I love the idea of Seattle getting a team back but I think the NBA is diluted enough as it is. But it's more money for the owners and more possibilities for million dollar employment for the players so I can't imagine the "It's diluted" argument will hold much water.

Where would you want to see the NBA go? Of the ones mentioned, I'd rank them:

1. Seattle
2. Vancouver
3. Vegas
4. Omaha
5. Louisville
6. Pittsburgh
7. Mexico City

I might throw St. Louis #4 though. Any other cities that should be in the running?

http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/243593/NBA-Could-Begin-Expansion-Talks-After-Signing-New-CBA

The NBA could open up expansion bidding once a new collective bargaining agreement is in place.

Seattle has been without a franchise since the Sonics left for Oklahoma City in 2008 and would figure to be a leading candidate to receive an expansion team.

Louisville, Pittsburgh, Omaha, Las Vegas, Vancouver and Mexico City are other candidates for a team.

The NBA's new television contract reportedly has expansion escalators that would further incentivize the league to add teams on top of the expansion fee though they would have two additional revenue partners.

You have all the details right?

STL and KC would both be fine, Omaha would low-key be a pretty decent choice. Never Vegas, though.

In order I would go....
>
>1. Seattle
>2. Louisville
>3. Pittsburgh
>4. Vegas
>5. Vancouver
>6. Omaha
>7. Mexico City

.

but i guess they have to add 2 at once? so they shouldnt add any at all.

the Bucks or Kings should have already been sent to Seattle with complimentary umbrellas.

Seattle definitely, mexico city would be dope


www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

It's high time that both got a basketball team again.

hahahaha....

Mexico City would be fun since Canada already has a team but drug cartels would probably corrupt the whole org lol

Seattle is obvious
Then I'd say a 3 way tie between Pittsburg/St. Louis/Vegas.

Vegas is highly unlikely because...gambling
STL isn't on the list (should be)
So that leaves Pittsburg as the most likely choice for me (one new team per conference so no need to realign...Memphis and NO would need to move into the eastern conference if it were say Seattle and Vancouver or Vegas).

I actually don't think it'll be a worse product with 30 additional players to account for though. With the influx of international players and a viable developmental league, there's probably a lil more talent out there to field a few more competitive teams.

It didn't work out before, but it's the same thing as Seattle, and it's 20 some years since the Grizzle left.

Rest of this list? Not major league except Mexico City, and no way any US based league is going into Mexico until the country is stable for 10 years.

I gotta be honest. That team was such a dud, I never even paid attention to why they were leaving.

*skatin' the rings of saturn*


..and miles to go before i sleep...

They've got pro teams in 3 of the 4 sports, but I don't ever remember them mentioned as being a possibility for an NBA franchise.

I love the Burgh, but it's a white, provincial city. The teams there do so well because they've always been the teams, and the region is generally not real friendly to new jacks. Unless they land a Duncan or a Durant, a NBA team is not going to establish itself in the fabric of that city.

We the children of the Light, you know what I mean?
That's why I'm hating on the darkness like Paula Deen
Cause in my hood they masked up like it's Halloween
We going hard for the Rock, but we not some fiends
- Andy Mineo

Is it the gambling stigma? Is it the worrying that it's a recipe for diaster with the strippa groupies + millionaire athletes eventually mixing together after home games & practice? Maaaaaaaan kill alla that. Let them get a sports franchise or two. We all obey their sports lines, let them cook.

>Is it the gambling stigma? Is it the worrying that it's a
>recipe for diaster with the strippa groupies + millionaire
>athletes eventually mixing together after home games &
>practice?

If I'm the NFL or the NBA, I can see thinking it isn't worth the risk.

How are they gonna do for a mid-January game against the Kings? It's a huge transplant city that I can't see actually supporting an NBA team of their own. I'm not even that high on Vegas as a destination for the Raiders, but at least that's only 8 home games a year they have to sell out.

8 weekends for LA and Bay Area people to flood Vegas? It's going to be huge for the city.

NBA is tougher since people aren't flying into Vegas for regular season games.

at best they would hope their games would sell tickets to visiting fans, but who the fuck would go to Vegas just to see their team play a road game when theirs literally a million other things to do in Vegas that they can't do in their own city?

might support a winner, but allegiances to UNLV basketball is probably a priority

I'd let the NHL and NFL take the risk first

1. Seattle or Vancouver (Don't think you would do both with territory)
2. Kansas City or Omaha (See above and Omaha's metro area is only 900,000 + Lincoln's 300,000 45 minutes away)
3. Louisville (Like Omaha, you could get the Salt Lake City, Sacramento only pro game in town dynamic)
4. Pittsburgh
5. Las Vegas
6. Mexico City (Does the average citizen have enough coin to afford this? Same issue MLB is going to have)

Other cities:

I like the St. Louis idea
Austin, TX? (Spurs make this problematic?)
El Paso? (If we are going to mention Omaha....)
Does Montreal care? Seems like the Expos are on back burner until Oakland and Tampa MLB stadium situations are resolved

Louisville and Pittsburgh are the options east of Memphis. St. Louis is close.

But if you do two of the western options, do you move Memphis to the Eastern Conference?

esp since i travel to vancouver once or twice every year, but i wouldn't mind somewhere like kansas city either.