A Sonics fan's point of view

[ninjabiscuit]

One of the Kings fans on Reddit posted what I think is a really good "reader's digest" version of the whole, sordid affair with the Maloofs. It might help to show Sonic fans exactly what this has been like for Kings fans with the Maloofs as owners. (And even if you know your Kings history, I found it to be a really entertaining read.) Some strong language, since you can't really describe the bleeping Maloofs without it.

http://www.reddit.com/r/nba/comments/1dhugj/hansen_and_the_maloofs_have_been_talking_since/c9qnub4

 

[VF21]

One of the Kings fans on Reddit posted what I think is a really good "reader's digest" version of the whole, sordid affair with the Maloofs. It might help to show Sonic fans exactly what this has been like for Kings fans with the Maloofs as owners. (And even if you know your Kings history, I found it to be a really entertaining read.) Some strong language, since you can't really describe the bleeping Maloofs without it.

http://www.reddit.com/r/nba/comments/1dhugj/hansen_and_the_maloofs_have_been_talking_since/c9qnub4

Excellent read but don't expect any Sonics fan to be swayed by what has happened.

 

[The Hammer]

Excellent read but don't expect any Sonics fan to be swayed by what has happened.

Exactly. This is why they lost my sympathy a long time ago. You can present them with facts, but they do not take them in, and puff on and on about supremely twisted and unrealistic "options" (see hoopsTER). They've fully constructed an alternate reality of not only the Sonics history, but of ours. They are also fond of constructing rules or laws or "legal framework" to suit their interests. (behaving like a franchise is an independent business). I've managed a GNC franchise, even considered buying. Every franchise entry process is different but you don't have any legal "rights" to buy one if you somehow finagle the sale of one and sign some "PSA"... such a joke that they even still bring that term up. Just total comedy. With GNC for example, you have to jump through all kinds of hoops, and even when you owned it, there are all kinds of regulations in place about what you can sell in your store, how you run your store, decorate your store, and on and on. All major successful franchises are like this, that's why there's so much uniformity. It's not an accident. To behave as if you can just offer someone a certain amount of money and if the person owning the franchise agrees to it, without the consent (for whatever reason) of the parent company, is ludicrous. This is why I've questioned whether poaching the team was even Hansen's endgame... I find it hard to believe he would make that bet. Was he essentially betting that his "singed, binding agreement" language, (totally made up given that it's a franchise, by the way), was going to create enough public pressure that the NBA would cave in to his wishes somehow?

In any case, I'll be glad when this is finalized and we don't have the merry go round arguments from people like hoopsTER, who show no interest in living in reality, with its requisite facts, finally fade into the background.

What I'm glad for now is that such numb-minded arguments are not a threat to confuse our fans anymore, (who are extremely well informed) and/or to deflate any public support needed to get a deal done.

 

[mac]

Exactly. This is why they lost my sympathy a long time ago. You can present them with facts, but they do not take them in, and puff on and on about supremely twisted and unrealistic "options" (see hoopsfan). They've fully constructed an alternate reality of not only the Sonics history, but of ours. They are also fond of constructing rules or laws or "legal framework" to suit their interests. (behaving like a franchise is an independent business). I've managed a GNC franchise, even considered buying. Every franchise entry process is different but you don't have any legal "rights" to buy one if you somehow finagle the sale of one and sign some "PSA"... such a joke that they even still bring that term up. Just total comedy. With GNC for example, you have to jump through all kinds of hoops, and even when you owned it, you have no idea the regulations in place about what you can sell, how you sell it, how you keep your store, run your store, decorate your store. All major successful franchises are like this, that's why there's so much uniformity. It's not an accident. To behave, even suggest, or think, that you can just offer someone a certain amount of money and if the person owning the franchise agrees to it, without the consent (for whatever reason) of the parent company, is ludicrous. This is why I've questioned whether poaching the team was even Hansen's endgame... I find it hard to believe he would make that bet. Was he essentially betting that his "singed, binding agreement" language, (totally made up given that it's a franchise, by the way), was going to create enough public pressure that the NBA would cave in to his wishes somehow?

In any case, I'll be glad when this is finalized and we don't have the merry go round arguments from people like hoopsfan, who show no interest in living in reality, with its requisite facts, finally fade into the background.

