PDA

View Full Version : The NBA needs to get rid of 4-6 teams ...



mudvayne387
07-09-2012, 11:54 AM
Bucks
Bobcats
Kings
T-Wolves
Cavs

Maybe one more ?


The same goes for all of the other three major sports, but I fear the NBA is the worst of the bunch.

Spread some talent throughout the rest of the league while weeding out the crap.

With the way things are going, the teams mentioned above will never be able to compete with LA,Miami,OKC, ETC....

There is no desire for players to go there, and because they are not overwhelmingly desirable cities to live in, there never will be....

It may sound harsh, but you can either nip this issue in the butt now, or continue to string along fan bases until eventually they die a slow painful death....

BleedingGreen9
07-09-2012, 11:58 AM
yes

BleedingGreen9
07-09-2012, 11:59 AM
Im not agreeing with those teams but the league is watered down loosing 4-5 teams would be great

LongIslandIcedZ
07-09-2012, 11:59 AM
With the direction the league is going in, it probably wouldnt be the worst idea.

mudvayne387
07-09-2012, 12:02 PM
Im not agreeing with those teams but the league is watered down loosing 4-5 teams would be great

Those were just a few off the top of my head, but I could be way off. (Especially with the Bucks)

mudvayne387
07-09-2012, 12:06 PM
You're ********

Yea, Minnesota is really making some great strides ...

KG wanted out
Rubio didn't want to come
Love potentially wants out ....

and you havn't made the playoffs since Moby Dick was a minnow ....

Arch Stanton
07-09-2012, 12:07 PM
Bucks
Bobcats
Kings
T-Wolves
Cavs

Maybe one more ?


The same goes for all of the other three major sports, but I fear the NBA is the worst of the bunch.

Spread some talent throughout the rest of the league while weeding out the crap.

With the way things are going, the teams mentioned above will never be able to compete with LA,Miami,OKC, ETC....

There is no desire for players to go there, and because they are not overwhelmingly desirable cities to live in, there never will be....

It may sound harsh, but you can either nip this issue in the butt now, or continue to string along fan bases until eventually they die a slow painful death....

As long as you're okay with them ridding of whatever team you root for.

mudvayne387
07-09-2012, 12:10 PM
As long as you're okay with them ridding of whatever team you root for.

Thats probably why this will never happen. The backlash would be tremendous from the fans. There is still sour grapes over the Sonics move, and that was only one team relocating.

Arch Stanton
07-09-2012, 12:12 PM
Thats probably why this will never happen. The backlash would be tremendous from the fans. There is still sour grapes over the Sonics move, and that was only one team relocating.

Are you okay with the NBA ridding of your favorite team?

Gritz
07-09-2012, 12:14 PM
Just have the whack teams that miss the playoffs year in and year out play in a whack team playoff, call it...

The Whackoffs (Where strange things happen)

gaughan333
07-09-2012, 12:15 PM
They need to get rid of teams that aren't

Lakers
Heat
Knicks

Possibly
Clippers
Nets
Bulls
OKC

because those are the only teams anyone is gonna go to

BigBlueCrew
07-09-2012, 12:17 PM
agreed with the OP, this is quickly becoming a joke

The goods
07-09-2012, 12:20 PM
The way the league is going your probably right,or move them to a big city market.

PlezPlayDKnicks
07-09-2012, 12:21 PM
THIS TEAM UP STUFF IS WACK. THAT INCLUDES MY TEAM AS WELL. If im a fan of one of those teams i wouldnt want them gone. This will be a short term phase with the new rules coming into effect.

ThornMo
07-09-2012, 12:22 PM
only way i see this happening is if stern wants teams in Europe. 3 teams from the east and 3 from the west go overseas.

Hellcrooner
07-09-2012, 12:26 PM
oh, maybe league should have gotten rid of Knicks while they were sucking during the 00s for 10 years, or the bulls after jordan and their long string or sucking.

or whatever.

OP.

SAN ANTONIO

you can compete wherever you are if you are intellignet.

Your case is invalid.

Dade County
07-09-2012, 12:28 PM
Thank You...

They need to get rid of 4 but they will probably get rid of 2 only... The league needs it, and the only way they can make all these other franchisees better, is just start over and change the rules so that their is only two all star on any given team. ( yes I know what happens if a player on your team because an all star..smh... I don't know how fans expect things to change), these stars are going to play togethr, so they are not shut out by the HEAT and Big markets teams...

HEAT & OKC are two small markets fighting for the little guys :)

Nycbball08
07-09-2012, 12:47 PM
They need to get rid of teams that aren't

Lakers
Heat
Knicks

Possibly
Clippers
Nets
Bulls
OKC

because those are the only teams anyone is gonna go to
Boston ??

SportsNY
07-09-2012, 12:50 PM
With players only wanting to go to big markets, teams like the Bucks, Cavs, Kings, etc. Probably wont be winning much. It's sad.

Corey
07-09-2012, 12:55 PM
What an interesting and unique thread topic. I've never seen anything like this before.

JLynn943
07-09-2012, 01:03 PM
oh, maybe league should have gotten rid of Knicks while they were sucking during the 00s for 10 years, or the bulls after jordan and their long string or sucking.

or whatever.

OP.

SAN ANTONIO

you can compete wherever you are if you are intellignet.

Your case is invalid.

Exactly. How long did the Knicks suck? They're only decent now even with 2 stars. But no one was calling for them to get axed. I mean, 5 years ago Seattle/OKC would have been lumped together with the teams in the OP and look at them now.

The problem isn't diluted talent. Almost every team has at least one really good player. The problem is owners paying way too much for players who don't deserve what they get, which forces less well-off teams out of the hunt for good players.

StarvingKnick22
07-09-2012, 01:04 PM
any teams outside off Knicks, Lakers, Bulls, Celtics, Supersonics,pistons, rockets, SAS warriors(because of Wilt 100) im ok with throwing away sorry if i forgot to name anybody.

Raph12
07-09-2012, 01:06 PM
I agree with removing 6 teams...

Gritz
07-09-2012, 01:07 PM
They need to remove charges and just call all of those blocking fouls

Raps08-09 Champ
07-09-2012, 01:09 PM
Bucks
Bobcats
Kings
T-Wolves
Cavs

Maybe one more ?


The same goes for all of the other three major sports, but I fear the NBA is the worst of the bunch.

Spread some talent throughout the rest of the league while weeding out the crap.

With the way things are going, the teams mentioned above will never be able to compete with LA,Miami,OKC, ETC....

There is no desire for players to go there, and because they are not overwhelmingly desirable cities to live in, there never will be....

It may sound harsh, but you can either nip this issue in the butt now, or continue to string along fan bases until eventually they die a slow painful death....

:laugh2:


If there was a hard cap, we wouldn't have to deal super teams to begin with.

jayjay33
07-09-2012, 01:12 PM
Yes.... The 1 of the 2 biggest things about ALL jobs is location! an we all know the other.

I'm other sports this is countered by the NUMBER of players needed to win. The very tip guys always have there choice of location. But they are not enough by them seleves to change the Balance.

In Bball however 2 or 3 guys can Change everything. An if guys can pick, most of the time, they are going to pick the best city (money being close). It just is what it is. There is nothing you can ever do about it.

duaniak28
07-09-2012, 01:12 PM
the fairest way to trim down all major sports is make a limit of one team per state with the exception of Cali and Texas where their could be a 2 team limit!

tcav701
07-09-2012, 01:12 PM
Salary cap is a much more logical solution.

yanksrock
07-09-2012, 01:15 PM
Agree wholeheartedly.

HouRealCoach
07-09-2012, 01:18 PM
Bucks
Bobcats
Kings
T-Wolves
Cavs

Maybe one more ?

:facepalm:

How about those teams learn how to draft???

Cavs, TWolves, & Kings have VERY bright futures and Cleveland has some damn good fans

Kyrie Irving will be box office/high profile after this year and maybe Dion Waiters

Kevin Love already is & they were on their way to the playoffs ntil Rubio, Pek, & Love got injuries

Kings have DMC, Evans, & Robinson who I think with the right coach can be VERY dangerous in the future & DMC will challenge Bynum as the second best center this year and maybe next year will pass him

The Bucks just never decide to blow it up & rebuild... They just stay constant which is 8-13 seed for the last 10 years

Bobcats were one of the best defensive teams at one point but chose to go another direction

The NBA needs to get rid of "Restricted" Free Agents, Find GM's who know how to draft, quit giving scrubs mega millions, & build a ****ing team

nate2usmc
07-09-2012, 01:21 PM
Thanks to last year's lockout, I agree with this, unfortunately. The easiest way to alleviate this situation is imposing a hard cap. It's only in the NBA that I agree to contraction. Jayjay said it right, only in basketball can 1-3 players change the whole dynamic of a franchise. So it has to happen. And no, this isn't LeBron's fault lol

IgglesFanInCO
07-09-2012, 01:27 PM
Hard cap

Compensatory picks for losing FAs to max deals

Changing playoff series to leave less rest and increase role of bench and depth


These are all ways to increase parity in the nba without having a riot of the fans, a combination of them could be very effective

Lakers + Giants
07-09-2012, 01:27 PM
Bobcats, Cavs, Kings, and Wizards then just move the grizzlies to the East.

Dade County
07-09-2012, 01:36 PM
Ok I know the Clippers are good now, but it never made sense to me that L.A has two teams... I will stop right their.

Lo Porto
07-09-2012, 01:37 PM
Hard cap

Compensatory picks for losing FAs to max deals

Changing playoff series to leave less rest and increase role of bench and depth


These are all ways to increase parity in the nba without having a riot of the fans, a combination of them could be very effective

Hard cap isn't going to happen - we just had a new CBA passed.

Compensatory picks would be an incredible idea. Imagine if you lost a 2nd rounder if you signed another team's player to a max contract. Seems fair and better than nothing for that team losing the player.

The playoff series format has to be re-done and this idea is perfect. Well done.

C_Mund
07-09-2012, 01:41 PM
Hard cap

Compensatory picks for losing FAs to max deals

Changing playoff series to leave less rest and increase role of bench and depth


These are all ways to increase parity in the nba without having a riot of the fans, a combination of them could be very effective

Exactly. A hard cap would spread the talent out. Even if we had four less teams, the all-stars from those teams would eventually join a big market because of the CBA structure. Like if they got rid of the Wolves (NO hate, just an example), Love would maybe go to Phoenix, and if they're not contending he'd end up on LA or New York or Miami in a couple years, then Phoenix would suck again. If nobody wants to earn a ring the old fashioned way we'd end up paring the teams down until every team's entire starting lineup is a potential all-star.

THERE'S WAY TOO MANY AMAZING BBALL PLAYERS IN THE WORLD TO HAVE ONLY FOUR OR FIVE GOOD TEAMS IN THE NBA

jayjay33
07-09-2012, 01:45 PM
Grid the guys who want a hard cap....can you have a hard cap and guaranteed contracts? It really seams like a recipe for disaster.

The best thing would be ( and I wouldn't want this) a franchise tag that last for 2 years not 1. with the second year a team option. So if you franchise a guy he has to play with his teams for two more year. But without sercurity. That would taking a big chance.

nyknicks141
07-09-2012, 01:46 PM
Exactly. A hard cap would spread the talent out. Even if we had four less teams, the all-stars from those teams would eventually join a big market because of the CBA structure. Like if they got rid of the Wolves (NO hate, just an example), Love would maybe go to Phoenix, and if they're not contending he'd end up on LA or New York or Miami in a couple years, then Phoenix would suck again. If nobody wants to earn a ring the old fashioned way we'd end up paring the teams down until every team's entire starting lineup is a potential all-star.

THERE'S WAY TOO MANY AMAZING BBALL PLAYERS IN THE WORLD TO HAVE ONLY FOUR OR FIVE GOOD TEAMS IN THE NBA

And one of those good teams is OKC, and we all agree on this. OKC is a small market and they got better through good drafts. They drafted Westbrook, Durant, and Harden. Yes it took them a couple of years but that's how you can become a significant franchise. Any team can do this.

KingsPhillies
07-09-2012, 01:46 PM
Hard cap

Compensatory picks for losing FAs to max deals

Changing playoff series to leave less rest and increase role of bench and depth


These are all ways to increase parity in the nba without having a riot of the fans, a combination of them could be very effective


:nod: This is the most logical post in the thread. Well done, sir.

Dade County
07-09-2012, 01:46 PM
Hard cap isn't going to happen - we just had a new CBA passed.

Compensatory picks would be an incredible idea. Imagine if you lost a 2nd rounder if you signed another team's player to a max contract. Seems fair and better than nothing for that team losing the player.

The playoff series format has to be re-done and this idea is perfect. Well done.

Redone how? what are you going to add more teams? I just heard the same thing on the radio yesterday... ( they sad the league is watered down and they might just start adding more teams to the playoffs, so these franchisees can make more money because of the extra games ).

man just get rid of two teams or start the league over ... A big reset lmao... I would stop watching if they took Wade and Co off the HEAT ( I know :( don't judge me ) .

mudvayne387
07-09-2012, 01:47 PM
oh, maybe league should have gotten rid of Knicks while they were sucking during the 00s for 10 years, or the bulls after jordan and their long string or sucking.

or whatever.

OP.

SAN ANTONIO

you can compete wherever you are if you are intellignet.

Your case is invalid.

Yea, because when the Knicks sucked they weren't bringing in any money for the NBA right ?

If a team like the Bobcats ranked #4 in attendance during last years abysmal season, then I wouldn't have mentioned them.

I think you are missing the point ...

Some cities just can't support a major sports franchise.

Look at the Tampa Bay Rays ...

Winning isn't everything

Dade County
07-09-2012, 01:50 PM
Grid the guys who want a hard cap....can you have a hard cap and guaranteed contracts? It really seams like a recipe for disaster.

The best thing would be ( and I wouldn't want this) a franchise tag that last for 2 years not 1. with the second year a team option. So if you franchise a guy he has to play with his teams for two more year. But without sercurity. That would taking a big chance.

No man...

Thats just wrong.

When the contract is up, it's up... Trade the player before his contract is over with, or try to put good enough pieces around him so he wants to stay.

StarvingKnick22
07-09-2012, 01:51 PM
oh, maybe league should have gotten rid of Knicks while they were sucking during the 00s for 10 years, or the bulls after jordan and their long string or sucking.

or whatever.

OP.

SAN ANTONIO

you can compete wherever you are if you are intellignet.

Your case is invalid.
the knicks are the richest franchise, without the Knicks there would be no NBA. try again bra

Lakers + Giants
07-09-2012, 01:53 PM
the knicks are the richest franchise, without the Knicks there would be no NBA. try again bra

Lakers surpassed knicks with the TWC 3 billion dollar deal. The NBA doesn't need the knicks tbh . . not saying to get rid of the knicks, but "without the knicks there would be no NBA" is laughable.

