Las Vegas Kings??

[NBAGURU]

Link:
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/index


Six NBA franchises might be moving to a city near you



By Chris Sheridan
ESPN Insider
Archive




Let's pull out the crystal ball, take a peek one decade into the future and handicap a few of the games on the imaginary NBA schedule:



The Kings of Las Vegas at Brooklyn Nets: Another jam-packed crowd of nearly 20,000 is expected at the sparkling new arena above the old Atlantic Railyards as the Nets play host to the Kings. The Kings left Sacramento behind after commissioner David Stern stunned the basketball universe at the 2007 All-Star Game when he announced an agreement with the Nevada Gaming Commission, which compromised by taking NBA games off the books in Sin City, but not in the rest of the state.


Kansas City Hornets at Oklahoma City Magic: Should be about a 50-50 split in the stands between those who pledged their allegiance to the Hornets when they temporarily relocated from New Orleans and those who latched onto the replacement franchise that ditched its old digs near Disney World and moved to the nicest, newest arena in the Midwest.
San Jose SuperSonics at Vancouver Trail Blazers: Remember back in the good ol' days when the laws of geography said the Sonics traveled south to play the Blazers? Things sure have changed since Paul Allen cut his losses and left the Rose Garden, the country's nicest tractor pull facility. Not many thought Starbucks magnate Howard Schultz would make good on his threat to leave Seattle, but San Jose's final sweetener -- replacing low-fat milk with frappucinos in the city's public schools -- sealed the deal.
Anaheim Clippers at East Rutherford Knicks: Some still blame Isiah Thomas' leadership for the sequence of events that forced the Knickerbockers to abandon their original city of New York, but the real blame lies in former owner James Dolan's decision to ignore the decrepit state of Madison Square Garden with the same nearsightedness that caused him to miss the wireless television revolution. After selling the franchise to the New Secaucus Seven, Dolan took a job as cabana boy for multibillionaire Donald Sterling, whose fiscal responsibility was actually ridiculed a generation ago.
OK, maybe that's stretching the limits of future shock by mixing in a few too many absurdities.
But the fact remains that the NBA is on the precipice of moving into an era of franchise relocation unlike anything the league has experienced since the 1970s, when four teams -- the Rockets, Kings, Clippers and Jazz -- called in the long-haul moving trucks and three others -- the Nets, Bullets and Warriors -- relocated within their geographical regions.
Stern's league went through an era of relative tranquility in the late 1980s and through the '90s when 16 years elapsed between the move of the Kings from Kansas City to Sacramento and the move of the Grizzlies from Vancouver to Memphis in 2001.
The Hornets left Charlotte for New Orleans one year later, only to pick up and move again this season when Hurricane Katrina forced them into their temporary digs in Oklahoma City.
But the travels of the Grizzlies and Hornets could be just the tip of the iceberg, depending on how events play out over the next couple of years, with a full 20 percent of the league's 30 teams -- the Nets, Trail Blazers, Kings, Supersonics, Magic and Hornets -- either openly seeking to relocate or actively discussing the possibility of setting up shop in new cities.
The Milwaukee Bucks would be on that list, too, if their owner, Wisconsin senator Herb Kohl, sells the team to someone who would move them out of Milwaukee. As it is, the Bucks are on a year-to-year lease as they lobby for a new building to replace the 18-year-old Bradley Center, a facility that -- like a few others around the league -- does not have enough luxury boxes and club seats to generate the large revenue streams needed to compete in this day and age when nearly every NBA player is a millionaire.
"I always viewed leaving a city as a failure," Stern said last week in New Orleans. "I now understand these things go in cycles."
Here, then, is a look at the situation of each of the six franchises, with a prediction on where each team will end up.

 

[HndsmCelt]

Yawn... wake me when they say something new and interesting.

 

[Diabeticwonder]

Sheridan has way too much time on his hands. However, this part stuck out for me:
"But the travels of the Grizzlies and Hornets could be just the tip of the iceberg, depending on how events play out over the next couple of years, with a full 20 percent of the league's 30 teams -- the Nets, Trail Blazers, Kings, Supersonics, Magic and Hornets -- either openly seeking to relocate or actively discussing the possibility of setting up shop in new cities."
Does he know something I don't know: Are the Kings openly seeking to relocate or are they actively discussing that possibility? No, he doesn't and no they are not.

 

[Revrag]

Actually I think they are. I don't think they WANT to move, but I think it's unrealistic to assume they're not working on contingency plans if Sacramento can't or won't get a new arena built.

The possibility of them leaving IS real. I think the articles last week about the rial yard and those behind the River Cats facility helping out are encouraging, but there's still a long way to go.