What I'm glad for now is that such numb-minded arguments are not a threat to confuse our fans anymore, (who are extremely well informed) and/or to deflate any public support needed to get a deal done.

I don't mean to nitpick but isn't hoopsfan a very polite Lakers fan? I think you've got the wrong hoops---

 

[Warhawk]

The NBA won't discuss expansion though, Seattle absolutely 100% deserves expansion, except the league is using Seattle to leverage its other cities, which is not right. Which is why I hope Ballmer uses possible litigation to force expansion. Even if everyone here believes there is no case that exists, if anyone can make an anti-trust case against the NBA its Steve Ballmer and his Microsoft lawyers. And even if its a losing case, the league still loses because they'd have to open up their books, open up emails, open up a lot of things the league wants to keep quiet. So this kind of legal pressure on the league could still force expansion.

The league used Seattle to leverage Sacramento into paying a higher price for the team, I don't think for a second Hansen or Ballmer pursued this path without getting a wink or two from the league office. And to be honest, I think if Ballmer pursues litigation, its purely to spite the NBA, because even if Seattle plays nice I don't think the NBA is returning for a decade at minimum. Seattle should have forced the league into honoring its lease in 2008, the Sonics would still be there because I think the economic conditions (the economy falling off a cliff) would have forced him into selling. The past is the past, and the people did speak, for all the people who say Seattle should have stepped up in the past, the voters of Seattle booted out Nickels and brought in a guy more pro-Sonics.

At the end of the day, I truly believe the relocation committee voted the way they did because Sacramento put up more public funding than Seattle. I just don't understand why the NBA has to go to the lengths of pushing for basically bankruptcy in order to get its way. At the very least, EVERY single NBA team that puts money into funding a public arena should have equity in the team they are funding. Every NBA, NFL, and MLB team should demand equity if they're going to fund an arena. Its just not right the way all these professional sporting leagues operate, from a fan perspective and from a taxpayer perspective. I think all of us can agree on that point.

Your posts are so full of revisionist thinking and conspiracy theories it's pathetic.

Seattle doesn't 100% deserve anything - they told the NBA to go fly a kite, so they did. That's on the city of Seattle. I feel sorry for the Seattle Sonics fans, and I think that a team will be back before long. But how does Seattle "deserve" something they actively pushed out?

The league did not use Seattle to leverage a higher price for the team. The Maloofs wanted to move the team from Sacramento as soon as they bought it but couldn't - we got good and there was no way to move it then. They have tried to move or sell to everyone EXCEPT Sacramento. We have just been able to fight back each time to keep the team here, despite the a**hat owners.

I don't think that Seattle got a "wink-wink" anything. They went about this all wrong. They dealt with the Maloofs. They went behind the league's back with a "binding" (LOL) agreement and "non-refundable" down payment. See how well that worked out?

Why would you go out to sue the NBA to "spite" them? That makes NO sense. You want to work WITH them (like Sacramento does each time something like this pops up) to get what you want.

I don't think the % of public funding was all that critical. Possibly helped, but the critical factor is that the Maloofs kept trying to move a team from a viable market that wanted to keep the team here. We have the fans, the corporate support, and several arena deals we have put forward over the years that the Maloofs kept shooting down. Basically crappy owners with a great market and history of unparalleled team support. THAT is why the team is staying.

 

[Bibbilicious]

Wasnt it already stated by David Stern that potential owners sign a contract that prevents them from pursuing legal action if the process of buying a team does not go their way? That pretty much kills any chance of a court case.

 

[The Hammer]

I don't mean to nitpick but isn't hoopsfan a very polite Lakers fan? I think you've got the wrong hoops---

I think your right. I'll edit. hoopsfan is cool. hoopsTER, on the other hand, with the fake politeness decorated by modest eloquence that masks an attitude oriented more toward willful ignorance than open and honest dialogue, well... I'll let the reader finish the sentence.

 

[The Hammer]

Wasnt it already stated by David Stern that potential owners sign a contract that prevents them from pursuing legal action if the process of buying a team does not go their way? That pretty much kills any chance of a court case.

Of course, yes. Which is why the blithering about threats to sue is so funny. It's almost like if they simply act as if it's not true, then it isn't.

