Judging the strength of an NBA market is a more complicated task than our casual use of the term “big market” often suggests. The following is a table that allows you to compare the relative strength of every NBA team when it comes to some (but not all) of the major factors that determine market strength for NBA clubs.
Most headings are self-explanatory, but “Swag Factor” certainly is not. This ranking (subjectively) takes into account many of the factors that attract NBA players to a certain market, but are not exactly quantifiable. Factors such as: weather, tax law, nightlife, franchise tradition, culture and lifestyle (eg- Houston happens to house one of the greatest concentration of NBA talent in the summer), health of the organization, team facilities, proximity to the beach, and other factors that would entice the typical twenty-something millionaire professional basketball player (or anyone else, for that matter) to live in a city.
Lest you think the Swag Factor rankings are completely subjective, I did clear them with bloggers from around TrueHoop Network.
To calculate the Total Market Rank, I added the rankings from the other columns (excluding the team win rankings at the far right of the table). In doing so, these data assume that a strong NBA market would include: a large TV market (important for player sponsorships, legacy), an excessively wealthy owner who spends heavily on players, fans who will pay to fill up an arena, and access to a lifestyle befitting a young millionaire.
Note that a team’s on-court success if only tangentially factored into these rankings. However, also included are rankings of how each team has fared over the past five and ten seasons, for comparison against the market factors to the left.
The franchise/market with the lowest total of combined rankings, and thus the best market in the NBA, was Dallas; the worst was Sacramento. Over the last ten years, the Mavericks have been the 6th most successful playoff team, while the Kings have been the eleventh. However, it’s the weak-market Kings that are on the brink of relocation.
Perhaps certain factors should be weighted more heavily than others (TV market size is not as accurate as measure as revenue earned from TV deals, corporate sponsors, etc), but I’ll leave that for you to debate in the comments.
NBA Franchise Market Strength Indicator Rankings
| Franchise | Total Market Score | Franchise Value | Owner Net Worth | Team Salary | Media Market | Attend. % | Swag Factor | 5 yr Avg. Reg Season Wins | 5 yr Avg. Post Season Wins | 10 yr Avg. Reg Season Wins | 10 yr Avg. Post Season Wins |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mavericks | 1 | 6 | 8 | 3 | 8 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 8 | 2 | 5 |
