. Seattle deserves a team after what happened, and the NBA arena situation for pretty much all 30 teams seems pretty good. Logic would say that Seattle gets a 31st expansion team, might be smart to have a 32nd team while they're going to Seattle for alignment and scheduling reasons.

[EmperorLocky]

Voted never but expect something after 20 years.

The league shouldn't even be considering expansion any time soon. Too many teams as it is as the disparity is huge.

[Qwigglez]

Give Seattle a team already! 3-5 years is my hope.

[Scott Hall]

I hope it doesn't

[Ugly0598]

I'd be OK with 31 teams from a talent perspective, I don't think 15 and 16 in a conference is that big of a deal anymore in terms of how scheduling could work out with how division winners don't matter.

32 teams seems to stretch things thin for good players, but who knows if Silver and Mexico City is a serious idea.

[shawn_hemp]

They don't need to expand they should just take the Kings and move them to Seattle as the Sonics

All 7 Kings fans might be upset but that's something they will have to live with

warned for baiting

[Cactus Jack]

Expansion is happening sooner than you think! 1-3 years!

[Cactus Jack]

They don't need to expand they should just take the Kings and move them to Seattle as the Sonics

All 7 Kings fans might be upset but that's something they will have to live with

No team is moving. Expansion is on the horizon tho.

[Dirk]

They don't need to expand they should just take the Kings and move them to Seattle as the Sonics

All 7 Kings fans might be upset but that's something they will have to live with

You got away with baiting on the Marcus Smart thread. You won't get away this time.

Stop baiting other fanbases.

The Kings have one of the most passionate fanbases in the league and have a new arena.

[Ugly0598]

They don't need to expand they should just take the Kings and move them to Seattle as the Sonics

All 7 Kings fans might be upset but that's something they will have to live with

Yeah I'm sure Sacramento is gonna abandon the 500 million+ arena they just built.

[shawn_hemp]

You know what this league needs?

More lottery teams...

I don't get the expansion fervor

[Cactus Jack]

You know what this league needs?

More lottery teams...

I don't get the expansion fervor

Adding another team isn't going to change much of anything. The league will be fine.

[N.O.R.E.]

I've seen talking heads speculate this is going to happen in the next couple of years, tossing around a $2 billion expansion fee and adding that this would somehow equate to $30 million to each team.

Expansion dilutes the talent and product and one would hope/suspect owners would be smart enough not to devalue their investment for a paltry payment of $30 million (plus whatever minimal benefit of expanding into another likely smaller US market in a global game).

I think a more prudent approach would be investing in the Development League and developing this into a 2nd division of sorts - similar to the approach seen in real football (probably soccer to you *insert smilie with sunglasses*).