 

[curitibagarrett]

Listen all I'm saying is the ultimate outcome is still up in the air, nothing has been set in stone, all we know is that the league wants the Kings in Sacramento. I'll eat my words if I'm wrong here, but all I"m saying is owners are voting against their own business interests to vote down the Hansen deal, even if it comes with stipulations requiring he build an arena and being forced to sell if he fails to do so. Which makes it possible that Hansen ends up owning the team. Hansen can't burn his bridges in Sacramento like Bennett because he's already shown his hand. He can't conspire because everyone already knows his intentions. And again, for Hansen, its at least a foot in the door to the NBA even if the team stays in Sacramento. That would buy him at least some leverage (first off a vote for expansion) to ultimately get the league to expand.

And if Hansen is rejected, the possibility of a lawsuit, which remains a possibility, could force the league's hand enough to expand.

The most unlikely outcome is that Hansen and Ballmer walk away from this project $100 million poorer waiting around for the next available team, which is the Bucks, who are not for sale, whose lease doesn't expire until 2017. That to me is really the least likely outcome.

Hansen and Ballmer can kiss their desires to be owners if they file a lawsuit. Expansion may come to Seattle but they sure wouldn't be the owners....Do you really want that to happen?

 

[ninjabiscuit]

Excellent read but don't expect any Sonics fan to be swayed by what has happened.

Not expecting that, honestly. I posted the link because I felt like it was nice to read all the stuff that we've dealt with, all summed up in one place. Sonics fans (hoopster, specifically) who post on this board need to read that. They are not the only fan base that has been through a stupid pile of crap. Read that post.

http://www.reddit.com/r/nba/comments..._since/c9qnub4

 

[VF21]

Another take on the idea to sell to Hansen and have him keep the team in Sacramento for a year, banking on a Sacramento failure so he can move the team to Seattle a year later:

A quiet murmur of an idea has made its way around Seattle the last few days. It is an alternative suggestion of what could happen to the Sacramento Kings. It borders on the insane and gives an incredibly small amount of optimism to a fanbase anxiously praying for the tiniest morsel of hope.

Read rest here

 

[arwen undomiel]

In time, H/B and the Seattle fans will have to accept that there's just some things money and litigation just can't resolve. No matter how much money is thrown at the Maloofs, no matter the threat of an (empty) lawsuit, they will not get what they want. Some things (like the goodwill of the NBA) just can't be bought. The rumbles you hear are just a couple of men with more money than most of us can imagine having a temper tantrum.

H/B, if you need someone to sue, please have at the Maloofs. I'd derive a little bit of poetic justice in watching the H/B group spend lots of money to sue those who have no money.

 

[rainmaker]

I've come on here before and have clearly made my position from day one that I hope to have an expansion team. I understand your emotion, and my posts aren't pushing for relocation. I'm merely trying to have an intelligent discussion.

Technically speaking, no votes have been accounted for, so we don't know what the final tally will be. The fact of the matter is that there is legal framework for Hansen to own this team even though the NBA doesn't want him to relocate it. It may even be in the NBA's best interest to AVOID a lawsuit from Hansen/Ballmer to approve a sale, sign some kind of deal with them to work through the Sacramento arena plan with no relocation, and reward the Hansen group with expansion. If they reject a sale, the NBA does risk litigation.

You Seattle fans love nothing more than to ignore the fact the Maloofs went behind KJ's/Sac's back to make the deal. They told everyone the team was not for sale while negotiating with Hansen. The NBA can't have wealthy men just going around offering 500M+ for franchises while not giving the city a chance to bid themselves. You guys keep concentrating on the deal rather than how the deal came to fruition. And just because there is a deal it means nothing until it's approved by the league.

You guys also don't seem to realize there's no point in moving a team if the current city has local buyers and an arena set up. There's no reason to move the Kings, and the offer from Hansen doesn't matter even if it is a bit more. What you're implying by saying since the Hansen deal is more and the NBA should go with that offer is that any wealthy businessman at any time should just be able to go to any owner in the league, splash down 500M+, and either force the local ownership to pony up or relocate. That makes no sense.

If you want an intelligent conversation, start by attempting to be intelligent. The deal with Hansen doesn't mean **** when a) it happened behind our backs because the Maloofs have a childish grudge against KJ/Sac and b) there's no reason to move an NBA team when we have local owners and an arena plan, which puts us on the same level as every other franchise with owners and an arena, except our arena will be the newest.

