Chris Daniels : David Stern backing Sacramento.

[Gary]

Hansen has already releases a potential number for the tv deal at $40M, which is way beyond any tv deal we've ever had and leverages their other sports. Our potential new ownership group is vastly superior to the Maloofs and I think we'll see improved business on many fronts. But that doesn't mean they have the magical ability to level any playing field with the Seattle market.

They also have a vastly different corporate base that will lead to much more in sponsorship $.

I still think we have a great market and the concentrated fan base is a great balance. But from a annual value standpoint plus the other financial benefits of a move to the other owners, I think the short term finances favor Seattle.

That released TV number means nothing to me until it's a done deal. Also, Sac will be re-negotiating theirs as well. Remember Anaheim reported some monstrous TV deal which was later confirmed to be untrue?

Until it's on paper and a done deal it's all just fantasy to me.

 

[sdballer]

Boy, you're a real beam of sunshine, aren't you?

I really like to look to participate in honest dialogue and I think there are pieces that favor both sides of this battle. It annoys me seeing either fanbase act like its only good news and pros for their side, because it isn't realistic and it makes any discussion around the potential outcome pointless. I have mentioned things I think are in Sac's favor and reasons I could see the BOG voting no

 

[pdxKingsFan]

Obviously S**tle has plenty of things going for it. Rich corporate sponsors, larger metropolitan area, I guess it is a "big league city" since it has NFL, MLS and MLB too, though I've always thought they had more teams than they can properly support, and the fact that losing teams always sell poorly supports this belief. They had a team with a great legacy, and they (WA state and Seattle city) shipped them away by refusing to play ball with the NBA until it was too late. They can blame Stern, they can blame Bennett but they ultimately dropped the ball.

They are a fine city.

But its still unprecedented to steal a team away from a city that has been doing everything asked and have dead beat owners throwing rocks in the gears at every turn. When the Maloofs tried to move themselves they were thwarted at every turn. Only because they knew they couldn't move on their own did they decide to sell and kick dirt in Sacramento's face on the way out. It's not really biased to say that the NBA has shown a vested interest in the Sacramento market and that interest carries some capital that the pro-relo crowd just doesn't comprehend.

I don't think its a done deal, but it would be a major move in the wrong direction for the long term success prospects of other small market teams and overall franchise stability if this move is allowed to happen.

And expansion to Seattle can still be done in a year or two when Stern leaves with no looking back and HUGE fees to the owners that trump the crap out of paltry relo fees.

 

[butteredbiscuit]

30mil is a lot of money and while I think the way the whole deposit thing was done was a bit shady like they were trying to bypass the NBA or something. I assume that the whole "giving the deposit back" thing is because they want Hansen in the league through either expansion or another team moving (which I dread) and want to stay on his good side.

1140am says Maloofs have given new ownership of Sacramento time past the deadline to submit a offer.

 

[Ryan]

1140am says Maloofs have given new ownership of Sacramento time past the deadline to submit a offer.

Ugh, this made up deadline has NOTHING to do with ANYTHING. Ignore it. You have more important things to do like chewing gum.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

The made up deadline is the Maloofs trolling S**tle.

 

[bajaden]

I really like to look to participate in honest dialogue and I think there are pieces that favor both sides of this battle. It annoys me seeing either fanbase act like its only good news and pros for their side, because it isn't realistic and it makes any discussion around the potential outcome pointless. I have mentioned things I think are in Sac's favor and reasons I could see the BOG voting no

Describe yourself anyway you want, but in my day, you'd be called a fence sitter. A person not willing to commit. No matter which way it shakes out, your right. My problem with you is, I seldom hear you shooting down all the optimistic fans from Seattle. You only try and temper the Sac fans. I'm the guy saying I see light up ahead, and I think were going to make it, and your the guy saying its all an illusion, and were probably going to die. I seldom hear anyone on this fourm exaggerating the information they get. Most have come to logical conclusions about that info. You on the other hand create straw dogs to try and discourage the optimistic fans here. I think the majority of the fans here are very realisitc, and know its not yet a done deal.

So when I get a piece of information that can be interpruted in different ways, depending on one's point of view, excuse me if I annoy you by taking a positive position on that piece of information. I'll just continue to have a dishonest dialogue.

