Should The NBA Contract?

By: John Fraty

I’m a sports junkie through and through. ESPNEWS is on more frequently in my house than any other news channel. I watch nearly any sport and appreciate everything sports have to offer. While I’m a diehard New York Mets and Philadelphia Eagles fan, basketball is my favorite sport to watch and write about. The beauty of sports is often the underdog competing to beat all odds and be extremely successful.

However, in the NBA, that is very rarely the case. The NBA has become a top-heavy, almost predictable league. Predictability truly kills the enjoyment of watching sports. That is why I propose a plan that would radically, and I mean radically, change the way the NBA works today. I believe the NBA should contract to a 24-team league: 4 teams per division, 3 divisions per conference, 2 conferences, 1 better and more exciting league.

Call me crazy, but this plan could definitely work. Let’s start with 12 teams. These teams aren’t going to be  in real contention for a championship for a while and are rebuilding for the future. I’m sad to say that the Nets would be one of these teams, but here is my list:

Eastern Conference:

1. Milwaukee Bucks

2. New Jersey Nets

3. Philadelphia 76ers

4. Indiana Pacers

5. Charlotte Bobcats

6. Cleveland Cavaliers

Western Conference:

1. Sacramento Kings

2. New Orleans Hornets

3. Memphis Grizzlies

4. Los Angeles Clippers

5. Golden State Warriors

6. Minnesota Timberwolves

This is where it gets confusing (very, very confusing), so pay very close attention. The 12 teams that I listed are separated by conference and then ranked by how good I personally feel they will be in the future. The 1st ranked team and the 6th ranked team would be combined, the 2nd ranked team and the 5th ranked team would be combined, and the 3rd ranked team and the 4th ranked team would be combined.

The tricky part is the combination of ownerships and team officials. I would solve this by having a panel of great NBA minds, whether it be analysts or even officials of teams not listed, alongside NBA officials. The panelists would vote on which ownership group they think is the most competent to run the franchise, and that would be the ownership group that would run the new franchise. Obviously, this sort of plan would have to go through with those same owners before the voting.

Now the money comes into play. Let’s say we have the Nets and the Bobcats. DISCLAIMER: The following numbers are made up. Mikhail Prokhorov has paid $10 to buy majority ownership of the Nets, while Michael Jordan and his group paid $8 to buy majority ownership of the Bobcats. The panelists vote to give Prokhorov the ownership of the new club, leaving Jordan in the dust. However, it will still be fair for Jordan. Let’s now imagine the new club makes a profit of $2 every year that goes to the majority owner. Those $2 would be split in half for the next 8 years until Jordan gets his $8 back (that’s 8 years).

I only mentioned the majority owners, but if you use that concept to include minority owners also, they would get a profit until they are paid the total amount they originally spent. So let’s say there’s a minority owner on the Bobcats who owns 25% of the team while Jordan own the other 75%.

The two sides would split the $1 dollar they get every year until they are fully paid. If that was hard to understand for you, imagine how hard it was for me   to type that out and try and   make it understandable.

These same panelists would also vote on which GM of the two teams is better, and that GM would be running the new combination team. This goes for presidents, coaches, and the other countless team officials. The salaries of the unchosen officials would still be covered by the new ownership group.

So, imagine that we take the New Jersey Nets (ranked 2nd in the East) and the Charlotte Bobcats (ranked 5th in the East) and combine them in this new team with the Nets’ ownership and a mix of team officials. How would we balance out the players? This is slightly less confusing: cuts. The problem is, how would we make sure it’s a good blend of players from both sides? Another easy fix: the team has to be at most 67%-33% one team. So if this new team will have 15 players on the roster come the start of the season, there will be no more then 10 players from one team with 5 on the other. Contracts for the cut players will be paid by ownership (getting kinda hefty for the ownership, I know).

