U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Basketball
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-22-2012, 01:59 PM
 
266 posts, read 317,857 times
Reputation: 169

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Henry Hill View Post
Lol I think that the Bronx should have a basketball team or even queens lol The Queens Kings (If they move from sactown) xD
Would New Yorkers really change their loyalties that quickly? I mean its gotta be hard being a Knicks or Nets fan but if another team ever came to Philly I'd still always be a Sixers fan, and its not to easy being a Sixers fan either.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-13-2013, 05:04 AM
 
Location: Carlton North, Victoria, Australia
103 posts, read 83,413 times
Reputation: 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chicago76 View Post
I thought it was an interesting one too. Looking at places without territorial issues (areas where there isn't an existing team within 90 miles):

NBA: Montreal, Vegas, VA Beach/Hampton Roads/Norfolk, Richmond, Louisville, Birmingham, Rochester, Seattle are the 40 bn+ markets. If you eliminate the gambling issues, poor fits (Montreal, Birmingham, etc.) and the one region where the different municipalities can’t agree on who hosts and how revenues may be shared for a venue (VA Beach). Richmond, Louisville, and Seattle are about it. Seattle did support their team while they were there...until the OKC investment group owning the team sabotaged the roster and it became apparent the Sonics were moving.

MLB: no one

NFL: Montreal, Vegas, VA Beach/Hampton Roads/Norfolk, Austin, Sacramento, Richmond, Louisville, Birmingham, San Antonio, Portland. First three seem unlikely for NBA reasons above, but I could see any of the others if expansion becomes a possibility again.
An NHL issue was planned but never done.

I find the NHL very interesting, though, for two reasons.

The first is that when I tried to analyse the relative costs of supporting a franchise into the various variables that might explain the diferences between the sports, I came to the conclusion that an NHL franchise ought to cost relatively more to support than the figure given, which is only very slightly larger than for NBA or NFL.

The second is that, if we follow your very sensible step of excluding places like the Inland Empire with territorial issues, we have the following markets: Atlanta, Houston, Las Vegas, VA Beach/Hampton Roads/Norfolk, Richmond, Austin, Sacramento, Louisville, San Antonio, Birmingham, Portland, Honolulu, Rochester, Seattle, Tulsa, Albany, Omaha.

Of these, we can exclude all but Portland, Rochester, Seattle and Albany as very poor fits for hockey culture, though I am uncertain about Sacramento and Omaha. Sacramento despite its hot climate is of course close to high, icy mountains. The rest are in hot climates on flat terrain where people have never seen natural ice and would have no interest in ice hockey.

Thus, I would argue that re expansion/relocation potential the NHL is more akin to MLB than to the NFL or NBA. There exist extremely few unoccupied markets which are reasonable “fits” for hockey culture and have the economy to support an NHL team, and yet people seem to think ice hockey can expand a great deal.

Unlike MLB, the NHL is not declining in popularity, so overcoming the territorial problems that plague North American sport and lead to teams playing in culturally or economically unviable markets is most critical here. Should the NHL do this, it has much more hope of thriving in the long term.

Last edited by mianfei; 02-13-2013 at 05:12 AM.. Reason: Better grammar
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2013, 09:06 PM
 
Location: Currently living in Reddit
5,655 posts, read 5,463,126 times
Reputation: 7254
Not factored into this is territory costs. A team coming into a media market where one or more teams already exist (e.g. Stamford/Bridgeport is the NYC media market) would have to pay a steep fee to those teams (Knicks, Nets). So it wouldn't be prudent to put a team in some of those cities.

I actually stopped following pro hoops after the Knicks forced the Nets to sell Dr. J in order to come up with the premium the Nets had to pay the Knicks.

Btw, as someone living in Pittsburgh, we don't want an NBA franchise.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-14-2013, 12:59 AM
 
Location: Tha 6th Bourough
3,634 posts, read 4,854,932 times
Reputation: 1750
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC View Post
The NBA couldn't support two more teams - from a talent perspective. Two teams allows 30 more players at the bottom of the barrel into the league.
I think the opposite. Just as in real life, sometimes there is talent that goes overlooked or doesn't get the opportunites, yet they are just as good or better than the people that hold those positions. I think it would give lots of players that haven't gone noticed an opportunity to show the world that there are players out there that lack opportunities to get thier foot in the door. Just like in fighting, we see who the best is in the UFC, but that doesn't mean they are neccessarily the best people fighting in the world.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2013, 06:11 PM
 
735 posts, read 916,160 times
Reputation: 280
For markets that could actually support an NBA team right now, I'd say Vancouver, Montreal, Seattle, Baltimore, maybe St. Louis and maybe Kansas City.

No other city in California could support a team. Las Vegas definitely couldn't. Virginia Beach couldn't. Going by numbers alone really isn't very accurate. Louisville couldn't because of the Cardinals. Richmond couldn't because it's way too small a market. Ditto for Birmingham, and Rochester isn't enough of a basketball hotbed to make up for its being smaller than most NBA markets.

Edit: Forgot Pittsburgh. However, I think that it's a similar situation to Louisville. It seems people follow Pitt and other local college teams as if they're pro teams to an extent.

