PDA

View Full Version : "Super Teams" in the NBA.



Sadds The Gr8
07-22-2010, 07:09 PM
With Pat Riley signing Bosh and Lebron to join Miami, and the rumours of CP3 goin to Orlando, LA, or NY (possibly with Melo), there seems to be a new trend in the NBA. Players that are unhappy with their teams because of the inability to win, bail out, demand trades, and try to join friends/superstars on another team at a chance to win a championship. IMO if CP3 is dealt to one of those teams, the NBA will be very cheesy because: #1: Other players will follow suit and try to do the same thing. And #2: This will make a huge separation between the big market teams (who will be the good teams), and the small market teams (who will seem to be the bad teams). I think of this "strategy" is continued, it will ruin the NBA. I know it will be exciting for many people to see Juggernaut vs Juggernaut (Heat vs. Lakers) but I think this trend will take away from small market teams. It just sucks that the NBA is filled with divas and self-centered pricks that just demand trades, instead of hard working players that will do and try anything it takes for their team to win.

So basically I'm just asking what you guys think about the possibilties of "Super Teams" and whether it'll be good or bad for the NBA. Do you think "Super Teams" will gather more excitement for the NBA? Or would you prefer the talents of these players to be spread out around different teams of the league? will it ruin the NBA? Discuss.

AntiG
07-22-2010, 07:14 PM
the NBA needs to downsize in reality.

kozelkid
07-22-2010, 07:16 PM
It's a great thing. It's what made the 80s so exciting.
To be honest, more than anything, I think the best thing for the NBA would be to cut down the number of teams. Make the D-league stronger. Or maybe make it similar to the leagues in Europe with a relegation system. More than anything, I think the biggest mistake was adding all those expansion teams in the 90s. This league would be better off with 20-25 teams or so. Makes the league leaner and cuts the deadweight. With the relegation system of course. Which would also stop tanking.

marlinsfan24
07-22-2010, 07:18 PM
It's a great thing. It's what made the 80s so exciting.
To be honest, more than anything, I think the best thing for the NBA would be to cut down the number of teams. Make the D-league stronger. Or maybe make it similar to the leagues in Europe with a relegation system. More than anything, I think the biggest mistake was adding all those expansion teams in the 90s. This league would be better off with 20-25 teams or so. Makes the league leaner and cuts the deadweight. With the relegation system of course. Which would also stop tanking.

Problem with that is that many cities have been built with their economy depending on the NBA teams. It would be hard to tell 5-10 cities that they lose a money.

blue bleeder09
07-22-2010, 07:18 PM
i bet the poll goes anyone under 30 likes, above 30 dislikes ....
oh yeah lebron still sucks lol

blue bleeder09
07-22-2010, 07:21 PM
It's a great thing. It's what made the 80s so exciting.
To be honest, more than anything, I think the best thing for the NBA would be to cut down the number of teams. Make the D-league stronger. Or maybe make it similar to the leagues in Europe with a relegation system. More than anything, I think the biggest mistake was adding all those expansion teams in the 90s. This league would be better off with 20-25 teams or so. Makes the league leaner and cuts the deadweight. With the relegation system of course. Which would also stop tanking.

you never had stars teaming up together wanting to form a "super team" so they can win a title ???? jordan ,magic,wilkins,bird never sold their teams out like these guys do today so what do you mean bye that???

Sadds The Gr8
07-22-2010, 07:21 PM
i bet the poll goes anyone under 30 likes, above 30 dislikes ....
oh yeah lebron still sucks lol
are u talking about age? I'm under 30 and I dislike.

It's a great thing. It's what made the 80s so exciting.
To be honest, more than anything, I think the best thing for the NBA would be to cut down the number of teams. Make the D-league stronger. Or maybe make it similar to the leagues in Europe with a relegation system. More than anything, I think the biggest mistake was adding all those expansion teams in the 90s. This league would be better off with 20-25 teams or so. Makes the league leaner and cuts the deadweight. With the relegation system of course. Which would also stop tanking.

I see what u mean, but the thing that I hate about this is how players are just demanding trades and being so *****y about it. Like instead of complaining about your teammates, how about finding a way to freakin win...and star players didn't leave their teams in hopes of joining up with other superstar buddies to make a super team, and try to win a title.

kozelkid
07-22-2010, 07:30 PM
Problem with that is that many cities have been built with their economy depending on the NBA teams. It would be hard to tell 5-10 cities that they lose a money.