At this point I’m starting to think I’m crazy myself, but there is one final issue: where do we keep this team? This is where the panelists jump back in. They would vote on a variety of factors including but not limited to: market, fanbase and history of the franchises. So if it was a question where to keep the new combined Nets/Bobcats team, based off of the fact that the Nets are moving to Brooklyn and the Bobcats are looking like a worn down franchise with a small fanbase in Charlotte, we would keep this new combination team in New Jersey. The team would thus keep the New Jersey Nets name (barring the name change in Brooklyn).

So this would be the NBA structure after all the craziness (alphabetical order):

EASTERN CONFERENCE:

Atlantic Division:

Boston Celtics

New Jersey Nets (absorbed Charlotte Bobcats)

New York Knicks

Toronto Raptors

Central Division:

Chicago Bulls

Cleveland Cavaliers (absorb Milwaukee Bucks)

Detroit Pistons

Philadelphia 76ers (absorb Indiana Pacers)

Southeast Division:

Atlanta Hawks

Miami Heat

Orlando Magic

Washington Wizards

WESTERN CONFERENCE:

Southwest Division:

Dallas Mavericks

Houston Rockets

New Orleans Hornets (absorbed Golden State Warriors)

San Antonio Spurs

Northwest Division:

Denver Nuggets

Oklahoma City Thunder

Portland Trail Blazers

Utah Jazz

Pacific Division:

Los Angeles Clippers (absorbed Memphis Grizzlies)

Los Angeles Lakers

Phoenix Suns

Sacramento Kings (absorbed Minnesota Timberwolves)

I took the liberty of restructuring the divisions so it fits my 4 team-3 division-2 conference format. That’s how the league would look. There’s balance all around and division races would start to get interesting. Now, for the reasons this would make the NBA much more exciting and push it to the forefront of sports leagues across the country:

Reason #1: Better Players, Better Teams, Better League

This is the most obvious reason this should get done. The NBA has too many bottom feeders, too many unwatchable and boring teams. Restructuring the league to this format with these teams would do just what the words in bold say: it would create a chain. The players who are only in the league because they have to fill out the roster of a bad team would no longer be in the league, thus increasing the overall talent level of the teams, and finally, in turn, increasing the quality of the NBA as we know it. I remember when Charles Barkley said that the NBA should contract last year. He pointed out that too many teams throw games in order to qualify for the lottery, and that the NBA can be at times bad to watch. Barkley proposed contraction, and so did Jerry West. At the time I disagreed with them, but after a while I realized they were right. The pure quality of basketball is no longer what it used to be in the glory days. If the league is able to put out a quality product on every court for every game, the NBA would greatly increase its popularity. Let’s make this league more popular and exciting.

Reason #2: More Meaningful Regular Season

Biggie here. I remember after the playoffs ended last season and I was chatting with Omar and he pointed out that we spent so much time watching regular season basketball, and everything we thought going into the playoffs was blown out of the water. Let’s recap: heading into the playoffs the Lakers were stumbling, Boston was old and decrepit, and the Cavaliers were on top of the world. Do I have to remind everyone what happened after? Nope, not going to waste my time. The bottom line is this: the NBA regular season is a virtual showcase of talent. Nothing more. But, if we have teams that are much better, every game will be meaningful. There won’t be anymore pushover games in the NBA anymore: every team will have enough talent to compete with the others. Balance is the key to a successful and engaging league. Also, the regular season will be more meaningful because…

Reason #3: More Exciting Playoffs

…the NBA playoffs will become an exclusive club. I’m tearing apart the current NBA playoffs system to adjust to a smaller league for three reasons:

• No league should have more then half of its teams make the postseason.
• Two months of playoff basketball can get boring.
• For a team to potentially play more then 100 games is too much. Why is the NBA burning its best players out? Beats me.

Instead of 8 teams per conference (division winners get 3 of top 4 seeds in each conference) we will condense down to an MLB style playoffs. The three division winners will make the playoffs, with one wildcard from each conference. I’m still reluctant to combine the conferences although I have heard many people say that this would be the best way to adjust the playoffs. Obviously the West is better then than the East, but in time that will change and the conferences will begin to even out.