I can't wait until this is over and these Seattle fans go back in their little holes never to be heard again. I used to be sympathetic to their position and feelings, but that's passed since now they're more than willing to just screw over a city who's ensured the team doesn't need to be moved(which I've seen on numerous media platforms). Have local ownership and an arena and they're still bitching and moaning about not be able to steal our team for no good reason. I'm beginning to hope Seattle never gets a team. Really do. The fans on forums and message boards don't deserve a team, not with the pathetic amount of respect they show an NBA city like us who's put up with this for years.

That might rub some the wrong way but I don't care. I've been very quiet regarding Sea fans during this process but enough is enough, with the crap I read on Sonics Rising, trolls in the Bee, trolls on twitter, trolls on STR. I'll be happily enjoying our Kings in our city for the next 35 years while you guys can go tell another fanbase how they don't deserve their team even when they have ownership and an arena in place. You guys are more than welcome to come down for the All Star game in Sac in a few years though and support our local economy, just don't wear green.

BTW, if you want to blame anyone, blame Hansen for being a freaking idiot, not understanding how the league he wants to join operates, and instead went behind both our backs and the NBA's backs to make this deal with the Maloofs. KJ understood the game and played by the rules, not our fault Hansen is such an idiot he couldn't abide by the same process. But I have yet to see a single Sea fan pointing out the fact Hansen could have been more intelligent about this.

 

[ParniValjak]

You Seattle fans love nothing more than to ignore the fact the Maloofs went behind KJ's/Sac's back to make the deal. They told everyone the team was not for sale while negotiating with Hansen. The NBA can't have wealthy men just going around offering 500M+ for franchises while not giving the city a chance to bid themselves. You guys keep concentrating on the deal rather than how the deal came to fruition. And just because there is a deal it means nothing until it's approved by the league.

You guys also don't seem to realize there's no point in moving a team if the current city has local buyers and an arena set up. There's no reason to move the Kings, and the offer from Hansen doesn't matter even if it is a bit more. What you're implying by saying since the Hansen deal is more and the NBA should go with that offer is that any wealthy businessman at any time should just be able to go to any owner in the league, splash down 500M+, and either force the local ownership to pony up or relocate. That makes no sense.

If you want an intelligent conversation, start by attempting to be intelligent. The deal with Hansen doesn't mean **** when a) it happened behind our backs because the Maloofs have a childish grudge against KJ/Sac and b) there's no reason to move an NBA team when we have local owners and an arena plan, which puts us on the same level as every other franchise with owners and an arena, except our arena will be the newest.

I can't wait until this is over and these Seattle fans go back in their little holes never to be heard again. I used to be sympathetic to their position and feelings, but that's passed since now they're more than willing to just screw over a city who's ensured the team doesn't need to be moved(which I've seen on numerous media platforms). Have local ownership and an arena and they're still bitching and moaning about not be able to steal our team for no good reason. I'm beginning to hope Seattle never gets a team. Really do. The fans on forums and message boards don't deserve a team, not with the pathetic amount of respect they show an NBA city like us who's put up with this for years.

That might rub some the wrong way but I don't care. I've been very quiet regarding Sea fans during this process but enough is enough, with the crap I read on Sonics Rising, trolls in the Bee, trolls on twitter, trolls on STR. I'll be happily enjoying our Kings in our city for the next 35 years while you guys can go tell another fanbase how they don't deserve their team even when they have ownership and an arena in place. You guys are more than welcome to come down for the All Star game in Sac in a few years though and support our local economy, just don't wear green.

BTW, if you want to blame anyone, blame Hansen for being a freaking idiot, not understanding how the league he wants to join operates, and instead went behind both our backs and the NBA's backs to make this deal with the Maloofs. KJ understood the game and played by the rules, not our fault Hansen is such an idiot he couldn't abide by the same process. But I have yet to see a single Sea fan pointing out the fact Hansen could have been more intelligent about this.

Very well said and agree with every single word. When this process started, I felt compassion towards the Seattle crowd about losing their team and find a reason of why they deserved to get a team. As the process has gone on the classless, downright pathetic comments from the same lot has got me to the other side completely. Now I hope they never get a team and always suffer because of it. Reality tells me that they will get the team eventually but I know that once that happens, for me personally, there will be no more of a hated team that those smug ferals from Seattle. Heck the Lakers would be like our sister team compared to that lot.