BigBlueCrew
07-09-2012, 01:54 PM
the knicks are the richest franchise, without the Knicks there would be no NBA. try again bra

I think the Lakers are the richest franchise. The Knicks maybe 2nd.

C_Mund
07-09-2012, 01:57 PM
And one of those good teams is OKC, and we all agree on this. OKC is a small market and they got better through good drafts. They drafted Westbrook, Durant, and Harden. Yes it took them a couple of years but that's how you can become a significant franchise. Any team can do this.

I apologize, but this is such a cop out. No, "any team" cannot draft Durant. If there was a Durant coming out every year then disparity of talent wouldn't be an issue. Even if most teams did get somebody like him, the chances are that he would carry them out of the lottery into a place where they didn't have a shot at a top-5 pick for the next two straight years. OKC drafted very well but they also had the stars align.

One or two examples over the course of a decade doesn't really make for a good argument, because there's about 20 teams every year that are stuck in limbo and the same 5 teams compete all the time. That leaves about five teams at any given time that are able to play with the big boys until their fifteen minutes are up, and their players disperse to big markets.

Hellcrooner
07-09-2012, 02:07 PM
Yea, because when the Knicks sucked they weren't bringing in any money for the NBA right ?

If a team like the Bobcats ranked #4 in attendance during last years abysmal season, then I wouldn't have mentioned them.

I think you are missing the point ...

Some cities just can't support a major sports franchise.

Look at the Tampa Bay Rays ...

Winning isn't everything

All of the whopping 100.000 residents at Green Bay care to disagree.

mudvayne387
07-09-2012, 02:10 PM
All of the whopping 100.000 residents at Green Bay care to disagree.

Alright, I'm done. Time after time, you miss the point. It has nothing to do with population. Go ahead and continue to make your pointless comments as long as they help you sleep at night ...

Hellcrooner
07-09-2012, 02:16 PM
You knwo whats funny?

Hard caps and etc wont help.


Know what would help?

Get rid of Ncaa(integrate the teams in the new order), let the teams ahve younger divisions and Bring up Local kids ( kids under 18 HAVE to play for a team in their area, cant relocate to other places) since they are 8, they will be more loyal to the team, ITS GRANTED.

Get rid of Draft, and trade player for player, instead LET MONEY RUN.
Knicks want Lebron that has been raised trough Cavs young Ranks? whats his worht, ? 100 million dollars, ok, pay the cavs 100 million dollars to get his serives
1 Cavs no longer have Loses because they cashed in the player they developed
2 cavs have the money to pursue and pay other players to make up for the loss.

Obviously no salary limit, do you think if cavs would have had the option to pay lebron as much as he wanted he would ahve left? Nope, specially because with FRee Market his owner WOULD HAVE INDEED been able to put a team around him.

And last but not least.

VERTICAL divisions, every city in america have 1 or 2 nba teams, separated vertically in divisions of say 20 teams, just like european leagues have.

You dont want to spend much, you can have your team in third division.
Of course divisions with PROMOTION and RELEGATIOn, goodbye tanking!!!!!!!!!!!

Spacolie716
07-09-2012, 02:17 PM
oh, maybe league should have gotten rid of Knicks while they were sucking during the 00s for 10 years, or the bulls after jordan and their long string or sucking.

or whatever.

OP.

SAN ANTONIO

you can compete wherever you are if you are intellignet.

Your case is invalid.

Exactly.

xxplayerxx23
07-09-2012, 02:18 PM
I dont get the joke?

RenegadeRiot36
07-09-2012, 02:18 PM
Thank You...

They need to get rid of 4 but they will probably get rid of 2 only... The league needs it, and the only way they can make all these other franchisees better, is just start over and change the rules so that their is only two all star on any given team. ( yes I know what happens if a player on your team because an all star..smh... I don't know how fans expect things to change), these stars are going to play togethr, so they are not shut out by the HEAT and Big markets teams...

HEAT & OKC are two small markets fighting for the little guys :)

I really hope youre kidding

Hellcrooner
07-09-2012, 02:19 PM
Alright, I'm done. Time after time, you miss the point. It has nothing to do with population. Go ahead and continue to make your pointless comments as long as they help you sleep at night ...

If Green bay can support a franchise ( and go figure a succesfull one) any city in the U.S can.
But you have to work hard to make it happen.
Its as simple as that.

A good begining could be, being wise, and if you detect you drafted a superstar that wont want to resign there trade him way ahead of time for a kings ransom and thus have a competitive team that attracts people, isntead of waiting for last minute when player has leverage.

CityofTreez
07-09-2012, 02:20 PM
The NBA is just a joke nowadays, and the fans are falling with it, especially the OP.

Fans are glued in on players building super teams, players crying about demanded trades, and where they will not go. Fans have seen this, and see those teams win, and also tune out the lower market teams. Those lower market teams struggle, but give the NBA the ability to root for underdogs from time to time.

Now, owners are moving franchises and are creating super teams. Fans see this and could care less about lower markets. It's now gotten to the point where fans want those teams that can't do these moves to be eliminated. The OP and his question is a direct example of this.

They don't remember what old NBA was like, and now want these losing teams to be exonerated. Pathetic!!!

dodgersuck
07-09-2012, 02:21 PM
they need to stop players from creating "big three's". Small market teams have zero chance of competing unless they hit on multiple lottery picks in a row (OKC)

chitownredbulls
07-09-2012, 02:21 PM
This thread is pathetic. It doesn't matter how big of a market or who wants to go where. It's all about the fan base in the cities. It's about hope. It's about having something to root for. It's sports. Guys will get old. Teams will be relevant for a while and then become irrelevant. It's the way of life. Getting rid of teams, and I know you feel that way because your team is probably one of the teams that are actually "Good" now, doesn't solve a thing. Guaranteed, your team will suck in 5 years and those small market teams that you mentioned to get rid of, will be good. Then how would you feel if the fans of those teams said, "hey, lets get rid of the Knicks, Bulls, Lakers, etc...."..? EXACTLY......Every sports will have bottom feeders but f*@k it...it's what makes sports exciting........

majmarcus
07-09-2012, 02:25 PM
Its not the teams. Its the minds or lack thereof behind the operation. You can have a championship contending team on the court, field or whatever & the wrong coach can screw it all up.

People make such a big deal about player x being drafted #1. But noone acknowledges the team that chose them. Sam bowie was drafted ahead of Jordan. Does that mean its Sam's fault? Absolutely not! Dude was a bust!!! But blame the organization that drafted him.

Gm's are responsible for accumulating the talent & finding the proper coach to get the most out of that talent. So its not all about marketing. How da h3ll do u market 0-82 or 0-16 or 0-160???? You cant!!!! Get the right minds in management...youll see a difference & those teams would become relevant(again).

Joker117
07-09-2012, 02:25 PM
I would agree but maybe the should decide this .. Either add more or lose some.. Neithere hard or easy depending what teams like delete clippers ( relax just an example or the nets). There's already 2 other teams to cheer for then ... Ppl will move on ..

But more revenue comes from having more owners , teams ect and creates more fans but some teams have no talent despite who coaches them and ect...


I think with MORE team yes more we'd get rid of these super teams and go back to the melo vs lbj or dwade vs Kobe instead of almost 6 stars in 1 game and none in another game like bobcats v cavs although they have decent players. If the Knicks v celtics and heat v thunder is on those other games will. Catch more eyes

Melo , stat , TC , shump and Kidd. ( names/stars/future) v rondo , pp , kg, green and others ( up and comers) ... That means you'll also see more of say shumpert and green instead of guys like ..

Tyreke Evans , Kylie Irving ...even though they're solid players you don't see them bc no1 watches the games often enough for them to become big names sadly ...

lavell12
07-09-2012, 02:26 PM
Nobody mentions the Wizards b/c they are from a big market but they should be one of the first to go. I'd dump the Wizards, Bucks, Kings and Bobcats.

nyknicks141
07-09-2012, 02:26 PM
I apologize, but this is such a cop out. No, "any team" cannot draft Durant. If there was a Durant coming out every year then disparity of talent wouldn't be an issue. Even if most teams did get somebody like him, the chances are that he would carry them out of the lottery into a place where they didn't have a shot at a top-5 pick for the next two straight years. OKC drafted very well but they also had the stars align.

One or two examples over the course of a decade doesn't really make for a good argument, because there's about 20 teams every year that are stuck in limbo and the same 5 teams compete all the time. That leaves about five teams at any given time that are able to play with the big boys until their fifteen minutes are up, and their players disperse to big markets.

You're right, of course there isn't going to be great talent coming out of every draft but just removing teams from the NBA is not a valid solution. There's always going to be bad teams in the NBA but they at least need an opportunity to better themselves. Who's to say these teams won't get better in the near future? NO is another example. They looked to be in trouble after the departure of Chris Paul but here they are signing some good pieces to aide their 2 new stars (Rivers and Davis) in taking that team places. And while we can't simply assume that they will turn out to be good players, there's always the chance especially if one of those guys is the number one pick. The bucks are another example. Their starting lineup mostly came from the Draft. It took a couple of years but they're a decent team now in position to make a run with the addition of maybe one or two pieces. They gave many teams a hard time last year, who knows where they will go.



P.S: I understand this might be somewhat stretching here but I'm trying to look at it from the opposite point of view instead.

Joker117
07-09-2012, 02:29 PM
they need to stop players from creating "big three's". Small market teams have zero chance of competing unless they hit on multiple lottery picks in a row (OKC)

Or get a steal in Trade but yah it's tough , but I feel like they need to start either making more super teams or thin out and add more teams ..

Every1 looks to the nfl besides MLB but nfl has a different setting anyway .. Over 22 players every Sunday per team at different times get a chance to shine you watch the giants for Eli and then you see Cruz ... Now you have more house hold names ..

Nba. Should try to make every game more of an event but with a long season it's impossible or well hard and then the nba has poor broadcasting , poor ratings for some teams ..they need more pub...

Dade County
07-09-2012, 02:29 PM
You knwo whats funny?

Hard caps and etc wont help.


Know what would help?

Get rid of Ncaa(integrate the teams in the new order), let the teams ahve younger divisions and Bring up Local kids ( kids under 18 HAVE to play for a team in their area, cant relocate to other places) since they are 8, they will be more loyal to the team, ITS GRANTED.

Get rid of Draft, and trade player for player, instead LET MONEY RUN.
Knicks want Lebron that has been raised trough Cavs young Ranks? whats his worht, ? 100 million dollars, ok, pay the cavs 100 million dollars to get his serives
1 Cavs no longer have Loses because they cashed in the player they developed
2 cavs have the money to pursue and pay other players to make up for the loss.

Obviously no salary limit, do you think if cavs would have had the option to pay lebron as much as he wanted he would ahve left? Nope, specially because with FRee Market his owner WOULD HAVE INDEED been able to put a team around him.

And last but not least.

VERTICAL divisions, every city in america have 1 or 2 nba teams, separated vertically in divisions of say 20 teams, just like european leagues have.

You dont want to spend much, you can have your team in third division.
Of course divisions with PROMOTION and RELEGATIOn, goodbye tanking!!!!!!!!!!!

This is not europe ... psycho ... lol sorry, I am just upset at myself for reading your entire post.... my bad.

JLynn943
07-09-2012, 02:31 PM
I question if there really even is a talent disparity outside of a team like Charlotte. There's only ever going to be so many superstars at a time, so only so many teams will have superstars. What makes now different than 20 years ago? The only things I can figure is the exorbitant contracts and player culture (wanting to be in bigger markets, desire to team up in those places to make those teams competitive).

Hard cap is probably the only way to curb that. When the money-hungry players have to take severe pay cuts to play together, the league will be equalized because they won't be willing to do it.

chitownredbulls
07-09-2012, 02:31 PM
One more thing. Give the GM's a break. In the draft lottery, it's really a hit or miss. Unless it's a Derrick Rose, Dwight type of player. Some of the best players in the league didn't go number 1. When you are expected to pick number 1 you are expecting to take the best player available. For example, Greg Oden or Kevin Durant?...Every team has a front office. Trying to stay on top of your team and managing everything I believe would be pretty hard. Sometimes things will just click and sometimes things will not click.

Dade County
07-09-2012, 02:36 PM
I really hope youre kidding

First off, i would like to start off with this :laugh2:

Help me understand where I went wrong... All I said was Miami & OKC are fighting for the little guys, are you going to tell me that Miami is a major/big market?

So when tim hardaway, thunder dan,pj brown, Askins, leonard and morning was on the HEAT,was anyone calling them a mid market.

C_Mund
07-09-2012, 02:39 PM
This thread is pathetic. It doesn't matter how big of a market or who wants to go where. It's all about the fan base in the cities. It's about hope. It's about having something to root for. It's sports. Guys will get old. Teams will be relevant for a while and then become irrelevant. It's the way of life. Getting rid of teams, and I know you feel that way because your team is probably one of the teams that are actually "Good" now, doesn't solve a thing. Guaranteed, your team will suck in 5 years and those small market teams that you mentioned to get rid of, will be good. Then how would you feel if the fans of those teams said, "hey, lets get rid of the Knicks, Bulls, Lakers, etc...."..? EXACTLY......Every sports will have bottom feeders but f*@k it...it's what makes sports exciting........

Honestly I appreciate your opinion and I'd be happy as a clam if it worked that way, but you're also coming from a place that's won multiple NBA championships, an NHL trophy, a World Series and competed at a high level in the NFL over the last 2 decades. It's just as easy for you to say "there, there...." as it is for the OP to say "deal with it," ya know? No offense intended. It's just not as much fun watching a team that perennially blows goats.
There are certain places that will never have a taste of the good life based on the current system. I mean it's not like it's very possible at the moment but I'd even support 'Crooner's free market system. It's obviously worked in more markets and on multiple platforms, but it just won't happen in our lifetime.

King41
07-09-2012, 02:41 PM
what will happen with the players? i mean kill 5 teams means you have 75 player to share

Hellcrooner
07-09-2012, 02:43 PM
some nice data.

the Mavs, on the early 90s had a 12-70 season folowed by a 15 win one ( or something or the like) they spent the rest of the decade in the lottery with awfull teams ands records.
while the bulls , blazers, sonics, jazz, had superteams, and you had big threes of barkley, hakeem and clyde for example
People like the OP would have vowed to eliminate them.

guess what eventually they turned it up and became a powerhouse durign the next decade, and eventually won a ring, and they didnt need a player in the mold of the kobes, shaqs, lebrons or durants to do so.
O btw they actually BEAT the big threes of lakers, thunder and heat in the way to the ring.

so, calm the **** , there is no need to cut anything.

tp13baby
07-09-2012, 02:47 PM
This is stupid. It honestly takes a few good drafts to get there. OKC did it without buying anyone.

