Reply With Quote
Contraction should be based on profitability imo.
I haven't heard anyone mention it in a while and I was talking about it with someone so I wanted to hear your take on it.
Anyone opposed to contraction?
Anyone for it?
Would it hurt or improve the NBA to get rid of one or a few teams?
What are your opinions on the possibility of it?
I'm not sure of the financial ramifications but I do think the on-the-court product would be better.
Contraction should be based on profitability imo.
Get rid of these teams:
New Jersey (although moving to Brooklyn may fix that)
Cleveland
Milwaukee
Orlando
Charlotte
Minnesota
LA Clippers (if the stars bolt)
Sacramento
New Orleans
Memphis
I think thats a reasonable take on it. And when you think about it, in the world of business, thats all that matters.
Media will never spear head such a notion. Too much money involved for them to take part in their own monetary loss. And without their cooperation and push its impossible.
Indifferent fanbase though, for the most part
No. The usual bottom dwellers like the Clips. and Grizz, have turned their franchises around. The Nets, because of their new owner, will be able to compete as well. The only really bad teams right now are the Kings and Wiz. And given how quick the Clips and Grizz turned around, Wash. and Sac. should feel optimistic that they can as well.
It's good in theory,deeper teams, less games?, better games. But David stern won't give up. But honestly market size shouldn't matter there should be a front office contraction, smart front offices would fix everything.
Clips have been profitable now matter how much they sucked.
By profitability I mean to the league, not to the owners. It's the owners problem to be profitable for themselves. If the league could do better without these teams, so be it, but businesses are all about expanding. Contraction s on some fans and that can be really bad for business. Better to allow these Richie Rich guys to lose their own money than to risk alienating long time NBA customers.
Ultimately, you're right. If Stern won't let the WNBA die then it's safe to say he won't contract real basketball teams
This is true, kind of like the Pittsburgh Pirates in baseball. Their owners shoot for bare minimum every year and collect.
true s ain't playin it for money, we in play it for fun s
I'd keep Sacramento, Orlando, NJ, Cleveland and Milwaukee, and the Clippers, and kick out the Toronto Raptors and Washington Wizards instead. That'd put the league down to 24 teams, two conferences of 12, and two divisions of 6. Highly manageable. In fact, you could even see the divisions:
East:
Division 1: Boston, NJ, NYK, Philly, Milwaukee, Cleveland
Division 2: Miami, Orlando, Indiana, Atlanta, Detroit, Chicago
West:
Division 1: LAL, LAC, Golden State, Sacramento, Phoenix, Portland
Division 2: San Antonio, Houston, Dallas, OKC, Denver, Utah
To be honest, I'd love those divisions. Detroit and Chicago would have long travel times, but the rest of the teams would be pretty decent.
Raptors, Wizards, Hornets, and one of either the Kings/Grizzlies/Warriors. I'm tempted to say Oakland because they have always sucked but they and the Kings franchise both have a le in their history and you can't just obliterate that. Maybe the Wolves or Bucks.
With 24 teams the rosters would be stacked. It would be fun to watch.
crofl how did I forget the Raptors?
I like your idea but Keeping the Wizards is preferable because of the DC/Baltimore market
The fact that you forgot about them is the very reason why they should be gone.
lol, tou-cheThe fact that you forgot about them is the very reason why they should be gone.
Raptors should remain in the NBA, their problem has been an inept product and front office..the fans can easily support an NBA team, it was evident during the Carter days..
This thread has 20 posts, and I have yet to see a mention of the Bobcats..in their present form, it can be argued that they are among the worst teams in NBA history, tbh..they have yet to make the playoffs, they don't have any hope for the future, they have never displayed a decent product, at any point in their existence..
Bobcats, Hornets and Kings should be contracted..
I mentioned the Bobcats.
They made the playoffs in 2010 (I think) then got swept by Orlando, so they have yet to win a playoff game
I also agree that the Raptors shouldn't contract just cause Bryan Colangelo is a general manager. They have much more fan support than plenty of other teams.
I completely forgot that Charlotte made a playoffs, tbh..
Looks like they didn't build on that, at all..
Them making the playoffs was like Detroit's 2004 le or Philadelphia's 2001 finals appearance. Larry Brown is usually able to, with every team he coaches, squeeze 1-2 seasons out where they massively overachieve and particularly play WAY better defense than they ever will again. The 2010 Bobcats were the team Larry Brown did that with in Charlotte.
And yeah usually after Larry Brown gets those 1-2 seasons of massive overachieving he bolts at the very first offer he sees or the team gets tired of being micromanaged on every little thing and gradually tunes him out. That's why even though it got Charlotte a playoff birth hiring Larry Brown to coach a rebuilding team is as stupid as it gets.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