I think you really overrate the dependence of cities on basketball teams. Regardless, it's why I say you have a relegation system. I don't know that much about European basketball, but one thing I know that is great about it, is the relegation system. Essentially, if you suck, your team goes down a league and if play well, you go up a league. Essentially we can strengthen the D leauge in the process.


you never had stars teaming up together wanting to form a "super team" so they can win a title ???? jordan ,magic,wilkins,bird never sold their teams out like these guys do today so what do you mean bye that???

Obviously not. But teams in the 80s were much more stacked. It's not very realistic (unless players choose to team up) to have 3 of the top 10 players on the same team like you did with LA, Boston and even Philly in the 80s.



I see what u mean, but the thing that I hate about this is how players are just demanding trades and being so *****y about it. Like instead of complaining about your teammates, how about finding a way to freakin win...and star players didn't leave their teams in hopes of joining up with other superstar buddies to make a super team, and try to win a title.

Oh I agree entirely.
I just thing that one of the biggest mistakes this league made was adding so many teams in the 90s. It's one reason that makes the NBA so damn predictable.

Klivlend
07-22-2010, 07:32 PM
i bet the poll goes anyone under 30 likes, above 30 dislikes ....
oh yeah lebron still sucks lol

I'm under 30 and dislike :p

HoopsDrive
07-22-2010, 07:33 PM
I prefer it with supersized teams rather than a bunch of mediocre teams. I'm not sure how to answer whether it will be bad for the NBA or not. Some small market teams were already losing a lot of money and having empty seats in the arenas. The Heat will generate boat loads of revenue but the city of Cleveland will take a huge hit. Toronto won't be affected so much since the market is huge up here and the team was already sucking before Bosh left.

Raydogg909
07-22-2010, 07:34 PM
You know what to be honest since this big 3 in Miami thing happened I've hated the NBA but now as time passes I'm actually starting to not mind it so much! This "super teams" as you put it is why! It would actually put the league back into balance of good teams vs. bad ones! Yes I do rather the league to be spread out where we have almost 12-15 good teams with good chances of success battling!! But now the NBA is moving towards lowering that number down again like in the past because we have bared witness to the new Miami big 3 and as a basketball fan I now rather more teams to follow suit so there is more league wide competition!

Right now the league is owned by the Lakers VS Heat.....but if another team comes along like NY with a big three of there own we'd then have another stacked team! I mean now there's SOOO much talent in the NBA that it takes that much more to be an all-star and teams have multiple "stars" like look at the grizz will Zbo, Gay, Mayo, Gasol! thats solid and almost looks like they have no where to improve! But with this new trend those guys become more role player esque and teams will need more all-stars to compete!

Right now the competitive teams are:

Lakers
Heat
Magic
Celtics
Mavs
Thunder/Trailblazers/Nuggets (real long shots without more star power...but close)

Basically, what im trying to say is that Miami has raised the title competition bar! Thus, the only way to keep the league alive is for other teams to follow suit whether we like it or not!!

djlamer
07-22-2010, 07:34 PM
totally bad.
for every super team that forms 2 other teams suffer. the smaller franchises are losing money as it is already. putting allstars together makes it all the much harder for them to be competitive and draw crowds. i don't want a lock out to happen, but if this keeps going on i think we are definitely gonna need one.

Sadds The Gr8
07-22-2010, 07:36 PM
I think you really overrate the dependence of cities on basketball teams. Regardless, it's why I say you have a relegation system. I don't know that much about European basketball, but one thing I know that is great about it, is the relegation system. Essentially, if you suck, your team goes down a league and if play well, you go up a league. Essentially we can strengthen the D leauge in the process.

That's what they do with soccer. I never knew that about Basketball, but I do like that idea. No more tanking.


Oh I agree entirely.
I just thing that one of the biggest mistakes this league made was adding so many teams in the 90s. It's one reason that makes the NBA so damn predictable.
Kinda true, which is why the relegation system would make sense.

EDIT: Now that I think about it, I don't think it will be that great of an idea. That's because in Europe (England, Spain, Italy, which have the most popular leagues) big/richer teams are always able to sign good/up-and-coming players from the smaller/less rich teams...mainly because those players wouldn't want the risk of being relegated to a lower league, so they jump ship. If the NBA put in the relegation system this would surely happen, knowing the egos of the NBA players.