Sooner or later they have to realise that money cannot buy you everything in life. If it was all about the highest bid, Larry Ellison would be in the NBA for over a decade now and his team would be located in San Jose. We both know that is not the case and its unlikely that it will ever be the case.

 

[Jose]

What Seattle needs to understand is this:

They were USED by the Maloofs to pump up the franchise price. They wanted to sell, but needed more than fair market value for the team in order to cover all their debts and come out ahead. They were hoping for a big payout, so, they flirted with Anaheim, couldn't get it done. They balked at the new Arena deal because it would tie them up there and lock up the franchise's value. They flirted with Virginia Beach looking for handouts from the city to move there, no dice. At some point in between they got lucky - Hansen got in touch. So the Maloofs started talking about how valuable the franchise was due to its "mobility". Hansen got desperate and made a deal with the devil - $525M, with a $30M non-refundable deposit if they signed a "binding" agreement, hoping he could grab a hold of the team before the city could react. Of course, the Maloffs agreed - they get their money no matter what. They know the city will put up a fight. Best case, Hansen ups his offer and they get to stick it to the city. Worst case, the city matches and they laugh all the way to the bank.

So there you have it - your idols (HBN) made a deal with the devil, and now it's judgement time. You can try to deflect blame to the NBA, Stern, KJ, whoever... truth is, this is all on the Maloofs and HBN.

 

[ninjabiscuit]

What Seattle needs to understand is this:

They were USED by the Maloofs to pump up the franchise price. They wanted to sell, but needed more than fair market value for the team in order to cover all their debts and come out ahead. They were hoping for a big payout, so, they flirted with Anaheim, couldn't get it done. They balked at the new Arena deal because it would tie them up there and lock up the franchise's value. They flirted with Virginia Beach looking for handouts from the city to move there, no dice. At some point in between they got lucky - Hansen got in touch. So the Maloofs started talking about how valuable the franchise was due to its "mobility". Hansen got desperate and made a deal with the devil - $525M, with a $30M non-refundable deposit if they signed a "binding" agreement, hoping he could grab a hold of the team before the city could react. Of course, the Maloffs agreed - they get their money no matter what. They know the city will put up a fight. Best case, Hansen ups his offer and they get to stick it to the city. Worst case, the city matches and they laugh all the way to the bank.

So there you have it - your idols (HBN) made a deal with the devil, and now it's judgement time. You can try to deflect blame to the NBA, Stern, KJ, whoever... truth is, this is all on the Maloofs and HBN.

Not sure I'd give the Maloofs that much credit.

 

[HndsmCelt]

I recommend Kings Fans follow the NBA's example and focus on the new buyers in Sacramento and a smooth translation of ownership. Meanwhile it is best to ignore the noise from Seattle, it is a pointless and meaningless and ultimately a distraction from important things. And no I will NOT comment on the title of this thread.

 

[Kingsfan23]

I keep hearing back on forth on the 30 mil deposit by HBN, is it refundable or no? I thought the league asked us to make them whole, and our bid deducted 30 mil from it so that we would reimburse HBN? I hope its not refundable

 

[VF21]

I keep hearing back on forth on the 30 mil deposit by HBN, is it refundable or no? I thought the league asked us to make them whole, and our bid deducted 30 mil from it so that we would reimburse HBN? I hope its not refundable

According to some, there is no such thing as a "non-refundable deposit" in California. So, if the sale does not go through I would assume the money has to be returned. That's one of the few things I actually don't have a problem with. if you put down a deposit to purchase something and the sale doesn't go through due to no fault of yours, I think you deserve your deposit back.

 

[VF21]

I recommend Kings Fans follow the NBA's example and focus on the new buyers in Sacramento and a smooth translation of ownership. Meanwhile it is best to ignore the noise from Seattle, it is a pointless and meaningless and ultimately a distraction from important things. And no I will NOT comment on the title of this thread.

I put the title on this thread when I broke out the Seattle conversation from our other discussions. It was meant to make it clear that we were talking/discussing this with someone who is a self-proclaimed Sonics fan.

 

[funkykingston]

The issue with this thread or any conversation between Seattle fans and Kings fans is pointless at this point.

Fans on either side can agree (for the most part) that Seattle should get an expansion team which is meaningless unless the league gives any sign that it is a legitimate option now or in the near future.