 

[Hoovtrain]

Describe yourself anyway you want, but in my day, you'd be called a fence sitter. A person not willing to commit. No matter which way it shakes out, your right. My problem with you is, I seldom hear you shooting down all the optimistic fans from Seattle. You only try and temper the Sac fans. I'm the guy saying I see light up ahead, and I think were going to make it, and your the guy saying its all an illusion, and were probably going to die. I seldom hear anyone on this fourm exaggerating the information they get. Most have come to logical conclusions about that info. You on the other hand create straw dogs to try and discourage the optimistic fans here. I think the majority of the fans here are very realisitc, and know its not yet a done deal.

So when I get a piece of information that can be interpruted in different ways, depending on one's point of view, excuse me if I annoy you by taking a positive position on that piece of information. I'll just continue to have a dishonest dialogue.

Well that is just because you are not being honest with yourself you damn delusional fool!
That said i thoroughly enjoyed your post.

 

[KingsFanSince85]

If we're banking on the tipping point being an Indian owner, I think we're not being honest with our selves. There is no precedent in sports that having an owner with international ties is a game changer.

How many owners do you know of with ties to a third world country, a country that isn't already familiar with some type of professional basketball league and also happens to have a population of over 1.2 Billion? The NBA will be a new thing to many of them and they would have their own ambassador to the league. I think you're underestimating the overall potential. While there may not be a precedent in favor, there's also no precedent against.

Look at the impact Yao Ming had in China. While he was a player and not an owner, he was still their first ambassador to what's become a popular sport in that country. Without researching, I'll bet the Houston Rockets saw a pretty good spike in merchandising and TV revenue from it.

In this case, the popularity of the game of basketball is growing in India. If Ranadive is able to own the team, logic would tell you that a fair number of Indian basketball fans would then have a reason to follow the Kings versus other NBA franchises. If that happens, you really can't understate the impact it would have on the franchise.

If the team goes to Seattle under different ownership, that angle is gone.

 

[VF21]

1140am says Maloofs have given new ownership of Sacramento time past the deadline to submit a offer.

Thanks, but we're really right on top of all this stuff. This particular point is being discussed at great length in the Maloof deadline thread and, as is stated therein, the Maloofs really don't have a say. Any offer is submitted to the NBA, not to them.

 

[KingsFanSince85]

Describe yourself anyway you want, but in my day, you'd be called a fence sitter. A person not willing to commit. No matter which way it shakes out, your right. My problem with you is, I seldom hear you shooting down all the optimistic fans from Seattle. You only try and temper the Sac fans. I'm the guy saying I see light up ahead, and I think were going to make it, and your the guy saying its all an illusion, and were probably going to die. I seldom hear anyone on this fourm exaggerating the information they get. Most have come to logical conclusions about that info. You on the other hand create straw dogs to try and discourage the optimistic fans here. I think the majority of the fans here are very realisitc, and know its not yet a done deal.

So when I get a piece of information that can be interpruted in different ways, depending on one's point of view, excuse me if I annoy you by taking a positive position on that piece of information. I'll just continue to have a dishonest dialogue.

+1

I couldn't agree more with this assessment.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

There was a pretty good point made in one of the nobody-reads-them Sacramento fans allowed comment threads on that other site, which was that the Kings are more than Sacramento. The NBA has 3 other teams in CA and S**tle seems to think that works against us. But when you cross the political apparatus of CA state and still have 3 other franchises that may also seek public funds at some point... maybe that isn't thinking things through very thoroughly.

Of course this was met with their collective yawning.

 

[uolj]

Describe yourself anyway you want, but in my day, you'd be called a fence sitter. A person not willing to commit. No matter which way it shakes out, your right. My problem with you is, I seldom hear you shooting down all the optimistic fans from Seattle. You only try and temper the Sac fans. I'm the guy saying I see light up ahead, and I think were going to make it, and your the guy saying its all an illusion, and were probably going to die. I seldom hear anyone on this fourm exaggerating the information they get. Most have come to logical conclusions about that info. You on the other hand create straw dogs to try and discourage the optimistic fans here. I think the majority of the fans here are very realisitc, and know its not yet a done deal.

So when I get a piece of information that can be interpruted in different ways, depending on one's point of view, excuse me if I annoy you by taking a positive position on that piece of information. I'll just continue to have a dishonest dialogue.

That's just silly.

Being able to see both sides of an issue is a good thing, not a bad one. Being willing to consider evidence for and against your preferred outcome is a good thing, not a bad one.

Can you point to where sdballer ever said it's an illusion, or even that we weren't going to make it? In reading the posts just on this page it seems he's giving positives for Sacramento, too.