Chronz
07-22-2010, 07:37 PM
you never had stars teaming up together wanting to form a "super team" so they can win a title ???? jordan ,magic,wilkins,bird never sold their teams out like these guys do today so what do you mean bye that???
FA was different then, paired with the fact that the league was smaller, it enabled the teams who had amassed that talent to compete to keep that talent. In other words, they didnt have to ask. Those players were already on the team.

blue bleeder09
07-22-2010, 07:38 PM
are u talking about age? I'm under 30 and I dislike.


I see what u mean, but the thing that I hate about this is how players are just demanding trades and being so *****y about it. Like instead of complaining about your teammates, how about finding a way to freakin win...and star players didn't leave their teams in hopes of joining up with other superstar buddies to make a super team, and try to win a title.


I'm under 30 and dislike :p

i didnt mean ALL ,i ment on a avg...and good for u two :clap:

Raidaz4Life
07-22-2010, 07:40 PM
When done right, super teams are a lot of fun. Look at memorable squads like the 80's Lakers, 80's Celtics, 90's Bulls, 90's Rockets, 90's Jazz, and 2000 Lakers. Really they are what makes people want to tune in. Granted there is a difference between having a "super team" and a "random assortment of superstars playing for the same team".

blue bleeder09
07-22-2010, 07:42 PM
FA was different then, paired with the fact that the league was smaller, it enabled the teams who had amassed that talent to compete to keep that talent. In other words, they didnt have to ask. Those players were already on the team.

u can make a case for everything ,but i belive we can both agree that loyality is gone !!!!
its easyer to sell out and jump on the bandwagon(lebron):D

Jamiecballer
07-22-2010, 07:43 PM
good luck getting the league to do anything about it.

this is turning into Major League Baseball the sequel; where the big markets will be so critical to the leagues success that they won't do anything to level the playing field. as a Jays fan i am used to it so this doesn't bother me as much because at least they are doing it within the constraints of the salary cap.

djlamer
07-22-2010, 07:43 PM
Basically, what im trying to say is that Miami has raised the title competition bar! Thus, the only way to keep the league alive is for other teams to follow suit whether we like it or not!!

the nba is already pretty competitive as it is. last season the west had 8 teams with 50 wins! and the playoffs were solid. nothing was for sure. not even for the lakers. we barely squeezed past the first round and the finals went to 7 games!

i think there is plenty of competition as it is. however, the disparity between good teams and bad teams is huge.

if teams are this bad already(kings, nets, wiz, clipps, etc) in an already competitive league, what makes you think things will change. the way i see it, the disparity will only get larger. there is only so much talent to go around, if we pool it into 8 teams, what are the other 22 teams going to do? get rocked all day and sell no tickets?

VinceCarter
07-22-2010, 07:43 PM
i bet the poll goes anyone under 30 likes, above 30 dislikes ....
oh yeah lebron still sucks lol

I think it goes casual fan likes and true nba fans dislike.

Once you start following the NBA which happens when you're under 15 you'd still be opposed to ring chasers. At least Kobe winning rings is competitive because he doesn't have another top 8 (forget top 3) player playing with him.

Competitors>Superteams

Right now prime example is Kevin Durant. He could've explored teaming up but he decided to stay with the team he was drafted to and try to bring a championship to his team.

There's a salary cap for a reason in the NBA. It's because teams are made up of only 12 players. Whereas maybe 8-10 of them are really important to the team. Therefore if you have 2 of the greatest players in the league or 3 of the top 20 players in the league you are going to be too dominant and not enough "competitve".

yuoke
07-22-2010, 07:44 PM
It was already boring with the cthe teams pre-F.A., now it is far worse. It's boring when we know every year for 6-7 years, the same 4-5 teams will be in the Con. Champs.

kozelkid
07-22-2010, 07:47 PM
good luck getting the league to do anything about it.

this is turning into Major League Baseball the sequel; where the big markets will be so critical to the leagues success that they won't do anything to level the playing field. as a Jays fan i am used to it so this doesn't bother me as much because at least they are doing it within the constraints of the salary cap.

I think one thing that the league SHOULD do is make a hardcap and do away with the max salary. That's another way of looking at it. In fact I think that's the far more likely result (at least the hardcap part).

But I do think this league needs less teams regardless.


the nba is already pretty competitive as it is. last season the west had 8 teams with 50 wins! and the playoffs were solid. nothing was for sure. not even for the lakers. we barely squeezed past the first round and the finals went to 7 games!

i think there is plenty of competition as it is. however, the disparity between good teams and bad teams is huge.

if teams are this bad already(kings, nets, wiz, clipps, etc) in an already competitive league, what makes you think things will change. the way i see it, the disparity will only get larger. there is only so much talent to go around, if we pool it into 8 teams, what are the other 22 teams going to do? get rocked all day and sell no tickets?

