Board of Gov Meeting Updates
- Thread starter ReinadelosReys
- Start date
I think the important thing to note here is that Burkle is what the Maloofs are not: a self-made billionaire (as opposed to the Maloofs who are inherited millionaires) and also a savvy businessman.
If anything else, this incites the other owners in the NBA to look at the situation and value of the region in the NBA market. If Burkle sees something in the Central Valley, then why don't the Maloofs.
Major KJ has, if anything else, only added further doubt as to the motives of the Maloofs and this will surely weigh heavily in the minds of the BOG (except for Stern, who doubtlessly will be busy trying to scarf down pastrami while thinking up another method of disparaging Sacto).
If anything else, this incites the other owners in the NBA to look at the situation and value of the region in the NBA market. If Burkle sees something in the Central Valley, then why don't the Maloofs.
Major KJ has, if anything else, only added further doubt as to the motives of the Maloofs and this will surely weigh heavily in the minds of the BOG (except for Stern, who doubtlessly will be busy trying to scarf down pastrami while thinking up another method of disparaging Sacto).
Same here.. We keep the history and all those ROYAL fans that are going to follow the team get their stupid expansion team. When we get the KINGS back in Sac we will rip the Royals a new one. New public Enemy #1 is the ROYALS.
Not to mention they DO NOT talk about Webber as if he was EVER a Royal. They don't talk about Divac as ever being part of their Franchise, or Richmond or JDub. Those were all KINGS players. So have your Royals... We are the KINGS. We were in the WCF against the Lakers, not the Royals.
For all intents and purposes the Royals are an expansion team.
Not to mention they DO NOT talk about Webber as if he was EVER a Royal. They don't talk about Divac as ever being part of their Franchise, or Richmond or JDub. Those were all KINGS players. So have your Royals... We are the KINGS. We were in the WCF against the Lakers, not the Royals.
For all intents and purposes the Royals are an expansion team.
Last edited:
I'm aware they were in Charlotte. Actually, that's an illustrative example for another reason. The Hornets left Charlotte and then they got an expansion team a few years later once a new arena was completed. And now the NBA is struggling to sell tickets for both teams. Charlotte fans lost their team and their history and are understandably gun shy about signing up for another round of punishment. And New Orleans got hit with Hurricane Katrina and are in worse economic circumstances as a result of that than Sacramento is right now because of the recession. I'm not going to call out Hornet fans for not supporting their team in the midst of that anymore than I would call out Sacramento fans who care about the Kings but can't afford to go to games right now. They met the quota which means there are fans there who care. Moving teams around every few years is bad for fans and bad for the NBA.
[ btw, it's a funny coincidence that those two teams happen to be the ones featured in my avatar along with a former Kings player who came to Charlotte in the expansion draft.
]
[ btw, it's a funny coincidence that those two teams happen to be the ones featured in my avatar along with a former Kings player who came to Charlotte in the expansion draft.
]
Last edited:
I was just commenting logistically in response to Brick's comment, basically that it would make more sense to move the Hornets directly to Anaheim, rather than doing a three-city swap/shell game where the Kings move and the Hornets take their place, and now you have five teams in California, and no teams in Seattle and Kansas City.
KC has an argument against Sac because they actually have a new arena with no NBA tenant. Not necessarily against Sac at this point, but if the Kings were to move and the NBA was going to move a team somewhere, why wouldn't KC be in the discussion when they have a four year old arena? I would assume they would at least have a seat at the table. Same with Seattle, even though they still don't have an arena.
KC has an argument against Sac because they actually have a new arena with no NBA tenant. Not necessarily against Sac at this point, but if the Kings were to move and the NBA was going to move a team somewhere, why wouldn't KC be in the discussion when they have a four year old arena? I would assume they would at least have a seat at the table. Same with Seattle, even though they still don't have an arena.
Rough math. Forbes valued the Kings at about 300 million. The Maloofs own about 51%. The Maloofs owe 75 to the city. It was reported yesterday that they’ve drawn 75 from the league. They want to take on another 75 million from Samuelli. They are starting to look like Shin 2.0 to the other owners Thus, the owners might consider blocking the move or approving one with an exorbitant relocation fee to force a sale.
Which is why KJ’s pitch was great. Hey, NBA owners. Here’s a model owner who wants to be in Sacramento. Here are the people who are doing my arena study, and they think we can get this done. And I’m promising you that, just like Charlotte, I can deliver with the old owner out of the picture.
KJ hasn’t given up, he’s taken aim at directly the Maloofs knees. Props to him. You all wanted KJ to “work behind the scenes” looks like he did. He just didn’t work with the Maloofs. I think KJ deserves some props.