Your post is nonsense based on a silly notion that being able to see two sides of an issue is a bad thing. I've got no problem if you prefer to take an optimistic view of things, but please have some respect for people who do want to have an honest dialog. (And don't sully the idea of being able to do both, which many here are capable of doing.)

 

[KingsFanSince85]

Thanks, but we're really right on top of all this stuff. This particular point is being discussed at great length in the Maloof deadline thread and, as is stated therein, the Maloofs really don't have a say. Any offer is submitted to the NBA, not to them.

VF ..this is exactly the reason the Maloofs keep up with the appearance that they have some say or control in what's going on .. because there are many out there that haven't a clue otherwise and still believe them.

As we've all been saying for months now. The Maloofs are completely out of this. They've played their last hand, their cards are on the table for all to see and they are about to find out that their straight has been beaten by a 4-of-a-kind.

GAME OVER.

 

[Gary]

I really like to look to participate in honest dialogue and I think there are pieces that favor both sides of this battle. It annoys me seeing either fanbase act like its only good news and pros for their side, because it isn't realistic and it makes any discussion around the potential outcome pointless. I have mentioned things I think are in Sac's favor and reasons I could see the BOG voting no

You mention corporate sponsors, but you do know that owners have about as much to do with bringing in sponsors as the actual team itself right? Vivek could bring in HUGE sponsors just because he is who he is.

 

[ninjabiscuit]

Describe yourself anyway you want, but in my day, you'd be called a fence sitter. A person not willing to commit. No matter which way it shakes out, your right. My problem with you is, I seldom hear you shooting down all the optimistic fans from Seattle. You only try and temper the Sac fans. I'm the guy saying I see light up ahead, and I think were going to make it, and your the guy saying its all an illusion, and were probably going to die. I seldom hear anyone on this fourm exaggerating the information they get. Most have come to logical conclusions about that info. You on the other hand create straw dogs to try and discourage the optimistic fans here. I think the majority of the fans here are very realisitc, and know its not yet a done deal.

So when I get a piece of information that can be interpruted in different ways, depending on one's point of view, excuse me if I annoy you by taking a positive position on that piece of information. I'll just continue to have a dishonest dialogue.

Thanks for posting this.

 

[KingsFanSince85]

That's just silly.

Being able to see both sides of an issue is a good thing, not a bad one. Being willing to consider evidence for and against your preferred outcome is a good thing, not a bad one.

Can you point to where sdballer ever said it's an illusion, or even that we weren't going to make it? In reading the posts just on this page it seems he's giving positives for Sacramento, too.

Your post is nonsense based on a silly notion that being able to see two sides of an issue is a bad thing. I've got no problem if you prefer to take an optimistic view of things, but please have some respect for people who do want to have an honest dialog. (And don't sully the idea of being able to do both, which many here are capable of doing.)

Since when is burden of proof upon Bajaden or anybody else to try to convince you of anything? Go back and re-read this thread, as well as others, if you have questions how he (and others) came to the same conclusion.

Thanks for posting this.

Count another one that sees it the same exact way.

 

[VF21]

That's just silly.

Being able to see both sides of an issue is a good thing, not a bad one. Being willing to consider evidence for and against your preferred outcome is a good thing, not a bad one.

Can you point to where sdballer ever said it's an illusion, or even that we weren't going to make it? In reading the posts just on this page it seems he's giving positives for Sacramento, too.

Your post is nonsense based on a silly notion that being able to see two sides of an issue is a bad thing. I've got no problem if you prefer to take an optimistic view of things, but please have some respect for people who do want to have an honest dialog. (And don't sully the idea of being able to do both, which many here are capable of doing.)

Really? We're really going to start going after each other over something like this? REALLY?

This is about so much, much more than what constitutes an honest dialog. One long-time respected Kings fan is telling another long-time respected Kings fan to have respect while telling him his post is nonsense?

I will be so glad when all this is over and behind us. Good Kings fans are turning against each other over semantics. There are some who want to focus on the positives, there are others who are much more cautious and there are some who seem hellbent on always pointing out the negatives. Why can't we respect each other without all the other stuff?

...smh...

 

[Gary]

That's just silly.

Being able to see both sides of an issue is a good thing, not a bad one. Being willing to consider evidence for and against your preferred outcome is a good thing, not a bad one.

Can you point to where sdballer ever said it's an illusion, or even that we weren't going to make it? In reading the posts just on this page it seems he's giving positives for Sacramento, too.

