OT: Kings to Seattle

[Robotech]

They've already screwed over NBA fans before - Seattle - and that's why the BOV will approve this deal.

Award Seattle an expansion team. Keep the Kings in Sac. Everyone wins except the Maloofs.

 

[clyde_carbon]

Award Seattle an expansion team. Keep the Kings in Sac. Everyone wins except the Maloofs.

Well, the Maloofs will be getting 300mil+ from the deal, so I don't know if they don't actually win here.

I think San Jose is a better market than Sac, and might be better than Seattle. Why not an expansion team there? The Warriors and Giants trying vehemently to keep San Jose as a market for them.

 

[wartyOne]

Award Seattle an expansion team. Keep the Kings in Sac. Everyone wins except the Maloofs.

The NBA is already WAY too watered down. Adding another expansion team would be a bad idea, in my opinion.

 

[Kinzu]

The NBA is already WAY too watered down. Adding another expansion team would be a bad idea, in my opinion.

Yeah I agree
There has been a lot more talk of shutting down some teams and shrinking the NBA as opposed to adding more teams.

 

[sjballer03]

The NBA is already WAY too watered down. Adding another expansion team would be a bad idea, in my opinion.

I agree. Also, the playoffs would be much more exciting if less teams made it, but that's never going to happen.

 

[yossarian]

Stern had said no expansion. Seattle is the 13th media market according to arbitron, Sacramento is 27th. And the Maloofs tried to move the team to Anaheim but Stern, under the "advice" of Jerry Buss and Donald Sterling, denied the move.

 

[clyde_carbon]

The NBA is already WAY too watered down. Adding another expansion team would be a bad idea, in my opinion.

Exactly. The NBA needs to be consolidated, and they've acknowledged as much in the past by discussing it.

I think sooner or later the Grizzlies will have to move. Their 5 year profit margin is in the negatives. Same with the Bobcats, but that market does have potential. The Hornets and Pacers are pretty bad, too.

 

[Dodub]

Wish Kansas City would have made a play for them. Not KC Mo but KCK

 

[MHSL82]

Well, the Maloofs will be getting 300mil+ from the deal, so I don't know if they don't actually win here.

I think San Jose is a better market than Sac, and might be better than Seattle. Why not an expansion team there? The Warriors and Giants trying vehemently to keep San Jose as a market for them.

If it came to that, what would you think of the Warriors moving to San Jose? Maybe they'd also change the Warriors name. Or was your suggestion of expansion there predicted on keeping the Golden State Warriors, knowing that the area is big enough to support two teams, like the Clippers and Lakers do, and sort of, the Raiders and 49ers?

 

[MHSL82]

Exactly. The NBA needs to be consolidated, and they've acknowledged as much in the past by discussing it.

I think sooner or later the Grizzlies will have to move. Their 5 year profit margin is in the negatives. Same with the Bobcats, but that market does have potential. The Hornets and Pacers are pretty bad, too.

I think the order should be Grizzlies, Hornets, Bobcats, and then Pacers. I'd like the Pacers to stay though I don't like the Pacers.

 

[MHSL82]

Stern had said no expansion. Seattle is the 13th media market according to arbitron, Sacramento is 27th. And the Maloofs tried to move the team to Anaheim but Stern, under the "advice" of Jerry Buss and Donald Sterling, denied the move.

Good. I wouldn't like three NBA teams so quickly. I feel like Clippers fans are a bit of bandwagoners. Obviously, I'm not speaking about all of them. I just think the Anaheim team would be the same. Would they keep the name? There'd be two Kings in LA (though one would be Anaheim). Didn't the Clippers used to play there but moved to the Staples Center? Wouldn't that have been some evidence that that area would be less prosperous?

 

[sjballer03]

I think the order should be Grizzlies, Hornets, Bobcats, and then Pacers. I'd like the Pacers to stay though I don't like the Pacers.

Personally, I'd move the soon to be New Orleans Pelicans to the top of that list, just based on the name alone.

 

[MHSL82]

Personally, I'd move the soon to be New Orleans Pelicans to the top of that list, just based on the name alone.

Here's where I miss the like button, because I like this because it's funny, but my reply here is pointless. Good point, SJ. Pelicans is a dumb name, especially for a basketball team. I could see hockey, college, or something because I don't watch those as much as the NBA. Hockey has more names like that, it seems, but then again, not big on hockey. Maybe if there had been a local team growing up for me.

 

[sjballer03]

Here's where I miss the like button, because I like this because it's funny, but my reply here is pointless. Good point, SJ. Pelicans is a dumb name, especially for a basketball team. I could see hockey, college, or something because I don't watch those as much as the NBA. Hockey has more names like that, it seems, but then again, not big on hockey. Maybe if there had been a local team growing up for me.