And yeah lets cut facility jobs that normal citizens have. Think of it from a business economic standpoint. :facepalm:

JLynn943
07-09-2012, 02:49 PM
some nice data.

the Mavs, on the early 90s had a 12-70 season folowed by a 15 win one ( or something or the like) they spent the rest of the decade in the lottery with awfull teams ands records.
while the bulls , blazers, sonics, jazz, had superteams, and you had big threes of barkley, hakeem and clyde for example
People like the OP would have vowed to eliminate them.

guess what eventually they turned it up and became a powerhouse durign the next decade, and eventually won a ring, and they didnt need a player in the mold of the kobes, shaqs, lebrons or durants to do so.
O btw they actually BEAT the big threes of lakers, thunder and heat in the way to the ring.

so, calm the **** , there is no need to cut anything.

Exactly. Everything moves in cycles, and there are always bottom-feeders. With the nature of the NBA and the draft, it can take a while to get back into contention, but it happens. A couple of years ago OKC/Seattle would have been considered as a team to be cut, and now no one would even think about it.

Ty Fast
07-09-2012, 02:58 PM
They need to get rid of teams that aren't

Lakers
Heat
Knicks

Possibly
Clippers
Nets
Bulls
OKC

because those are the only teams anyone is gonna go to

okc and the bulls??? what??? if your gonna get rid of teams start with the bobcats and hornets

Ty Fast
07-09-2012, 02:59 PM
okc has a great fan base. when the hornets played there and they were still a crappy team lots of fans still showed up.

Tom Stone
07-09-2012, 03:19 PM
you are not a true fan of the league........Anyone who wants to see any team removed is a fool........i think we should add a couple teams actually.

Vinylman
07-09-2012, 03:41 PM
I question if there really even is a talent disparity outside of a team like Charlotte. There's only ever going to be so many superstars at a time, so only so many teams will have superstars. What makes now different than 20 years ago? The only things I can figure is the exorbitant contracts and player culture (wanting to be in bigger markets, desire to team up in those places to make those teams competitive).

Hard cap is probably the only way to curb that. When the money-hungry players have to take severe pay cuts to play together, the league will be equalized because they won't be willing to do it.

bolded... the difference is 4 more teams...

i have been a proponent of contraction for a long time. Unfortunately it won't happen... especially in light of how easy it would have been to CONTRACT New Orleans...

plan on seeing a continuing massive disparity in talent levels between teams

daboywonder2002
07-09-2012, 03:42 PM
so people who live in these smaller market cities, what are we supposed to do for fun?? its not like the timberwolves aren't selling tickets.

Vinylman
07-09-2012, 03:45 PM
some nice data.

the Mavs, on the early 90s had a 12-70 season folowed by a 15 win one ( or something or the like) they spent the rest of the decade in the lottery with awfull teams ands records.
while the bulls , blazers, sonics, jazz, had superteams, and you had big threes of barkley, hakeem and clyde for example
People like the OP would have vowed to eliminate them.

guess what eventually they turned it up and became a powerhouse durign the next decade, and eventually won a ring, and they didnt need a player in the mold of the kobes, shaqs, lebrons or durants to do so.
O btw they actually BEAT the big threes of lakers, thunder and heat in the way to the ring.

so, calm the **** , there is no need to cut anything.

leave it to crooner to use an outlyer example as a Norm... :rolleyes:

hey, might want to do some research... they have an owner who doesn't give a **** about the cap and had ONE OF THE HIGHEST ALL TIME PAYROLLS WHEN THEY WON...

that is a gteat model for small market teams :facepalm:

HoodedSB
07-09-2012, 03:48 PM
Make it like soccer in europe and have the 4 worst teams compete in a round-robin tourney, and the worst team gets booted to the d-league! Yeah!

But really, the league needs to be more selective about who they allow to purchase teams, if parity is a goal.

HrtHustleNMscle
07-09-2012, 03:56 PM
oh, maybe league should have gotten rid of Knicks while they were sucking during the 00s for 10 years, or the bulls after jordan and their long string or sucking.

or whatever.

OP.

SAN ANTONIO

you can compete wherever you are if you are intellignet.

Your case is invalid.

You are going to compare the Knicks and Bulls (Who have a collective 8 titles to the Cavs, Wolves, Kings, Bucks, Bobcats who have none? That is comical, anything you say after this in this particular thread is invalid. Those 2 teams have more fans than all the other teams listed combined.

HrtHustleNMscle
07-09-2012, 03:59 PM
some nice data.

the Mavs, on the early 90s had a 12-70 season folowed by a 15 win one ( or something or the like) they spent the rest of the decade in the lottery with awfull teams ands records.
while the bulls , blazers, sonics, jazz, had superteams, and you had big threes of barkley, hakeem and clyde for example
People like the OP would have vowed to eliminate them.

guess what eventually they turned it up and became a powerhouse durign the next decade, and eventually won a ring, and they didnt need a player in the mold of the kobes, shaqs, lebrons or durants to do so.
O btw they actually BEAT the big threes of lakers, thunder and heat in the way to the ring.

so, calm the **** , there is no need to cut anything.

Ok, Dallas is the 4th largest city in America and a pretty awesome one at that. This is a terrible example to use as an argument for what the OP is talking about. He said that people don't want to re-sign or go to cities that aren't major markets, which Dallas absolutely is. With the exception of OKC, who will probably lose Hardin and possibly Westbrook, small market teams are getting crushed. Again, you're argument is invalid because it's not what the OP was saying.

HrtHustleNMscle
07-09-2012, 04:02 PM
so people who live in these smaller market cities, what are we supposed to do for fun?? its not like the timberwolves aren't selling tickets.

Move, people do it all the time.

Lo Porto
07-09-2012, 04:09 PM
Redone how? what are you going to add more teams? I just heard the same thing on the radio yesterday... ( they sad the league is watered down and they might just start adding more teams to the playoffs, so these franchisees can make more money because of the extra games ).

man just get rid of two teams or start the league over ... A big reset lmao... I would stop watching if they took Wade and Co off the HEAT ( I know :( don't judge me ) .

The playoffs are too drawn out. All of these "super teams" are top heavy with stars who are in their prime or past it. Look at LA with Kobe, Nash and Gasol all past their prime. NY has Amare and Chandler who are past their prime. Miami has Wade and Bosh who are in the prime but for how much longer?

If playoff games were played every other day, these "super teams" would have a bigger problem with teams built around depth and youth. It would create more parody in the league.

3 star teams with questionable depth would be tested more if the playoffs were set up in a more consistent manner. The NBA needs to make teams play every other day no matter what. Now that the new CBA is in place, it's the only way for the NBA to truly create "parody" in the league and create a more level playing field.

Cfrey
07-09-2012, 04:09 PM
The fact that you even mentioned the timberwolves shows your lack of knowledge in a lot of different aspects. Minnesota has a great fan base as evidenced by the years with KG. We currently are a year away from making the playoffs for the first time in awhile but just like many sports franchises, we had a down period as it is tough to rebuild after losing one of the greatest PFs of all time.

Hellcrooner
07-09-2012, 04:13 PM
You are going to compare the Knicks and Bulls (Who have a collective 8 titles to the Cavs, Wolves, Kings, Bucks, Bobcats who have none? That is comical, anything you say after this in this particular thread is invalid. Those 2 teams have more fans than all the other teams listed combined.Next time check your facts before posting and looking like an ignorant person.

JLynn943
07-09-2012, 04:50 PM
Next time check your facts before posting and looking like an ignorant person.

Why would people do that? This is the NBA forum :p

JohnnyOutcast
07-09-2012, 05:02 PM
The OP is right. Small markets like OKC, Indiana, and San Antonio will never be able to compete in the league today. We should just get rid of them..................OH wait

Arch Stanton
07-09-2012, 05:07 PM
I just think if people, including the OP, are wishing to cut 5-6 teams from the NBA then they have to be willing to accept one of the cuts to be their favorite team. Otherwise it is a complete biased opinion. And it's not for the betterment of the NBA. It's for the betterment of their team.

LA_Raiders
07-09-2012, 05:08 PM
Agree. NBA is one sided, big markets get the best players, the "stars", the $ makers and win most of the time... Small markets just sell beer at the games...

Blitzbolt
07-09-2012, 05:08 PM
So dumb

All you need is a salary cap.

Hellcrooner
07-09-2012, 05:13 PM
So dumb

All you need is a salary cap.

On teh contrary, a salary caps only gets that everysummer there are just 3 or 4 teams thatn can have you, and of course if you are a great player there might be teams that cut salary the previous years in order to get you.


On a FREE MARKET.

You have 30 teams bidding for you.

Guess what if Bucks are offering you double than Lakers th eplayer will go to bucks 9 times out of 10.

And of course if you are a Lebron it will be worth for the bucks paying you double , theyll get it back with marketing income and tickets and etc.

ThornMo
07-09-2012, 05:24 PM
The Charlotte Bobcats are going to change their name back to the Hornets after next year. I can't explain the phenomenon in Charlotte after the name change, but it will put fans back in the seats and Charlotte will be relevant again. They won't be subtracted from the league.

NYKalltheway
07-09-2012, 05:28 PM
vertical divisions is the answer

Bigbadmoffo
07-09-2012, 05:33 PM
Lol Okc wad one of those teams which makes what you said rubbish. Okc is not desirable but they built a great team. This is no knock on there city it's just not considered a big market.

chitownredbulls
07-09-2012, 05:38 PM
Honestly I appreciate your opinion and I'd be happy as a clam if it worked that way, but you're also coming from a place that's won multiple NBA championships, an NHL trophy, a World Series and competed at a high level in the NFL over the last 2 decades. It's just as easy for you to say "there, there...." as it is for the OP to say "deal with it," ya know? No offense intended. It's just not as much fun watching a team that perennially blows goats.
There are certain places that will never have a taste of the good life based on the current system. I mean it's not like it's very possible at the moment but I'd even support 'Crooner's free market system. It's obviously worked in more markets and on multiple platforms, but it just won't happen in our lifetime.

Sorry bud..I root for the Sacramento Kings. I've seen them at their best and at their worst. But it's my pride. I love my team. I will root for them no matter what. I'm not like a lot of these bandwagon fans. (not saying you guys are, I just know a lot of people that are). It just makes it sooooooo much better when you root for your team at its lowest and see them rise to their highest.

chitownredbulls
07-09-2012, 05:39 PM
some nice data.

The mavs, on the early 90s had a 12-70 season folowed by a 15 win one ( or something or the like) they spent the rest of the decade in the lottery with awfull teams ands records.
While the bulls , blazers, sonics, jazz, had superteams, and you had big threes of barkley, hakeem and clyde for example
people like the op would have vowed to eliminate them.

Guess what eventually they turned it up and became a powerhouse durign the next decade, and eventually won a ring, and they didnt need a player in the mold of the kobes, shaqs, lebrons or durants to do so.
O btw they actually beat the big threes of lakers, thunder and heat in the way to the ring.

So, calm the **** , there is no need to cut anything.


this^

chitownredbulls
07-09-2012, 05:40 PM
you are not a true fan of the league........Anyone who wants to see any team removed is a fool........i think we should add a couple teams actually.

This too^

ichitownclowni
07-09-2012, 05:43 PM
They need to get rid of teams that aren't

Lakers
Heat
Knicks

Possibly
Clippers
Nets
Bulls
OKC

because those are the only teams anyone is gonna go to

Yep because everyone goes to the Bulls

chitownredbulls
07-09-2012, 05:43 PM
You are going to compare the Knicks and Bulls (Who have a collective 8 titles to the Cavs, Wolves, Kings, Bucks, Bobcats who have none? That is comical, anything you say after this in this particular thread is invalid. Those 2 teams have more fans than all the other teams listed combined.

You are Hysterical....LOL....so ignorant..those 2 teams have more fans than all the teams mentioned combined? WOW...you really know your basketball...:clap:

fadedmario
07-09-2012, 05:43 PM
These threads never end well because they hurt people's feelings.

Don't see why the mods even allow them.

akagiredsuns
07-09-2012, 05:46 PM
Glad to see people here aren't taking this thread as baiting because it is not. OP makes a good point. Though the Bucks at least are improving and gave Miami some fits last year. But other teams listed there makes sense. I said that this super team crap would be bad for the NBA. And though Miami won it all, which they did play their butts off for in the Finals (no one is going to argue that) now the mindset is superstars teaming up together.

The Nets will be the next super team if they have D12 with JJ and D-Will and the Clips are getting stronger as well. There will only be a certain amount of elite teams in the league. Gaughan pointed out 7. There will be a lot of second tier teams and then the lowly cream puffs listed at the start of the thread.

Parody makes a sport fun to watch. The NFL has parody, the NHL has parody, baseball this year at least is fairly balanced, but the NBA you have a good idea who's going to be there in the end. Stern has caused irreparable damage to the sport. The owners are no different then before the lockout overpaying players. So I think phasing out a few teams is a good idea. They will never be able to compete with the elites.

Especially when big markets don't care about luxury tax despite the new CBA making it double + 5 (Ex. Heat are $20M over and have to pay $45M in tax). It would be nice to see a downsizing. I'm all for it.

rocket
07-09-2012, 05:51 PM
The Cavs?

No

Beantownsboss
07-09-2012, 05:52 PM
You are just plain old dumb, all those teams are on the rise, maybe with the exception of the Bobcats. This will never happen IMO.

Bramaca
07-09-2012, 05:52 PM
To the OP, cutting 6 teams will do nothing to really improve the level of play or make bottom teams more competitive. All it will do is piss off a lot of markets which will hurt the game overall and it will increase the salary cap putting even more strain on the 8-10 remaining small market teams making it even harder for them to compete.

The league is actually less watered down now then they have been since the 60's.


You knwo whats funny?

Hard caps and etc wont help.


Know what would help?

Get rid of Ncaa(integrate the teams in the new order), let the teams ahve younger divisions and Bring up Local kids ( kids under 18 HAVE to play for a team in their area, cant relocate to other places) since they are 8, they will be more loyal to the team, ITS GRANTED.

Get rid of Draft, and trade player for player, instead LET MONEY RUN.
Knicks want Lebron that has been raised trough Cavs young Ranks? whats his worht, ? 100 million dollars, ok, pay the cavs 100 million dollars to get his serives
1 Cavs no longer have Loses because they cashed in the player they developed
2 cavs have the money to pursue and pay other players to make up for the loss.

