By Jeje Gomez, Devon Birdsong, Bill Huan, Jacob Douglas | Pounding The Rock (PtR), 2026-03-23 01:28:29
最近有报道称，联盟正在讨论在2028/29赛季进行扩军。这会是一个提升比赛水平的好决定，还是会导致球员天赋的稀释？
雅各布·道格拉斯 (Jacob Douglas)： 目前NBA的天赋是过剩的，但缺乏能够利用这些天赋的称职管理层和组织。联盟的摆烂问题使得现在并不是支持扩军的好时机。我们真的想再增加两支在三月份让首发球员休战、然后惨败30-40分的球队吗？话虽如此，我还是希望西雅图能以某种形式找回他们的球队。那座城市拥有深厚的篮球文化，需要一支职业球队与之匹配。
比尔·黄 (Bill Huan)： 这绝对是个好决定。假设各支球队真的派出了他们的最强阵容，联盟中每支球队都有多个能在任何夜晚砍下40+的球员。更大的问题是摆烂，球队数量增加可能意味着更多管理层会认为摆烂是必要的，但这不应阻碍联盟扩军。人才的数量和质量从未像现在这样高，在更多地方展示这些技能以推广这项运动是合情合理的。我唯一的担忧是NBA将拉斯维加斯视为潜在目的地。那座城市不再是以前那样的派对中心了，而且那里已经有无数的职业运动队了。给温哥华另一个机会难道不是更有意义吗？这样他们就能与西雅图建立起即时的宿敌关系，同时在一个产出NBA人才比以往任何时候都多的国家推广篮球。或者考虑一下墨西哥城如何？那里已经有一支发展联盟（G League）球队了。美国国内对篮球的兴趣已经足够大——如果亚当·萧华 (Adam Silver) 想要实现增长最大化，他需要考虑美国的邻国。
德文·伯德桑 (Devon Birdsong)： 我的观点是，当一个联盟具备了足够的吸引力和财务基础时，扩军总是正确的选择，而且我认为NBA很难找到比现在更好的时机了。在只有一支“四大”职业体育联盟球队的地区长大并为其撰稿，让我对于一支没有多支球队的城市意味着什么有了很多见解，所以我更希望看到第二支球队去往拉斯维加斯以外的地方。就目前情况来看，似乎有一些关于孟菲斯灰熊队可能搬到纳什维尔的讨论，如果真的发生，我会非常同情孟菲斯的球迷。扩军可能会阻止这种情况发生。至于天赋稀释，这看起来是一个苍白的借口。目前正式名单上只有450名球员，加上双向合同球员，总数接近500多人，所以我认为从这些过剩的人才中再容纳30名球员是没问题的。在我看来，更大的问题是摆烂。如果有太多的球队故意输球，天赋平衡与否并不重要。
杰杰·戈麦斯 (Jeje Gomez)： 天赋是存在的，问题在于它是如何分布的。现在没有真正的超级球队，而严苛的土豪线规则最终应该会导致更多的球员流动，因为当一些球队无法留住所有球星时，另一些球队会重新将自由球员市场作为优先级，马刺在他们的年轻球员变得越来越贵时可能会遇到这个问题。问题在于，只要新秀合同和受限制自由球员市场制度存在，获取廉价人才的最佳方式就是通过选秀，这可能会导致更多球队摆烂，进而产生一种天赋稀释的错觉，尽管现在的优秀球员比以往任何时候都多。华盛顿奇才队就是一个例子，他们交易来了两名全明星球员，但似乎对让他们上场并不感兴趣。在扩军问题上，联盟必须赢得的最大战役是认知之战，因为许多球迷已经认为比赛太多且烂队太多了。
如果西雅图和拉斯维加斯如报道所言获得了两支扩军球队，那么两支西部联盟球队将不得不迁往东部。哪两支球队应该去那个实力较弱的分区？
道格拉斯： 明尼苏达森林狼队、孟菲斯灰熊队和新奥尔良鹈鹕队都可以轻易迁往东部。明尼苏达可以轻松地与芝加哥公牛队、密尔沃基雄鹿队、底特律活塞队、印第安纳步行者队和克利夫兰骑士队一起归入中部赛区。孟菲斯放在那个分区也合理，或者与夏洛特黄蜂队、亚特兰大老鹰队、迈阿密热火队、华盛顿奇才队一起归入东南赛区。新奥尔良可以去东南赛区，但考虑到他们与西南赛区德克萨斯州球队的地理接近性，我会让他们留在西部。
黄： 我同意雅各布的看法：考虑到地理位置，应该是明尼苏达和孟菲斯，而新奥尔良可以留在西部，因为他们离德州球队很近。拥有安东尼·爱德华兹 (Anthony Edwards) 以及孟菲斯在今年选秀抽签中选中的任何年轻球星，对于为东部提供更多可宣传和营销的球员也至关重要，并有望进一步平衡两个分区之间的实力。
伯德桑： 从地理上讲，明尼苏达是一个显而易见的选择。我还会加上俄克拉荷马城雷霆队。这倒不是因为这很合理，而是因为我讨厌他们。而且，我想避免在季后赛的西部半区遇到他们。事实上，如果你让我纯粹出于恶意来做这件事，我还会把休斯顿火箭队或洛杉矶湖人队中的一个和雷霆队一起踢走。也许洛杉矶快船队可以作为第三选择，以弥补他们犯下的种种罪孽。在我看来，这样会令人满意得多。我将成为圣安东尼奥历史上最受爱戴的NBA总裁。
戈麦斯： 明尼苏达和孟菲斯感觉是最好的答案，不仅是因为地理位置，还因为如果鹈鹕队未来搬迁，将他们移至东部可能会产生麻烦。新奥尔良大概能支持一支优秀的NBA球队，也应该得到证明这一点的机会，但到目前为止，他们一直难以持续打造出一支强队，而且如果联盟最终尝试进军墨西哥或加拿大，他们看起来像是那种可能会搬迁的球队。为了避免未来再次重新洗牌，将鹈鹕队留在西部可能是明智之举，尽管他们可能非常渴望去那个竞争较弱的分区。
扩军在短时间内不会到来，但如果它在这个休赛期发生，马刺应该保护哪八名球员？
道格拉斯： 几年后情况可能会有所改变，但目前值得留住的核心是文班亚马、卡斯尔、哈珀、福克斯、瓦塞尔、约翰逊、布莱恩特和尚帕尼。无意冒犯卢克·科内特 (Luke Kornet)，他本赛季的表现非常出色，但在过去的几个赛季中，我们看到其他球队以更廉价的合同签下了高质量的大个子。我有信心，如果科内特被西雅图或拉斯维加斯选走，圣安东尼奥能找到另一个高质量的大个子。