Otherwise all conversation (civil or otherwise) just boils down to Seattle fans thinking of reasons or scenarios that would allow them to take the team that we are all so passionate about keeping.

In many debates/discussions you just reach a point where you are at a complete impass and that's where we are and pretty much have been since the beginning.

 

[Trueblood]

The NBA won't discuss expansion though, Seattle absolutely 100% deserves expansion, except the league is using Seattle to leverage its other cities, which is not right. Which is why I hope Ballmer uses possible litigation to force expansion. Even if everyone here believes there is no case that exists, if anyone can make an anti-trust case against the NBA its Steve Ballmer and his Microsoft lawyers. And even if its a losing case, the league still loses because they'd have to open up their books, open up emails, open up a lot of things the league wants to keep quiet. So this kind of legal pressure on the league could still force expansion.

The league used Seattle to leverage Sacramento into paying a higher price for the team, I don't think for a second Hansen or Ballmer pursued this path without getting a wink or two from the league office. And to be honest, I think if Ballmer pursues litigation, its purely to spite the NBA, because even if Seattle plays nice I don't think the NBA is returning for a decade at minimum. Seattle should have forced the league into honoring its lease in 2008, the Sonics would still be there because I think the economic conditions (the economy falling off a cliff) would have forced him into selling. The past is the past, and the people did speak, for all the people who say Seattle should have stepped up in the past, the voters of Seattle booted out Nickels and brought in a guy more pro-Sonics.

At the end of the day, I truly believe the relocation committee voted the way they did because Sacramento put up more public funding than Seattle. I just don't understand why the NBA has to go to the lengths of pushing for basically bankruptcy in order to get its way. At the very least, EVERY single NBA team that puts money into funding a public arena should have equity in the team they are funding. Every NBA, NFL, and MLB team should demand equity if they're going to fund an arena. Its just not right the way all these professional sporting leagues operate, from a fan perspective and from a taxpayer perspective. I think all of us can agree on that point.

That's 100% on Nickels for taking the sell out route.

They couldn't force the league to make them honor the lease. There was enough gray area in the lease wording to allow it to go to trial. The fact that it went to trial is proof that the city couldn't force the league to do anything. A judge obviously saw it differently and the city preferred to get the $35 million as opposed to risking whether or not Bennett's team would sell.

 

[Trueblood]

Listen all I'm saying is the ultimate outcome is still up in the air, nothing has been set in stone, all we know is that the league wants the Kings in Sacramento. I'll eat my words if I'm wrong here, but all I"m saying is owners are voting against their own business interests to vote down the Hansen deal, even if it comes with stipulations requiring he build an arena and being forced to sell if he fails to do so. Which makes it possible that Hansen ends up owning the team. Hansen can't burn his bridges in Sacramento like Bennett because he's already shown his hand. He can't conspire because everyone already knows his intentions. And again, for Hansen, its at least a foot in the door to the NBA even if the team stays in Sacramento. That would buy him at least some leverage (first off a vote for expansion) to ultimately get the league to expand.

And if Hansen is rejected, the possibility of a lawsuit, which remains a possibility, could force the league's hand enough to expand.

The most unlikely outcome is that Hansen and Ballmer walk away from this project $100 million poorer waiting around for the next available team, which is the Bucks, who are not for sale, whose lease doesn't expire until 2017. That to me is really the least likely outcome.

I don't want to see the Bucks move but they are going to know prior to 2017 if they have an arena deal in place or not. If it looks like a political non starter and inevitable that relocation take place, they may be smart to take the same sellout that Nickels did. Nobody in Milwaukee is going to throw up $525 for the Bucks. They have been dead last in the Forbes rankings for like a decade now so Hansen could actually get them for a lot cheaper than what he is doing now. I'm thinking $400 million plus $50 for negotiating a lease termination and he still comes out $75 million ahead of what he's doing now.

 

[Trueblood]

Lol its already corrupt! Its been corrupt for a very, very long time.

Maloofs aren't the first bad owners and certainly aren't the last.

Shinn had a high profile sexual harassment lawsuit slapped on him back in the 1990s. Bennett/McClendon pillaged the Sonics, not to mention McClendon embezzled funds in 2011 in his actual corporate company (which by the way makes its money through fracking, which is highly controversial in itself). And Donald Sterling, probably the worst of them all, a slumlord, and certified racist, who ran his team into the ground for two decades, and openly discriminates against hispanics and black people in his business life.