Obviously no salary limit, do you think if cavs would have had the option to pay lebron as much as he wanted he would ahve left? Nope, specially because with FRee Market his owner WOULD HAVE INDEED been able to put a team around him.

And last but not least.

VERTICAL divisions, every city in america have 1 or 2 nba teams, separated vertically in divisions of say 20 teams, just like european leagues have.

You dont want to spend much, you can have your team in third division.
Of course divisions with PROMOTION and RELEGATIOn, goodbye tanking!!!!!!!!!!!

Don't really agree with getting rid of the draft and trades, creating a 'free market', or increasing the number of teams you are suggesting. Its too drastic of a change plus it saturates the market beyond what is realistically marketable.

I do agree that the NBA should go with a version of a vertical division and it sort of goes with the point by others of changing the playoff format. The reality is that the bottom 8 teams of the 16 that make the playoffs every year don't matter and aren't going to win anyways. Last time that a team that wasn't top 4 ranked even made the conference finals, 1999.

Add 2 teams and do two 16 team divisions with 8 east and 8 west in each one.

Division 1 - top 4 teams in each conferense (east and west) make playoffs. Bottom 8 teams are in the lottery for the top 8 picks. Theres a catch though.

Division 2 - like the top division same playoff format but the winner moves up to the next division. So the bottom team in the east and west in division 1 are waiting for the winner of these playoffs. East team wins they move up and get the lottery pick of the bottom east team who moves down.

More entertaining seasons, everyone is playing for something and there is little incentive to tank. Top level talent stays in the top 16 teams for the most part while bottom teams probably concentrate on making better overall ball teams.


If Green bay can support a franchise ( and go figure a succesfull one) any city in the U.S can.
But you have to work hard to make it happen.
Its as simple as that.

A good begining could be, being wise, and if you detect you drafted a superstar that wont want to resign there trade him way ahead of time for a kings ransom and thus have a competitive team that attracts people, isntead of waiting for last minute when player has leverage.

There are a lot of reasons why Green Bay has managed to support an NFL team and it isn't even close to realistic to expect all those factors to happen again for any other small market. There is a huge difference between markets, you should know this being from Spain where Madrid and Barcelona absolutely dominate and there is no realistic expectation that the other teams in Spain really have a chance.


On teh contrary, a salary caps only gets that everysummer there are just 3 or 4 teams thatn can have you, and of course if you are a great player there might be teams that cut salary the previous years in order to get you.


On a FREE MARKET.

You have 30 teams bidding for you.

Guess what if Bucks are offering you double than Lakers th eplayer will go to bucks 9 times out of 10.

And of course if you are a Lebron it will be worth for the bucks paying you double , theyll get it back with marketing income and tickets and etc.

The 'free market' has limitations and creates problems as well which is being discovered in the European leagues.

Mikeleafs
07-09-2012, 05:52 PM
There should be yearly conference realignment. One conference would include the "have" teams and the other with the "have nots". A "have" team has more than 1 and a "have not" team would have 1 or no all star players... Then the 2 finalists from each conference would compete for the championship:

Have conference:
Miami
New York
Brooklyn
Lakers
Clippers
Bulls
Okc
Dallas
Etc.

Have not conference:
Toronto
Detroit
Milwaukee
Cleveland
Philly
Charlotte
Etc.

What do you guys think? :D

JohnnyOutcast
07-09-2012, 05:54 PM
On teh contrary, a salary caps only gets that everysummer there are just 3 or 4 teams thatn can have you, and of course if you are a great player there might be teams that cut salary the previous years in order to get you.


On a FREE MARKET.

You have 30 teams bidding for you.

Guess what if Bucks are offering you double than Lakers the player will go to bucks 9 times out of 10.

And of course if you are a Lebron it will be worth for the bucks paying you double , theyll get it back with marketing income and tickets and etc.

^^This.

The best way to create parity is to get rid of "Max" contracts and let teams offer whatever they want to players. If teams are forced to offer an equal "max" value then players are going to make their choices based on factors like market size and what other players they can play with instead of money. The only way smaller markets can attract top tier talent is by offering more money, and under the current system they are restricted from doing so.

TopsyTurvy
07-09-2012, 06:00 PM
Contraction would only serve to help the international game. "Failing teams" were given a bailout with the new revenue sharing provisions in the CBA.

LongWayFromHome
07-09-2012, 06:02 PM
^^This.

The best way to create parity is to get rid of "Max" contracts and let teams offer whatever they want to players. If teams are forced to offer an equal "max" value then players are going to make their choices based on factors like market size and what other players they can play with instead of money. The only way smaller markets can attract top tier talent is by offering more money, and under the current system they are restricted from doing so.

I agree mostly with this. But they also can attract talent by having a good team too.

If I was a MLE guy like Ray Allen, I would totally consider OKC if they wanted me.

Also if there was no MAX then big market teams would be able to hand out contracts that small market teams can't even compete with.

Jazzgear
07-09-2012, 06:02 PM
First off, i would like to start off with this :laugh2:

Help me understand where I went wrong... All I said was Miami & OKC are fighting for the little guys, are you going to tell me that Miami is a major/big market?

So when tim hardaway, thunder dan,pj brown, Askins, leonard and morning was on the HEAT,was anyone calling them a mid market.

Miami Vice. Nuff said:D

C_Mund
07-09-2012, 06:04 PM
Sorry bud..I root for the Sacramento Kings. I've seen them at their best and at their worst. But it's my pride. I love my team. I will root for them no matter what. I'm not like a lot of these bandwagon fans. (not saying you guys are, I just know a lot of people that are). It just makes it sooooooo much better when you root for your team at its lowest and see them rise to their highest.

Cool man. I didn't mean to pigeonhole you, and I as well am definitely a fan of my team till the day I die. It's just tough to be part of a system where it feels like everything is literally working against you and there's no forseeable solution other than to strike gold in the lottery. Plus every time we make an acquisition I get excited and buy a jersey then they're gone within the year.... I got a wicked collection of outdated jerseys

IIISSKiLL
07-09-2012, 06:13 PM
[QUOTE=mudvayne387;22857366]Bucks
Bobcats
Kings
T-Wolves
Cavs

crap.

With the way things are going, the teams mentioned above will never be able to compete with LA,Miami,OKC, ETC....

QUOTE]

Why do you think OKC is a great city ? They made great choices with the draft thats why those guys are there not because OKC is this great place everyone wants to go to

Jazzgear
07-09-2012, 06:13 PM
There should be yearly conference realignment. One conference would include the "have" teams and the other with the "have nots". A "have" team has more than 1 and a "have not" team would have 1 or no all star players... Then the 2 finalists from each conference would compete for the championship:

Have conference:
Miami
New York
Brooklyn
Lakers
Clippers
Bulls
Okc
Dallas
Etc.

Have not conference:
Toronto
Detroit
Milwaukee
Cleveland
Philly
Charlotte
Etc.

What do you guys think? :D

Great, so now we've in essence eliminated the NBA Finals. Why watch after the Have's Conf. Finals?:facepalm:

daboywonder2002
07-09-2012, 06:14 PM
Move, people do it all the time.

uh its not that easy to just move. people have jobs and lives in their states.

D-Block21-Chito
07-09-2012, 06:16 PM
Ha-ha.. The real question is can you imagine living in a smaller town with a crap team every year? That would suck so bad... I can't imagine it...

RaiderLakersA's
07-09-2012, 06:18 PM
Don't be so sure that contraction equates to a competitive landscape. Even if you go back thirty or so years when there were less teams in the league, as far as champions go, there were still only a handful of franchises holding a bulk of the title banners. As with most aspects in life, mediocrity is the far more common endpoint in the NBA.

Mikeleafs
07-09-2012, 06:19 PM
Great, so now we've in essence eliminated the NBA Finals. Why watch after the Have's Conf. Finals?:facepalm:

I would just like to see these super teams beat up on each other all year long. :D

Iron24th
07-09-2012, 06:23 PM
Count me in.

There are too much teams,I mean 30,really?!

Where at least 5-8 teams were never and will never be relevant.

RaiderKid318
07-09-2012, 06:23 PM
Just need to re-up on salary caps and maybe number of players on a team.

fadedmario
07-09-2012, 06:24 PM
17 Boston Celtics 2007-08, 1985-86, 1983-84, 1980-81, 1975-76, 1973-74, 1968-69,
1967-68, 1965-66, 1964-65, 1963-64, 1962-63, 1961-62,
1960-61, 1959-60, 1958-59, 1956-57

16 Los Angeles Lakers 2009-10, 2008-09, 2001-02, 2000-01, 1999-00, 1987-88 , 1986-87,
1984-85, 1981-82, 1979-80, 1971-72
(as Los Angeles Lakers)
1953-54, 1952-53, 1951-52, 1949-50, 1948-49
(as Minneapolis Lakers)

6 Chicago Bulls 1997-98, 1996-97, 1995-96, 1992-93, 1991-92, 1990-91

4 San Antonio Spurs 2006-07, 2004-05, 2002-03, 1998-99

3 Detroit Pistons 2003-04, 1989-90, 1988-89

3 Golden State Warriors 1974-75 (as Golden State Warriors)
1955-56, 1946-47 (as Philadelphia Warriors)

3 Philadelphia 76ers 1982-83, 1966-67 (as Philadelphia 76ers)
1954-55 (as Syracuse Nationals)

2 Houston Rockets 1994-95, 1993-94

2 Miami Heat 2011-12, 2005-06

2 New York Knicks 1972-73, 1969-70

1 Atlanta Hawks 1957-58 (as St. Louis Hawks)

1 Baltimore Bullets
(defunct franchise) 1947-48

1 Dallas Mavericks 2010-11

1 Milwaukee Bucks 1970-71

1 Oklahoma City Thunder 1978-79 (as Seattle Supersonics)

1 Portland Trail Blazers 1976-77

1 Sacramento Kings 1950-51 (as Rochester Royals)

1 Washington Wizards 1977-78 (as Washington Bullets)


I noticed alot of people in this thread talking ****, are fans of teams not on this list.

If your favorite team has never won a title. Don't talk so much - so far your team has accomplished nothing in the history of the game.

knicksfan42
07-09-2012, 06:27 PM
The music industry needs to get rid of mudvayne.

fadedmario
07-09-2012, 06:36 PM
Only 5 teams in the NBA have 3 or more titles (from the same city) LA, Boston, Chicago, San Antonio, and Detroit.

sanjay_prick
07-09-2012, 06:43 PM
Start with adding a hard salary cap. And remove all that max contract crap.

I don't necessarily agree with it....but if you really want to get rid of teams, then go to a relegation system like the Premier League in the UK, with either the D-League or split the teams down in half and create a two leagues in the NBA.

For example, 16 teams in League A, 14 teams in League B. Top 8 in League A make it to the playoffs and fight for the championship. The bottom 2 teams in League A would be relegated to League B for the next season. The top 2 teams in League B would move up to League A. All teams in League B (not including the newly relegated teams from League A) would be in the draft lottery every year with weighted odds. League A teams will draft in the order that they finish.

It gives excitement to fans for bottom-feeding teams to see their team have the chance to move up from League B to League A and compete with the big boys. Essentially, that's the small market prize.

fadedmario
07-09-2012, 06:47 PM
Leave the league the way it is.

Mckphins
07-09-2012, 06:47 PM
They need to get rid of teams that aren't

Lakers
Heat
Knicks

Possibly
Clippers
Nets
Bulls
OKC

because those are the only teams anyone is gonna go to

This is ********. Teams like the thunder only got people tha would go there now because of who they have drafTed. In the future other teams have a chance to build a team like that, hence players wanting to go there. Same can be said for the clippers. They got to draft Blake, then cp wanted be traded there. Any of those teams your suggesting to cut can get lucky and be the next big thing. Last year everyone was writing off the hornets saying they need to go. Then the draft Davis and rivers, rid bad contracts and nice trades, now people think they'll be good. Labeling teams like you did is plain stupid

YungQ89
07-09-2012, 07:41 PM
The Charlotte Bobcats are going to change their name back to the Hornets after next year. I can't explain the phenomenon in Charlotte after the name change, but it will put fans back in the seats and Charlotte will be relevant again. They won't be subtracted from the league.

was this a serious post?

Shammyguy3
07-09-2012, 08:48 PM
I like the idea of contraction, but only one or two teams. No more than that. But, it's still not the best solution. Something much more like this makes sense to inhibit/hinder megateams from forming and help teams who draft well retain their players:

The league needs to make some further changes in the next CBA. These are my propositions:

1) Free Agent contracts signed with a team outside of the team that owns your bird-rights are limited to 3 years instead of 5 years. Along with that, the max contract will be further lowered to help prevent guys from leaving the teams that drafted them. Say the max for a bird-rights FA is 5/$100M, then the max for a Non-Bird Signing is only 3 years for $40,000,000 which equals 67% of the Bird-Rights max salary.

2) In order for you to obtain bird-rights, you must either be drafted by the team or be playing for that team for 100 games (more than 1 season, excluding the playoffs).

3) If you sign a player that is a Non-Bird Free Agent, the team for which you signed him from receives the next 2nd round pick that team has available.

4) Restricted Free Agency and Unrestricted Free Agency are somewhat morphed into one Free Agency Pool where there are Bird-Right Signings (BRS) and Non-Bird-Right Signings (NBRS). However, RFAs will still exist in the sense that if the player chooses to sign a Non-Bird Signing with another team, the original team who owns his Bird Rights (via draft or the 100+ game minimum) has the opportunity to match that offer.

Bruno
07-09-2012, 08:56 PM
oh, maybe league should have gotten rid of Knicks while they were sucking during the 00s for 10 years, or the bulls after jordan and their long string or sucking.

or whatever.

OP.

SAN ANTONIO

you can compete wherever you are if you are intellignet.

Your case is invalid.

as is your example. SA was extremely lucky. intelligence was secondary to their luck.

Bruno
07-09-2012, 08:56 PM
I support contraction.

SportsAndrew25
07-09-2012, 09:21 PM
Bucks
Bobcats
Kings
T-Wolves
Cavs

Maybe one more ?


The same goes for all of the other three major sports, but I fear the NBA is the worst of the bunch.

Spread some talent throughout the rest of the league while weeding out the crap.

With the way things are going, the teams mentioned above will never be able to compete with LA,Miami,OKC, ETC....

There is no desire for players to go there, and because they are not overwhelmingly desirable cities to live in, there never will be....

It may sound harsh, but you can either nip this issue in the butt now, or continue to string along fan bases until eventually they die a slow painful death....Dude you are just asking for the small market fans to get on your ****. This is an idea that not even be close to popular to them.