In comes the relegation system, split the league into 2.

blue bleeder09
07-22-2010, 07:47 PM
I think it goes casual fan likes and true nba fans dislike.

Once you start following the NBA which happens when you're under 15 you'd still be opposed to ring chasers. At least Kobe winning rings is competitive because he doesn't have another top 8 (forget top 3) player playing with him.

Competitors>Superteams

Right now prime example is Kevin Durant. He could've explored teaming up but he decided to stay with the team he was drafted to and try to bring a championship to his team.

There's a salary cap for a reason in the NBA. It's because teams are made up of only 12 players. Whereas maybe 8-10 of them are really important to the team. Therefore if you have 2 of the greatest players in the league or 3 of the top 20 players in the league you are going to be too dominant and not enough "competitve".
well put:clap:

Sadds The Gr8
07-22-2010, 07:48 PM
When done right, super teams are a lot of fun. Look at memorable squads like the 80's Lakers, 80's Celtics, 90's Bulls, 90's Rockets, 90's Jazz, and 2000 Lakers. Really they are what makes people want to tune in. Granted there is a difference between having a "super team" and a "random assortment of superstars playing for the same team".

I see what you mean, but this Heat team is different. 90's Bulls wasn't really a "Super Team" because it wasn't filled with a bunch of superstars. Only superstar(s) were Jordan and arguably Pippen. That's pretty much it. Same with the Rockets with Hakeem. This Heat team has LBJ (arguable best player in the league), Wade (ANOTHER arguable best player in the league), and Bosh (arguable best PF in league). That's 3 of the best 20 players in the league (2 of them arguably being the best) and ALL are still in there 20's/in their prime. I dont think we've seen anything like this in the NBA.

blue bleeder09
07-22-2010, 07:51 PM
I see what you mean, but this Heat team is different. 90's Bulls wasn't really a "Super Team" because it wasn't filled with a bunch of superstars. Only superstar(s) were Jordan and arguably Pippen. That's pretty much it. Same with the Rockets with Hakeem. This Heat team has LBJ (arguable best player in the league), Wade (ANOTHER arguable best player in the league), and Bosh (arguable best PF in league). That's 3 of the best 20 players in the league (2 of them arguably being the best).

i just wished people would wait to see them play b4 we star saying how great this team is :facepalm:

HoopsDrive
07-22-2010, 07:52 PM
I think it goes casual fan likes and true nba fans dislike.

Once you start following the NBA which happens when you're under 15 you'd still be opposed to ring chasers. At least Kobe winning rings is competitive because he doesn't have another top 8 (forget top 3) player playing with him.

Competitors>Superteams

Right now prime example is Kevin Durant. He could've explored teaming up but he decided to stay with the team he was drafted to and try to bring a championship to his team.

There's a salary cap for a reason in the NBA. It's because teams are made up of only 12 players. Whereas maybe 8-10 of them are really important to the team. Therefore if you have 2 of the greatest players in the league or 3 of the top 20 players in the league you are going to be too dominant and not enough "competitve".

Nah.

Sadds The Gr8
07-22-2010, 07:52 PM
i just wished people would wait to see them play b4 we star saying how great this team is :facepalm:

I know...I'm just saying that this team is mad stacked. I'm not saying their gonna be a dynasty/best team ever or anything...

masalex1205
07-22-2010, 07:55 PM
i just wished people would wait to see them play b4 we star saying how great this team is :facepalm:

+1

djlamer
07-22-2010, 07:56 PM
In comes the relegation system, split the league into 2.

thats what the D-league is supposed to be...

kjoke
07-22-2010, 08:02 PM
soccer system would be amazing, prevents team from tanking top 15 teams are in divison one, bottom teams divison 2 at the end the worse teams in divsion 1 downgrad to disvison 2 and top divison 2 teams move up to division 1

kozelkid
07-22-2010, 08:03 PM
thats what the D-league is supposed to be...

Except it's garbage compared to other minor league systems. Like I said, NBA simply isn't capable of having 30 teams like the NFL or NHL. Too much deadweight and usually for multiple years at a time.

