Would expanding to 32 teams dilute the talent pool too much?

[Harry Garris]

The talent pool is already super diluted…

Look at
Detroit
Minnesota
Houston
New Orleans
Orlando

These teams have like 3-4 solidified nba guys a piece and the rest are barely nba players. You want to make more nba teams and then what? Team 31 and 32 will just be elite g league teams basically.

Detroit isn't bad they're just super young. Same story with Houston and Orlando. A lot of guys on their roster will end up being good NBA players, they're just not there yet. Minnesota is a disaster of terrible coaching, bad chemistry, and poor fit. They have a roster full of legit NBA players though. New Orleans is just decimated by injuries. Zion hasn't played yet and Brandon Ingram has barely seen the floor.

With maybe the exception of Minnesota, we don't have any teams in the NBA right now that are bad because they are trying to compete and can't find talent. Every other team that is struggling has either made the conscious choice to fill their roster with young guys who haven't developed yet and that's why they're losing games, or they're struggling with injuries. We don't have a lack of talent in the league right now, there's more than we've ever had.

[Hornet Mania]

Talent concentration is as high or higher than in the late 80s, mid 90s and early 00s when the last few expansions took place. It should not be a problem to add two more teams.

The NBA is already a bit strange in that over half the teams make the playoffs each year.

[Ron Swanson]

Nah, expansion only watered down the league in the 80s and 90s because "Something, something Jordan is overrated"

Am I doing this right?

[LAL1947]

Increasing the number of teams will dilute the pool for awhile... but that could/should even back out to current levels after some years have passed, as the talent pool keeps growing. So I can't say it'll be a bad or good thing... and didn't vote because of your choice of wording in the poll, i.e., dilute it too much.

What I do know is the number should be either 30 or 32... no to 31.

Also, no more than 32... and a relegation based system won't work with the NBA. That kind of system will only make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

[hauntedcomputer]

If we contracted teams to only 8 teams theres gonna still be teams that are "tanking" based on all your arguments.

These same people make the argument that Wilt and Russell were bums because they only played against seven other teams.

[chilluminati]

It's just not a good idea to expand the NBA, free agents already are picky about where they go, and parity has been so disrupted over time that we can predict what happens with decent accuracy every season. Adding more tankers will only generate more teams that "aren't the Lakers".

[ReddoverKobe]

100% yes. If anything the should contract two teams. I'm sorry but New Orleans can be gone and no one would care. Then pick one of the other terrible teams and lets get back to loaded rosters like the 80's.

[Secret Lover14]

100% yes. If anything the should contract two teams. I'm sorry but New Orleans can be gone and no one would care. Then pick one of the other terrible teams and lets get back to loaded rosters like the 80's.

Contracting is never the answer. Every team has been terrible at some point in their existence. A **** ton of ppl will care if NO is gone, don't be ignorant.

Get back to loaded rosters like the 80's? When half the league was terrible and tanking. Sounds like the talent was diluted back then as well. I guess we should contract to only 8 teams or something... but oh wait I guess that doesn't solve terrible teams either cause there is always gonna be good teams and bad teams no matter what. It has nothing to do with talent dilution.

[Sothron]

There is plenty of talent on benches, in the G league and playing overseas to easily make up for two additional teams.

[Duke4life831]

The talent gap between the top teams and the bottom teams are already drastic enough. Adding more teams isn't going to improve the product.

To me the better idea would be to get rid of the Wolves and Pels, then move the Pistons to Seattle. 28 teams with each conference having 14 teams. That is plenty.

[pillwenney]

The NBA already has too many teams that are awful at the same time. Right now we have 5 teams that are abjectly terrible - Rockets, Pels, Spurs, Pistons and Magic. Then we have a tier of teams that are just plain bad: Raptors, Thunder, Kings, Wolves and Pacers. Together that's a third of the league.

NBA doesn't need more bad teams competing for who can tank the hardest.