This is a bit off-topic but personally, I think that if the teams in Memphis, New Orleans, and Charlotte tried to better connect with their cities then they could do well there. Calling a team in Memphis the Grizzlies makes no sense. There should be a reference to Memphis' musical background. Ditto for New Orleans. And the Bobcats? What kind of a name is that? Just call them the Hornets again.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2013, 06:14 PM
 
735 posts, read 916,160 times
Reputation: 280
Quote:
Originally Posted by RazorRob305 View Post
I think the opposite. Just as in real life, sometimes there is talent that goes overlooked or doesn't get the opportunites, yet they are just as good or better than the people that hold those positions. I think it would give lots of players that haven't gone noticed an opportunity to show the world that there are players out there that lack opportunities to get thier foot in the door. Just like in fighting, we see who the best is in the UFC, but that doesn't mean they are neccessarily the best people fighting in the world.
Without a doubt. GMs go for athleticism and "potential" versus skill these days. Casual fans who call themselves experts try to say that there is a lack of talent but nothing could be further from the truth. The vast majority of the talent simply doesn't get developed.

The only reason expansion can't work is it would mess up the schedule. The NBA probably has the best schedule set-up out of any professional league.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2013, 06:30 PM
 
735 posts, read 916,160 times
Reputation: 280
Quote:
Originally Posted by pgtvatitans View Post
I actually agree with this. The NBA is becoming too diluted with talent. I think a lot of this has to do with college players coming to the NBA too soon and not understanding how to actually play basketball. The product has become worse because of the fact that most the newer players rely strictly on athleticism as oppose to skill. If the NBA decides to extend the requirement of how long players have to stay in college and/or recruit more overseas, it may help the overall product, but until then it wouldn't be too exciting to see more long athletic types that can't dribble or shoot or play defense.
That really won't help anything. It's the focus on everything but what makes somebody a good player that is making it seem there is a dilution in talent these days. All increasing limits on when players can enter does is keep more kids from having a chance to play in the league.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2013, 04:33 PM
 
Location: New Albany, Indiana (Greater Louisville)
9,584 posts, read 20,459,831 times
Reputation: 9077
Louisvile was and could again be a great NBA city. I think it could be for the NBA what St Louis is to MLB - a small market with a wide spread passionate fan base that is (most importantly) basketball literate. Basketball is to Kentucky what hockey is to Canada. Name another market were the NBA would always be the most popular sport in that market no matter what other pro sports teams (NFL, MLB) were in town? Louisville would be unlikely to get any other pro sports team but even if it did NBA would be the most popular because of the region's love and history with the game of basketball.

The main knock again Louisville getting a team is the proximity of Indy, but I think the Pacers would benefit from a true rivalry. They suffer from apathy and poor attendance despite being a top tier team right now. Heated rivalries benefit both sides through added excitement and merchandise sales. Additionally the parts of Indiana that would root for the Colonels really don't support the Pacers anyway. Within a couple counties of the Kentucky border into Indiana is mostly people whose parents or grandparents moved from Kentucky and their loyallty remains to the Commonwealth. UK Wildcats and U of L Cardinals outnumber IU and Purdue fans at least 3 to 1 in the Louisville metro counties of Indiana (Clark, Floyd, Harrision, & Washington). The only Indiana team that is popular in that area is the Colts. I am in Clarksville IN a lot and have never seen anyone wearing a Pacers shirt. Ever.

Louisville right now is split along Red and Blue lines on bringing in an NBA team. Unfortunately the making backers of the idea say a lot of things to antaganise U of L fans. The face of the movement (Bruce Miller) is a nut that says really dumb things. If the NBA to Louisville movement had a moderate face that didn't view U of L as the enemy I think it would work . I think the NBA would work without damaging any regional college bball teams.

Long live the Kentucky Colonels!!

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2013, 12:08 AM
 
389 posts, read 769,508 times
Reputation: 132
I'm absolutely dying to get NBA basketball back in St. Louis. Specifically the Hawks, but I'd take any team. Its been 45 years.
And I think we deserve it. David Lee was an All-Star Brad Beal is a ROY candidate, and Ben McLemore is one of the best players in college and viewed as a lottery pick. All from St. Louis. And there's Otto Porter from Georgetown - born in St. Louis played AAU ball in St. Louis but played high school down in Sikeston Missouri but his St. Louis roots are deep. He'll also being a lottery pick this year. By the end of this decade St. Louis will be respected for its basketball talent and maybe even seen as a basketball hotbed. BJ Young is staying in Arkansas to continue to develop as a PG but he's another one to watch if you haven't, just beat Mizzou the other day. And if you want to keep an eye on the future, look out for Jayson Tatum c/o 2016 people are pretty excited about this freshman.

And I think an NBA team would be an invaluable resource in helping us get there. From building courts to hosting clinics and just being a foundation for St. Louis Basketball. St. Louis would love having an NBA team. I want a second chance at the Hawks, the 60s were tough times and I wish they'd survived here. Atlanta can rename their team the Atlanta Flame, I just want the Hawks name back and the '58 Championship Banner.

Last edited by arch_genesis; 02-21-2013 at 12:22 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-17-2013, 07:42 AM
 
Location: Fairfax County, VA
3,718 posts, read 4,592,987 times
Reputation: 1448
Here is another URL showing what cities can host and not host a sports team based on personal income. NBA is listed on here:

Could Your City Give a Sports Team a Good Home?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Basketball
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top