Is there even a point in small market teams in the NBA?

[flyerhawk]

How are we defining small market?

 

[Inimical]

I feel we could easily solve the super team thing by limiting teams to two max contracts.

 

[bksballer89]

I feel we could easily solve the super team thing by limiting teams to two max contracts.

There's only 1 super team though and I don't even think they have more 2 max contracts

 

[msgkings322]

There's only 1 super team though and I don't even think they have more 2 max contracts

KD and Curry

 

[msgkings322]

I feel we could easily solve the super team thing by limiting teams to two max contracts.

That would do it but never ever happen. The union would definitely go to the mat on that one

 

[SU Nittany Tide]

The Warriors have been to the finals 4 staright years, have won it 3 times and are favored to make it 4 out of 5 and complete a 3-peat. They also won it in the 70's.

Cleveland has been to the finals 4 straight times and won it once.

Miami made it 4 straight times and won it twice, plus they had another title before Lebron arrived, so that gives them 3 total.

San Antonio has 5 titles in 6 finals appearances.

Unless you count Boston as part of the Eastern seaboard, they are not a big market. They have 17 titles (more than any other franchise).

While some of the other smaller market teams haven't won anything (or haven't in a long time) several (Milwaukee and OKC for example) have exciting young stars and the talent to at least make some noise in the playoffs.

Add in what @logic pointed out re: Atlanta, Houston, Philly and Washington and you can say that, of the large market teams, the Lakers are the only large market team that has won consistently and even they are in the process of rebuilding and have missed the playoffs for 5 straight years.

In short, I'd say the small market teams are doing pretty well.

Mostly accurate but Boston is a large market.

 

[bksballer89]

That would do it but never ever happen. The union would definitely go to the mat on that one

Yep....and to be fair to a team like the Warriors, 3 of their top players are homegrown and was drafted by them. Not their fault that the rest of the league missed out on Steph, Klay, and Draymond

 

[trojanfan12]

Yep....and to be fair to a team like the Warriors, 3 of their top players are homegrown and was drafted by them. Not their fault that the rest of the league missed out on Steph, Klay, and Draymond

And that's the real problem with any attempts to limit the number of max level guys/having a salary cap. A team drafts players, develops them into max level players and then potentially have to watch 1 or 2 of them go play for someone else.

The other option...a player who already isn't being paid what he's actually worth, has to consider taking even less ("less" being relative of course).

 

[flyerhawk]

Mostly accurate but Boston is a large market.

It all depends on how you measure it.

It could be argued that there are only 3 large markets. New York, LA, and Chicago. Heck it could even be argued that New York and LA are the only 2 large markets. There is a reason why they both have 2 professional basketball teams.

OTOH, you could argue that there are only about 3 teams in "small" markets. Sactown, New Orleans, and Orlando.

Ultimately it boils down to the size of the potential fan base. Boston is the 24th or so largest city in the country but the dominate New England. So they have a market of over 10 million people.

 

[trojanfan12]

It all depends on how you measure it.

It could be argued that there are only 3 large markets. New York, LA, and Chicago. Heck it could even be argued that New York and LA are the only 2 large markets. There is a reason why they both have 2 professional basketball teams.

OTOH, you could argue that there are only about 3 teams in "small" markets. Sactown, New Orleans, and Orlando.

Ultimately it boils down to the size of the potential fan base. Boston is the 24th or so largest city in the country but the dominate New England. So they have a market of over 10 million people.

Agree. Like I said in my post, I think that if you count the Eastern Seaboard/New England as Boston's market, then it's probably a large market. If you don't, then it isn't.

 

[flyerhawk]

Agree. Like I said in my post, I think that if you count the Eastern Seaboard/New England as Boston's market, then it's probably a large market. If you don't, then it isn't.

Exactly. And this is why it gets complicated.

Atlanta is the 40th largest city in the United States. But it is the 11th largest metropolitan area. Boston is the 25th largest city by 6th largest metropolitan area.

Charlotte is the 16th largest city in the US but the 21st largest metropolitan area.

So how do you measure it?

 

[trojanfan12]

Exactly. And this is why it gets complicated.

Atlanta is the 40th largest city in the United States. But it is the 11th largest metropolitan area. Boston is the 25th largest city by 6th largest metropolitan area.

Charlotte is the 16th largest city in the US but the 21st largest metropolitan area.

So how do you measure it?

Seems like it's definitely more of an art than a science. lol

And what about teams like the Clippers and Nets? Definitely large market, but both have a small market "feel" to them.

 

[Used 2 B Hu]

I quit reading when someone said Dallas is a small market.

I'm still trying to figure out when Cleveland became a large market


Are we basing this on payroll, or population, or television market size?

 

[Used 2 B Hu]

It all depends on how you measure it.

It could be argued that there are only 3 large markets. New York, LA, and Chicago. Heck it could even be argued that New York and LA are the only 2 large markets. There is a reason why they both have 2 professional basketball teams.

