| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
pf9
Joined: 02 Dec 2008
Posts: 317
|
 Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 5:56 pm Post subject: NBA Expansion/Realignment discussion |
 |
|
|
Are you dissatisfied with the current NBA alignment? Well this is the place to discuss changes to it.
I have proposed a realignment that requires expansion to 36 teams. 6 new teams would be established, while 2 teams would move from the Northwest Division to more geographically-appropriate divisions.
East:
Atlantic - Boston, Brooklyn, New York, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh*, Toronto
Central - Chicago, Cleveland, Detroit, Indiana, Milwaukee, Minnesota#
Southeast - Atlanta, Charlotte, Miami, Orlando, Tampa Bay*, Washington
West:
Northwest - Alberta*, Denver, Portland, Seattle*, Utah, Vancouver*
Pacific - Golden State, LA Clippers, LA Lakers, Phoenix, Sacramento (or Anaheim), San Diego*
Southwest - Dallas, Houston, Memphis, New Orleans, Oklahoma City#, San Antonio
Notes:
* - expansion team
# - team changing divisions
Alberta splits home games between Edmonton and Calgary
If you think you can do better, post your ideas. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Finnerception
Joined: 24 Sep 2008
Posts: 12985
Location: New Jersey
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 6:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
I thought the NBA wanted to cut down on teams, not expand?
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mossburg
Joined: 02 Jan 2005
Posts: 38142
Location: Straight Cash Inc. Headquarters
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 6:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Won't comment on realignment, but there is DEFINITELY no need for expansion. There are enough crappy teams, and with the way stars are all flocking together to one team, it'll make things even worse.
_________________
Equal Opportunity Hater
| simonwayne wrote: | | imani wrote: | | Lebron has had a magnificient career putting up cheap and useless assist numbers. |
YES. THIS. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
IrishGreen
Joined: 22 Mar 2007
Posts: 31031
Location: Wisconsin
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 6:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
nba needs to cut like 6 teams, not add more
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
seminoles1
Joined: 10 Jan 2005
Posts: 32255
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2013 7:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Mossburg wrote: | | Won't comment on realignment, but there is DEFINITELY no need for expansion. There are enough crappy teams, and with the way stars are all flocking together to one team, it'll make things even worse. |
Yup. Adding teams is just too much.
I'd cut 2-4 teams.
_________________
To give anything less than your best is to sacrifice the gift-Steve Prefontaine
The future is not set. There is no fate but what we make for ourselves. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dr. Philly
Joined: 02 Nov 2009
Posts: 23520
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 8:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Which teams would they cut though, not to mention a general relocation for Seattle
_________________
| simonwayne wrote: | | LeBron has done for the NBA what Teen Mom has done for teenage pregnancies |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pastor Dillon
Joined: 12 Jan 2007
Posts: 4720
Location: Mountain Home, Arkansas
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 9:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
The nba could survive with 2 more teams
Personally I would like to see a single elimination tment among all the none playoff teams with the winner getting the first pick
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
steelcurtain29
Joined: 04 Oct 2007
Posts: 33098
Location: Monongahela, PA
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
candyman93
Joined: 02 Dec 2009
Posts: 35422
Location: Adopt a Brownie 2012: TJ Ward
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 2:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
We need less teams, not more.
Too many teams are becoming farm systems for bigger markets
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ArrowheadRage58
Joined: 31 Aug 2011
Posts: 3550
Location: Hate for the Donkeys is at a mile high
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2013 10:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
How do you add that many new teams without giving KC a franchise? They would be 2nd to Seattle to get a team. Actually Sac should go back to KC and Seattle show be an expansion franchise if possible. Seattle taking over the Sac/KC franchise is just weird.
Alberta and Tampa just don't scream basketball cities...I'd go St Louis and Louisville as well. Kansas and Kentucky are obviously HUGE basketball states and although the Jayhawks and Wildcats are the major reason for that, that doesn't mean that an NBA team wouldn't also be huge in those regions. KC already has the arena, I'm not sure about Louisville.
_________________
| fortdetroit wrote: | | I wonder if people realize that Matt Cassel's 2 best seasons of his career are probably better than anything Alex Smith has ever done. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pf9
Joined: 02 Dec 2008
Posts: 317
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2013 2:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| ArrowheadRage58 wrote: | How do you add that many new teams without giving KC a franchise? They would be 2nd to Seattle to get a team. Actually Sac should go back to KC and Seattle show be an expansion franchise if possible. Seattle taking over the Sac/KC franchise is just weird.
Alberta and Tampa just don't scream basketball cities...I'd go St Louis and Louisville as well. Kansas and Kentucky are obviously HUGE basketball states and although the Jayhawks and Wildcats are the major reason for that, that doesn't mean that an NBA team wouldn't also be huge in those regions. KC already has the arena, I'm not sure about Louisville. |
I picked certain cities for expansion teams because I'm trying to envision an NBA in which every team is in a division that is the best geographical fit for them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sdrawkcab321
Joined: 23 Dec 2009
Posts: 773
Location: cleveland
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2013 3:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| dont need 3 teams in canada. they barely need 1 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rAmFan39
Joined: 08 Apr 2012
Posts: 401
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2013 4:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
T-Wolves in the east??
_________________
^^Joe_is_the_best on the Sig |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
panther dude
Joined: 01 Apr 2007
Posts: 5696
Location: East Lansing, MI
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2013 5:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| rAmFan39 wrote: | | T-Wolves in the east?? |
It has been tossed around by division realigners for years because we are closer to the Bucks and Pistons of the league than the Blazers and Thunder distance types.
But adding extra teams, especially so many extra just wouldn't work out. The talent would be so diluted and the competitive balance would be so off. That's almost like calling up a couple development league teams to compete in the league, it's just not a good idea. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pf9
Joined: 02 Dec 2008
Posts: 317
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2013 8:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
If it's done correctly it could work. For starters, I wouldn't suggest having all 6 teams start play in the same year. The expansion should occur in 3 phases. In each year, in addition to the expansion drafts, the regular drafts would have some extra rounds in which only the expansion teams participate.
In year one, I would have Pittsburgh and San Diego start play in the Atlantic and Pacific Divisions respectively.
In year two, Seattle joins the Northwest Division and Tampa Bay the Southeast. Oklahoma City also moves to the Southwest.
In the third and final year/phase, Alberta and Vancouver would begin play in the Northwest Division, sending Minnesota to the Central.
It could work. It just needs to be done in a precise way. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
