Are there too many teams in the NBA?

by **allamerican08** on Thu Mar 10, 2005 10:29 pm

What do you think? Because I think thats the reason we see so many trades! Especialy with good solid players! The L is expanding so fast that teams dont have the opprotunity to settle down and create something of temselfs. It like each team is allowed ONE superstar! And god forbit..if there are TWO?!! No way....that one of the players MUST get traded?!! Only because there are way too many teams.
PLus David Stern is talking about adding Erou teams as well!

Dont get me wrong... I love the fact that we have so much choice..but maybe there is too much choice...
Arn't you guys tired ONE player hitting 50s 60s etc. Ok we know AI, T-mac, Kobe can score.. but... do u think we've moved away from team game...simply because players think that if they dont OUTSHINE no one will notice them?!
Someone already said this..but ill say it again. One of the Euro coaches said NBA is a "show", and i agree. Everytime we see a "team" play we think the Messiah has arrived. But thats the ONLY way they play in Europe!

I say we cut down a few ONE superstar teams and put somewehre good!

by **Fresh8** on Thu Mar 10, 2005 11:22 pm

But think about the quality of players... there are so many guys who can play NBA ball even as a bencher and more teams accomodates more spots for everyone from overseas and in the USA to give them more chance to make the lleague.. therefore more money for NBA and basketball should become bigger and bigger...

30 should be good now.. i dont think they should expand any further!

by **IronMan** on Fri Mar 11, 2005 2:29 am

I think the number of teams are perfect. No more teams, or else teams will start to lose depth and won't be as exciting to watch.

by **Jeffx** on Fri Mar 11, 2005 4:53 am

IMO, expansion has seriously hurt the NBA, along with the NHL. All these teams have watered down the league. Stern should never have expanded into Canada(no offense to Canadians). He let greed get in the way of putting a decent product on the court. I know it'll never happen, but I'd like to see several franchises liquidated to bring the NBA down to 24 teams.

by **Matthew** on Fri Mar 11, 2005 7:55 am

But Jeff, the talent base for the NBA is massive. As long as there are talented guys comming into the league, then I think it doesnt hurt the nba. Look at football: there are 32 teams and nobody really cares about the expansion for their sport, yet there are more positions and less of a talent pool to draw players from. The NBA is fine imo.

by **Doobie** on Fri Mar 11, 2005 9:06 am

personally i think the nba should expand to about 3 to 4 more teams within the next 30 years. cities like St. Louis , Kansas City , Virginia , and Baltimore would be good places . Seriously , their are too many talented players in the NBA that if they got the playing time they deserve they can also have super-star numbers . I think about 1 star a team keeps the nba more balanced plus stars want money and their such a thing as a salary cap. But on the real i think the nba is fine as is but in the future they should make more teams to give alot more players playing time , and the depth will still be there because their is a draft and their are many free agents that dont get chances , plus their are players in euroleagues and the NBDL that can make an impact in the nba . Also their is bogut!!!! lol , but seriously the nba is fine and doesnt have too many teams.

by **Fresh8** on Fri Mar 11, 2005 11:21 am

Is the NBDL gonnd be a sort of a minor league... cause maybe thats the way to go nstead of expanding the NBA..

by **Strike Freedom** on Fri Mar 11, 2005 12:27 pm

why hasn't Harlem play against the NBA teams??
i'd only seen them playin against College teams..
and isn't NCAA have too many teams.. yet there're also many talents..as well?

by **Sauru** on Fri Mar 11, 2005 12:42 pm

TheCambyManVol3 wrote:But Jeff, the talent base for the NBA is massive. As long as there are talented guys comming into the league, then I think it doesnt hurt the nba. Look at football: there are 32 teams and nobody really cares about the expansion for their sport, yet there are more positions and less of a talent pool to draw players from. The NBA is fine imo.

i agree that the nba has alot of talent to draw from but i would really love to see more basics in these kids. the biggest thing to this day that has impressed me about lebron james was in his rookie season he was wide open for a dunk and slowed down to pass the ball over to davis and let him get the dunk. this is when james was trying to play the point and this is exactly what a point is supposed to do, involve thier teammates. this is why i really like lebron.