I'm half drunk and not going to go too into this (or express myself very articulately), but a couple of relevant points below:
- I am ethically/morally against the 19 age limit / one and done rule - if you're old enough to be shipped off to fight old men's wars, you are old enough to sit at the table and drink a brew with them, and you are certainly old enough to receive their money to provide for yourself and your family, in exchange for performing a craft you have likely dedicated your life to.
- **** the AAU system and the NCAA. Universities and colleges have long been reduced to a tradeable commodity / business (as opposed to academic institution) and the quality of the education has suffered a lot (while costs, etc have increased ridiculously worldwide). AAU promotes me-first/"get mine" mindsets, and the NCAA/universities have become huge businesses that have the largely unprecedented benefit of not having to pay the worker. In addition to this, players that are as dumb as rocks take scholarship spots away from more worthy candidates who have more well-rounded/holistic ambitions. If you never intend/ed to pursue even a base level of academic education, doing so to satisfy some arbitrary NBA rule while making other people money seems wrong. Some people are more geared towards trades, others are more suited and interested in academia - neither is better/worse than the other, we all (should) have roles to play in a healthy community/society, or team. No point in playing charades - unless of course, that's in your interests.
- If the D-league's visibility and competitiveness grew, the perception of being "demoted" would be shifted to one of earning your stripes/learning. This would be great if all age restrictions were taken away, because I suspect it would be more common place for riskier/high ceiling 1st round draft choices to be "loaned" to the D-league affiliate/feeder until they are more ready to contribute at the highest level. Fans coming to watch tanking teams can only ever be a short-term thing. If you had a an exciting 18 year old (or even younger???) stud on your DL team, don't think you'd pay say $20 to go watch the potential future? I would. Due to still not being the "big stage", players would play with more urgency as they still have to prove themselves (similar to the college game)
- Making a 2nd division team/DL/"feeder" team mandatory would help reduce the dog eat dog, everyone out for themselves/transient nature of the DL. Want to get "promoted" to the first team? If you score 20 a game just getting yours, that's going to be difficult - teams are more sophisticated than "back in the day", and it would be unlikely to transition from DL to one of the primary scorers on an actual NBA team.
- This would give organisation's more control over their pipeline of talent - tanking's effectiveness would be largely minimised IMO.
- NBA's rookie program would need to be strengthened, using their financial might to access/develop courses to prepare players for after their career/helping them become more well-rounded as men, etc - the business benefits greatly from this, but it is a long-term investment. Otherwise, I suspect the trend of broke retired athletes continuing, in addition to an increase in problematic, entitled behaviour - e.g the old Kobe rape case "Shaq did this type of thing all the time", or the more recent Derrick Rose bull.

The development of this "secondary" product would also increase the value of the main one IMO.
Injuries suck, players don't like back to backs, etc, 82 games is too long for almost everyone except for the tv networks and the owners, and this is only due to money. If you shorten the schedule to say 58 games (play everyone twice), each fixture has far more significance and would increase competitiveness/rivalries. This creates an even higher premium, allowing everyone to recoup costs by charging more, because the games suddenly have more meaning. The shortened schedule would also allow for easier expansion/moves into other global markets. If a team based in London or wherever in the world goes on "short" 5-10 game "tours" things become far more manageable. For the US teams travelling to whatever international market, the less number of games (over a similar season length in terms of time) provides the breathing space to allow the travel to be factored in. Do you think players would complain if they had to play games in London, Paris and say Milan during one week or so every year?

[Kilo]

Mexico City and Seattle within the next 3-5.

[mhd]

Say its Seattle and Vancouver hypothetically, they need to move either Memphis East to compensate, and make 2 super divisions (winners get top 2 seeds, and rest are wildcards)

EAST:

North:
1) Toronto
2) Knicks
3) Nets
4) Celtics
5) Pistons
6) Cavs
7) Bucks
8) Bulls

South:
1) 76ers
2) Wizards
3) Hornets
4) Hawks
5) Heat
6) Orlando
7) Grizz
8) Pacers

WEST:

Mountain
1) Minny
2) Spurs
3) Dallas
4) Houston
5) Pelicans
6) Nuggets
7) OKC
8) Utah

Pacific:
1) Lakers
2) Clips
3) GSW
4) Kings
5) Portland
6) Suns
7) Seattle
8) Vancouver

[J-Ves]

Las Vegas just got a hokey team, do you think they would be in the running for the next expansion team?

[giberish]

You know what this league needs?

More lottery teams...

I don't get the expansion fervor

That's kind of the problem. It's not that the talent level isn't there to support it, it's that there would still be just one title, so extra teams would just mean extra non-contending teams.

[Cactus Jack]

You know what this league needs?

More lottery teams...

I don't get the expansion fervor

That's kind of the problem. It's not that the talent level isn't there to support it, it's that there would still be just one title, so extra teams would just mean extra non-contending teams.

That's okay, I'll take the team anyway. Thanks!

[Cactus Jack]

Las Vegas just got a hokey team, do you think they would be in the running for the next expansion team?

They should be. If the league adds two teams as has been rumored. Seattle is getting a team. But, Vegas could be the 2nd team. Lots of speculation also about Louisville & recently Mexico City.

[bwgood77]

Hopefully just a few years. Get Seattle, Pittsburgh, KC and St Louis some teams.