HrtHustleNMscle
07-10-2012, 05:40 AM
Next time check your facts before posting and looking like an ignorant person.

Pot meet kettle, the Kings have not won a title, nor was the team in Sacramento when they did it. They were the Rochester Royals which last I checked was not in Sacramento and weren't named the Kings. As for the Bucks, I was wrong on that but this is just you turning an argument like you did earlier, finding one example of all the teams listed that won a title in '71 and has been a joke ever since. I will say what I said earlier, not what the OP was talking about.

HrtHustleNMscle
07-10-2012, 05:43 AM
You are Hysterical....LOL....so ignorant..those 2 teams have more fans than all the teams mentioned combined? WOW...you really know your basketball...:clap:

No, it's simple math. You are combining 2 cities that have roughly 11 million people, I don't think you realize how many people that is. That and the fact that there are Bulls fans all over the world strictly because of MJ and Knicks fans because it's NY it's really not that hard to figure out. But hey, way to say something without actually saying something. No argument made, no numbers thrown out just insults and emoticons just the way PSD should be.

HrtHustleNMscle
07-10-2012, 05:47 AM
uh its not that easy to just move. people have jobs and lives in their states.

Then why complain about nothing to do there? People move based off that alone.

HrtHustleNMscle
07-10-2012, 05:57 AM
^^This.

The best way to create parity is to get rid of "Max" contracts and let teams offer whatever they want to players. If teams are forced to offer an equal "max" value then players are going to make their choices based on factors like market size and what other players they can play with instead of money. The only way smaller markets can attract top tier talent is by offering more money, and under the current system they are restricted from doing so.

Either way the big markets win, they make more money in other places and sell more tickets. What people aren't getting is that it's not that a market can't draft well and build something, but todays NBA has players wanting to go to bigger cities when their rookie contract is up because there are more lucrative deals to be made with shoe companies, clothing companies, fitness companies etc... Durant is the exception and I fear they will lose some players from that team. I love watching that OKC team and I am a Bulls fan. It's not that I don't want parity in the NBA, it's that I don't see it as being realistic. It's not like the NFL where there is ridiculous competition. There are only so many guys who are 6' 6" and above that are athletic enough to play this game at the NBA level. Simple fact is, there is not enough talent to choose from and all the good players are moving to play together at big markets pretty much everywhere other than Chicago from what I have seen. But Chicago still sells out every game and has a huge following, something you can't say for all the other teams listed. People will turn the games off or not watch strictly because it's not as interesting. I am not saying I like it like this, but this is what the NBA is today.

kombayn
07-10-2012, 06:17 AM
I think the NBA along with MLB & NHL should contract by 2 teams. I would contract the Milwaukee Bucks & Sacramento Kings from the NBA, as both don't have arena solutions. MLB I would suggest the A's and Rays, while with the NHL I would get rid of the Coyotes & Blue Jackets.

JordansBulls
07-10-2012, 08:29 AM
Only teams you remove are the ones who have bad attendance.

chi-townlove1
07-10-2012, 08:35 AM
Bucks
Bobcats
Kings
T-Wolves
Cavs

Maybe one more ?

:facepalm:

How about those teams learn how to draft???

Cavs, TWolves, & Kings have VERY bright futures and Cleveland has some damn good fans

Kyrie Irving will be box office/high profile after this year and maybe Dion Waiters

Kevin Love already is & they were on their way to the playoffs ntil Rubio, Pek, & Love got injuries

Kings have DMC, Evans, & Robinson who I think with the right coach can be VERY dangerous in the future & DMC will challenge Bynum as the second best center this year and maybe next year will pass him

The Bucks just never decide to blow it up & rebuild... They just stay constant which is 8-13 seed for the last 10 years

Bobcats were one of the best defensive teams at one point but chose to go another direction

The NBA needs to get rid of "Restricted" Free Agents, Find GM's who know how to draft, quit giving scrubs mega millions, & build a ****ing team

Couldn't have said it any better myself :clap:

nate2usmc
07-10-2012, 08:37 AM
Only teams you remove are the ones who have bad attendance.

This.

BKLYNpigeon
07-10-2012, 08:40 AM
yeah, but its doesnt matter. the League is making so much money, they want to add 2 more teams.

Heatcheck
07-10-2012, 09:32 AM
The answers on this site just showed everyone's age.
"Well, what about your team?" Genius, his team probably doesnt have problems attracting customers.

We're not talking about getting rid of bad teams (no **** teams cycle from good to bad and back) its the ones that have problems selling tickets (which coincidentally put a ****** product on the floor year after year).

No, they wouldnt have gotten rid of the knicks or bulls when they were crap because they still sold tickets all those years, THE WERE PROFITABLE.

Basically, get out of your feelings, no ones attacking your garbage *** team, its business he's talking.

BURAKOBE
07-10-2012, 09:49 AM
Look, you can not forget cause and effect on this.

just 4 years ago Lakers wouldn't go this hard after Dwight because the core they have would be more than enough to win championships. But now, it is not enough. You can not overcome a team that consists of wade- lbj - bosh- allen with this core. Miami did that because teams couldn't overcome a team consists of pierce-garnett-allen, they one upped that. Dwight was content with Magic until the big three of Miami happened. Now he knows he has zero chance of overcoming that in Orlando.

Until the NBA finds a way to stop these stars from teaming up, this is how it is gonna be. Depth is not that much important if you are that top heavy. If they can not find a solution, i think some teams would fold by themselves anyways.

nyKnicks126
07-10-2012, 09:52 AM
Expand the league overseas.. I get pissed when a team wins the NBA championship and everyone calls them the champions of the world.. NBA teams and fans shouldn't be punished.. Have the 30 teams and add 10 teams in Europe.. 40 game season wouldn't be too bad.

Heatcheck
07-10-2012, 09:59 AM
Expand the league overseas.. I get pissed when a team wins the NBA championship and everyone calls them the champions of the world.. NBA teams and fans shouldn't be punished.. Have the 30 teams and add 10 teams in Europe.. 40 game season wouldn't be too bad.

i dont know how that would work, flights to europe start at 8hrs. could you see a team making that flight everytime they had to play in paris or london? and god help those teams.

mlisica19
07-10-2012, 10:02 AM
I am a huge advocate to the Hard Cap Philosophy.

The current Soft Cap is full of BULL****. The S.Cap allows the rich to get richer and the poor to get poorer, creating a huge gap. For those who are not aware of what the Soft cap is... it sets a limit of maximum salary a team can reach and if they go over it they will have to pay extra fees to obtain that player. All they did last year was increase the luxury tax (the fees). But lets bring up the Knicks and Dolan for example and then lets bring up any of the bottom market teams...

Those bottom market teams already have a hard time reaching the max salary. Which is fine. But a guy like Dolan not only can reach the roof but his hardest decision is whether hes willing to spend a few extra bucks to keep players... Please, a few million is like 20 bucks for us.

Its an unfair advantage... rich get richer, poor get poorer.
The Draft could help in acquiring talent but that is if you only get the top 5... most of the time only top 3. Leaving the middle class teams stranded.

You can blame poor management, but I think if they install a Hard Cap with a lower max roof. It will spread the talent around the league or force teams to properly manage contracts and its players. It is fair.

Hockey put in the hard cap right after the lockout. Since then I would have to say all 30 NHL teams are more balanced. Their is a much more competitive season especially come the last weeks of the season. Where I feel in basketball there is a clear distinction half way thru the year where each team will be ending up


Teams do not need 3 SUPERSTARS. Take one of those out and throw them onto another team and you have a more balanced league, schedule and games.

nyKnicks126
07-10-2012, 10:05 AM
i dont know how that would work, flights to europe start at 8hrs. could you see a team making that flight everytime they had to play in paris or london? and god help those teams.

39 games per season.. Some of the teams in Europe would come to the US on a 10 away away streak, and same goes for the NBA teams when they go to Europe. Play every team once.

Glen20
07-10-2012, 10:09 AM
I am a huge advocate to the Hard Cap Philosophy.

The current Soft Cap is full of BULL****. The S.Cap allows the rich to get richer and the poor to get poorer, creating a huge gap. For those who are not aware of what the Soft cap is... it sets a limit of maximum salary a team can reach and if they go over it they will have to pay extra fees to obtain that player. All they did last year was increase the luxury tax (the fees). But lets bring up the Knicks and Dolan for example and then lets bring up any of the bottom market teams...

Those bottom market teams already have a hard time reaching the max salary. Which is fine. But a guy like Dolan not only can reach the roof but his hardest decision is whether hes willing to spend a few extra bucks to keep players... Please, a few million is like 20 bucks for us.

Its an unfair advantage... rich get richer, poor get poorer.
The Draft could help in acquiring talent but that is if you only get the top 5... most of the time only top 3. Leaving the middle class teams stranded.

You can blame poor management, but I think if they install a Hard Cap with a lower max roof. It will spread the talent around the league or force teams to properly manage contracts and its players. It is fair.

Hockey put in the hard cap right after the lockout. Since then I would have to say all 30 NHL teams are more balanced. Their is a much more competitive season especially come the last weeks of the season. Where I feel in basketball there is a clear distinction half way thru the year where each team will be ending up


Teams do not need 3 SUPERSTARS. Take one of those out and throw them onto another team and you have a more balanced league, schedule and games.

im all for a hard cap if the roof was higher actually

Hellcrooner
07-10-2012, 10:09 AM
Pot meet kettle, the Kings have not won a title, nor was the team in Sacramento when they did it. They were the Rochester Royals which last I checked was not in Sacramento and weren't named the Kings. As for the Bucks, I was wrong on that but this is just you turning an argument like you did earlier, finding one example of all the teams listed that won a title in '71 and has been a joke ever since. I will say what I said earlier, not what the OP was talking about.

Excuse me, but rings count for the Franchise no matter if they moved.

Or maybe you are one of those celtic fans taht say L.A Lakers only have 11 rings :rolleyes:


oh and its very funny but you were talking bout knicks and bulls rings, who go figure happened 15 and 40 years ago too.

Glen20
07-10-2012, 10:09 AM
39 games per season.. Some of the teams in Europe would come to the US on a 10 away away streak, and same goes for the NBA teams when they go to Europe. Play every team once.

yeah that's similar to the proposed idea
what happens if players dont want to move to europe though?

Heatcheck
07-10-2012, 10:09 AM
but then what about divisional games(where you play the teams in your division several times), would they be in a small division by themselves with 3 teams? would you need more teams to make a complete division? does it go in the east or the west (either way it unbalances the amount of playoff teams for each conference)? Is it fair to have a division of expansion teams when everyone else has to duke it out with powerhouses? and is it economically possible to have 5 european teams? very interesting subject.

Hellcrooner
07-10-2012, 10:15 AM
yeah that's similar to the proposed idea
what happens if players dont want to move to europe though?

You cant expand nba into europe.

Things like Draft, Salary cap, Max Contracts, Restricted Fa are jsut forbidden in europe because here players are like ANY OTHER worker.
100% they can break a contract and go wherever they want at any moment ( of course paying money to the club/franchise), they can choose were to start their career, they can command as many money as market brings, teams can waste as many money as they want, you dont have to send players to bring players etc.
Players here hold ALL the leverage because its illegal to limit his freedom, they are just as any other worker.

nyKnicks126
07-10-2012, 10:32 AM
Then the NBA should eliminate drafts, the salary cap, max Contracts, and restricted FA..

nyKnicks126
07-10-2012, 10:33 AM
only the strong will be able to play. Not this fair game BS Stern has.

Heatcheck
07-10-2012, 10:35 AM
can you clarify a little? then you say here, you mean..?

As someone who watches football, i feel like the transfer policies work for each sport.

You cant compare each because the talent pool for nba talent is infinitely smaller than football, thats why theres a draft and a cap, and RFA's. its out of neccesity

mlisica19
07-10-2012, 10:36 AM
I also like the European way of running a sport league. They have premier leagues and secondary leagues and so on... I understand its quite different there and it would be hard to implement here but I think its better...

Idk just off the top of my head...

30 NBA teams currently...

A new format would have the NBA be a two division format.

Champion Division (14 teams)
56-70 games
The top 8 teams make the playoffs
The bottom 3 teams automatically get demoted
the bottom #4 and #5 team will face each other in a small playoff series for demotion or staying put

2nd Tier League (16 teams)
55-70 games
8 team playoffs
Champion of Playoffs get promoted
#2 and #3 Also get promoted
The #4 and #5 have to fight in a short playoff to either get promoted or relegated.

So at the end of the season you have 5 teams going down, and 5 teams going up.

Draft is the same way... Lottery picks, records based on tier ranking and standings create draft time.

So lets say this starts in 2013-2014.
The standings depending on 2012-2013 season will depict where teams end up in this new format.

Heres how I see it playing out...
1) 2012-2013 will be a very very competitive season as many teams will have to fight harder and push longer for a better spot in the following season.
2) Once the new format begins... The 2nd tier league might have issues with being in the 2nd tier but at least they will be playing in a more evened out league. More competitive and more balanced. They will also fight harder to get back to the top league and so it still will be fun to watch.
3) The top league will be as if you were watching the best teams go against each other all year. But at the end of the year when the bottom teams are just looking for the season to be done with to start drafting... they will have to keep playing hard to avoid relegation.
4) The small playoffs between the bottom and top #4 and #5 ranked teams will be fun to watch, trying to avoid relegation and get promotion in a 3 game battle or something.

5) You still have the NBA playoffs... Now you have two... 2nd tier playoffs which may not sound that Appealing to the majority of fans but it will be to local fans and real NBA fans wanting to see who advances next year. And you still have your top teams in the 1st division...


*** NBA D League can continue the way it is. Trades can continue the way they are. I still believe in a hard cap or a harder cap (stricter rules).

**** All Star game can still be between East and West in the 1st tier and 2nd tier or just the league as a whole. Or you can do Championship Tier vs the 2nd tier all stars.

I think the idea is cool? How bouta ya?

nyKnicks126
07-10-2012, 10:40 AM
Free market.. Owners have the cash.. Go ahead and have Durant, Lebron, CP3, Dwight, Love, all on the same team.. FREE MARKET..

nyKnicks126
07-10-2012, 10:41 AM
It's not like Anthony Davis wanted to go to the Hornets.. They are all forced to teams they might not want to play for..

Hellcrooner
07-10-2012, 10:42 AM
I also like the European way of running a sport league. They have premier leagues and secondary leagues and so on... I understand its quite different there and it would be hard to implement here but I think its better...

Idk just off the top of my head...

30 NBA teams currently...

A new format would have the NBA be a two division format.

