NBA considers relegating tanking teams to the G-league

[kraidstar]

Aren't most of the G-League teams affiliated with NBA teams?  Terribly dumb idea

Yeah, makes no sense.

If I'm a gleague owner I'm loving this though.

[Moranis]

Aren't most of the G-League teams affiliated with NBA teams?  Terribly dumb idea

Yeah, makes no sense.

If I'm a gleague owner I'm loving this though.

Aren't a lot of the GLeague owners, the NBA owners?

The only way this sort of relegation system works, is if there are actual independent teams all within the same structure.  That just doesn't exist in American sports and it never will (at least for NBA, NFL, MLB, and NHL).  Now maybe the MLS could do something like this, given it is so much newer and there is a real model for it (plus the dollars aren't the same), but it won't work for the 4 long time major sports leagues.

[ozgod]

This would be extremely exciting:

Two worst teams get the first and second overall pick decided by a coin flip. But they’re then both relegated to G-League the following season. At the end of G-League, the two teams face off against each other in a best-of-seven and the winner re-enters the NBA the following season. Meanwhile, the loser of that series faces off against whoever wins a best-of-seven series against the teams with the two worst records in the NBA that year. The losers of these two series are the next teams in G-League and, once again, get first and second overall decided by a coin flip. In other words, no more incentive to tank for a top two pick since it means you’re headed to G-League and maybe never finding your way out. After this plays out for a few years and bankrupts a few small market teams, we revert back to 1990s-style business as usual with 26-28 teams and keep the league limited to no more than 28 teams since the world will rarely have more than 300 true NBA-caliber players in any given year.

You're looking at it from the lens of a fan. Certainly as a fan that would be exciting. But the NBA is a league of 30 owners, who employ a commissioner (Adam Silver) to act in their interest. It costs a fortune to buy into this exclusive club. You think any of them would be willing to accept your proposal and risk getting relegated, with each team worth $1.5bn dollars minimum and $2.6bn average according to Forbes? And SI estimated that salaries make up approx. 50-55% of total running expenses for a team, so we can assume, based on last year's average payroll for an NBA team being $135m, that OpEx, staff and non-staff costs, revenue sharing and de minimis expenses to be the same, then you're looking at an average spend of $260m a year, not including luxury tax payments. And these owners, with this much vested in the game, would be willing to risk getting relegated to the G-league on the basis of  a coin flip?

Again, I'm not against the concept of promotion and relegation per se. As I mentioned before, in Europe's leagues it works because they have multiple tiers of competition, and there's no barrier to entry at the lowest level. Any guy can start his own pub team in England, pay his own players peanuts and compete in the local Friday night Tier 20 comp. All he has to do is register his team and that's it. If his team wins the flag then they get promoted to Tier 19. If they finish bottom 3 they go back to Tier 20. And they can work their way up and part of the fun for those fans is seeing their team work their way up and compete against the big guys, even if they have no prayer of winning. Because the higher up you go the more you have to spend, until you get to the Premier League where the likes of Man City, bankrolled by Sheikh Mansour of Abu Dhabi and their sovereign wealth fund where they've spent $1.1billion on their squad. But there are fans in Manchester that support neither United or City, but rather some local team in Tier 4 or 5 because that's the team that is around where they live. There are even fan-owned teams.

Joe Blow with his pub team will probably stop getting promoted long before that, he'll stop when he has no more money he's willing to spend. But that's not how the NBA or any of our US professional leagues work. You need a billion dollars just to buy into the NBA club, nobody in their right mind would entertain the chance of getting booted out of it. The Americans who have invested billions in European soccer teams are trying to get rid of promotion and relegation, because obviously nobody wants to spend money and run the risk they get relegated. They're not making headway because the way the European leagues are organized are by national associations, not private franchises, but on the flip side there's no salary cap or equalizing mechanism, so they just need to spend more money than anyone else to get the best players.

[ozgod]

There's so way this would work in established American sports.  I hope that when Silver says they considered it, it means they spent about 6 seconds on the idea and automatically dismissed it.  There isn't a single owner who would put his franchise at that type of risk.

I think Silver is a huge fan of the way European soccer is run and is seriously trying all he can to replicate it with the NBA here in the states. How he can be the guy in charge and have such absolutely crappy ideas as to how to get the league into a better overall state is beyond me. That he can't recognize the inherently obvious issues with relegation and why it would never work in the NBA is beyond me.