by **Amphatoast** on Fri Mar 11, 2005 12:45 pm

it's a good balance right now i think.just some stubborn losing franchises out there like the clippers and warriors that make it seem like it's unbalance.

by **jwill2** on Fri Mar 11, 2005 2:13 pm

SO wrote:why hasn't Harlem play against the NBA teams??
i'd only seen them playin against College teams..
and isn't NCAA have too many teams.. yet there're also many talents..as well?

very harlem players make the nba because they play for show. they're not necessarily in it for the competition. tack on the fact that just because you have crazy crossovers/passes doesn't make you an elite nba player.

by **COOLmac©** on Fri Mar 11, 2005 2:46 pm

harlem players have sick dunks too. they all seem to move like shawn marion and dunks like stoudamire. so sick

by **End Boss** on Fri Mar 11, 2005 3:18 pm

If there were say.. hmmmz.. around 600 teams then I could play in the NBA.. gogo expansion!

Bluesky · by **Andrew** on Fri Mar 11, 2005 4:30 pm

30 seems like a good amount to me. I don't like the idea of overseas expansion, as I believe nations need their own major professional leagues in addition to world tournaments. The NBA, like other American sports leagues, has so many aspects to keep fans interested beyond the game itself - trades, free agency, the draft...these are things that would be affected by worldwide expansion.

Tournaments featuring the champions of professional basketball leagues from around the world is a great idea. A worldwide basketball league - at least one that replaces the NBA - isn't.

by **Fresh8** on Fri Mar 11, 2005 8:14 pm

Yeah, we need a Basketball Champions League.

If we had good teams from all over the world and they had a mini tournament during a time where basketball scheules dn't conflict, it could work out. Maybe, having all Leagues to have their offseasons during the NBA's ones... and then countries sending teams to these tournaments... different host every year. Maybe that could work.

I'd be interested too!

by **Strike Freedom** on Sat Mar 12, 2005 6:54 am

u mean college champions.. vs highschool champions... then vs nbdl champions...
then nba champions.. to see who's really the champ?
but the rules in nba and the court sizes.. are bit different..
so all teams have to adapt to nba b4 they can play with them..

by **bdot19** on Sat Mar 12, 2005 10:08 am

I Feel that teams are good how they are, one team that is stacked next season is the nets. No need to explain why. But I feel teams like my team- the raptors will become really big in years to come. We got a rising star, and our roster is growing in skill wise. So I personally like it how it is.

Bluesky · by **Andrew** on Sat Mar 12, 2005 10:30 am

Sit wrote:Yeah, we need a Basketball Champions League.

If we had good teams from all over the world and they had a mini tournament during a time where basketball scheules dn't conflict, it could work out. Maybe, having all Leagues to have their offseasons during the NBA's ones... and then countries sending teams to these tournaments... different host every year. Maybe that could work.

They did hold such a tournament, the McDonalds Open, every couple of years, though sometimes the runner-up was selected. I'm pretty sure they don't run it anymore, the last team I remember competing was the Bulls in 1997...the Rockets and Suns represented the NBA in 1995 and 1993 respectively. I'm sure in the 80s the Lakers and Celtics also competed.

by **Fresh8** on Sat Mar 12, 2005 10:44 am

Similar.. except hype it up... heaps of european tems as well...

play on an olympic size court. I reakon it could work out!

by **Sauru** on Sat Mar 12, 2005 1:39 pm

i dont think i ever answered the question so here goes. i personally like 28 teams myself with 4 divisions of 7. i dont really mind the 30 teams i just dont like the 6 division layout that they now use.

Bluesky · by **Andrew** on Sat Mar 12, 2005 4:30 pm

I too think they could have made 30 teams work with the four divisions they had in place, simply by doing a little shuffling.

by **Sauru** on Sun Mar 13, 2005 12:32 am

i would have much rather of seen that. infact i could even deal with 32 teams, 8 in each of the 4. anything over 32 of course would be stupid, infact 32 is a bit much. every team added drains the talent pool a little more.

Are there too many teams in the NBA?

Are there too many teams in the NBA?

Who is online