| Lakers | 2 | 2 | 17 | 1 | 3 | 8 | 1 | 5 | 2 | 3 | 2 |
| Knicks | 3 | 1 | 13 | 15 | 1 | 7 | 3 | 29 | 29 | 26 | 28 |
| Celtics | 4 | 4 | 18 | 4 | 10 | 6 | 6 | 11 | 4 | 8 | 4 |
| Magic | 5 | 11 | 6 | 2 | 20 | 4 | 11 | 7 | 6 | 10 | 10 |
| Heat | 6 | 7 | 3 | 20 | 17 | 5 | 2 | 14 | 10 | 16 | 9 |
| Trail Blazers | 7 | 14 | 1 | 9 | 22 | 3 | 13 | 15 | 20 | 15 | 25 |
| Bulls | 8 | 3 | 23 | 26 | 5 | 2 | 5 | 13 | 13 | 24 | 20 |
| Rockets | 9 | 5 | 27 | 6 | 13 | 16 | 7 | 10 | 12 | 7 | 17 |
| Warriors | 10 | 12 | 19 | 16 | 9 | 13 | 10 | 28 | 18 | 23 | 27 |
| Nets | 11 | 21 | 2 | 24 | 2 | 29 | 8 | 23 | 15 | 18 | 6 |
| Suns | 12 | 8 | 16 | 19 | 15 | 14 | 18 | 4 | 7 | 4 | 7 |
| Clippers | 13 | 22 | 12 | 29 | 4 | 15 | 9 | 25 | 17 | 28 | 26 |
| Raptors | 14 | 10 | 22 | 11 | 6 | 20 | 22 | 17 | 23 | 22 | 22 |
| Hawks | 15 | 23 | 21 | 7 | 11 | 24 | 16 | 16 | 14 | 30 | 23 |
| 76ers | 16 | 17 | 20 | 12 | 7 | 30 | 12 | 18 | 21 | 17 | 12 |
| Pistons | 17 | 13 | 4 | 17 | 14 | 28 | 23 | 9 | 5 | 5 | 3 |
| Spurs | 18 | 9 | 28 | 13 | 27 | 12 | 14 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Jazz | 19 | 16 | 14 | 5 | 25 | 11 | 30 | 6 | 9 | 6 | 13 |
| Nuggets | 20 | 20 | 9 | 18 | 19 | 18 | 19 | 8 | 11 | 12 | 18 |
| Cavaliers | 21 | 15 | 15 | 27 | 18 | 10 | 24 | 3 | 3 | 11 | 8 |
| Wizards | 22 | 19 | 26 | 23 | 12 | 22 | 15 | 21 | 19 | 25 | 24 |
| Bobcats | 23 | 25 | 11 | 21 | 23 | 19 | 25 | 22 | 26 | 29 | 30 |
| Thunder | 24 | 18 | 29 | 25 | 28 | 9 | 21 | 24 | 24 | 20 | 21 |
| Grizzles | 25 | 28 | 10 | 8 | 29 | 23 | 26 | 26 | 27 | 27 | 29 |
| Timberwolves | 26 | 29 | 7 | 28 | 16 | 27 | 20 | 30 | 30 | 21 | 19 |
| Hornets | 27 | 26 | 30 | 14 | 30 | 17 | 17 | 12 | 16 | 14 | 15 |
| Pacers | 28 | 27 | 5 | 22 | 24 | 26 | 27 | 19 | 25 | 13 | 14 |
| Bucks | 29 | 30 | 24 | 10 | 26 | 21 | 28 | 20 | 22 | 19 | 16 |
| Kings | 30 | 24 | 25 | 30 | 21 | 25 | 29 | 27 | 28 | 9 | 11 |
–
Here are the raw data that produced the rankings above. You can see that a simple ranking system does not account for the exponential discrepancies between teams in categories like Owner Net Worth or Media Market size.
NBA Franchise Market Strength Indicators Raw Data
| Franchise | Total Market Score | Franchise Value ($mil) | Owner Net Worth ($mil) | Team Salary ($mil) | Media Market (mil TVs) | Attend. % | Swag Factor | 5 yr Avg. Reg Season Wins | 5 yr Avg. Post Season Wins | 10 yr Avg. Reg Season Wins | 10 yr Avg. Post Season Wins |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mavericks | 1 | 438 | 1800 | 87.9 | 2.5 | 104.1 | 4 | 56.6 | 4.6 | 56.3 | 4.4 |