黄： 凭直觉想，应该是文班、迪伦·哈珀 (Dylan Harper)、斯蒂芬·卡斯尔 (Stephon Castle)、达龙·福克斯 (De’Aaron Fox)、朱利安·尚帕尼 (Julian Champagnie)、德文·瓦塞尔 (Devin Vassell)、凯尔登·约翰逊 (Keldon Johnson) 和托马斯·布莱恩特 (Thomas Bryant)。德文提出了不保护福克斯的想法，这可能会得到一些支持，但我仍会避免这样做。是的，他的合同不是最好的，但近年来我们一次又一次地看到球星级别的球员被交易，即使合同有问题。我们不能冒着白白流失像福克斯这样的人才的风险，而且到扩军球队进入时，他已经处于当前合同的倒数第二年了。即使考虑到状态下滑和合同可能变成负资产，对手球队总是愿意交易即将到期的合同。
伯德桑： 根据目前的阵容，我会选择文班、卡斯尔、哈珀、瓦塞尔、凯尔登、科内特、布莱恩特和尚帕尼。我不保护福克斯的原因很大程度上是基于他合同的战略考虑。扩军球队在成立初期可能会对承担顶薪合同持谨慎态度，即便不是这样，如果福克斯开始下滑（目前还没有），这也能让马刺省去考虑如何处理这份合同的麻烦。当然，这很大程度上取决于季后赛的进展。如果马刺把拉里·奥布莱恩杯带回家，我百分之百坚持我的排名。如果没有……我可能不得不对其进行修改。
戈麦斯： 既然我们是在为这个练习讨论即将到来的赛季，我会选择维克托·文班亚马 (Victor Wembanyama)、福克斯、卡斯尔、哈珀、瓦塞尔、布莱恩特、约翰逊和尚帕尼。科内特的合同很棒，但尚帕尼也是如此，而且他更年轻，打的位置也更稀缺。不保护福克斯并以此试探扩军球队是否敢承担他的合同可能是明智的，但如果他们真的接受了马刺的虚晃一枪，圣安东尼奥将失去一名核心球员。如果我们讨论的是几年后的情况，名单会发生变化，福克斯很可能不会被保护，但就目前而言，他太重要了。
由生成式人工智能翻译，译文内容可能不准确或不完整，以原文为准。
点击查看原文：NBA expansion only works if the league fixes tanking first
NBA expansion only works if the league fixes tanking first
Recently, it was reported that expansion is being discussed for the 2028/29 season. Would it be a good decision that elevates the game, or would it lead to a dilution of talent?
Jacob Douglas: There is a surplus in NBA talent right now, but there is a lack of competent front offices and organizations that can capitalize on that talent. The league’s tanking problem makes it a tough time to support expansion. Do we really want to add two more teams that are getting blown out by 30-40 points in March while sitting their starters? That said, I hope that Seattle gets their team back in some capacity. The city has a rich basketball culture and needs a pro team to match it.
Bill Huan: It’s absolutely a good decision. Every team in the league has multiple guys who can drop 40+ on any given night, assuming they’re actually fielding their best lineup. The bigger issue is tanking, and having more teams might mean that more front offices will deem it necessary to tank, but that shouldn’t stop the league from expanding. The quantity and quality of talent have never been higher, and it makes sense to showcase that skill in more places to grow the game. My only concern is the NBA prioritizing Vegas as a potential destination. The city isn’t the party hub it once was, and there are already countless pro sports teams there already. Wouldn’t it make more sense to give Vancouver