I mean, that's just the way that sports work when teams play each other. 20% of the teams will be bad, 60% will be levels of medicore, 20% will be truly great. Doesn't necessarily matter how many teams there are in a league for it to shape up like that.

Teams like the Raptors, Pacers, Wolves, and Kings can all win on any given night. I would say Spurs as well.

You mean to tell me that in order for some teams to win a lot, other teams have to lose a lot?

[JujitsuFlip]

If anything, they should consolidate the league.

[CIN-C-STAR]

There's plenty of talent to go around, the problem is it isn't going around.
For the most part the top-end talent wants to play in one of 3 locations and with each other.
But I dont see expansion really affecting that one way or another, so why not?

[payton2kemp]

There's plenty of talent to go around, the problem is it isn't going around.
For the most part the top-end talent wants to play in one of 3 locations and with each other.
But I dont see expansion really affecting that one way or another, so why not?

I think if they do expand there should also be some sort of Hard cap, the luxury tax penalties don't do anything. So the talent does actually get spread around.

[kodo]

People said the same thing when the League added Miami, Orlando, Minnesota, Toronto...if all these expansions were bad for the league it must be in pretty horrible shape now.

[leolozon]

This is like a 6% dilution. There are more than 6% playing basketball now than in any other era. People who think this dilutes the talent too much, must think the talent was always diluted.

Plus, less concentration of talent maybe isn't a bad thing.

[Cactus Jack]

The talent gap between the top teams and the bottom teams are already drastic enough. Adding more teams isn't going to improve the product.

To me the better idea would be to get rid of the Wolves and Pels, then move the Pistons to Seattle. 28 teams with each conference having 14 teams. That is plenty.

Detroit just built a new arena.

I'm not sure Marc Lore & A-rod who just paid a boatload of money for the team (Wolves) would be in favor of that.

The league really doesn't have any incentive to move teams. Not when they can capitalize on exorbitant expansion fees. Especially when both Seattle & Vegas have groups that are more than willing to pay up.

[guldakot]

The talent gap between the top teams and the bottom teams are already drastic enough. Adding more teams isn't going to improve the product.

To me the better idea would be to get rid of the Wolves and Pels, then move the Pistons to Seattle. 28 teams with each conference having 14 teams. That is plenty.

Moving the Pistons? The Pistons are in th 15th largest media market, and they are also one of 7 teams that has won 3 or more championships. Detroit has great attendance when they are winning, when they are trash like they have been for the last 10 years people stop going to games. As soon as they start winning again attendance goes back up.
https://hoop-social.com/nba-team-market-size-rankings/

If you are going to move a team west, you move a smaller market like Orlando, Cleveland Charlotte or indiana. They have also been around since 1948 (moved to Detroit in 1957) and are one of the original NBA teams. Oh and Sacramento and San Antonio are also smaller markets then the Pistons, and are equally terrible this year. Hell Sac has the longest playoff drought in the nba and the 2nd longest in sports history. Move them to Seattle.

[Secret Lover14]

The talent gap between the top teams and the bottom teams are already drastic enough. Adding more teams isn't going to improve the product.

To me the better idea would be to get rid of the Wolves and Pels, then move the Pistons to Seattle. 28 teams with each conference having 14 teams. That is plenty.

Contracting is never the answer. Every team has been terrible at some point in their existence. There will always be good teams and bad teams no matter how many teams are in the league. Talent disparity between good and bad teams has alway existed in any competitive sports league.

Especially in the NBA 1980's when the Lakers and Celtics dominated and half the league was terrible and tanking. Sounds like the talent was diluted back then as well. I guess we should contract to only 8 teams or something... but oh wait I guess that doesn't solve terrible teams either cause there is always gonna be good teams and bad teams no matter what. It has nothing to do with talent dilution.

[Lockdown504090]

Theres so much talent in the world right now, it would only help the game.

Theres going to be more players coming from west and central africa too in the next 6-8 years as well.... its almost time to expand.