And I know that there is a bunch of guys here who aren't from America that love and push this idea, but come on!!! Imagine a team worth $5-6 billion with a $120+ million payroll like the Knicks or Lakers getting relegated to a league where the entire league isn't worth that much? Imagine the damage done by having franchises in the largest markets suddenly not being able to be on national TV? Imagine both teams getting relegated and people in those markets deciding not to watch NBA basketball because their team isn't in the NBA? Imagine the uproar at the media partners when New York is replaced by a team in Sioux City and the Lakers by a team in Little Rock? The head honchos at ABC/ESPN and TNT would explode!!!!

The NBA business model and the American fan base simply are not built for or acceptable to relegation.

I don't think Silver is the one pushing it. He knows it will get no traction with the owners. It's mainly segments of the fanbase and influencers and media that keep bringing it up.

Speaking of a concept in European soccer, Silver told employees that the league has thought about relegation as a potential solution to ensure the worst-performing teams are incentivized to compete. But the commissioner then said relegation would be "destabilizing" to the NBA.

In such a scenario, Silver told employees, relegation would essentially mean demoting the worst one or two teams to the G League while promoting the best team or two from the G League to the NBA.

"It would so disrupt our business model," Silver told employees. "And even if you took two teams up from the G League, they wouldn't be equipped to compete in the NBA."

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/34854066/adam-silver-says-nba-monitoring-serious-tanking-issue-sources-say

[Jvalin]

Only way I can see this work is if the 30 existing teams split into 2 divisions of 15 (or 16 in case of expansion). It makes no sense to involve the G-League.

[GetLucky]

Quick reminder that Tremont Waters was an All-NBA G League Second Team member in 2020.

[Moranis]

Only way I can see this work is if the 30 existing teams split into 2 divisions of 15 (or 16 in case of expansion). It makes no sense to involve the G-League.

I think the league would have to expand, but that would be interesting.  An upper tier of 24 teams and a lower tier of 24 teams would be a way to make it work.  Add like 10 teams in Europe and the rest in North America.  It would be a way to have the expansion the league wants, but with some caveats.  All expansion teams are in the lower tier and the worst 6 teams go to it for that first season.  With the significant increase in markets, you could probably make the money work to where it might actually work.  1st tier teams are the first 24 picks in each round of draft, 2nd tier are the 2nd 24 picks in the draft, so you just expand the draft to all 48 teams, which will also allow for trades between teams in the different tiers.

So add something like

"European" Teams - London, Paris, Madrid or Barcelona, Lisbon, Athens, Istanbul, Berlin, Rome, Tel Aviv (I'd say Moscow, but kind of hard to include them at moment, so I will leave that 10th spot blank)

N. American Teams - Seattle, Las Vegas, Kansas City, St. Louis, Louisville, San Diego, Buffalo, Nashville, Albuquerque, Tampa, Baltimore, Montreal, Vancouver, Mexico City, Guadalajara, El Paso/Juarez,

Something like that. 

[Celtics4ever]

I hope we never do European teams, heck, West Coast games are bad enough..

Expansion will dilute talent to a large degree.

[Jvalin]

Only way I can see this work is if the 30 existing teams split into 2 divisions of 15 (or 16 in case of expansion). It makes no sense to involve the G-League.

I think the league would have to expand, but that would be interesting.  An upper tier of 24 teams and a lower tier of 24 teams would be a way to make it work.  Add like 10 teams in Europe and the rest in North America.  It would be a way to have the expansion the league wants, but with some caveats.  All expansion teams are in the lower tier and the worst 6 teams go to it for that first season.  With the significant increase in markets, you could probably make the money work to where it might actually work.  1st tier teams are the first 24 picks in each round of draft, 2nd tier are the 2nd 24 picks in the draft, so you just expand the draft to all 48 teams, which will also allow for trades between teams in the different tiers.

So add something like

"European" Teams - London, Paris, Madrid or Barcelona, Lisbon, Athens, Istanbul, Berlin, Rome, Tel Aviv (I'd say Moscow, but kind of hard to include them at moment, so I will leave that 10th spot blank)

N. American Teams - Seattle, Las Vegas, Kansas City, St. Louis, Louisville, San Diego, Buffalo, Nashville, Albuquerque, Tampa, Baltimore, Montreal, Vancouver, Mexico City, Guadalajara, El Paso/Juarez,

Something like that.