another chance, so that they could create an instant rivalry with Seattle while growing the game in a country that’s producing more NBA talent than ever before? Or how about Mexico City, where there’s already a G League team in place? There’s enough interest in basketball in the States — if Adam Silver wants to maximize growth, he needs to consider America’s neighbors.
Devon Birdsong: I’m of the opinion that expansion is always the right choice when a league has the right mixture of appeal and finances, and I think the NBA is going to be hard-pressed to find a better time to do so. Growing up around and writing about the only “Big Four” professional sports team in the area has given me a lot of perspective regarding what that might mean for a city without multiple teams, so I’d prefer to see the second team go somewhere other than Vegas. As it is, there seems to be some conversation about the Grizzlies potentially moving to Nashville, and I’d really feel for Memphis fans if that came to pass. Expansion might forestall that. As for dilution of talent, that seems like a thin excuse not to. There are only 450 players on permanent rosters as is, and with two-ways, that approaches 500+, so I think it’s safe to say that there’s room for 30 more players out of that surplus without much issue. The bigger issue, in my view, is tanking. It doesn’t matter what the talent balance is if you have too many teams losing on purpose.
Jeje Gomez: The talent is there. The problem is how it’s spread around. There are no real superteams, and the draconian apron rules should lead to more player movement eventually, as some teams go back to prioritizing free agency when others simply can’t retain all their stars, an issue the Spurs might experience as their young players become more expensive. The problem is that, as long as rookie contracts and restricted free agency are in place, the best way to acquire cheap talent will be through the draft, which might lead to more teams tanking, which subsequently will give the illusion of dilution, even if there are more good players now than ever. An example of that are the Wizards, who traded for two All-Stars but don’t seem all that interested in playing them. The biggest battle the league will have to win when it comes to expansion is a battle of perception, since a lot of fans already think there are too many games and bad teams.