Which is why KJ’s pitch was great. Hey, NBA owners. Here’s a model owner who wants to be in Sacramento. Here are the people who are doing my arena study, and they think we can get this done. And I’m promising you that, just like Charlotte, I can deliver with the old owner out of the picture.
KJ hasn’t given up, he’s taken aim at directly the Maloofs knees. Props to him. You all wanted KJ to “work behind the scenes” looks like he did. He just didn’t work with the Maloofs. I think KJ deserves some props.
Reasons here are a bit different.. We have "customer service" oriented owners who failed at customer service. Who raised ticket prices when the team was at its worst, and who alienated the fans with rumors of the team moving this whole time they were underpaying players to save the money for themselves.
The Maloofs totally screwed over Sacramento and I am really surprised the attendance improved this year. Had they TRIED to put a product on the floor that was not at the leagues minimum salary level rather than trying to save money by dumping fan favorites for nothing the fans would still be there. The Maloofs caused the attendance drop, not the fans. We have already proven we are loyal. They have not proven anything.
The Maloofs totally screwed over Sacramento and I am really surprised the attendance improved this year. Had they TRIED to put a product on the floor that was not at the leagues minimum salary level rather than trying to save money by dumping fan favorites for nothing the fans would still be there. The Maloofs caused the attendance drop, not the fans. We have already proven we are loyal. They have not proven anything.
Load of hooey as always.
If the Maloofs did antyhing to the fanbase it was continue to pay too many players too LONG. Its not their fault if many Sacto fans don't undersand how you rebuild a basketball team. If the fans have hasd any part in al this, it is in not getting it. this team, regardless of where it is geographically next year, is about ready to blow up. And the reason is because the owners/Petrie finally did the right thing the last few year,s no matter how dumb and shortsighted many fans were going to be about it.
If the Maloofs did antyhing to the fanbase it was continue to pay too many players too LONG. Its not their fault if many Sacto fans don't undersand how you rebuild a basketball team. If the fans have hasd any part in al this, it is in not getting it. this team, regardless of where it is geographically next year, is about ready to blow up. And the reason is because the owners/Petrie finally did the right thing the last few year,s no matter how dumb and shortsighted many fans were going to be about it.
This doesn't change their disastrous PR campaign and the fact that they raised tickets for a dreadful product, but overall the fact is that the reason they have a low payroll this year is that they're rebuilding the team the right way, finally, after much kicking and screaming and dragging. They finally got rid of the overpaid players -- fan favorites or not -- and started building through the draft and putting together a team that actually has a chance to win. I don't understand why people complain about the low payroll. That's not the reason the team isn't winning now. It may be the reason the team is able to hang on to key players like Dalembert and Thornton.
Wrrrooooong..
They have been unloading players for "movable pieces" for years. Turns out those movable pieces aren't as easy to move, but whether or not they were at or close to the cap they have been trying to shed salary for years. The product on the floor has suffered because of that and the prices of tickets going up just to see the mess they put out? Please.... Maloofs are as much to blame as anyone for the attendance.
I canceled my season ticket because of that.. So did my father with his 2 season tickets. So it must have affected someone, right?
They have been unloading players for "movable pieces" for years. Turns out those movable pieces aren't as easy to move, but whether or not they were at or close to the cap they have been trying to shed salary for years. The product on the floor has suffered because of that and the prices of tickets going up just to see the mess they put out? Please.... Maloofs are as much to blame as anyone for the attendance.
I canceled my season ticket because of that.. So did my father with his 2 season tickets. So it must have affected someone, right?
Who hacked your account and is posting something positive?
Not to ruin the mood, I was backing KJ for the last month when nobody else was. Turns out he didn't fold, he raised the stakes.
Also, I think a lot of people are a lot more receptive of my view of the Maloofs.
Because I'm me, I'll still point out that this is all still contingent upon our broke city footing the costs for most of a 300 million dollar building. Those odds remain long. But when you ad spite, hope, and a new poltical big wig (with huge ties to labor) ... the odds aren't good by any means, but I think they got better.
A team in a market the size of Sacramento which cannot afford luxury tax has to suck for several years to get great draft picks. Our team could not afford to be a Dallas or Lakers and simply spend our way to the top. The income just isn't in this city and the corporate money isn't in this city for us to behave like Dallas.
The team, a middle to low media market team, had little money but had to find a way to get great players. So how do you do that? You have to be very bad and get great draft picks who will develop into stars. The team had to deliberately let the bottom drop out to get there.