48 teams ?!?!? We both know it will never happen.

16 teams per division should work fine. Bottom 2 teams from 1st division get relegated. Top 2 teams from 2nd division get promoted. Winner of 2nd division gets the #1 pick in the draft, runner up gets the #2 pick, etc. It seems simple and relatively realistic (assuming they are considering the promotion/relegation idea).

[Moranis]

Only way I can see this work is if the 30 existing teams split into 2 divisions of 15 (or 16 in case of expansion). It makes no sense to involve the G-League.

I think the league would have to expand, but that would be interesting.  An upper tier of 24 teams and a lower tier of 24 teams would be a way to make it work.  Add like 10 teams in Europe and the rest in North America.  It would be a way to have the expansion the league wants, but with some caveats.  All expansion teams are in the lower tier and the worst 6 teams go to it for that first season.  With the significant increase in markets, you could probably make the money work to where it might actually work.  1st tier teams are the first 24 picks in each round of draft, 2nd tier are the 2nd 24 picks in the draft, so you just expand the draft to all 48 teams, which will also allow for trades between teams in the different tiers.

So add something like

"European" Teams - London, Paris, Madrid or Barcelona, Lisbon, Athens, Istanbul, Berlin, Rome, Tel Aviv (I'd say Moscow, but kind of hard to include them at moment, so I will leave that 10th spot blank)

N. American Teams - Seattle, Las Vegas, Kansas City, St. Louis, Louisville, San Diego, Buffalo, Nashville, Albuquerque, Tampa, Baltimore, Montreal, Vancouver, Mexico City, Guadalajara, El Paso/Juarez,

Something like that.

48 teams ? ? ? We both know it will never happen.

16 teams per division should work fine. Bottom 2 teams from 1st division get relegated. Top 2 teams from 2nd division get promoted. Winner of 2nd division gets the #1 pick in the draft, runner up gets the #2 pick, etc. It seems simple and relatively realistic (assuming they are considering the promotion/relegation idea).

And I should say, I have more teams listed above then there are spots for, I was just thinking about potential cities that would at least make some level of sense.  You'd need to add 18 and I have 24 cities up there (with both Madrid and Barcelona and no Moscow).

I think you need more than 16 teams, just for scheduling purposes.  Need at least 24 I think.  I'd also keep the draft such that the better players go to the better teams.   

[Jvalin]

Only way I can see this work is if the 30 existing teams split into 2 divisions of 15 (or 16 in case of expansion). It makes no sense to involve the G-League.

I think the league would have to expand, but that would be interesting.  An upper tier of 24 teams and a lower tier of 24 teams would be a way to make it work.  Add like 10 teams in Europe and the rest in North America.  It would be a way to have the expansion the league wants, but with some caveats.  All expansion teams are in the lower tier and the worst 6 teams go to it for that first season.  With the significant increase in markets, you could probably make the money work to where it might actually work.  1st tier teams are the first 24 picks in each round of draft, 2nd tier are the 2nd 24 picks in the draft, so you just expand the draft to all 48 teams, which will also allow for trades between teams in the different tiers.

So add something like

"European" Teams - London, Paris, Madrid or Barcelona, Lisbon, Athens, Istanbul, Berlin, Rome, Tel Aviv (I'd say Moscow, but kind of hard to include them at moment, so I will leave that 10th spot blank)

N. American Teams - Seattle, Las Vegas, Kansas City, St. Louis, Louisville, San Diego, Buffalo, Nashville, Albuquerque, Tampa, Baltimore, Montreal, Vancouver, Mexico City, Guadalajara, El Paso/Juarez,

Something like that.

48 teams ? ? ? We both know it will never happen.

16 teams per division should work fine. Bottom 2 teams from 1st division get relegated. Top 2 teams from 2nd division get promoted. Winner of 2nd division gets the #1 pick in the draft, runner up gets the #2 pick, etc. It seems simple and relatively realistic (assuming they are considering the promotion/relegation idea).

And I should say, I have more teams listed above then there are spots for, I was just thinking about potential cities that would at least make some level of sense.  You'd need to add 18 and I have 24 cities up there (with both Madrid and Barcelona and no Moscow).

