More good news for Kings fans. Mark Kriedler is reporting that "Rob Stutzman confirms his group cruised past needed sigs to force public vote on Anaheim bonds. Collecting plenty extras now in case of DQs. Rob already has sent letter to NBA explaining exactly what this means: $75 mil bonds now cannot be issued until public approves." Which means there will now need to be a public vote on the required bonds needed for the Kings to move into Honda Center. The city cannot just "issue" them anymore. And the next scheduled election in Anaheim is June 2012...
Another reason why it's looking like the Kings could very well stay in Sacramento is the hardened opposition from the owners of the Lakers and Clippers for another NBA team to relocate into their market. If they're successful in keeping the Sacramento Kings put, that'll also mean that it'll thankfully be much less likely for the vaguely-rumored possible purchase and relocation of the New Orleans Hornets to San José (intruding on the Golden State Warriors' market) to actually occur. GO SAN JOSE EARTHQUAKES!!! -G
I get the feeling that the NBA would have rubber-stamped the move it were a better deal in a better destination, but Anaheim was a poor choice. In addition to whatever problems exist on the financial side, it has natural opposition from the two LA teams as well as any other team that wants to avoid setting a precedent of teams moving into existing NBA markets (Warriors and Bulls would be two such examples). So for now if they don't move it would be a 1-year reprieve where either the Maloofs can come up with a more attractive moving scheme, or the situation in Sacramento can get sorted out.
On that note, why do you mention the Bulls? I know the Lakers/Clippers don't want another team in their area, namely Anaheim/Orange County, and the Knicks and Nets the same--especially when the latter transfers to New Jersey back to New York Brooklyn in a few years, leaving open Newark (where the Nets currently play)... The Warriors do have an issue if a team moves to San Jose. But the Bulls? I know Chicago in theory could support 2 NBA teams (like they do with the Cubs and White Sox, and in the past with the Bears and Cardinals before that team left)...
There's been a little bit of rumor about somebody buying the Hornets and moving them to Chicago. Almost certainly won't happen, but I'm sure the Bulls won't want to set a precedent.
The Kings leaving Sac would be a shame. I don't follow the NBA closely and my team is GS whenever I do watch. But the Kings have great fans and get a lot of support. And the LA market doesn't need a 3rd team. The Maloofs are douches.
Interesting and thanks... don't think they will move to the United Center (where the Bulls play), but there is a second venue called the Allstate Arena (aka the Rosemont Horizon) home of DePaul and the WNBA Sky where they could have a second team in theory. A longshot there but that shift could set a precedent, as would having three teams in LA and NY. If I have a hunch the Milwaukee Bucks could also raise a stink if a second team were to head to Chicago. If anything, the Hornets could be heading to either to San Jose, or maybe Seattle--which is still wanting a team after the Sonics left. Looks like the Kings/Royals are staying up but stay tuned--the bigger issue is the CBA (and the NBA is watching the NFL to see how their deal pans out--unrelated but significant given how the small-market NBA teams are in red ink).
^This. Built-in fanbase in waiting. The success of the Sounders alone ought to make any potential investor take notice.
It means a lot to get support from our Bay Area brethren in keeping the Kings here. NorCal must stick together, especially when SoCal is the opposition.
If I remember the league took over the Hornets, and Ellison of Oracle got rebuffed in getting the Warriors. If he wanted to bring the Warriors to San Jose he would run into opposition. The only issue for Seattle is the arena, which is why they left for Oklahoma in the first place despite the venue being refurbished in the mid-1990s. Who ever ends up getting a team there will have to resolve that first. Otherwise I'm thinking when the NBA goes to 32 teams, Seattle will be first in line.
