PDA

View Full Version : Shrinking the NBA



CELTICS4LYFE
01-04-2014, 10:57 AM
With so many bad teams n small markets would it make sense to cut some teams?

Less teams = more talent.

Idea #1 - Cut a team from each division. -6 teams

Idea #2 - Cut 2 teams per conference. Then only use only conference standings. (No divisions) -4 teams.

Discuss pros, cons, reactions of fans/owners, n what teams you think would/should get cut.

Maybe cut some teams, do a "fantasy draft", n start the draft wheel all at the same time?

MILLERHIGHLIFE
01-04-2014, 11:48 AM
Doesn't pay. League been diluted way before the 90's.

dhopisthename
01-04-2014, 02:19 PM
sure lets start with whoever your favorite team is

mike_noodles
01-04-2014, 02:34 PM
Talent pool is bigger than it has ever been. Revenues are through the roof. You're mistaken if you are thinking that this league is about the fans, it is only about making money. Less teams is less revenue.

Cal827
01-04-2014, 02:35 PM
sure lets start with whoever your favorite team is

This.

Pros: Yes some teams would be more talented, as they would obtain from the ones that were folded

Con: The exact same issues would occur. Soon enough from those teams with more talent, horrible teams would emerge, leading to a similar conversation. E.g. Suppose a team like Philly (not trying to bait, just an example), survives the folds, but still is playing horribly, people are going to bring up the same thing, should they fold too, and add to the talent on the other teams?

- Pretty much lose a state/province depending on who you fold.
- Fans of teams in a similar market to the teams folded will get worried, and might abandon before they are abandoned.

IndyRealist
01-04-2014, 03:14 PM
Big markets have no problems with viewership or attendance. Why do they need to be more talented, from a business standpoint? The NBA is maximizing profits by spreading teams into smaller markets and gaining a fanbase that would otherwise not spend money on the NBA. Do smaller markets make less money? Yes. But with revenue sharing virtually every team will turn a profit unless they are horribly mismanaged, and almost all teams appreciate in value. Not to mention there are tax incentives to owning a team (the infamous "roster depreciation").

Pistol_Pete
01-04-2014, 08:12 PM
The problem isn't really the number of teams, it's the talent. Years ago, players would come out of college ready to be starters/stars/all-stars. They went to college and played tough ball against touch players and teams that were actually teams.

Now, you get a kid who plays one year in college (if that) against other kids playing one year, on teams with no identity because they're one-year-wonders, who then jumps to the NBA. So instead of an immediate star, you have a guy who needs 3, 4, 5, years to become a complete and consistent NBA player, but who shows superstar flashes, so they get paid $10mil, $15mil, whatever.

So the NBA has now become like a lot of other sports, where you have kind of have prospects and have to wait for them to contribute. And a lot of times, they don't. Combine that with super teams like the Heat or the Celtics of a few years ago and you can see how the league looks watered down.

Chrisclover
01-04-2014, 10:57 PM
David Stern and his successor will prefer an expanding policy than a shrinking one. Build more teams, even in other countries.
You said some teams are lacking talents ?just do more promotion to attract overseas talents!I believe some foreign guys possess superstar talents. We just havent discovered them yet

mzgrizz
01-04-2014, 11:05 PM
Not going to happen
I agree they are more likely to expand into Europe than to cut any teams here
Talent pool is immense now and you have to have good management to stay competitive(hint to Pera !!!)

asandhu23
01-04-2014, 11:06 PM
Easy to say when your team is the Celtics and there's no way NBA will get rid of that team.

Drummond#1
01-04-2014, 11:13 PM
The NBA is not nearly as balanced as the NFL. But small market teams can succeed in this system. Look at GSW. Small market team that has doubled there franchise value in three years with a smart GM and good marketing. Sometimes small market teams become great through coaching and character. Look at Phoenix this year.

Drummond#1
01-04-2014, 11:17 PM
Also about half of the best teams play in small markets this year. Portland, Indy, SAS, Phoenix, OKC, Atlanta, Toronto. These are all relatively small market teams compared to LAL, Boston, NYK, BKN, Chicago and Philly.This is one of the most balanced years in recent memory.

Plus some of these big market teams that are failing have "talent" but they have failed because of their bloated contracts and overexposure in the media.

Heres a better idea. Instead of robbing small market fans of their teams maybe the lottery should be based on revenue rather than performance. That way when fans of big market teams start *****ing because their GM orchestrated a **** roster (Ainge) and they voluntarily tank the league punishes them for not having integrity.

Guppyfighter
01-05-2014, 12:30 AM
Yeah, go **** yourself. wanting to take away six people's team makes you an *******.

Shammyguy3
01-05-2014, 01:01 AM
I'm all for contraction, but only two teams should be contracted. Four teams is too much, and six is ridiculous. Cut two teams, reduce the schedule by a dozen games or so, and I think the league would benefit

Slug3
01-05-2014, 02:02 AM
There are always going to be cheap owners who want to own a team, not pay for the talent to be great, make a little profit and then complain when they are not good.