Sadds The Gr8
07-22-2010, 08:13 PM
soccer system would be amazing, prevents team from tanking top 15 teams are in divison one, bottom teams divison 2 at the end the worse teams in divsion 1 downgrad to disvison 2 and top divison 2 teams move up to division 1

nah it wouldnt because players on bad teams would jump ship to good teams so they don't get relegated into the lower division, like in Europe. That's why in Europe the same teams are always good (Manchester United & Real Madrid) I don't know if u know alot about soccer but those teams are always in the top 3 every year and thats because they have the money to pickup the good players from those bad teams that are about to be relegated, and therefore the top teams will always be good because they keep stacking up on players. If relegation system comes to NBA this samw thing would happen

HiphopRelated
07-22-2010, 08:21 PM
league needs contraction anyway

I want to watch great teams

HoopsDrive
07-22-2010, 08:35 PM
nah it wouldnt because players on bad teams would jump ship to good teams so they don't get relegated into the lower division, like in Europe. That's why in Europe the same teams are always good (Manchester United & Real Madrid) I don't know if u know alot about soccer but those teams are always in the top 3 every year and thats because they have the money to pickup the good players from those bad teams that are about to be relegated, and therefore the top teams will always be good because they keep stacking up on players. If relegation system comes to NBA this samw thing would happen

There's a salary cap in the NBA though, which would limit this kind of event fromm taking place a little bit. Obviously, top stars who get relegated in the NBA would still demand a trade akin to what CP3 is doing right now but not everyone will be capable of pulling that off. Lesser stars, role players and just plain fillers will just have to deal with the fact that they got relegated.

Also, Brasileirao is for you if you want parity. Top teams constantly get relegated there and the champion is never confirmed until the final 3 rounds of the league. Amazing.

rufo4100
07-22-2010, 08:41 PM
If your asking if I like what Miami did...NO.

HoopsDrive
07-22-2010, 08:44 PM
If your asking if I like what Miami did...NO.

Did you like what your Celtics did just some years ago? Something like acquiring KG and Jesus while already having The Truth in your team. Hmm.

Raidaz4Life
07-22-2010, 08:52 PM
I see what you mean, but this Heat team is different. 90's Bulls wasn't really a "Super Team" because it wasn't filled with a bunch of superstars. Only superstar(s) were Jordan and arguably Pippen. That's pretty much it. Same with the Rockets with Hakeem. This Heat team has LBJ (arguable best player in the league), Wade (ANOTHER arguable best player in the league), and Bosh (arguable best PF in league). That's 3 of the best 20 players in the league (2 of them arguably being the best) and ALL are still in there 20's/in their prime. I dont think we've seen anything like this in the NBA.

Hence the reason for my last sentence. There is a difference between a super TEAM and a 3 superstars with a bunch of scrubs. The Lakers are a super TEAM. The heat are just a random assortment of superstars.


So really I don't know how to answer this poll. Do I support all the top 10 players in the league teaming up and playing divide and conquer? No. But I love teams like the 90's Knicks with a bunch of great team players like Ewing, Houston, Sprewell, Ward, Johnson, Camby, etc.

Or the 94 Suns with Barkley, Majerle, Johnson, Ceballos, and Green.

I like watching teams that have talent all through their roster. I don't like watching 3 superstars fight over the ball with a bunch of scrubs around them.

DCSportsIsPain
07-22-2010, 08:55 PM
There is nothing new about spoiled little ***** who think they are bigger than the team, the game and the contract they signed. Newsflash *******s: Everyone wants to play for a winning team. Competition is what drives sports. Without competition, sports has no meaning.

Draco
07-22-2010, 08:55 PM
Rosen's takes


Despite the NBA’s official claim to the contrary (issued because they could do nothing to rectify the situation) LeBron, D-Wade and Chris Bosh definitely colluded to join forces. As you say, the easy way to compete is to have other star-quality players follow suit — and this will certainly be the case from now on.

There are several reasons why this is and will be bad for the league:

• Several teams will practically give away good players for second-round draft choices with the sole aim of clearing cap space. This will leave little money for the teams that do sign tandems of stars to fill their rosters with capable complementary players.

• Only those teams with the appropriate financial resources coupled with attractive urban environments will be able to attract top-tier free agents. This will lead to four or five teams battling for championships, four or five wannabes, and the other 20 or so franchises stuck in the mud.

• The bottom teams will therefore lose money at an astounding rate.

• No more parity. A diminishing of truly competitive regular-season games.

• With teams abandoning 5-man concepts on offense in lieu of playing 3-man games, Nellie Ball will conquer the NBA!

• As a result, young hooplings will be less team-oriented than they are now.