Champion Division (14 teams)
56-70 games
The top 8 teams make the playoffs
The bottom 3 teams automatically get demoted
the bottom #4 and #5 team will face each other in a small playoff series for demotion or staying put

2nd Tier League (16 teams)
55-70 games
8 team playoffs
Champion of Playoffs get promoted
#2 and #3 Also get promoted
The #4 and #5 have to fight in a short playoff to either get promoted or relegated.

So at the end of the season you have 5 teams going down, and 5 teams going up.

Draft is the same way... Lottery picks, records based on tier ranking and standings create draft time.

So lets say this starts in 2013-2014.
The standings depending on 2012-2013 season will depict where teams end up in this new format.

Heres how I see it playing out...
1) 2012-2013 will be a very very competitive season as many teams will have to fight harder and push longer for a better spot in the following season.
2) Once the new format begins... The 2nd tier league might have issues with being in the 2nd tier but at least they will be playing in a more evened out league. More competitive and more balanced. They will also fight harder to get back to the top league and so it still will be fun to watch.
3) The top league will be as if you were watching the best teams go against each other all year. But at the end of the year when the bottom teams are just looking for the season to be done with to start drafting... they will have to keep playing hard to avoid relegation.
4) The small playoffs between the bottom and top #4 and #5 ranked teams will be fun to watch, trying to avoid relegation and get promotion in a 3 game battle or something.

5) You still have the NBA playoffs... Now you have two... 2nd tier playoffs which may not sound that Appealing to the majority of fans but it will be to local fans and real NBA fans wanting to see who advances next year. And you still have your top teams in the 1st division...


*** NBA D League can continue the way it is. Trades can continue the way they are. I still believe in a hard cap or a harder cap (stricter rules).

**** All Star game can still be between East and West in the 1st tier and 2nd tier or just the league as a whole. Or you can do Championship Tier vs the 2nd tier all stars.

I think the idea is cool? How bouta ya?
The model only works if theres many teams.

at least 80 in 4 divisons of 20 for example.
This would open the nba for citys that currently are not in it.
But thre are many problems to implement, the biggest of it being the Ncaa vs the your developement programs from teams.

The best thing woudl be integrate the ncaa teams into the pro league ( time to start paying those players that are making you a ton of money university principals !!!!!!)

Draft should be removed and instead have territorial rights for the youth schemes of each pro team, they can only get players of their area to the youth team.

mlisica19
07-10-2012, 10:45 AM
European teams in the NBA? Why? Its not the NFL where American Football is not strong over in Europe so you can probably sell the game over there for like 6 or 7 weeks in a season. Basketball is already pretty big in Europe, why would they go see an expensive NBA game when most cities over there have their own home town teams that they have loved for years. Not that NO ONE WOULD GO, but would they be able to sell out arenas on a consistent basis. And yea sure you can have weeks in america where you play, and then weeks in Europe you can play so its less travel but thats kinda lame. Your basically on the road for a long long long time. Plus having to move a family or be away from ur family on another conitinent.

Its not 8 hours away... its like 5-6 hours to get to London but still...

Im all for European tours, games against European teams and some games being played over there. But no way a franchise relocating outside North America.

plus where would they even relocate to? The stadiums over there are not as big... So you have a franchise move into a stadium with only 11-12k seats. They just lost 5k seats... they also lost Americans who love to buy buy buy to Europeans who loved to drink and sit in a Cafe lol. Joking, but still money would be extremely lost.

Hellcrooner
07-10-2012, 10:48 AM
European teams in the NBA? Why? Its not the NFL where American Football is not strong over in Europe so you can probably sell the game over there for like 6 or 7 weeks in a season. Basketball is already pretty big in Europe, why would they go see an expensive NBA game when most cities over there have their own home town teams that they have loved for years. Not that NO ONE WOULD GO, but would they be able to sell out arenas on a consistent basis. And yea sure you can have weeks in america where you play, and then weeks in Europe you can play so its less travel but thats kinda lame. Your basically on the road for a long long long time. Plus having to move a family or be away from ur family on another conitinent.

Its not 8 hours away... its like 5-6 hours to get to London but still...

Im all for European tours, games against European teams and some games being played over there. But no way a franchise relocating outside North America.

plus where would they even relocate to? The stadiums over there are not as big... So you have a franchise move into a stadium with only 11-12k seats. They just lost 5k seats... they also lost Americans who love to buy buy buy to Europeans who loved to drink and sit in a Cafe lol. Joking, but still money would be extremely lost.

there are more problems

1 as i said many of nba rules are illegal in europe

2 people in europe likes their players to come from their city, and to have been developed in the young ranks of the pro team since being younger, they would ahve a hard time rooting for a team comprised of 10 americans coming from who knows where.

GoferKing_
07-10-2012, 10:59 AM
Ok, let's wait for Heat and Lakers and Boston to suck in upcoming years and then just get rid of them usless teams. How about that?

mlisica19
07-10-2012, 11:00 AM
The model only works if theres many teams.

at least 80 in 4 divisons of 20 for example.
This would open the nba for citys that currently are not in it.
But thre are many problems to implement, the biggest of it being the Ncaa vs the your developement programs from teams.

The best thing woudl be integrate the ncaa teams into the pro league ( time to start paying those players that are making you a ton of money university principals !!!!!!)

Draft should be removed and instead have territorial rights for the youth schemes of each pro team, they can only get players of their area to the youth team.

i can understand if their is an issue with my format but to say it would not work because there is not enough teams is BS. Why would it have to ONLY work if there was 80 teams involved, and 4 divisions. It could very well work with 2 divisions of 15 or so. You dont need a lower division when you have a D-league. Or you can turn the D-league into its own teams but theres a reason those are D-league franchise teams. Arent some sponsored by the NBA or the NBA teams so that might not work exactly

INTEGRATE THE NCAA TEAMS? I apologize but right there is when I knew this was a joke comment or im talking to the wrong guy. You cannot take the teams owned by Colleges and Universities to join a professional league no matter how much money those players deserve. And I am one who disagrees with College players getting paid.

WhiteSoxGod
07-10-2012, 11:06 AM
The only team I want gone is the Toronto Raptors (sorry Rap fans). I just don't like foreign teams in American sports. That goes for the Blue-jays too in baseball. That is just my personal opinion.

WhiteSoxGod
07-10-2012, 11:08 AM
The NBA would be FAR more competitive if they just went to a HARD cap. Look at football, they have had 5 new playoff teams EVERY year for the last 16 YEARS!!!

I mean let's be real, that makes for competitive balance.

Hellcrooner
07-10-2012, 11:09 AM
i can understand if their is an issue with my format but to say it would not work because there is not enough teams is BS. Why would it have to ONLY work if there was 80 teams involved, and 4 divisions. It could very well work with 2 divisions of 15 or so. You dont need a lower division when you have a D-league. Or you can turn the D-league into its own teams but theres a reason those are D-league franchise teams. Arent some sponsored by the NBA or the NBA teams so that might not work exactly

INTEGRATE THE NCAA TEAMS? I apologize but right there is when I knew this was a joke comment or im talking to the wrong guy. You cannot take the teams owned by Colleges and Universities to join a professional league no matter how much money those players deserve. And I am one who disagrees with College players getting paid.

Sorry but i find laughable the disparity of the money made by ncaa teams with the price of what costs to study in those universitys, wich indeed makes their players not satisfactorily paid.

They are getting scolarships worht 15000-20000 dollars while they are generating Millions.

And to top it they dont even allow them to get show deals.

I really dont get why havent there been a Massive emigration from american players from H.S to europe.

They will get paid 100.000 to 500.000 (after taxes) dollars for a year before reporting to nba draft.

thats more than enough money to start a bussiness if they break their knees while if they break their knees in ncca, they will most probably lose the scolarship and be in a tough position.

Hellcrooner
07-10-2012, 11:12 AM
The NBA would be FAR more competitive if they just went to a HARD cap. Look at football, they have had 5 new playoff teams EVERY year for the last 16 YEARS!!!

I mean let's be real, that makes for competitive balance.

in the last 16 years ALL of nba teams ahve made playoffs at least once.

nolafan33
07-10-2012, 11:15 AM
Or just find a way to distribute the talent better.

mlisica19
07-10-2012, 11:25 AM
Sorry but i find laughable the disparity of the money made by ncaa teams with the price of what costs to study in those universitys, wich indeed makes their players not satisfactorily paid.

They are getting scolarships worht 15000-20000 dollars while they are generating Millions.

And to top it they dont even allow them to get show deals.

I really dont get why havent there been a Massive emigration from american players from H.S to europe.

They will get paid 100.000 to 500.000 (after taxes) dollars for a year before reporting to nba draft.

thats more than enough money to start a bussiness if they break their knees while if they break their knees in ncca, they will most probably lose the scolarship and be in a tough position.

1) Because the best players get free education and free living at a place you can be a normal kid still and not worry about bills and party.
2) The 2nd tier of kids who might have a chance, know the best chance is the NCAA route. The best competition and the most training plus they can get an education in the making
3) The kids who cant make it go for a college education...

Thats why theres not a huge amount heading over to Europe.

I agree if Colleges are making millions off their athletics than the kids should all be entitled to something. many of these athletes dont get a scholarship or food or free dorm. And I think they should.

I do though believe these are kids who shouldnt be paid a salary for their play but should be compensated in some way.

mlisica19
07-10-2012, 11:28 AM
in the last 16 years ALL of nba teams ahve made playoffs at least once.

Oh JUMP FOR JOY...

IM GLAD FOR almost two decades every nba team has made it to the playoffs once.

that mans NOTHINGGGGGGGG. So you jump into the playoffs 1st round and get swept.

It still does not avoid the fact that the rich get richer in the NBA and the poor get poorer. An NBA draft pick will not save your franchise from being the worst or among the bottom teams. But allowing 6-7-8 teams to all hold 3-4 superstars AND strong optional players is hurting the NBA. The forum is right... why not just delete half the league and have 15 teams all with dream teams... Its like the White and Blue USA scrimmage every game...

WhiteSoxGod
07-10-2012, 11:47 AM
in the last 16 years ALL of nba teams ahve made playoffs at least once.

These are the Teams that have won Championships:

Boston Celtics - 17
Los Angeles Lakers - 15: 5 in Minneapolis/ 10 in Los Angeles
Chicago Bulls - 6
San Antonio Spurs - 4
Detroit Pistons - 3
Golden State Warriors - 3: 2 as the Philadelphia Warriors
Philadelphia 76ers - 3: 1 as the Syracuse Nationals
Houston Rockets - 2
New York Knickerbockers - 2
Atlanta Hawks - 1 as the St. Louis Hawks in 1958
Baltimore Bullets - 1 in 1948: now defunct, the franchise folded in 1954
Miami Heat - 1
Milwaukee Bucks - 1
Portland Trailblazers - 1
Sacramento Kings - 1 as the Rochester Royals in 1951
Seattle Supersonics - 1
Washington Bullets - 1


Doesn't look that balanced to me. There is no argument that the NFL is more competitive.

Hellcrooner
07-10-2012, 11:54 AM
These are the Teams that have won Championships:

Boston Celtics - 17
Los Angeles Lakers - 15: 5 in Minneapolis/ 10 in Los Angeles
Chicago Bulls - 6
San Antonio Spurs - 4
Detroit Pistons - 3
Golden State Warriors - 3: 2 as the Philadelphia Warriors
Philadelphia 76ers - 3: 1 as the Syracuse Nationals
Houston Rockets - 2
New York Knickerbockers - 2
Atlanta Hawks - 1 as the St. Louis Hawks in 1958
Baltimore Bullets - 1 in 1948: now defunct, the franchise folded in 1954
Miami Heat - 1
Milwaukee Bucks - 1
Portland Trailblazers - 1
Sacramento Kings - 1 as the Rochester Royals in 1951
Seattle Supersonics - 1
Washington Bullets - 1


Doesn't look that balanced to me. There is no argument that the NFL is more competitive.

there is a differential fact that makes imposible to compare nba and nfl.

league system.

Much less regular season games, wich means the outcome will be very different, in 82 games the best teams get on top 95% of the time ( injurys affect here and then) on 15 games ANything can happen, a great team can be on a funk for a month and miss playoffs in nba if you are in a funk for a month you may not get a top seed but will stil make playoffs.

then playoffs, vs one game elimination.
How many times have we seen in the nba the worse team to upset the best team in the first game of the series to finally get defeated 4-1 or 4-2?
In nfl if you upset the team , you go trough.

Glen20
07-10-2012, 12:01 PM
These are the Teams that have won Championships:

Boston Celtics - 17
Los Angeles Lakers - 15: 5 in Minneapolis/ 10 in Los Angeles
Chicago Bulls - 6
San Antonio Spurs - 4
Detroit Pistons - 3
Golden State Warriors - 3: 2 as the Philadelphia Warriors
Philadelphia 76ers - 3: 1 as the Syracuse Nationals
Houston Rockets - 2
New York Knickerbockers - 2
Atlanta Hawks - 1 as the St. Louis Hawks in 1958
Baltimore Bullets - 1 in 1948: now defunct, the franchise folded in 1954
Miami Heat - 1
Milwaukee Bucks - 1
Portland Trailblazers - 1
Sacramento Kings - 1 as the Rochester Royals in 1951
Seattle Supersonics - 1
Washington Bullets - 1


Doesn't look that balanced to me. There is no argument that the NFL is more competitive.

your list is a couple of years old, but it still drives home the point

jtrinaldi
07-10-2012, 12:13 PM
Bucks
Bobcats
Kings
T-Wolves
Cavs

Maybe one more ?


The same goes for all of the other three major sports, but I fear the NBA is the worst of the bunch.

Spread some talent throughout the rest of the league while weeding out the crap.

With the way things are going, the teams mentioned above will never be able to compete with LA,Miami,OKC, ETC....

There is no desire for players to go there, and because they are not overwhelmingly desirable cities to live in, there never will be....

