Will the NBA Expand to New Cities? Exploring Future Growth Possibilities

As I sit here scrolling through the latest sports news, I can't help but wonder about the NBA's expansion possibilities. The recent situation with Jerwin Ancajas being pulled from the Pacquiao-Barrios boxing card in Nevada got me thinking about how sports commissions and leagues handle growth opportunities. The Nevada State Athletic Commission turned down several potential opponents for Ancajas, including Casero, which ironically mirrors how professional sports leagues sometimes approach expansion - with extreme caution and numerous vetting processes.

Having followed the NBA's expansion history closely, I've noticed the league has been remarkably conservative about adding new teams compared to other major sports. The last expansion was back in 2004 with the Charlotte Bobcats (now Hornets), making it nearly two decades since we've seen a new franchise. That's an eternity in sports business terms. The current 30-team structure has served the league well, but I'm convinced we're approaching a tipping point where expansion becomes not just possible, but necessary for the league's continued global dominance.

The financial mathematics of expansion are simply too compelling to ignore. Based on my analysis of recent franchise sales and market valuations, the NBA could realistically charge expansion fees in the $2.5 to $3 billion range per new team. That means adding just two teams could generate $6 billion in revenue shared among existing owners - that's approximately $200 million per current franchise owner before they even sell a single ticket or jersey. These numbers are staggering when you consider that the entire league's basketball-related income was about $8.9 billion in the 2022-23 season.

Seattle feels like an absolute no-brainer to me. Having visited the city multiple times during SuperSonics era, the basketball hunger there is palpable. When the team relocated to Oklahoma City in 2008, it left a void that no other sport has filled. The city has since built the Climate Pledge Arena, which is essentially NBA-ready, and the corporate support in the Seattle metro area could easily sustain a franchise. I've spoken with several sports business colleagues who estimate Seattle could support a franchise valuation exceeding $3.5 billion within five years of relaunch.

Las Vegas presents another fascinating case study. The success of the Golden Knights in the NHL and the Raiders' relocation to Vegas demonstrates the city's evolution from purely tourist destination to legitimate sports market. The NBA has already dipped its toes in the Vegas waters with the Summer League's massive success there. Personally, I've attended the last three Summer Leagues, and the energy is electric - it feels like a market ready to explode. The T-Mobile Arena could serve as a temporary home while a basketball-specific venue gets developed, much like what happened with the hockey team.

What many people don't consider are the international possibilities. Mexico City keeps coming up in expansion conversations, and having visited the arena there multiple times, I can attest to the passionate basketball culture. The infrastructure challenges are real - travel logistics, currency fluctuations, and political considerations all factor in - but the potential to tap into a market of over 20 million people is too significant to ignore. The NBA has been strategically planting seeds there with regular-season games, and I believe we'll see a Mexico City franchise within the next 15 years.

The Ancajas situation in Nevada actually provides an interesting parallel to NBA expansion considerations. Just as boxing commissions carefully vet potential matchups to maintain competitive balance and safety, the NBA must consider how new teams would affect league parity. The last thing anyone wants is another situation like the Charlotte Bobcats' inaugural 7-59 season in 2011-12. From my perspective, the league has learned from past expansion drafts and would likely structure player allocation differently to ensure new franchises can compete more quickly.

Television market dynamics also play a crucial role that many fans overlook. The current media rights deal expires after the 2024-25 season, and expansion could be strategically timed with the next contract. Adding teams in Seattle and Las Vegas would deliver two new major media markets while not significantly diluting the existing revenue pie. I've done some back-of-the-envelope calculations suggesting these two markets could increase the value of the next national TV deal by 8-12%, which translates to hundreds of millions annually.

There are legitimate concerns about diluting the talent pool, but I think this is overblown. The global basketball talent pipeline is deeper than ever, with European leagues, the G-League, and college basketball producing more NBA-ready players than at any point in history. Adding two teams would mean roughly 30 additional roster spots - the league absorbed more than that when it expanded from 27 to 29 teams between 1988 and 1995 without noticeable quality dilution.

The competitive balance question is what keeps league executives up at night, in my opinion. Having spoken with several front office personnel over the years, their primary expansion concern isn't finding 30 new players - it's ensuring the product remains compelling. The league has worked hard to achieve its current parity, with multiple different champions over the past decade. Any expansion plan would need to preserve this competitive equilibrium while allowing new franchises to build viable teams within a reasonable timeframe.

Looking at other sports leagues provides valuable lessons. The NHL's expansion to Seattle with the Kraken demonstrated how a properly structured expansion draft can immediately create a competitive team, while the Las Vegas Golden Knights proved an expansion team could reach the Stanley Cup Final in its first season. The NBA would be wise to study these blueprints closely, though basketball's different roster construction dynamics would require adaptation.

From my vantage point, the question isn't if the NBA will expand, but when and where. The economic incentives are too powerful, the market opportunities too compelling, and the global basketball ecosystem too robust to maintain the status quo indefinitely. The careful approach we've seen from Commissioner Adam Silver suggests that when expansion does happen, it will be meticulously planned and executed. Much like the Nevada commission's cautious approach to boxing matches, the NBA appears determined to get expansion right rather than get it done quickly.

I'm particularly excited about the potential ripple effects of expansion. New franchises would create additional coaching and front office opportunities, stimulate local economies, and potentially reinvigorate rivalries. Having witnessed the impact of the Raptors' addition to the league in 1995, I'm convinced that strategic expansion strengthens the entire ecosystem rather than simply dividing the existing pie into smaller pieces.

The coming years will undoubtedly bring more clarity to the expansion conversation. As media rights negotiations intensify and the global sports landscape continues evolving, the pressure to expand will likely increase. My prediction? We'll see formal expansion plans announced within the next three years, with Seattle and Las Vegas as the leading candidates. The process may mirror the careful vetting we saw in the Ancajas situation, but the outcome will likely be far more positive for basketball fans craving new teams and cities longing for NBA action.