With this system we would keep 7-game series for all 3 round of the playoffs, and drama would arise from the start. God knows we need more obligatory sweeps in the first round. Just imagine last season if the playoffs began with 1 vs. 4, 2 vs. 3 in both conferences. We would have Cleveland vs. Boston and Orlando vs. Atlanta in the East (that’s what it was after the first round). Then, we would have Los Angeles vs. Denver and Dallas vs. Phoenix in the West. Imagine the excitement heading down the stretch of the season for the wild card slot. Every game would potentially involve a team that is on the cusp of making the playoffs. Division races would finally mean something in the NBA and the last few games of the season wouldn’t be bench players starting.

The playoffs would be so intriguing and thrilling, while still ending before fans are burnt out and Kendrick Perkins isn’t able to play in the most important game of the season. Win-win.

Reason #4: Sparks Interest

The NBA is the third-most popular league in the nation. How does it jump past America’s Favorite Pastime and Guys Getting Concussions?

By generating interest. It’s just that simple. The NBA was at the forefront of the sporting world this offseason because of free agency. Let’s push it back to the forefront. Let’s shake things up and get people talking about basketball throughout the whole season, and not just for the beginning and end. I would argue that basketball is the 2nd most popular global sport behind fùtbol. David Stern needs to make it the most popular in this country.

Reason #5: Excites Both Fanbases

Obviously you will greatly disappoint the cities whose teams are being snatched away but there are some advantages to the way I designed this. First of all, I tried my hardest to keep the teams close by (sorry Minnesota, didn’t happen) so fans can still see their favorite players from their former team play. In the end, won’t this make them happier? Now, they can root for a team that actually has a chance now, instead of a team that didn’t have a shot from the beginning, We can’t label them as bandwagon fans, and isn’t that what everyone wants? A winner? You bet it is. Did you read that first paragraph? I’m a Eagles and Mets fan. The Eagles have been successful recently, but definitely disappointing. The Mets? I’ll stop myself before the ranting starts. The bottom line is winners are what keep fans in touch with a sport. You can’t be a winner without having the potential to be a winner first. That potential will be given to every NBA team.

Reason #6: European Teams

This is the stretch reason; the one that is purely abstract. The Nets are playing overseas games this upcoming season, and David Stern said there is a definite possibility of the NBA attempting to launch a franchise in Europe. Imagine 6 NBA franchises in Europe (wouldn’t the Spanish Fuego be an awesome name?). 36 teams? That would need contraction, so why not attempt contraction right now? Yeah, you can’t give me a good reason the NBA shouldn’t.

Reason #7: We Can Finally Fix The NBA Lottery

The NBA Lottery is one of the most flawed systems in sports. It’s clear and obvious that the draft is supposed to be where bad teams are given a great chance to get better, so why is the NBA potentially giving that chance to a near-playoff team? Beats me.  I know that it won’t be like the Bulls in 2008 every year, but the NBA has to fix this system. I propose another plan (I have basically created a new league here), and it’s very simple: keep the lottery system with only the worst 5 teams in the league. That way the worst teams will get the best draft picks, and the NBA will be an even more balanced league.

Reason #8: The Heat/Lakers/Thunder Won’t Win The Next 7 NBA Championships

Jokes, jokes.

Will David Stern ever read this? No, probably not.

Am I crazy for even thinking this up? Yeah, probably.

Am I a genius? Nope, I’m crazy.

Did I channel my inner Bill Simmons? You bet.

Will this plan make the NBA a much, MUCH better league? Absolutely. I know there is definitely contractual stuff I ignored, along with the fact that if Stern ever read this he’d see money being burned in front of his eyes. I don’t care, because at the end of the day the NBA would be propelled to a new, amazing level.

After all, doesn’t the NBA claim to be the league “Where Amazing Happens”?