It may sound harsh, but you can either nip this issue in the butt now, or continue to string along fan bases until eventually they die a slow painful death....
Wow, trolling to the Max. The Bucks Wolves and Cavs are all likely playoff teams this year. The Bucks and Cavs will be able to compete for the Central this year with Rose out. Why would you get rid of the Bucks? They did beat The Lebron's 66% of the time this year (2 out of 3 for your simple mind). The wolves are becoming a hit in Spain because of Rubio....and they are going to have 3 white guys on the court at the same time throughout various times this year. In case you don't follow the NBA enough to know, I am talking about Love/Ridnour/Budinger. Players will go where the money is, not by how desirable a city is to live in. If a player is getting paid $9 million a year they will live in a ****** city. Just look at Ersan Ilaysova, he is staying in Milwaukee because they give him the best chance to win over Brooklyn, and pay him the most. New Jersey is a ****** city to live in as well, but why is Dwight going there? Because they have TALENT!!!!! Dwight didn't wanna go to the Lakers because there top Talent is all getting older.
:facepalm:

RenegadeRiot36
07-10-2012, 12:20 PM
Wow, trolling to the Max. The Bucks Wolves and Cavs are all likely playoff teams this year. The Bucks and Cavs will be able to compete for the Central this year with Rose out. Why would you get rid of the Bucks? They did beat The Lebron's 66% of the time this year (2 out of 3 for your simple mind). The wolves are becoming a hit in Spain because of Rubio....and they are going to have 3 white guys on the court at the same time throughout various times this year. In case you don't follow the NBA enough to know, I am talking about Love/Ridnour/Budinger. Players will go where the money is, not by how desirable a city is to live in. If a player is getting paid $9 million a year they will live in a ****** city. Just look at Ersan Ilaysova, he is staying in Milwaukee because they give him the best chance to win over Brooklyn, and pay him the most. New Jersey is a ****** city to live in as well, but why is Dwight going there? Because they have TALENT!!!!! Dwight didn't wanna go to the Lakers because there top Talent is all getting older.
:facepalm:

Agreed, but the Dwight example can be thrown out because its Brooklyn.

Oefarmy2005
07-10-2012, 12:22 PM
Bucks
Bobcats
Kings
T-Wolves
Cavs

Maybe one more ?


The same goes for all of the other three major sports, but I fear the NBA is the worst of the bunch.

Spread some talent throughout the rest of the league while weeding out the crap.

With the way things are going, the teams mentioned above will never be able to compete with LA,Miami,OKC, ETC....

There is no desire for players to go there, and because they are not overwhelmingly desirable cities to live in, there never will be....

It may sound harsh, but you can either nip this issue in the butt now, or continue to string along fan bases until eventually they die a slow painful death....

It's a normal cycle. I know it's easy to pick on team that are bad right now - but these teams will be good teams some time down the road. As far as your list of good teams goes - LA, Miami, OKC - OKC is a smaller market than all 4 teams mentioned above. Yes they are set for the next 10 years with Durant, but it is not an FA hotspot by any means and their media market is pathetic.

daboywonder2002
07-10-2012, 12:27 PM
http://espn.go.com/nba/attendance

minnesota- 15th. thats pretty good. portland- 2nd?? wowwww

Oefarmy2005
07-10-2012, 12:34 PM
http://espn.go.com/nba/attendance

minnesota- 15th. thats pretty good. portland- 2nd?? wowwww

Exactly. How do you base which teams should be gone? If you go by media markets, the worst 4 are: Memphis, OKC, Charlotte, Indiana. You can't really go by the teams that haven't been relevant - which decade - 2000's, 90's, 80's? New Jersey hasn't made the playoffs as long as the Timberwolves, so lets jut get rid of Jersey/Brooklyn instead...

Oefarmy2005
07-10-2012, 12:37 PM
http://www.tvb.org/media/file/TVB_Market_Profiles_Nielsen_Household_DMA_RANKS.pd f

A list of biggest media markets. Minneapolis is a bigger market than Miami, so they choice is easy - right, lets get rid of Miami. OKC is 44th - I'm sure that market is just raking in the dough for the NBA.

nolafan33
07-10-2012, 12:39 PM
I see some of yall looking at this from a competitive point, but the NBA would surely look at the teams that aren't turning a profit before teams that are in the lottery every season.

Hellcrooner
07-10-2012, 12:42 PM
in the last 30 years:

Lakers, several rings.
Clippers: NOW are contenders.
Suns: were heavy contenders in late 80s/first 90s midle 00s.
Kings: heavy contenders in early 00s
Warriors: ok....there is always an exception..... and yet Run TMC was a good era broken by stupid management.
Spurs: won rings
Mavs: won ring.
Rockets: Won Ring.
Grizz: are contending NOw.
Hornets : were kind of contending in mid 90s.
Blazers: heavy contenders in late 80s and first 90s and late 90s.
Wolves: Contenders in early 90s.
Nuggets: Contenders in mid 80s and second tier contenders in mid 00s.
Jazz: Heavy contenders in late 80s and trough the 90s.
Heat: have won rings.
Magic: Contenders in mid 90s
Hawks: Contenders in mid 80s.
Wizards: second tier in mid 90s gms ****ed it up
Bobcats: its too early they are an expansion team and have yet to go up.
Bulls: several rings.
Pistons: several rings.
Pacers: heavy contenders in late 90s and first 00s.
Bucks: heavy contenders in early/mid 80s, had a good run in first 00s.
Cavs: heavy contenders in late 80s/first 90s and late 00s.
Knicks: heavy contenders in mid/late 90s are back at it.
Nets: heavy contenders in early 00s, back at it.
Celtics: won rings.
Sixers: won rings.
Raptors: ok....this is the worst ( aside of the too young franchise bobcats).

This is the big picture, it all goes to cycles, is as easy as that, and of course only one team wins the ring each year so its only logical that some wont be able to do so, how many franchises have not won nfl, mlb or nhl and not make the finals in that span?

in short in nba we have had 8 different champions and another 10 teams make the finals in this 30 years.

No need to cut anything.

As you can see very few franchises have been constantly bad, and even they have made playoffs.

WhiteSoxGod
07-10-2012, 12:48 PM
your list is a couple of years old, but it still drives home the point

Yeah my bad it was an old archive file. I had it because I had answered a question a while ago for somebody on another site. But yes the point is the Salary cap makes the most difference. a Hard cap would make the competitive balance exist more apparently.

Heatcheck
07-10-2012, 12:51 PM
there are more problems

1 as i said many of nba rules are illegal in europe

2 people in europe likes their players to come from their city, and to have been developed in the young ranks of the pro team since being younger, they would ahve a hard time rooting for a team comprised of 10 americans coming from who knows where.

that couldnt be further from the truth and you know it, there is nothing homegrown about successful european teams, unless you happen to be a country known for producing talent (lithuania, croatia, spain, in basketball. and footballs the same way and even then teams are riddled with foreigners.)

Hellcrooner
07-10-2012, 12:53 PM
that couldnt be further from the truth and you know it, there is nothing homegrown about successful european teams, unless you happen to be a country known for producing talent (lithuania, croatia, spain, in basketball. and footballs the same way and even then teams are riddled with foreigners.)

more than half of the roster of european basketball teams are made from players grown in their yout base ( not all of them have to be from the actual country, we take players from outside liek say ibaka in spain and grow them too).

Heatcheck
07-10-2012, 12:59 PM
Wow, trolling to the Max. The Bucks Wolves and Cavs are all likely playoff teams this year. The Bucks and Cavs will be able to compete for the Central this year with Rose out. Why would you get rid of the Bucks? They did beat The Lebron's 66% of the time this year (2 out of 3 for your simple mind). The wolves are becoming a hit in Spain because of Rubio....and they are going to have 3 white guys on the court at the same time throughout various times this year. In case you don't follow the NBA enough to know, I am talking about Love/Ridnour/Budinger. Players will go where the money is, not by how desirable a city is to live in. If a player is getting paid $9 million a year they will live in a ****** city. Just look at Ersan Ilaysova, he is staying in Milwaukee because they give him the best chance to win over Brooklyn, and pay him the most. New Jersey is a ****** city to live in as well, but why is Dwight going there? Because they have TALENT!!!!! Dwight didn't wanna go to the Lakers because there top Talent is all getting older.
:facepalm:


couple things. because your competing for a playoff spot doesnt mean your team sells tickets and turns a profit. the wolves can become a hit in spain, but a. is that going to make them enough money to be profitable? and B. how long will rubio be there considering the culture clash?
These players are people too, if you had to pick a job, of course the city you live in is going to matter.

It goes case by case, but for the most part, rich people like to live in nice places (money wise, not to say utah isnt nice, it cant offer millionaires what miami or ny can)

Hellcrooner
07-10-2012, 01:04 PM
couple things. because your competing for a playoff spot doesnt mean your team sells tickets and turns a profit. the wolves can become a hit in spain, but a. is that going to make them enough money to be profitable? and B. how long will rubio be there considering the culture clash?
These players are people too, if you had to pick a job, of course the city you live in is going to matter.

It goes case by case, but for the most part, rich people like to live in nice places (money wise, not to say utah isnt nice, it cant offer millionaires what miami or ny can)

supossing he recovers satisfactorily from the injury and becomes what he can become.

the rest of the 3 years of his rookie contract + the year of theam option, + they will match any offer in his Rfa, wich means 5 more years.

Total, 10 seasons played with the wolves, 9 if they decide to trade him on his last years deadline if he wants to leave.

More than enough i would say.....

Heatcheck
07-10-2012, 01:07 PM
you know it doesnt work like that, if a player like that wants out, in any sport, he's going to go.

Worst thing you can have is someone working for you that doesnt want to be there, If he doesnt want to live there, what can you do?

Heatcheck
07-10-2012, 01:10 PM
Ok, let's wait for Heat and Lakers and Boston to suck in upcoming years and then just get rid of them usless teams. How about that?

According to the numbers (which is all that matters here) they sell tickets even when they are bad, so it wouldnt be neccessary.

Heatcheck
07-10-2012, 01:12 PM
i can understand if their is an issue with my format but to say it would not work because there is not enough teams is BS. Why would it have to ONLY work if there was 80 teams involved, and 4 divisions. It could very well work with 2 divisions of 15 or so. You dont need a lower division when you have a D-league. Or you can turn the D-league into its own teams but theres a reason those are D-league franchise teams. Arent some sponsored by the NBA or the NBA teams so that might not work exactly

INTEGRATE THE NCAA TEAMS? I apologize but right there is when I knew this was a joke comment or im talking to the wrong guy. You cannot take the teams owned by Colleges and Universities to join a professional league no matter how much money those players deserve. And I am one who disagrees with College players getting paid.


Buddy, this is america, if everyteam doesnt have a chance (and by chance i mean technically, not percieved) at winning it all, no one will watch.

Hellcrooner
07-10-2012, 01:14 PM
Buddy, this is america, if everyteam doesnt have a chance (and by chance i mean technically, not percieved) at winning it all, no one will watch.

Do people watch the olympics?
not everybody stands a chance.

In fact in basketball, the odds for team usa to win are 99% and yet people watch it with good ratings.

Also when the soccer world cup is played it gets good rates even in U.S.A and that considering only 4 or 5 teams have a chance to win it and usa has NONE.

Heatcheck
07-10-2012, 01:17 PM
These are the Teams that have won Championships:

Boston Celtics - 17
Los Angeles Lakers - 15: 5 in Minneapolis/ 10 in Los Angeles
Chicago Bulls - 6
San Antonio Spurs - 4
Detroit Pistons - 3
Golden State Warriors - 3: 2 as the Philadelphia Warriors
Philadelphia 76ers - 3: 1 as the Syracuse Nationals
Houston Rockets - 2
New York Knickerbockers - 2
Atlanta Hawks - 1 as the St. Louis Hawks in 1958
Baltimore Bullets - 1 in 1948: now defunct, the franchise folded in 1954
Miami Heat - 2
Milwaukee Bucks - 1
Portland Trailblazers - 1
Sacramento Kings - 1 as the Rochester Royals in 1951
Seattle Supersonics - 1
Washington Bullets - 1


Doesn't look that balanced to me. There is no argument that the NFL is more competitive.

fixed

Pens_fan_21
07-10-2012, 01:18 PM
You think its watered down because there are too many teams? I think keep the teams (or move them - but dont cut them out) and change the rules. I mean it has gone from an ownder/GM league where anyone stood a chance to a league dominated and held up by the players...owners and GMs don't have power anymore...try to fix the players ego issues with rules and I think you are ok...but in no way do they NEED to get rid of teams

Heatcheck
07-10-2012, 01:21 PM
Do people watch the olympics?
not everybody stands a chance.

In fact in basketball, the odds for team usa to win are 99% and yet people watch it with good ratings.

Also when the soccer world cup is played it gets good rates even in U.S.A and that considering only 4 or 5 teams have a chance to win it and usa has NONE.

Again, understand me, technically not percieved. meaning there IS a chance, no matter how small (PR vs USA basketball a couple years, Greece and Denmark winning the Euros, one of the afc west teams made the playoffs with a losing record a couple of years ago and then won a playoff game) that your team will click, your older players regain top form, young players break out, other teams arent as good as advertised, key injuries, and a miracle might happen, which it has several times.

But people wont tune in to a 2nd division whatever here, we're obssesed with winning and being number one and all that lombardi stuff, not promotion.

And by the way i was talking America only, its obvious internationally (which is what the olympics and WC are), people watch for many different reasons, and second divisions are viable.

smith&wesson
07-10-2012, 01:26 PM
Bucks
Bobcats
Kings
T-Wolves
Cavs

Maybe one more ?


The same goes for all of the other three major sports, but I fear the NBA is the worst of the bunch.

Spread some talent throughout the rest of the league while weeding out the crap.

With the way things are going, the teams mentioned above will never be able to compete with LA,Miami,OKC, ETC....

There is no desire for players to go there, and because they are not overwhelmingly desirable cities to live in, there never will be....

It may sound harsh, but you can either nip this issue in the butt now, or continue to string along fan bases until eventually they die a slow painful death....


i would keep the t.wolves.

celtisox41
07-10-2012, 01:27 PM
I agree the NBA needs to get rid of some teams. Less teams means the players like Kevin Martin, Danny Granger, Andre Iguedala, and Joe Johnson who are considered "stars" in this league, and are payed that way because small market teams can't lure the bigger stars there, wouldn't get that type of money. So teams wouldn't have to overpay for certain players and then maybe an actual TEAM made of good players and maybe one star might win, instead of just 3 legitimate stars who want to play together.

And they should have some kind of tournament to see which teams are eliminated. Have it like the playoffs, except if you lose you advance, and the last team standing gets eliminated for the next year. Keep doing that until you lose 4-5 teams. It will never happen but I'm willing to bet it would be watched at least as much as the real playoffs if not more

Hellcrooner
07-10-2012, 01:28 PM
Again, understand me, technically not percieved. meaning there IS a chance no matter how small (PR vs USA basketball a couple years, Greece and Denmark winning the Euros) that a miracle might happen, which it has several times.

But people wont tune in to a 2nd division whatever here, we're obssesed with winning and being number one and all that lombardi stuff, not promotion.