IndyRealist
01-05-2014, 10:18 AM
I'm all for contraction, but only two teams should be contracted. Four teams is too much, and six is ridiculous. Cut two teams, reduce the schedule by a dozen games or so, and I think the league would benefit

The league would never shorten the game schedule. It's all about maximizing profit. Less games would mean renegotiating their TV deals.

gatkins11
01-05-2014, 02:47 PM
The league will expand before it contracts, so talk like this is pointless.

Raps18-19 Champ
01-05-2014, 02:53 PM
Hardcap = Division of talent.

Solved.

THE MTL
01-05-2014, 02:58 PM
With so many bad teams n small markets would it make sense to cut some teams?

Less teams = more talent.

Idea #1 - Cut a team from each division. -6 teams

Idea #2 - Cut 2 teams per conference. Then only use only conference standings. (No divisions) -4 teams.

Discuss pros, cons, reactions of fans/owners, n what teams you think would/should get cut.

Maybe cut some teams, do a "fantasy draft", n start the draft wheel all at the same time?

No sense from a business standpoint

Slug3
01-05-2014, 04:16 PM
Hardcap = Division of talent.

Solved.

I don't see the players ever agreeing on a hard cap though. I'm sure they would let that lockout go for awhile.

Kenny Powders
01-05-2014, 05:03 PM
Also about half of the best teams play in small markets this year. Portland, Indy, SAS, Phoenix, OKC, Atlanta, Toronto. These are all relatively small market teams compared to LAL, Boston, NYK, BKN, Chicago and Philly.This is one of the most balanced years in recent memory.

Plus some of these big market teams that are failing have "talent" but they have failed because of their bloated contracts and overexposure in the media.

Heres a better idea. Instead of robbing small market fans of their teams maybe the lottery should be based on revenue rather than performance. That way when fans of big market teams start *****ing because their GM orchestrated a **** roster (Ainge) and they voluntarily tank the league punishes them for not having integrity.

Despite what you may think, Toronto is far from a small market team

JasonJohnHorn
01-06-2014, 02:08 PM
The parity in the league has to do with two things.

Poorly run teams and Super Teams.


OKC is a small market that is run well. Portland is also a small market that is run fairly well, and Denver is also a small market that has run fairly well.

The GMs from those teams are doing well. Other GMs are struggling. The Bucks, Cavs, Bobcats. Some are poorly run, some have been hit by injuries. To take a city's team away because they had a bad GM for a few years seems unfair. I hate to see anybody lose a team because they had a bad GM.


That said, there is not much you can do about a poorly run team. Hope for a management change.

As for the super teams... there were three playoff teams in Miami, Cleveland and Toronto, and two of the three franchise players left their team to join the third. Obviously that is going to impact the parity in the league.

That can be addressed with a 'Franchise Tag'. If you only allow one team to sign a player to a max deal, then players likes Wade, Bosh and James would have to turn down tens of millions of dollars to play together.


There are way to encourage parity without contraction.


If this issue was a matter of a lack of talent, then contraction would make sense, but it is a matter of a distribution of talent. Teams like Miami (Wade, James), Houston (Harden, Howard), OKC (Westy and KD) and LAC (CP3 and BG) all have two of the top 15 players. That creates an imbalance.

Raps18-19 Champ
01-06-2014, 06:32 PM
I don't see the players ever agreeing on a hard cap though. I'm sure they would let that lockout go for awhile.

They wouldn't take it. But it is the best way to have parity of talent in the league.

KnickFanSince91
01-06-2014, 08:41 PM
Instead of contraction, they should expand the D-League to make it like the MLB's Minor League system. Each NBA team would affiliate with a club on the varying levels -rookie level, mid-tier and Jr pro (affiliate with Euro teams?). Players with at least 3 years of college ball can come in at the highest tier, Underclassmen at the mid and hs players at the lowest. Players in the D League wouldn't be a cap hit or roster spot until they are called up. Teams would still have 12-men rosters who are eligible to be called up by the NBA affiliate. The league would add at least two more rounds to the draft, but keep the rule that only 1st rounders are guaranteed contracts.

Players would be encouraged to stay in school longer (shortest path to the pros) and lesser players will be able to develop until ready. Even bad teams that are capped out and traded away their draft picks would have young talent in their system that they can use to become better. It will work much better than the draft wheel.

Green_Monster
01-06-2014, 09:11 PM
Also about half of the best teams play in small markets this year. Portland, Indy, SAS, Phoenix, OKC, Atlanta, Toronto. These are all relatively small market teams compared to LAL, Boston, NYK, BKN, Chicago and Philly.This is one of the most balanced years in recent memory.

Plus some of these big market teams that are failing have "talent" but they have failed because of their bloated contracts and overexposure in the media.

Heres a better idea. Instead of robbing small market fans of their teams maybe the lottery should be based on revenue rather than performance. That way when fans of big market teams start *****ing because their GM orchestrated a **** roster (Ainge) and they voluntarily tank the league punishes them for not having integrity.

What was Ainge supposed to do? The Big Three era was over. It was time for the Celtics to rebuild and that was clear.

todu82
01-07-2014, 01:29 AM
Doubt very much they'd ever contract teams. Got to think they are going to be looking at expansion very soon. Got to think Seattle and St.Louis would be prime markets for expansion.