If these guys aren't corrupt/nasty human beings, I don't know who is. Not to mention Stern, who two years ago bought the Hornets, then rejected a fair value trade from Chris Paul because it directly went against his argument for the CBA. Not to mention for over 20 years the NBA is behind the scenes determining the lottery results for the #1 pick.

Corruption is going to hang around this league for a very long time. I don't expect Silver to be any better.

But their actions came AFTER the NBA approved them as owners. Had Shinn committed those actions before 1986, he never would've been approved as an owner.

Had Sterling been charged with everything that he's been taken to court over prior to the early 80's, the league never would've approved him as an owner.

There was nothing wrong or illegal about Stern rejecting the Paul deal. For everyone crying fraud, there would've been 3 times as many Laker haters crying fix had the league owned Hornets allowed for a superstar to go to a glamorous franchise. The league was in talks with prospective Hornet owners and like any owner of a rebuilding team, they didn't want long term deals like Scola and Martin when you're going to be in the lottery anyways. The league got a better deal on the court and more importantly a deal that made it easier for them to sell the team.

And don't get me started on the lottery. There is security, lawyers and representatives for every team in the room when they do the hopper process and it's been scientifically proved to be impossible to rig. Even media doubters get invited into the room to see how the process goes down.

 

[Bricklayer]

I don't want to see the Bucks move but they are going to know prior to 2017 if they have an arena deal in place or not. If it looks like a political non starter and inevitable that relocation take place, they may be smart to take the same sellout that Nickels did. Nobody in Milwaukee is going to throw up $525 for the Bucks. They have been dead last in the Forbes rankings for like a decade now so Hansen could actually get them for a lot cheaper than what he is doing now. I'm thinking $400 million plus $50 for negotiating a lease termination and he still comes out $75 million ahead of what he's doing now.

I just again have to mention that the Bucks are owned by Herb Kohl. Former Wisconsin United States Senator Herb Kohl. Its kind of like expecting the Bushes to sell the Texans to a carpet bagger from Rhode Island wanting to move them to Providence.

 

[Trueblood]

I just again have to mention that the Bucks are owned by Herb Kohl. Former Wisconsin United States Senator Herb Kohl. Its kind of like expecting the Bushes to sell the Texans to a carpet bagger from Rhode Island wanting to move them to Providence.

Oh I know that. It's just that I don't know if he'll still want to own the team if there is no hope for a new arena. No new arena means no future for the Bucks in Wisconsin.

That's irrelevant. What bothers me about Seattle is that they've been making fun of the Sacramento arena deal for awhile. If they are so sure that it won't go through, then they should just wait for the arena process to fall apart. I know that it won't but I find it ironic that they don't see how it can happen but now that relocation has been denied, they seem to be changing their tune as if to say that they aren't so sure it will actually fall apart.

 

[HndsmCelt]

I put the title on this thread when I broke out the Seattle conversation from our other discussions. It was meant to make it clear that we were talking/discussing this with someone who is a self-proclaimed Sonics fan.

I was simply referencing my previous heated exchange over weather there is or could be such a ting as a Sonics fan in the real world.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

I just again have to mention that the Bucks are owned by Herb Kohl. Former Wisconsin United States Senator Herb Kohl. Its kind of like expecting the Bushes to sell the Texans to a carpet bagger from Rhode Island wanting to move them to Providence.

Though the Bush family is originally from next-door Connecticut, so...

 

[VF21]

The issue with this thread or any conversation between Seattle fans and Kings fans is pointless at this point.

Fans on either side can agree (for the most part) that Seattle should get an expansion team which is meaningless unless the league gives any sign that it is a legitimate option now or in the near future.

Otherwise all conversation (civil or otherwise) just boils down to Seattle fans thinking of reasons or scenarios that would allow them to take the team that we are all so passionate about keeping.

In many debates/discussions you just reach a point where you are at a complete impass and that's where we are and pretty much have been since the beginning.

I pretty much agree with all this. By having this thread, we at least can confine the rhetoric to one place...at least until May 15 or so when it all goes away.

 

[Kingsfan23]

I still don't see the proper precedent set forth that will stop owners from accepting 700 million for any franchise with negative intented purchasers? The reason this isn't an issue is because we were made to match something we never should have had to - 525.