That darn Gatorchip...

 

[NinerSickness]

That darn Gatorchip...

You gotta appreciate someone who's easy to please.

 

[clyde_carbon]

If it came to that, what would you think of the Warriors moving to San Jose? Maybe they'd also change the Warriors name. Or was your suggestion of expansion there predicted on keeping the Golden State Warriors, knowing that the area is big enough to support two teams, like the Clippers and Lakers do, and sort of, the Raiders and 49ers?

The Warriors already struck a deal with SF to build an arena there, as they should. SF should have a priority over SJ.

SJ is an up and coming market though and it's attractive to a lot of people. The A's wanna move there. It'll be tough though b/c the Giants claim SJ as their market so they've been trying hard to block an Oakland move there.

 

[wartyOne]

Exactly. The NBA needs to be consolidated, and they've acknowledged as much in the past by discussing it.

I think sooner or later the Grizzlies will have to move. Their 5 year profit margin is in the negatives. Same with the Bobcats, but that market does have potential. The Hornets and Pacers are pretty bad, too.

The Clippers are good now, but are an awful franchise in the grand scheme of things. The Bucks have no realistic shot of ever making another finals. Washington, Cleveland, Toronto and Charlotte can go. New Orleans has already lost a franchise and could stand to lose another.

The way I see it is this. If the finals are always going to be some combination of the same 6 teams every year anyway, why not just contract the teams that have no shot out of the gate. The Bobcats didn't have a single NBA-caliber starter on their roster last year, and if Charlotte were contracted, none of those guys would make a roster.

This would go a long way toward making the league more competitive. As it stands now, if Miami played a best of 7 with Charlotte 100 times, they might lose two total games out of 402. MIGHT. Why even bother having a franchise that is so clearly outmatched, and frankly irrelevant?

 

[Yoshi]

Thanks, bro. This whole thing is effed up. What kind of message is that to send to NBA fans if the NBA Board of Governors approves this? You can do everything right and still have your team ripped away from you. On top of screwing over great NBA fans, the move is wrong because the Kings have showed that they can make money in Sacramento. The right solution IMO is to give Seattle an expansion team. That way it's only the Maloofs who are screwed. I am a Warriors fan, and I know that the Warriors stand to benefit from the Kings leaving, but I support Kings fans' efforts to keep their team.

Honestly, I don't think the Warriors will benefit as much as people are assuming - the games will be televised up there but Sacramento isn't that big of a market to begin with, unlike the A's moving to SJ where the Giants are claiming "territorial rights" for reasons including having a Single A affiliate down there.

Also, the NBA is shady to begin with - the Tim Donaghy issue, super teams being formed, the commissioner being perhaps the 2nd worse commissioner in pro sports following Gary Bettman of the NHL, etc. Pretty sad loss for Kevin Johnson, a Cal alum, and the city of Sacramento. Pretty big win, on the otherhand, for Seattle. They lost out on a potential dynasty in what is currently the OKC Thunder, but the Kings have some pieces to make something happen on that team.

 

[Yoshi]

A lot of things are puzzling with the NBA similar to the NHL (which is what makes the NFL Playoffs more exciting and interesting) - too many teams are getting into the playoffs. Also, I have to wonder if the NBA, similar to the NHL, is overexpanding. I mean, it's nice OKC has that following going on, but what about other cities that have teams but should be relocated or flat out eliminated?

Granted, the average salary of an NBA player I believe is more than for athletes of other sports within North America, so who am I to say?

 

[clyde_carbon]

The Clippers are good now, but are an awful franchise in the grand scheme of things. The Bucks have no realistic shot of ever making another finals. Washington, Cleveland, Toronto and Charlotte can go. New Orleans has already lost a franchise and could stand to lose another.

The way I see it is this. If the finals are always going to be some combination of the same 6 teams every year anyway, why not just contract the teams that have no shot out of the gate. The Bobcats didn't have a single NBA-caliber starter on their roster last year, and if Charlotte were contracted, none of those guys would make a roster.

This would go a long way toward making the league more competitive. As it stands now, if Miami played a best of 7 with Charlotte 100 times, they might lose two total games out of 402. MIGHT. Why even bother having a franchise that is so clearly outmatched, and frankly irrelevant?

The thing about the Grizzlies/Pacers is that they are losing money despite the fact that they are fielding winning teams. What are they supposed to do?

Any chance that one of Heat, Thunder, or Clippers doesn't win the NBA finals this year? Slim to none.

And FUCK the Clippers. Bunch of bandwagon fans to say the least about that team.