I think you need more than 16 teams, just for scheduling purposes.  Need at least 24 I think.  I'd also keep the draft such that the better players go to the better teams.   

Not necessarily.

Teams from the same division play each other 4 times. Teams from different divisions play each other 1 time. Total number of regular season games per team = 76. Seems about right, especially since the NBA already considers shortening the regular season to fewer than 82 games.

[Quetzalcoatl]

Imagine the Lakers getting relegated and playing D2 games in their goofily named stadium.  Or Kawhi & P George get hurt and then Balmer has to host G league games in his brand new multibillion dollar stadium.  There is a 0% chance of this happening because of the financials behind it.  It would make more sense with the MLS and the USL Championship League but even that has stadium problems.

[Moranis]

Only way I can see this work is if the 30 existing teams split into 2 divisions of 15 (or 16 in case of expansion). It makes no sense to involve the G-League.

I think the league would have to expand, but that would be interesting.  An upper tier of 24 teams and a lower tier of 24 teams would be a way to make it work.  Add like 10 teams in Europe and the rest in North America.  It would be a way to have the expansion the league wants, but with some caveats.  All expansion teams are in the lower tier and the worst 6 teams go to it for that first season.  With the significant increase in markets, you could probably make the money work to where it might actually work.  1st tier teams are the first 24 picks in each round of draft, 2nd tier are the 2nd 24 picks in the draft, so you just expand the draft to all 48 teams, which will also allow for trades between teams in the different tiers.

So add something like

"European" Teams - London, Paris, Madrid or Barcelona, Lisbon, Athens, Istanbul, Berlin, Rome, Tel Aviv (I'd say Moscow, but kind of hard to include them at moment, so I will leave that 10th spot blank)

N. American Teams - Seattle, Las Vegas, Kansas City, St. Louis, Louisville, San Diego, Buffalo, Nashville, Albuquerque, Tampa, Baltimore, Montreal, Vancouver, Mexico City, Guadalajara, El Paso/Juarez,

Something like that.

48 teams ? ? ? We both know it will never happen.

16 teams per division should work fine. Bottom 2 teams from 1st division get relegated. Top 2 teams from 2nd division get promoted. Winner of 2nd division gets the #1 pick in the draft, runner up gets the #2 pick, etc. It seems simple and relatively realistic (assuming they are considering the promotion/relegation idea).

And I should say, I have more teams listed above then there are spots for, I was just thinking about potential cities that would at least make some level of sense.  You'd need to add 18 and I have 24 cities up there (with both Madrid and Barcelona and no Moscow).

I think you need more than 16 teams, just for scheduling purposes.  Need at least 24 I think.  I'd also keep the draft such that the better players go to the better teams.   

Not necessarily.

Teams from the same division play each other 4 times. Teams from different divisions play each other 1 time. Total number of regular season games per team = 76. Seems about right, especially since the NBA already considers shortening the regular season to fewer than 82 games.

I thought you meant 16 teams in tier 1, it appears you want 32 teams in tier 1, that would be fine by me.  32 teams in tier 1, a new 2nd tier of 16 teams with relegation. 

[Jvalin]

Only way I can see this work is if the 30 existing teams split into 2 divisions of 15 (or 16 in case of expansion). It makes no sense to involve the G-League.

I think the league would have to expand, but that would be interesting.  An upper tier of 24 teams and a lower tier of 24 teams would be a way to make it work.  Add like 10 teams in Europe and the rest in North America.  It would be a way to have the expansion the league wants, but with some caveats.  All expansion teams are in the lower tier and the worst 6 teams go to it for that first season.  With the significant increase in markets, you could probably make the money work to where it might actually work.  1st tier teams are the first 24 picks in each round of draft, 2nd tier are the 2nd 24 picks in the draft, so you just expand the draft to all 48 teams, which will also allow for trades between teams in the different tiers.

So add something like

"European" Teams - London, Paris, Madrid or Barcelona, Lisbon, Athens, Istanbul, Berlin, Rome, Tel Aviv (I'd say Moscow, but kind of hard to include them at moment, so I will leave that 10th spot blank)

N. American Teams - Seattle, Las Vegas, Kansas City, St. Louis, Louisville, San Diego, Buffalo, Nashville, Albuquerque, Tampa, Baltimore, Montreal, Vancouver, Mexico City, Guadalajara, El Paso/Juarez,

Something like that.

