Knicks · If the NBA had to Delete two NBA Teams, who would it be? (page 1)

playa2 @ 7/8/2013 7:58 PM
Toronto and Washington, Management is content on getting high picks and letting them walk without building any longevity of a competitive pro ball team . People send players there for punishment and substance abuse guys.
EnySpree @ 7/8/2013 8:02 PM
The bucks and Minnesota...historically nobody ever wanted to play in either spot
ToddTT @ 7/8/2013 8:08 PM
Pelicans... for the obvious reason.
Knixkik @ 7/8/2013 8:23 PM
Minnesota and Sacramemto are 2 teams that will always struggle to have sustainable success. Sacramento offering then withdrawing offer to iguodala shows management hasn't changed much. Minnesota drafting 2 PGs in lottery in 2009 and neither was even the best PG available. No one will ever truly develop in these places. Theres bad management and then there these joke franchises.
loweyecue @ 7/8/2013 8:56 PM
Knixkik wrote:Minnesota and Sacramemto are 2 teams that will always struggle to have sustainable success. Sacramento offering then withdrawing offer to iguodala shows management hasn't changed much. Minnesota drafting 2 PGs in lottery in 2009 and neither was even the best PG available. No one will ever truly develop in these places. Theres bad management and then there these joke franchises.

I agree with this. Even the wizards are better than these two.

IronWillGiroud @ 7/8/2013 9:12 PM
i would delete the wiz (unless they change back to bullets, then they can stay),

and would delete the magic, eyesore franchise

markvmc @ 7/8/2013 10:16 PM
ToddTT wrote:Pelicans... for the obvious reason.

what's the obvious reason?

loweyecue @ 7/8/2013 11:46 PM
OK - I am gonna change my vote to Chicago and Miami
Nalod @ 7/8/2013 11:48 PM
Wiz will be .500 this year.

New CBA creates a new ebb and flow for teams. Clips were left for dead and when owner paid off the debt on the team he spent money.

BTW, they made money then, and now.

SAC was an obvious choice but someone thought it was worth $550,000 and the jury will be out for the next few years.

Pelicans owned by same guy that turned around the Saints. Draft picks and a few deals/free agents and they seem to be "rebuilding" as they did in OKC, which was pathetic in seattle under disinterested/cash losing owner.

Diluted talent? Seems like every era can say "not like the old days" But every era gets defined in hindsight not in the moment.

There are so many players from overseas they make up for the gap. MVP's Nash (canada) and Dirk. Hakeem the Dream. The list is long.

The league is stronger now then ever!

Whats the measure? Viewership and money!

Solace @ 7/8/2013 11:53 PM
Knixkik wrote:Minnesota and Sacramemto are 2 teams that will always struggle to have sustainable success. Sacramento offering then withdrawing offer to iguodala shows management hasn't changed much. Minnesota drafting 2 PGs in lottery in 2009 and neither was even the best PG available. No one will ever truly develop in these places. Theres bad management and then there these joke franchises.

Actually Sacramento pulled the offer because it was clear Iguodala was playing them and had no intention of coming there.

jrodmc @ 7/9/2013 8:19 AM
ToddTT wrote:Pelicans... for the obvious reason.

+1
The Pelicans and the Pelicans. Next question...

ChuckBuck @ 7/9/2013 8:32 AM
Miami and Indiana
gunsnewing @ 7/9/2013 8:40 AM
The Knicks and sacramento
Jmpasq @ 7/9/2013 9:53 AM
Miami pisses me off because that city is such awful sports town they do not deserve that team. Could u Imagine what that team would be like in NY. Between Shaq and Lebron the building was a ghost town
VDesai @ 7/9/2013 10:35 AM
Knicks and Knicks
smackeddog @ 7/9/2013 10:41 AM
The Bucks. Twice.
Page 1 of 1