This is what the Kings began to do when they gave up spending their MLE on decent ball players which prevented the team from sucking bad enough to get great draft picks.
This is the strategy. It seemed obvious at the time to me that people would quit going and that season ticket holders would not renew. I balked at the idea of letting the team collapse. I was wrong. Given that scenario, it only makes sense to keep salary low. It is predictable what the fan reaction would be. I personally hate to watch a team lose and lose and lose.
Well, look what happened. The Kings sucked, got Tyreke and Cuz, traded and got Dalembert and Thornton and are one great defensive minded SF veteran from being in the way to becoming a great team in a few years. This is the rebuild model. Now the team needs to mature.
There is no doubt that these draft picks that came out of the deliberate suckatude era have rough edges but it also seems like the players that came out of this deliberate suckatude era will be spectacular ball players. You can disagree if you don't believe that Reke, Cuz, and Thornton aren't going to get better and be great but I think the more likely scenario is that this team takes off. The oldest player is 29. They can stay together for a long time and I think they showed that this is a team that will get better and better as that is exactly what happened this year. They started bad with an easy schedule and as they all got used to each other, they got better and better even as the schedule got more difficult. They began to win on the road which can be a sign of good things to come.
Now if they had not gone through the suckatude era, they would have had to spend more money here and there and never quite be bad enough to get out of the hell hole that is the 10th to 20th pick where all you find are great bench players unless you get lucky. If they would have proceded in the old model, the Kings would have been perpetually average. As it is, they have the chance of being great.
It is difficult being a fan and I actually quit watching them even on TV a few years ago. With the drafting of Tyreke I began to watch again. With the drafting of Cuz, I have missed few. With the acquisition of Thornton, I missed none.
With the rebuild strategy mentioned by Bricklayer you have the possibility of being great. We have been great for about 1/4 of the years the team has been here. If you are satisfied with average, you should be upset at what they did. If you want a shot at an NBA title, you should be happy with what they did.
The team, a middle to low media market team, had little money but had to find a way to get great players. So how do you do that? You have to be very bad and get great draft picks who will develop into stars. The team had to deliberately let the bottom drop out to get there.
This is what the Kings began to do when they gave up spending their MLE on decent ball players which prevented the team from sucking bad enough to get great draft picks.
This is the strategy. It seemed obvious at the time to me that people would quit going and that season ticket holders would not renew. I balked at the idea of letting the team collapse. I was wrong. Given that scenario, it only makes sense to keep salary low. It is predictable what the fan reaction would be. I personally hate to watch a team lose and lose and lose.
Well, look what happened. The Kings sucked, got Tyreke and Cuz, traded and got Dalembert and Thornton and are one great defensive minded SF veteran from being in the way to becoming a great team in a few years. This is the rebuild model. Now the team needs to mature.
There is no doubt that these draft picks that came out of the deliberate suckatude era have rough edges but it also seems like the players that came out of this deliberate suckatude era will be spectacular ball players. You can disagree if you don't believe that Reke, Cuz, and Thornton aren't going to get better and be great but I think the more likely scenario is that this team takes off. The oldest player is 29. They can stay together for a long time and I think they showed that this is a team that will get better and better as that is exactly what happened this year. They started bad with an easy schedule and as they all got used to each other, they got better and better even as the schedule got more difficult. They began to win on the road which can be a sign of good things to come.
Now if they had not gone through the suckatude era, they would have had to spend more money here and there and never quite be bad enough to get out of the hell hole that is the 10th to 20th pick where all you find are great bench players unless you get lucky. If they would have proceded in the old model, the Kings would have been perpetually average. As it is, they have the chance of being great.
It is difficult being a fan and I actually quit watching them even on TV a few years ago. With the drafting of Tyreke I began to watch again. With the drafting of Cuz, I have missed few. With the acquisition of Thornton, I missed none.
With the rebuild strategy mentioned by Bricklayer you have the possibility of being great. We have been great for about 1/4 of the years the team has been here. If you are satisfied with average, you should be upset at what they did. If you want a shot at an NBA title, you should be happy with what they did.
The Maloofs don't have to sell the team to Burkle. If he does want to help keep the team in Sacramento, he can loan them the $50 million they were going to get from Samueli to move to Anaheim. There's no relocation costs, they already have a practice facility, and they'll probably still be making more in revenue off PBP than they would in the agreement with Samueli to use the Honda Center. We know they really want the Southern California market badly. But they made a mistake in thinking they could take the Kings from Sacramento without a fight. Even if the BOG approve this, I don't think this is over.