And by the way i was talking America only, its obvious internationally (which is what the olympics and WC are), people watch for many different reasons, and second divisions are viable.

thats why i told that poster that for it to work it cant be just 2 divisions of 16 teams.

it needs to be a TON of teams, 80, 100, 120 in order for the little town dudes getting excited and the "perceived" chance of their 5th division team, going up to the 4th and maybe eventually one of these eyars to be able to go up and up and make "the league".
It bout Tulsa having a team and progressing and having his fans interested in seeing if they can go up, or once they are up if they are able to avoid relegation.
It also creates better rivalrys because someone from st Paul will feel happier beating someone from Minnie wich is closer than a minnie fan for beating blazers....

raidersrock99
07-10-2012, 01:32 PM
kings sold out for like 10 years straight, they are in rebuild mode, and look to have a young up and coming squad. Remember when OKC sucked, then they are in the finals a few years later. you cant just get rid of bad teams, sports need bad teams look at baseball the pirates are in first place and everyone is rooting for them right now

Heatcheck
07-10-2012, 01:34 PM
thats why i told that poster that for it to work it cant be just 2 divisions of 16 teams.

it needs to be a TON of teams, 80, 100, 120 in order for the little town dudes getting excited and the "perceived" chance of their 5th division team, going up to the 4th and maybe eventually one of these eyars to be able to go up and up and make "the league".
It bout Tulsa having a team and progressing and having his fans interested in seeing if they can go up, or once they are up if they are able to avoid relegation.
It also creates better rivalrys because someone from st Paul will feel happier beating someone from Minnie wich is closer than a minnie fan for beating blazers....

See but thats the thing, its the mentality we have here that is the deterent. I just cant see that guy from tulsa caring after too long, when he realizes his city isnt going to attract or keep a big name star (who are usually big because they are that much better than everyone else).
Americans arent going to be newcastle fans and be happy they are playing the big boys another year, or La Liga fans who know theyre just fighting for euro qualification every year. It just cant work here.

Punk
07-10-2012, 01:36 PM
Contraction isn't happening.

Heatcheck
07-10-2012, 01:37 PM
kings sold out for like 10 years straight, they are in rebuild mode, and look to have a young up and coming squad. Remember when OKC sucked, then they are in the finals a few years later. you cant just get rid of bad teams, sports need bad teams look at baseball the pirates are in first place and everyone is rooting for them right now

i dont know the specifics of the pirates organization (if they have bad or cheap owners or whatever), but if they couldnt turn a profit for those 15 yrs and had to suspend operations, does it matter that they would be good later? its still a business.

daboywonder2002
07-10-2012, 01:41 PM
couple things. because your competing for a playoff spot doesnt mean your team sells tickets and turns a profit. the wolves can become a hit in spain, but a. is that going to make them enough money to be profitable? and B. how long will rubio be there considering the culture clash?
These players are people too, if you had to pick a job, of course the city you live in is going to matter.

It goes case by case, but for the most part, rich people like to live in nice places (money wise, not to say utah isnt nice, it cant offer millionaires what miami or ny can)

dude, every rich person doesnt wanna live in new york, la or miami. Please stop with this nonsense.

Fly
07-10-2012, 01:43 PM
the league should just start over and do a fantasy draft

PrettyBoyJ
07-10-2012, 01:46 PM
This is just how sports work.. There is always going be teams that are at the top and at the bottom.. The real issue is parity... Fans want to see more parity and actually feel like their team has a shot at winning..

THE_FLASH_21
07-10-2012, 01:52 PM
Wouldn't be a bad idea.. suprised you guys didnt mention my JAZZ :) and my counter argument would be.. we are young, wild and talented... *****es!!

Heatcheck
07-10-2012, 02:04 PM
dude, every rich person doesnt wanna live in new york, la or miami. Please stop with this nonsense.

no **** genius. A) we're not talking about all rich people, we're talking about young males (usually black) with money.

B) no one said they only wanted to live in those cities. There are always exceptions (Boozer liked the outdoors, George Hill chose to stay close to home) but they are in no way reflective of the majority. those cities along with many others, are more attractive to young people with cash than others.

All i was saying is certain cities are more appealing to young people with loads of disposable income. you cant argue that.

Heatcheck
07-10-2012, 02:05 PM
Wouldn't be a bad idea.. suprised you guys didnt mention my JAZZ :) and my counter argument would be.. we are young, wild and talented *****es!!

your young wild talented *****es?

Oefarmy2005
07-10-2012, 02:09 PM
i would keep the t.wolves.

I could maybe see the bobcats, and maybe bucks, but the rest are solid IMO.

THE_FLASH_21
07-10-2012, 02:43 PM
your young wild talented *****es?

hahahah ment to put the comma.. LOL:p

Slade123
07-10-2012, 02:52 PM
I just think if people, including the OP, are wishing to cut 5-6 teams from the NBA then they have to be willing to accept one of the cuts to be their favorite team. Otherwise it is a complete biased opinion. And it's not for the betterment of the NBA. It's for the betterment of their team.

So if their favorite team are the Lakers then they should cut them too? You only cut teams that are losing money, doesn't matter what team you're a fan off.

futureman
07-10-2012, 03:05 PM
The Golden State Tankers should be the 6th team.

Catfish1314
07-10-2012, 03:23 PM
kings sold out for like 10 years straight, they are in rebuild mode, and look to have a young up and coming squad. Remember when OKC sucked, then they are in the finals a few years later. you cant just get rid of bad teams, sports need bad teams look at baseball the pirates are in first place and everyone is rooting for them right now

This and OKC would still be sucking had they not hit three consecutive home runs in the drafts from 2007-2009. The draft can save any franchise.

The Kings would be moved to Las Vegas before the league gets rid of them.

jtrinaldi
07-10-2012, 05:19 PM
couple things. because your competing for a playoff spot doesnt mean your team sells tickets and turns a profit. the wolves can become a hit in spain, but a. is that going to make them enough money to be profitable? and B. how long will rubio be there considering the culture clash? These players are people too, if you had to pick a job, of course the city you live in is going to matter.

It goes case by case, but for the most part, rich people like to live in nice places (money wise, not to say utah isnt nice, it cant offer millionaires what miami or ny can)
First, You must not be aware that the NBA has a Salary Cap which prevents Lebron from getting A-Rod like money, and prevents teams from going bakrupt. Your second part is invalid, "These players are people too" what the hell is that supposed to mean? I thought they were Ninja's

Second,If Rich people like to live in Nice places why the hell are they going to New Jersey? It is not like Dwight has to factor in weather or not to move from a state with little income tax (florida) to a state with High Income tax.


3rd,If talent is around players will come. Dwight has JJ,Deron,Gerald Wallace waiting for him in NJ, and is handcuffing the Magic. What more does New Jersey have to offer than Orlando? Is Orlando not the same as Miami? Why would anyone want to go to a coldweather city and get paid the same as they would somewhere else?

Arch Stanton
07-10-2012, 05:24 PM
So if their favorite team are the Lakers then they should cut them too? You only cut teams that are losing money, doesn't matter what team you're a fan off.

You're completely missing the point. People are so quick to cut teams that they aren't fans of. My point is that you have to be willing to sacrifice your own team in this scenario I don't see playing out.

Fnom11
07-10-2012, 09:45 PM
You knwo whats funny?

Hard caps and etc wont help.


Know what would help?

Get rid of Ncaa(integrate the teams in the new order), let the teams ahve younger divisions and Bring up Local kids ( kids under 18 HAVE to play for a team in their area, cant relocate to other places) since they are 8, they will be more loyal to the team, ITS GRANTED.

Get rid of Draft, and trade player for player, instead LET MONEY RUN.
Knicks want Lebron that has been raised trough Cavs young Ranks? whats his worht, ? 100 million dollars, ok, pay the cavs 100 million dollars to get his serives
1 Cavs no longer have Loses because they cashed in the player they developed
2 cavs have the money to pursue and pay other players to make up for the loss.

Obviously no salary limit, do you think if cavs would have had the option to pay lebron as much as he wanted he would ahve left? Nope, specially because with FRee Market his owner WOULD HAVE INDEED been able to put a team around him.

And last but not least.

VERTICAL divisions, every city in america have 1 or 2 nba teams, separated vertically in divisions of say 20 teams, just like european leagues have.

You dont want to spend much, you can have your team in third division.
Of course divisions with PROMOTION and RELEGATIOn, goodbye tanking!!!!!!!!!!!

srs.jpg?

Fnom11
07-10-2012, 09:47 PM
People forget the NBA would have to spend billions of dollars to contract a few teams.

Fnom11
07-10-2012, 09:50 PM
First, You must not be aware that the NBA has a Salary Cap which prevents Lebron from getting A-Rod like money, and prevents teams from going bakrupt. Your second part is invalid, "These players are people too" what the hell is that supposed to mean? I thought they were Ninja's

Second,If Rich people like to live in Nice places why the hell are they going to New Jersey? It is not like Dwight has to factor in weather or not to move from a state with little income tax (florida) to a state with High Income tax.


3rd,If talent is around players will come. Dwight has JJ,Deron,Gerald Wallace waiting for him in NJ, and is handcuffing the Magic. What more does New Jersey have to offer than Orlando? Is Orlando not the same as Miami? Why would anyone want to go to a coldweather city and get paid the same as they would somewhere else?


It's Brooklyn, not New Jersey. Orlando and Miami aren't even remotely close to being similar.

Losoway
07-10-2012, 09:59 PM
all the best players from those teams would sign with miami

HrtHustleNMscle
07-10-2012, 11:03 PM
Excuse me, but rings count for the Franchise no matter if they moved.

Or maybe you are one of those celtic fans taht say L.A Lakers only have 11 rings :rolleyes:


oh and its very funny but you were talking bout knicks and bulls rings, who go figure happened 15 and 40 years ago too.

I said the Kings had no rings, which they don't, the Royals do. Again, you are comparing apples and oranges. People still talk about Michael Jordan and the 90's Bulls ALL the time. He is what everyone is compared to. When you are comparing a team to a great one you compare them to the 90's Bulls, not the 71 Bucks. The only reason the NBA is what it is today is because of Magic and Larry building it up and MJ taking it global. There are Bulls fans all over the world for what happened 15 years ago. Can you say the same thing about the Bucks? Not to mention, 15 years is within just about everyone who comes on this sites range, it's still relevant, unlike your Bull **** argument. 15 years and 40 is kind of a big difference.

Hellcrooner
07-10-2012, 11:12 PM
I said the Kings had no rings, which they don't, the Royals do. Again, you are comparing apples and oranges. People still talk about Michael Jordan and the 90's Bulls ALL the time. He is what everyone is compared to. When you are comparing a team to a great one you compare them to the 90's Bulls, not the 71 Bucks. The only reason the NBA is what it is today is because of Magic and Larry building it up and MJ taking it global. There are Bulls fans all over the world for what happened 15 years ago. Can you say the same thing about the Bucks? Not to mention, 15 years is within just about everyone who comes on this sites range, it's still relevant, unlike your Bull **** argument. 15 years and 40 is kind of a big difference.

kings is the SAME franchise than Royals is so they have a ring in any nba official account.

So, stop trying to excuse your ignorant comment.
Saying " i was wrong" is much simpler and shows more integrity.

Hellcrooner
07-10-2012, 11:12 PM
I said the Kings had no rings, which they don't, the Royals do. Again, you are comparing apples and oranges. People still talk about Michael Jordan and the 90's Bulls ALL the time. He is what everyone is compared to. When you are comparing a team to a great one you compare them to the 90's Bulls, not the 71 Bucks. The only reason the NBA is what it is today is because of Magic and Larry building it up and MJ taking it global. There are Bulls fans all over the world for what happened 15 years ago. Can you say the same thing about the Bucks? Not to mention, 15 years is within just about everyone who comes on this sites range, it's still relevant, unlike your Bull **** argument. 15 years and 40 is kind of a big difference.

kings is the SAME franchise than Royals is so they have a ring in any nba official account.

So, stop trying to excuse your ignorant comment.
Saying " i was wrong" is much simpler and shows more integrity.

gatkins11
07-10-2012, 11:15 PM
Are you okay with the NBA ridding of your favorite team?

Exactly. Contraction is a great idea as long as your team isn't being contracted.

HrtHustleNMscle
07-11-2012, 02:44 PM
kings is the SAME franchise than Royals is so they have a ring in any nba official account.

So, stop trying to excuse your ignorant comment.
Saying " i was wrong" is much simpler and shows more integrity.

Then do so, because I said the Sacremento Kings do not have a ring, which means they were not in Sacramento, and they weren't the kings at the time. If Seattle decides to get another team and they name it the Super Sonics does that mean the OKC Thunder get a ring? Or if OKC wins one does it count as a title for Seattle? My argument is absolutely correct. Where you are and what your name is kind of matters. And as for ignorance, look it up because you fit the mold very well. And I noticed you didn't even try to defend your ******** comment of 15 years ago and 40 years ago being the same thing. Good boy, you are getting smarter...

RaiderLakersA's
07-11-2012, 02:52 PM
Bucks
Bobcats
Kings
T-Wolves
Cavs

Maybe one more ?


Oddly enough, I wouldn't mind seeing one of those teams actually become a perrenial contender again.

Ray
07-11-2012, 04:27 PM
its called economics... if these small market teams are making money even if they suck, they wont be contracted, if they are losing money they will have to cut costs or they eventually will go bankrupt... simple as that.

People talk about how parity is great and all but the numbers just don't add up. In any sport, the big market/dominant teams still get the highest ratings... not the upstart franchises. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Basketball_Association_Nielsen_ratings

Bajecco
07-11-2012, 05:54 PM
All of this player movement for the sake of manipulating the cap is friggin ridiculous. It's a bad joke and is making the NBA look foolish.

The salary cap is screwing the NBA up just as it did to the NHL & NFL. Get rid of the team salary cap, but maintain some restrictions in regards to contract length and amount. Allow teams that control a players to pay them more $ for more years than any other team can.

Contracting some teams wouldn't hurt either.

Bajecco
07-11-2012, 05:58 PM
its called economics... if these small market teams are making money even if they suck, they wont be contracted, if they are losing money they will have to cut costs or they eventually will go bankrupt... simple as that.

People talk about how parity is great and all but the numbers just don't add up. In any sport, the big market/dominant teams still get the highest ratings... not the upstart franchises. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Basketball_Association_Nielsen_ratings

I hate parity for the sake of....parity. I miss the dynasties in the NFL, NHL & NBA. Every NFL & NHL team turns over 50-70% of their roster every season. The NHL especially is a joke. Dynasties have been destroyed, arenas are empty and casual fans can't keep track of who is on there home team from year to year. I'd hate to see the NBA end up the same way.

LakersA's49ers
07-11-2012, 06:05 PM
hell nah. kings, twolves, bucks, and cavs have futures

king2218
07-11-2012, 06:09 PM
Kings, Bucks, Bobcats, Raptors.