• In other words, the NBA would have a much brighter future if the Heat fail to cop the championship next year.
http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/Miami-Heat-super-team-failure-would-be-good-for-the-NBA

shizzle09
07-22-2010, 08:59 PM
you never had stars teaming up together wanting to form a "super team" so they can win a title ???? jordan ,magic,wilkins,bird never sold their teams out like these guys do today so what do you mean bye that???

you're right. Magic was already on a super team. Bird had Parish and Mchale. Jordan had Pippen(top 50 all time). Lebron had who? Mo williams? A late addition of Jamison last year? Who did Bosh have? Turkolu? Who did Wade have last year? Beasley? I guess you expect these players to ride it out and play with chumps their whole career. All the while the Lakers run out Fisher, Kobe, Artest, Bynum, Gasol, Odom all on the same team with a payroll of 85+ mil. These players know they need to tam up to compete with the Lakers. A super team already exists in the NBA and has since gasol landed in LA.

HiphopRelated
07-22-2010, 09:01 PM
6 teams have won in the last 30 years

Miami is going to hurt some alleged parity?

eh....no, it's just the Heat's turn to eat

shizzle09
07-22-2010, 09:03 PM
6 teams have won in the last 30 years

Miami is going to hurt some alleged parity?

eh....no, it's just the Heat's turn to eat

:clap::clap::clap:

exactly!

HoopsDrive
07-22-2010, 09:11 PM
6 teams have won in the last 30 years

Miami is going to hurt some alleged parity?

eh....no, it's just the Heat's turn to eat

Exactly. Parity is not this common thing in sports that some people are making out to be.

kozelkid
07-22-2010, 10:25 PM
Exactly. Parity is not this common thing in sports that some people are making out to be.

I'd say it's more so in football, hockey and even baseball. But yes, in basketball, there really isn't such a thing. Which is one thing that really sucks about it. It's too predictable.

DCSportsIsPain
07-22-2010, 10:53 PM
Fun Facts: League Revenues Per Sport

NFL: $7.8BB
MLB: $6.8BB
NBA: $4.0BB
NHL: $3.0BB

That's 82 NBA games per team times 30 teams divided by two (teams can't be home and away on the same game day) = 1,230 home games per season. $4.0BB divided by 1,230 games equals $3,252,032.52 revenue per game. According to the league office the NBA lost $370MM last season. So, in effect the NBA is saying it lost just short of 114 games of revenue last season, or 9.268% of projected BRI.

The Miami Heat franchise was valued by Forbes at $364MM as of December 2009.

It's a business. People are losing interest because the same teams compete and the same teams don't. Six teams in 30 seasons, as was stated above. The numbers show people are growing tired of non-competition in the NBA. The NHL is catching back up to the NBA in revenue. Unless the CBA addresses the underlying causes, the NBA will be the fourth most popular sport in two years.

SupeUnagi
07-22-2010, 10:54 PM
you do realize that new stars will be born once those guy ship off

gwrighter
07-22-2010, 11:00 PM
I think its bad for the NBA and basketball in general. Players now a days play for the name on the back and not for the name on the front. Back in the day players used to take a sense of ownership in their respective teams and want to prove something. I think now players say one thing and do another.

In terms of the NBA they are going to lose more money with the creation of these super-teams. Pooling the greatest marketing tools into a couple of cities is going to kill the ad revenue for the majority of other teams. With The U.S. economy already in shambles this will most definitely put a dent within the armour of the league. I can imagine rules being put in place to prevent the creation of super teams. What they need are more evenly matched teams not a 8 team league. Whatever though it is what it is. Things are never as good as they seem on the surface. only time will tell.

redzone11
07-22-2010, 11:02 PM
As much as it will bring in fair-weather fans who wants to watch these super teams, it will lose just as many real fans who are sick of it. And the small markets will get smaller and smaller and smaller, and the NBA will have problems.

All teams will be losing money except like 5-8 teams. Immediately and for now it will help and spike ratings and stuff, but if it continues there will be problems.

nuggetsyankees
07-22-2010, 11:20 PM
multiple teams are losing fans, there is no longer a top player on every team, ticket sales go down for teams who lose players, losing a top player may forever damage your franchise in terms of credibility

Raph12
07-22-2010, 11:22 PM
Although this has been happening for a while, never has 2 of the top 3 players been on the same team that I know of.

mynameismo
07-22-2010, 11:39 PM
Good for some Cities.. Bad for most..