Did you mean if Ellison wanted to bring the Hornets to San Jose? In any case, Joe Lacob (one of the Warriors' two majority owners alongside Peter Guber) stated in a recent interview that along with the record $450 million purchase of the team came a 75-mile territorial rights rule that obviously covers the entire Bay Area and that Warriors ownership would vigorously fight any proposed intrusion of it. God forbid that any team gets relocated anywhere, but if an NBA team does end up getting relocated to Seattle, would it get renamed the Seattle SuperSonics? GO SAN JOSE EARTHQUAKES!!! -G
Yes it would. The Sonics history, trophies, etc... were taken by the Thunder, but if they get a team in a set period of time (either 5 or 10 years, I can't remember which one), then those records, titles, etc... get returned to Seattle for the new Sonics. Sound familiar? As for "god forbid moving a team", I used to think that until I saw what is hopefully going to happen in Phoenix with the Coyotes and learned the history of their franchise. In that case I wholeheartedly support stripping Phoenix of their team and sending them to Winnipeg since that's where they were originally from. Winnipeg would be getting back their original Jets team back 15 years later (not unlike the Raiders back to Oakland) from a city in Phoenix that has never supported them very well more often having crowds like this... Than sellouts. Sure they report 12,000 average attendance, but they've also been accused of being the biggest attendance fudgers this side of the early MLS.
Phoenix plays way out on the edge of civilization. Only El Jefe would argue that it doesn't affect their attendance.
Even more good news. The Relocation committee (run by the guy who moved the Sonics no less), is going to recommend to the other owners to block the move for at least the 2011-12 season. They see Sac as viable and capable of a long term shot at keeping the team. http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-sacramento-nba-20110423,0,7538878.story
makes me happy to see this. Quakes fans dont to be reminded not to take anything for granted. Just would have really sucked to see it happen all over again. Seeing em move to socal would have just been salt in the wounds. Even if you dont give two shades about basketball......you know thats just the right thing to do; being against something like that. the fact that someone actually even conceived such an idea is beyond reprieve. Kings fans know what they gotta do now though. This is clearly their last chance, they cant mess around anymore.
Of course it's viable. I remember nothing but sellout crowds when I followed them . Hell, the Kings would probably be a multi championship team and still bringing in those crowds if it weren't for illegal referee betting, match fixing and pure incompetence from the top. Although I can no longer stand to watch a basketball game because of all that, I do hope Sacramento keeps the Kings. If only bad owners could be ditched as easily as bad players. But truth be told, any city that isn't LA that has a basketball team should be worried about something like this happening. It's the only American pro league I know where those in charge actually get upset when Boston or LA aren't in the final.
Well looks like the Champagne may be back on ice... http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-dodgers-burkle-20110423,0,4458701.story The Burkle who is now interested in buying the Dodgers with Steve Garvey, is the same Burkle who was going to be Sacramento's white knight. Presumably he wouldn't buy two teams at once. Looks like LA may yet doubly screw NorCal.
Thanks I meant that... very much any team but since the league took over the Hornets and all the buzz regarding the team--it's rife for Ellison (though of course--rather see that team stay in New Orleans--they've been hard on their luck since 2005)...
Interesting article coming out of the Bee: http://www.sacbee.com/2011/04/23/3573282/sacramento-kings-status-a-mystery.html Traces of doubt coming from Anaheim: http://www.ocregister.com/sports/johnson-297631-nba-sacramento.html Seems the Maloofs don't even know the status of their team. NBA seems ready to give Sacramento another chance, and Anaheim is starting to deal with the reality they probably wont be hosting the NBA next season. The Maloofs are still fighting to move the team, but it seems the NBA has seen through their bullsh!t. With the recommendation of the relocation committee to stay in Sacramento, Jerry Buss and Donald Sterling campaigning for the relocation to be denied, and the city bonds being forced to the ballot (which will never pass in conservative Anaheim) the Maloofs are joking themselves if they think they will be playing basketball in SoCal next season. Now it is up to Mayor Johnson and city officials to get a new arena built fast. the relocation was a piss-poor attempt by the Maloofs to get bailed out of self inflicted crushing debt, and after a strenuous campaign, I feel Sacramento may have convinced the powers that be that they are at the mercy of incompetent, spoiled brats, and deserve another chance. I know its not over, but I feel positive about the future of the NBA in Sacramento tonight.