If Seattle and Las Vegas get the two expansion teams as reported, two Western Conference teams will have to move to the East. Which teams should go to the weaker conference?
Douglas: Minnesota, Memphis, and New Orleans could all easily be moved to the East. Minnesota would easily slot into the Central division with Chicago, Milwaukee, Detroit, Indiana, and Cleveland. Memphis could make sense in that conference, or in the Southeast with Charlotte, Atlanta, Miami, Washington, and Atlanta. New Orleans could go to the Southeast, but given their proximity to the Texas teams in the Southwest division, I’d keep them in the West.
Huan: I agree with Jacob here: it should be Minnesota and Memphis given their proximity, and New Orleans can stay in the West since they’re already close to the Texas teams. Having young stars in Ant and whoever Memphis gets in the lottery this year will also be important to give the East more players to feature and market, and hopefully even out the talent across the two conferences some more.
Birdsong: Geographically speaking, Minnesota is an obvious choice. I would also include Oklahoma City. Not as much because it makes sense as because I hate them. And also, I would like to avoid playing them on the Western side of the playoff bracket. Actually, if you were asking me to do this out of pure spite, I would also include either the Rockets or the Lakers alongside the Thunder. Maybe the Clippers as a third choice to atone for their multitude of sins. Much more satisfying if you ask me. I’d be the most beloved NBA commissioner in San Antonio history.
Gomez: Minnesota and Memphis feel like the best answers, not only because of proximity but because moving the Pelicans to the East could create a future problem if the franchise moves. New Orleans can probably support a good NBA team and should get a chance to prove that, but they have struggled to consistently create one so far, and they seem like the type of franchise that could be relocated if the league eventually tries to go to Mexico or Canada. To avoid a new reshuffling in the future, keeping the Pelicans in the West might be the smart move, even though they would probably love to go to the weaker conference.
Expansion is not coming for a while, but if it were to happen this offseason, which eight players should the Spurs protect?
Douglas: This will probably change in a few years, but the score to keep around is Wembanyama, Castle, Harper, Fox, Vassell, Johnson, Bryant, and Champagnie. No offense to Kornet, who has been incredible this season, but we’ve seen quality big men picked up on cheaper deals by other teams in the last few seasons. I have confidence that San Antonio could find another quality big man if Kornet were to be drafted to Seattle or Vegas.
Huan: Off the top of my head, it should be Wemby, Harper, Castle, Fox, Champagnie, Vassell, Johnson, and Bryant. Devon brought up the idea of leaving Fox unprotected, which will likely gain some traction, but I’d still avoid that. Yes, his contract isn’t the greatest, but we’ve seen star-level players get traded time and time again in recent years, even with questionable contracts. We can’t risk letting a talent like Fox go for free, and by the time the expansion teams come in, he’ll already be on the second-last year of his current deal. Even factoring a decline and the contract potentially becoming negative value, opposing teams are always willing to make deals with soon-to-be-expiring money.
Birdsong: Based on the roster right now, I’d say Wemby, Castle, Harper, Vassell, Keldon, Kornet, Bryant, and Champagnie. My reason for not protecting Fox is largely strategic due to his contract. Expansion teams may be leery of taking on a max contract so early in their existence, and if not, it saves the Spurs having to figure out what to do with that contract if Fox begins to decline (and no, he is not currently). Of course, a lot of this depends on how the postseason goes. If the Spurs bring Larry home, I 100% stand by my order. If not…I may have to make changes to it.
Gomez: Since we are talking about the upcoming season for this exercise, I’d go with Wembanyama, Fox, Castle, Harper, Vassell, Bryant, Johnson, and Champagnie. Kornet is in a great contract, but so is Champagnie, and he’s younger and plays a position that has more scarcity. Not protecting Fox and daring the expansion teams to take on his contract could be smart, but if they call the Spurs’ bluff, San Antonio would be losing a key player. If we are talking years down the line, the list would change and Fox would likely not be protected, but for now, he’s too important.
By Jeje Gomez, Devon Birdsong, Bill Huan, Jacob Douglas, via Pounding The Rock