Yeah


I've always been fond of saying that there really are no small markets, just small owners

 

[CaptainStubing]

the best way to measure the size of a 'city' is by total metropolitan area.

san antonio is #24 in the US -- small
cleveland is #33 -- small

and, as has been mentioned, there are ton of 'big' market teams that haven't won the title in a long time

and, actually, the san fran metro area is only the 12th biggest in the US. Not exactly huge.

every team can compete at basically the same level in the NBA

 

[Myles]

TV markets.

• New York (#1)
• Los Angeles (#2)
• Chicago (#3)
• Philadelphia (#4)
• Dallas-Fort Worth (#5)
• San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose (#6)
• Washington, D.C. (Hagerstown) (#7)
• Houston (#8)
• Boston (Manchester) (#9)
• Atlanta (#10)
• Tampa-St. Petersburg (Sarasota) (#11)
• Phoenix (Prescott) (#12)
• Detroit (#13)
• Seattle-Tacoma (#14)
• Minneapolis-St. Paul (#15)
• Miami-Fort Lauderdale (#16)
• Denver (#17)
• Orlando-Daytona Beach-Melbourne (#18)
• Cleveland-Akron (Canton) (#19)
• Sacramento-Stockton-Modesto (#20)
• St. Louis (#21)
• Charlotte (#22)
• Pittsburgh (#23)
• Raleigh-Durham (Fayetteville) (#24)
• Portland, OR (#25)
• Baltimore (#26)
• Indianapolis (#27)
• San Diego (#28)
• Nashville (#29)
• Hartford & New Haven (#30)
• San Antonio (#31)
• Columbus, OH (#32)
• Kansas City (#33)
• Salt Lake City (#34)
• Milwaukee (#35)
• Cincinnati (#36)
• Greenville-Spartanburg-Asheville-Anderson (#37)
• West Palm Beach-Fort Pierce (#38)
• Austin (#39)
• Las Vegas (#40)
• Oklahoma City (#41)
• Norfolk-Portsmouth-Newport News (#42)
• Harrisburg-Lancaster-Lebanon-York (#43)
• Grand Rapids-Kalamazoo-Battle Creek (#44)
• Birmingham (Anniston and Tuscaloosa) (#45)
• Greensboro-High Point-Winston-Salem (#46)
• Jacksonville (#47)
• Albuquerque-Santa Fe (#48)
• Louisville (#49)
• New Orleans (#50)

 

[trojanfan12]

Yeah


I've always been fond of saying that there really are no small markets, just small owners

I tend to agree with this.

End of the day, it's probably more about ownership than just about anything else.

Sure, some cities are "destination cities" based on climate, night life, etc. But even then, it doesn't seem to matter as much anymore.

The Lakers are a prime example of this. When Dr. Buss was alive, it seemed like the Lakers could get whoever they wanted. Then when Short Buss was running things, it was all they could do to get a meeting with a top FA, nevermind actually signing one.

Then Short Buss gets kicked to the curb, Magic and Pelinka take over, have done some good things, look competent and the Lakers are able to get Lebron and most seem to think they'll add someone else next off-season.

 

[tlance]

It all depends on how you measure it.

It could be argued that there are only 3 large markets. New York, LA, and Chicago. Heck it could even be argued that New York and LA are the only 2 large markets. There is a reason why they both have 2 professional basketball teams.

OTOH, you could argue that there are only about 3 teams in "small" markets. Sactown, New Orleans, and Orlando.

Ultimately it boils down to the size of the potential fan base. Boston is the 24th or so largest city in the country but the dominate New England. So they have a market of over 10 million people.

I think this is correct, but I would add one more thing.

Fan base is not limited to geographical regions. The Lakers and Celtics for example, are teams that always tend to have national followings. Other franchises can gain national following when they have extended periods of high success (GS, SA and Cleveland). That is hard to accomplish though.

 

[Myles]

I think this is correct, but I would add one more thing.

Fan base is not limited to geographical regions. The Lakers and Celtics for example, are teams that always tend to have national followings. Other franchises can gain national following when they have extended periods of high success (GS, SA and Cleveland). That is hard to accomplish though.

That is true. I think it is most defined by TV market though. If that is the case, where do the "small markets" start? #12 Phoenix?

 

[WiggyRuss]

the smallest market team in the league just resigned an All NBA player. The second time they have done that in the last 3 years. That same team has the highest payroll in the league.

Cleveland and San Antonio are not big markets by any stretch of the imagination but enjoyed success because they obtained stars through the draft--- and both teams ,especially Cleveland, spent a ton to support their teams.

Big market teams like New York, Philly, LAC, Brooklyn, have been atrocious more often than not.

Being a big market team was a lot more of an advantage a decade + ago, then it currently is now. Because of shared TV money, revenue sharing, being able to market from wherever you are, everyone being able to watch any game they want anywhere in the world instead of just having the Celts and Lakers on Sunday national TV, NBA owners like Bennett, Gilbert, DeVos, etc. that own small market teams like OKC, CLE, ORL with immense wealth, etc.....all have wiped out what was once an a very sizable advantage to a few teams.

The NBA has been growing leaps and bounds over the last 5 years and have done that while the Lakers and Knicks- and even teams like Dallas, Philly, Brooklyn, Washington etc. have not been very good.