| Lakers | 2 | 643 | 380 | 91.6 | 5.7 | 99.7 | 1 | 53 | 10 | 51.9 | 8.9 |
| Knicks | 3 | 655 | 494 | 67.1 | 7.4 | 99.7 | 3 | 28 | 0 | 32.7 | 0.2 |
| Celtics | 4 | 452 | 360 | 82.1 | 2.4 | 100 | 6 | 47 | 7.6 | 44.5 | 5.5 |
| Magic | 5 | 385 | 3400 | 89.1 | 1.46 | 102.4 | 11 | 49 | 5.6 | 43.1 | 3.3 |
| Heat | 6 | 425 | 5800 | 65.4 | 1.54 | 100.8 | 2 | 40.2 | 4 | 41.3 | 3.7 |
| Trail Blazers | 7 | 356 | 20000 | 70.1 | 1.2 | 102.5 | 13 | 39.6 | 0.8 | 41.5 | 0.7 |
| Bulls | 8 | 511 | 280 | 54.5 | 3.5 | 103.1 | 5 | 41 | 2.4 | 34.1 | 1.2 |
| Rockets | 9 | 443 | 80 | 73.5 | 2.1 | 89.1 | 7 | 47.2 | 2.4 | 44.8 | 1.6 |
| Warriors | 10 | 363 | 325 | 66.9 | 2.5 | 95 | 10 | 29.2 | 1.2 | 35.8 | 0.6 |
| Nets | 11 | 312 | 19500 | 59.1 | 7.4 | 70.9 | 8 | 34 | 2.2 | 38.6 | 4.4 |
| Suns | 12 | 411 | 400 | 65.7 | 1.85 | 94.7 | 18 | 54 | 5.4 | 49.2 | 4.3 |
| Clippers | 13 | 305 | 500 | 52 | 5.7 | 90.5 | 9 | 31.6 | 1.4 | 32 | 0.7 |
| Raptors | 14 | 399 | 297 | 69.5 | 3 | 83 | 22 | 37.6 | 0.6 | 36.7 | 1.1 |
| Hawks | 15 | 295 | 300 | 70.9 | 2.36 | 78 | 16 | 38.6 | 2.2 | 30.2 | 1.1 |
| 76ers | 16 | 330 | 310 | 69.4 | 2.9 | 69.4 | 12 | 36.2 | 0.8 | 40.4 | 2.5 |
| Pistons | 17 | 360 | 3500 | 65.9 | 1.9 | 73.5 | 23 | 49 | 6 | 48.5 | 7.3 |
| Spurs | 18 | 404 | 80 | 69 | 0.82 | 97.7 | 14 | 56 | 10.6 | 57.2 | 10.3 |
| Jazz | 19 | 343 | 480 | 74 | 0.92 | 98 | 30 | 49 | 4 | 45.7 | 2.4 |
| Nuggets | 20 | 316 | 1800 | 65.9 | 1.5 | 86.3 | 19 | 49 | 2.8 | 42.1 | 1.6 |
| Cavaliers | 21 | 355 | 478 | 53.3 | 1.52 | 98.5 | 24 | 54 | 8.4 | 42.3 | 4.2 |
| Wizards | 22 | 322 | 180 | 59.3 | 2.3 | 79.9 | 15 | 34.2 | 1 | 33.4 | 0.9 |
| Bobcats | 23 | 281 | 525 | 65.05 | 1.1 | 83.1 | 25 | 34 | 0 | 31.3 | 0 |
| Thunder | 24 | 329 | 55.4 | 0.69 | 99.6 | 21 | 31.8 | 0.6 | 37.7 | 1.1 | |
| Grizzles | 25 | 266 | 850 | 70.8 | 0.67 | 78.4 | 26 | 31.4 | 0 | 32.6 | 0 |
| Timberwolves | 26 | 264 | 2100 | 53.1 | 1.7 | 74.5 | 20 | 25.2 | 0 | 37.6 | 1.3 |
| Hornets | 27 | 280 | 68.4 | 0.6 | 86.5 | 17 | 43.8 | 1.6 | 41.5 | 2.3 | |
| Pacers | 28 | 269 | 3500 | 64.4 | 1.1 | 74.6 | 27 | 36 | 0.4 | 41.6 | 2.4 |
| Bucks | 29 | 258 | 279 | 69.6 | 0.9 | 81.9 | 28 | 34.8 | 0.8 | 38 | 1.7 |
| Kings | 30 | 293 | 200 | 44 | 1.4 | 77.9 | 29 | 31.4 | 0 | 43.7 | 2.5 |
—
*The Hornets (owned by the NBA) and Thunder (undisclosed amount) do not have data for “Owner Net Worth.”
References:
Team Salaries (HoopsHype)
Owner/Franchise Worth (HoopsHype)
Attendance (ESPN)
Related posts:
[...] NBA franchise market strength indicators (Data) [...]
[...] (This post is meant to accompany this data!) [...]
[...] NBA franchise market strength indicators (Data) « HoopSpeak.com [...]