NBA expansion seems imminent. A few months ago, it was decided that the league would look to expand to Seattle, Washington and Las Vegas, Nevada. There may not be a better time for the NBA to add two new expansion teams than right now. The league has—dare I say it—too much talent. Compare the rosters of teams from this season with ones from 10 years ago. The difference is hilariously stark.
Because of all this talent, now would be the ideal time to expand. Add to this the massive sums of money that the team owners could make from expansion, and it makes sense why the owners chose to explore expansion. Seattle and Las Vegas make great locations, but were they the best out there?
The following are three other rumored, potential locations for NBA expansion teams and a rating out of ten for how they would fare as expansion cities.
Nashville, Tennessee
Nashville fills the spot of the “city with a rapidly growing population.” Options like this are pretty much obligatory on lists like this. The most important thing a league should look at when picking expansion cities is the population of the metro area. Are there enough people to support an NBA team?
This isn’t necessarily to discriminate against smaller market teams, but it’s just good business. Putting a team in Fargo, North Dakota doesn’t make sense financially.
Nashville makes sense as an expansion location until you consider that Tennessee, not a particularly big state, already has an NBA team in the Memphis Grizzlies.
Nashville is a fun city, but it would be hard to justify putting two teams in the same state, when others, like Illinois, only have one team.
If the Grizzlies were ever to relocate, Nashville would be a great option, but expansion probably shouldn’t be in their future.
Rating: 3/10
St. Louis, Missouri
NBA historians will know that St. Louis once had a team before. The Hawks, now of Atlanta, were once in St. Louis. They were a very good team in the halcyon days of the NBA, led by players like Bob Pettit. The team moved to Atlanta before the 1968-1969 season, and St. Louis has been without an NBA team since.
The metro area has a large enough population, and the St. Louis Blues playing in the area is also a big plus. NHL arenas can be dual-purpose—they can also serve as NBA arenas. There are many teams across the NBA that do this. Expansion locations with this option are incredibly enticing because it negates the need to build a new arena.
St. Louis also has a strong basketball culture. There are several current NBA players—Jayson Tatum to name one—that hail from there.
The worry with moving a team to St. Louis though is that they would struggle to break into the zeitgeist. St. Louis already has strong fanbases, especially the Cardinals, and a new NBA team may struggle to get a foothold in the city.
Rating: 6/10
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Seattle and Las Vegas are excellent choices for expansion. Seattle has the requisite history with the SuperSonics, and everyone wants to put a team in Las Vegas nowadays. Both have large populations and arenas that could be used. They were the most logical choices to make. They make sense.
But Pittsburgh is a close third for me. Sure, you may not think of “basketball” when you think of Pittsburgh, but that’s only because they’ve never had an NBA team. The University of Pittsburgh has fielded good basketball teams over the years too, so there is an appetite for it.
They have the Pittsburgh Penguins, and often host NCAA Tournament games, so the arena is up to the standard needed for the NBA to move in.
What makes Pittsburgh especially appealing though is the fervent fan base. Imagine some version of the “Terrible Towel” at a basketball game. Sports are part of the fabric of Pittsburgh, and I think introducing another team to the mix would be incredible.
It does have the same potential problem as St. Louis in this regard, but I still feel as if Pittsburgh has fans that are good enough to adopt and latch on to any team in their city.
Rating: 8/10