Your post is nonsense based on a silly notion that being able to see two sides of an issue is a bad thing. I've got no problem if you prefer to take an optimistic view of things, but please have some respect for people who do want to have an honest dialog. (And don't sully the idea of being able to do both, which many here are capable of doing.)

Seeing things from both sides is not what I would call a fan of either side. That's like telling a family off a murder victim that you could see why the guy shot their son/daughter and then trying to explain to them why it happened. I don't think the family is really going to care what you say, and as King/Sacramento fans we really don't care about your objective posting. If you want to argue Seattle's point then go to their crappy forum. .

 

[uolj]

Since when is burden of proof upon Bajaden or anybody else to try to convince you of anything? Go back and re-read this thread, as well as others, if you have questions how he (and others) came to the same conclusion.

I did re-read the thread before posting that. What part specifically did you think I missed?

Also, the burden of proof isn't on anybody here. We're having a discussion. sdballer merely pointed out an alternative to Chupacabra's assertion that moving the team makes no sense. He never said anybody had to prove their position. (And if he did, I missed it and you're free to point it out instead of vaguely referencing something in the thread.)

 

[uolj]

Why can't we respect each other without all the other stuff?

Exactly. Thanks for backing me up.

(And yes, I know that wasn't exactly what you were saying, but that's what I was saying. These aren't "any questions" threads or welcome to the team threads or thanks for the memories threads, these are discussions threads. The posts being criticized are extremely tame and merely providing considerations on both sides. Those types of opinions don't need to be squelched or insulted.)

Here's the problem I have with it, personally: the end result is that the people who are "helping us see the other side" are also poking holes in the posts that give me hope that the Kings will stay in Sacramento.

I come here to support the Kings and the fact that I want them to stay. This web site is one of the few places I can do that. I don't come here to "see the other side." I could go to Sonics Rising if I wanted to do that. Someone who douses lots of the positive statements with cold water is (clearly) going to get on people's nerves. You guys can post what you want, but I reserve the right to complain about it.

Yeah, that's the problem with a place like this where different people have different motives for coming. I sure as heck don't want to go to Sonics rising for the other side, it's not about that. It's about trying to get a feel for the situation as it really is. This is by far the best place to do that, because we have a lot of people following the situation that are able to provide information, and we have a lot of smart people with smart opinions expressing them in these threads.

Some people prefer hope, even if it's not 100% backed by reality. Others prefer reality even if it isn't 100% hopeful. I actually don't mind either being here, but I think some of the posts in this thread especially cross the line from expressing a preference for one or the other to trying to insult and suppress those who fit the latter. I just don't think that's cool, that's all.

 

[ninjabiscuit]

I guess it depends on your definition of "fan."

I am officially dropping it...hopefully in a few days, there will be news that we can all agree is good.

 

[sdballer]

Exactly. Thanks for backing me up.

(And yes, I know that wasn't exactly what you were saying, but that's what I was saying. These aren't "any questions" threads or welcome to the team threads or thanks for the memories threads, these are discussions threads. The posts being criticized are extremely tame and merely providing considerations on both sides. Those types of opinions don't need to be squelched or insulted.)




Yeah, that's the problem with a place like this where different people have different motives for coming. I sure as heck don't want to go to Sonics rising for the other side, it's not about that. It's about trying to get a feel for the situation as it really is. This is by far the best place to do that, because we have a lot of people following the situation that are able to provide information, and we have a lot of smart people with smart opinions expressing them in these threads.

Some people prefer hope, even if it's not 100% backed by reality. Others prefer reality even if it isn't 100% hopeful. I actually don't mind either being here, but I think some of the posts in this thread especially cross the line from expressing a preference for one or the other to trying to insult and suppress those who fit the latter. I just don't think that's cool, that's all.

Thanks. Honestly, I don't have any hurt feelings over it and I'm not coming on here to be a killjoy. Its sad that anyone that doesn't interpret every bit as news or non-news as a win for the kings is branded as some sort of traitor. I find that kind of Sonics fans coverage of news to be embarrassing and like to think we hold ourselves to a higher standard.

Baja, you claim you never see me shooting down the hopeful Sonics fans. Where exactly would you see that? Are there a lot of Sonics fans on here for me to disagree with? I have a lot of respect for you as a poster here but it feels like any news or interpretation of news that isn't positive to the Kings is met with derision. i have yet to personally attack anyone or to do anything but present a side of facts that are supported by history and numbers. Its not like I've just come on here shouting that Seattle has everything going for it and Sac sucks.