48 teams ? ? ? We both know it will never happen.

16 teams per division should work fine. Bottom 2 teams from 1st division get relegated. Top 2 teams from 2nd division get promoted. Winner of 2nd division gets the #1 pick in the draft, runner up gets the #2 pick, etc. It seems simple and relatively realistic (assuming they are considering the promotion/relegation idea).

And I should say, I have more teams listed above then there are spots for, I was just thinking about potential cities that would at least make some level of sense.  You'd need to add 18 and I have 24 cities up there (with both Madrid and Barcelona and no Moscow).

I think you need more than 16 teams, just for scheduling purposes.  Need at least 24 I think.  I'd also keep the draft such that the better players go to the better teams.   

Not necessarily.

Teams from the same division play each other 4 times. Teams from different divisions play each other 1 time. Total number of regular season games per team = 76. Seems about right, especially since the NBA already considers shortening the regular season to fewer than 82 games.

I thought you meant 16 teams in tier 1, it appears you want 32 teams in tier 1, that would be fine by me.  32 teams in tier 1, a new 2nd tier of 16 teams with relegation.

16 teams in Tier 1 + 16 teams in Tier 2 = 32 teams in total

Teams from the same Tier/Division(/name it what you will) play each other 4 times during the regular season: 15 x 4 = 60 games.

Teams from different Tiers play each other 1 time: 16 × 1 = 16 games

SUM: 60 + 16 = 76 regular season games per team

[Moranis]

Only way I can see this work is if the 30 existing teams split into 2 divisions of 15 (or 16 in case of expansion). It makes no sense to involve the G-League.

I think the league would have to expand, but that would be interesting.  An upper tier of 24 teams and a lower tier of 24 teams would be a way to make it work.  Add like 10 teams in Europe and the rest in North America.  It would be a way to have the expansion the league wants, but with some caveats.  All expansion teams are in the lower tier and the worst 6 teams go to it for that first season.  With the significant increase in markets, you could probably make the money work to where it might actually work.  1st tier teams are the first 24 picks in each round of draft, 2nd tier are the 2nd 24 picks in the draft, so you just expand the draft to all 48 teams, which will also allow for trades between teams in the different tiers.

So add something like

"European" Teams - London, Paris, Madrid or Barcelona, Lisbon, Athens, Istanbul, Berlin, Rome, Tel Aviv (I'd say Moscow, but kind of hard to include them at moment, so I will leave that 10th spot blank)

N. American Teams - Seattle, Las Vegas, Kansas City, St. Louis, Louisville, San Diego, Buffalo, Nashville, Albuquerque, Tampa, Baltimore, Montreal, Vancouver, Mexico City, Guadalajara, El Paso/Juarez,

Something like that.

48 teams ? ? ? We both know it will never happen.

16 teams per division should work fine. Bottom 2 teams from 1st division get relegated. Top 2 teams from 2nd division get promoted. Winner of 2nd division gets the #1 pick in the draft, runner up gets the #2 pick, etc. It seems simple and relatively realistic (assuming they are considering the promotion/relegation idea).

And I should say, I have more teams listed above then there are spots for, I was just thinking about potential cities that would at least make some level of sense.  You'd need to add 18 and I have 24 cities up there (with both Madrid and Barcelona and no Moscow).

I think you need more than 16 teams, just for scheduling purposes.  Need at least 24 I think.  I'd also keep the draft such that the better players go to the better teams.   

Not necessarily.

Teams from the same division play each other 4 times. Teams from different divisions play each other 1 time. Total number of regular season games per team = 76. Seems about right, especially since the NBA already considers shortening the regular season to fewer than 82 games.

I thought you meant 16 teams in tier 1, it appears you want 32 teams in tier 1, that would be fine by me.  32 teams in tier 1, a new 2nd tier of 16 teams with relegation.

16 teams in Tier 1 + 16 teams in Tier 2 = 32 teams in total

Teams from the same Tier/Division(/name it what you will) play each other 4 times during the regular season: 15 x 4 = 60 games.

Teams from different Tiers play each other 1 time: 16 × 1 = 16 games

SUM: 60 + 16 = 76 regular season games per team

that is a horrible idea.  You need way more than 16 teams.