Analysis: Could NBA decline to bring Sonics back? Why it's possible.

SEATTLE — For all the excitement and buzz that’s been generated about the possibility of NBA expansion, it remains just that — a possibility. And while most of the conversation has focused on the potential of the SuperSonics returning, there is a world where all the talk falls flat and the NBA eventually comes back with the decision not to expand.

Seems blasphemous at this point. Seems like the kind of decision that could poison fans in the Seattle market to the point where any chance of the league returning becomes unlikely.

But there are viable points as to why expansion may not happen. Whether it’s Bill Simmons or former All-Star Tracy McGrady, there are prominent voices in the NBA space pumping the brakes with doubts that expansion will happen — whether it’s owners still not being on board or concern about the dilution of talent if two more teams are added.

NBA Commissioner Adam Silver even cautioned about it himself last month at the last Board of Governors meeting when the league formally announced the plans to engage with potential ownership groups in Seattle and Las Vegas.

“I think the league is in such a strong position right now, and there’s such enormous belief in the future prospects of this league, that for the 30 teams, there was nobody in the room saying, I really want to expand right now because I could really use the money,” Silver said. “It’s very much a strategic decision for this league. As I said, you’re selling equity. Part of the issue when you’re selling equity is you have to make predictions about future value. Virtually everyone in the room said, I’m a buyer, I’m not a seller. The real reason to ultimately expand is if you see strategic benefit. That’s why we’re particularly focused on Las Vegas and Seattle. I see strong strategic reasons for both those markets.”

With all that in mind, it’s worth taking a look at some of the factors that could lead to the opposite outcome NBA fans are hoping for here and why the league might decide not to move forward.

Nobody gives a damn about history

There are 30 teams in the NBA. Only 10 current principal owners were in charge of their respective teams the last time the league included the SuperSonics, including the owners of the Thunder that moved the franchise out of Seattle.

There has long been the feeling that this would be the opportunity to right the wrong from what happened nearly 20 years ago. And to be fair, there is a sentiment within the NBA league office that would like to see that happen.

But this decision isn’t made by the league office. It’s not made by Silver. It’s ultimately a decision that’ll be made by owners and two-thirds of the league has no sentimentality toward knowing what it was like when Seattle had a franchise. They are business people first and foremost and whatever the decision ends up being will come down to whether the dollars make sense — or the dollars and cents.

Which brings up another reason why it might not happen …

The money isn’t there

This is the most simple reason why the league won’t choose to expand and is the aspect of this process that feels the most in the control of the owners. The expansion fee is set by the current owners with input from the league office about what is expected to be offered in the open marketplace. Numbers have been floated between $7 and $10 billion with most believing the target area is somewhere north of $8 billion.

But if owners are dead set on getting $10 billion for an expansion fee and an ownership group in either Seattle or Las Vegas can’t get there, then expansion isn’t happening.

And even if the money is there the owners still might not be on board because of …

Owners don’t want to split the pot

When the NBA signed its new $77 billion media rights deal nearly two years ago, it became a massive windfall to help float each franchise. The media rights deals are split 30 ways with each team getting a share. This season, each team is expected to receive $142.56 million and the cut that each franchise gets is only supposed to grow through the remainder of the deal.

But, what if there are two more mouths to feed?

The league could cap a percentage on the amount of revenue new expansion teams could receive in their first couple of seasons. But let’s say Seattle and Las Vegas were to get a full share starting in 2028-29 when theoretically those teams could start. Split 30 ways, each team is expected to receive $174.66 million in media revenue that season per Sports Business Journal. But if Seattle and Las Vegas receive their full share, that number drops by nearly $11 million per team to $163.74 million.

Now, extrapolate that out over the remaining life of the media deal beginning in 2029-30 per the numbers from SBJ. The 30 current teams would have to be willing to part with an expected $100 million in media rights payments through the 2035-36 season by adding Seattle and Las Vegas to the mix.

While it seems like pennies in the scope of the numbers being thrown around, $100 million is still $100 million and a lump sum of $500-plus million on the front end in expansion fees might not be enough to placate those future losses for some owners.

There are real financial reasons why owners might eventually opt against expanding.

There’s also another factor, too: the guys on the court.

Not enough talent in the league

Are there enough basketball players? Yes. Are there players who currently sit on NBA benches who could thrive if given the chance at a bigger role and more playing time? Yes.

Are there enough stars or franchise centerpieces around that are usually required to be a good, competitive team? Eh …

It’s not so much the raw numbers of players. With the influx of international talent along with the development of players in college and the G League there will always be hoopsters out there, and the league’s players association would wholeheartedly be behind the idea of another 30 or so guaranteed jobs.

But are there enough stars, enough guys that are so unquestionably talented that they are worth a significant number of wins for a franchise simply by being on the court?

It sure seems there isn’t, currently. Just look the gulf of this year’s standings between the teams that were actively trying to get into the playoffs and the teams that were so devoid of talent that tanking became the best option. In almost all cases, those tanking teams either lacked a star player, or their star player was injured.

Howard Beck of The Ringer proposed this question in the wake of the owners’ meetings in New York last month and it’s the question that will have to be reconciled with should the league decide to move ahead. Because the expectation should be that if Seattle and Las Vegas end up joining the NBA family, they will not be featuring star-studded, winning rosters right away.