Finally, I have no desire to play "I told you so". There have been times where my ridiculed perspective has been validated and I have never (regrettably aside from this time) come back here to gloat. I will be overjoyed to find out the Kings stay and devastated if they leave. My interpretation of the events that led up to that decision won't matter.

 

[uolj]

I guess it depends on your definition of "fan."

I am officially dropping it...hopefully in a few days, there will be news that we can all agree is good.

As you probably we know we've had debates on that subject here for years, although usually it's confined to basketball-related opinions.

Just one more thing before I go, though, please don't anybody call Carmichael Dave a traitor for this.

Ok. We had a fun moment.Now consider:

Vlade just tipped the ball to Horry.

Last year's term sheet celebration.

We can EASILY still lose

Ouch... even I felt a gut punch from that.

 

[sdballer]

You mention corporate sponsors, but you do know that owners have about as much to do with bringing in sponsors as the actual team itself right? Vivek could bring in HUGE sponsors just because he is who he is.

And you do realize that markets have more to do with sponsors than anything else, right? Seattle has more sponsorship opportunities than Sacramento. Again, not an opinion thing. It's a fact. Now enthusiastic and well connected owners can do a lot to bring it as much corporate support as possible and it certainly seems like Vivek will be that kind of owner but its not an even playing field to begin with.

 

[sdballer]

I guess it depends on your definition of "fan."

I am officially dropping it...hopefully in a few days, there will be news that we can all agree is good.

That kind of bs drives me nuts. I've been following the kings since they arrived in town. Even after I left Sac, I've come up to games, contributed financially to efforts, organized friends still there. I'm the guy in a Kings jersey sitting in a LA bar watching Horry hit the 3. You and any other real fan on here wants to question my loyalty because I don't think this is a slam dunk? Nice.

 

[The Hammer]

And you do realize that markets have more to do with sponsors than anything else, right? Seattle has more sponsorship opportunities than Sacramento. Again, not an opinion thing. It's a fact. Now enthusiastic and well connected owners can do a lot to bring it as much corporate support as possible and it certainly seems like Vivek will be that kind of owner but its not an even playing field to begin with.

The sponsorship game may change when you open up an entire new market with 1.2 billion people. If a TV contract comes with that, all the sudden you have non local sponsors advertising on non local networks. This is absolutely the direction the NBA wants to go and Vivek (and his tech savvy investor team) has the vision, skills, and the means to do it. We're also talking about a whole new media, even beyond TV. Mobile media. 1.2 billion people watching kings games on their smartphone in India, each being exposed to user specific advertising through predictive use of mega data. Think outside the watermelon.

And yes that is enough push it over the tipping point.

I posted this in another thread, but Vivek is a legitimate tech and business revolutionary leader. Here's a taste:

 

[whozit]

And you do realize that markets have more to do with sponsors than anything else, right? Seattle has more sponsorship opportunities than Sacramento. Again, not an opinion thing. It's a fact. Now enthusiastic and well connected owners can do a lot to bring it as much corporate support as possible and it certainly seems like Vivek will be that kind of owner but its not an even playing field to begin with.

I don't remember where it was posted/printed. But in one of the earlier threads, there was a link to a article showing that despite the abundance of fortune 500 companies they didn't necessarily pay.

 

[ninjabiscuit]

The sponsorship game may change when you open up an entire new market with 1.2 billion people. If a TV contract comes with that, all the sudden you have non local sponsors advertising on non local networks. This is absolutely the direction the NBA wants to go and Vivek (and his tech savvy investor team) has the vision, skills, and the means to do it. We're also talking about a whole new media, even beyond TV. Mobile media. 1.2 billion people watching kings games on their smartphone in India, each being exposed to user specific advertising through predictive use of mega data. Think outside the watermelon.

And yes that is enough push it over the tipping point.

I think that's the vision that the Sac group showed Stern, and everything I've read indicates that he likes that idea. A lot. Noted basketball expert Ric Bucher called it a "game changer."

 

[ninjabiscuit]

That kind of bs drives me nuts. I've been following the kings since they arrived in town. Even after I left Sac, I've come up to games, contributed financially to efforts, organized friends still there. I'm the guy in a Kings jersey sitting in a LA bar watching Horry hit the 3. You and any other real fan on here wants to question my loyalty because I don't think this is a slam dunk? Nice.

Hey, I PM'd you about this, but just to make sure you see it...I'm against some of your posts, because I see them as overly negative. I'm not implying that you aren't a die-hard supporter of the team.