 

[Diabeticwonder]

Actually I think they are. I don't think they WANT to move, but I think it's unrealistic to assume they're not working on contingency plans if Sacramento can't or won't get a new arena built.

The possibility of them leaving IS real. I think the articles last week about the rial yard and those behind the River Cats facility helping out are encouraging, but there's still a long way to go.

Not one person from the Kings has ever said that they were looking to move the team nor has anyone given the city an ultimatum.

 

[CruzDude]

Scary thing is that article may have some future facts in it. Which ones? Kings leaving would not be my biggest suprise when they don't get a new arena.

San Jose getting an NBA team makes sense and teams them up with NHL team.

So does Anaheim as Orange County is full of sports fans and Staples Center is a no-no land for them. Teams them up with NHL team.

Vancouver, no way.

Nets in Brooklyn, way Dude!!!

 

[captain bill]

Not one person from the Kings has ever said that they were looking to move the team nor has anyone given the city an ultimatum.

Not publicly, certainly. If the Maloofs were looking for alternatives to Sac if they can't get an arena, I'm sure they would do it quietly and not make some press release about it. You don't know, don't act like you do. Further, if the city does nothing, sooner or later, the team will leave. Maybe not in 07, but if nothing happens by say, 2009 or 2010, the team will be gone.

 

[DocHolliday]

Not one person from the Kings has ever said that they were looking to move the team nor has anyone given the city an ultimatum.

They don't want to leave, and I believe that. But, the reality is if a deal does not get done in the next year and a half or so, so that the building can at least START....they will be FORCED to leave. Only a couple years away from Arco not being certified by the NBA

 

[Diabeticwonder]

Not publicly, certainly. If the Maloofs were looking for alternatives to Sac if they can't get an arena, I'm sure they would do it quietly and not make some press release about it. You don't know, don't act like you do. Further, if the city does nothing, sooner or later, the team will leave. Maybe not in 07, but if nothing happens by say, 2009 or 2010, the team will be gone.

I'm acting like I know because I do know, at least what the public has been told. The difference between the Kings and the other teams in the article is that all of the other teams have made it public that they may in fact leave their city, but the Kings have not. I don't doubt that internally there have been some significant and extensive discussions about leaving. My problem with the article is that while the Kings have never made it public that they want to leave or have publicly given the city an ultimatum, the article makes it appear as though they have.

 

[Revrag]

The Maloofs probably won't make a public statement or ultimatum. It's not the way they do business. IF you hear it from them it will most likely already be a done deal. This thing is being worked feverishly in the background, out of the public eye. I'm more optimistic then I was a month ago that something can be worked out but if it's not then they will be forced to leave.

 

[nbrans]

Chris Sheridan has become completely worthless at alarming speed.

Wouldn't it be great if sports journalists were actually JOURNALISTS and didn't post rampant speculation and innuendo without a single fact?

 

[captain bill]

I'm acting like I know because I do know, at least what the public has been told. The difference between the Kings and the other teams in the article is that all of the other teams have made it public that they may in fact leave their city, but the Kings have not. I don't doubt that internally there have been some significant and extensive discussions about leaving. My problem with the article is that while the Kings have never made it public that they want to leave or have publicly given the city an ultimatum, the article makes it appear as though they have.

There has been a lot of indications that the Kings might leave. Your assumption that the public will know in advance is absolutely wrong. Teams leave cities with little or very short warning all the time. It would be stupid for management to make anything public- obviously they want to stay in town, to keep a good thing going, but if things don't turn around in terms of an arena deal, they probably will seriously consider it. All the article says is that the Kings have considered moving the team. And at this point it's almost impossible to refute that- if they're discussing how to get an arena done, and what their alternative are, it would be stupid not to consider, if this falls through, can we move the team? Attitudes like yours- that the national media hates Sacramento and wants to see the Kings leave, shooting down every bit of information that indicates or postulates whether the Kings will leave, and having blind faith in ownership's desire to stay- is what makes a team leave. If the people in the community think they have a right to a team, that team will leave, because other regions understand they need to fight to keep a team around. The Cleveland Browns left because people in Cleveland thought they had enough history and allegiance to the team to ignore warning signs that the team would leave and not try to change things. The same thing is happening in Sac- brushing off things like this makes it all the more likely that it will actually happen.

 

[kingkung]

The Cleveland Browns left because people in Cleveland thought they had enough history and allegiance to the team to ignore warning signs that the team would leave and not try to change things. The same thing is happening in Sac- brushing off things like this makes it all the more likely that it will actually happen.

Amen to that. I remember when our Browns got taken away. It was completely unexpected. The Maloofs aren't complete jack***es like Art Modell, but that doesn't mean they won't move the team without warning.

Why would they warn us? That would just draw more ire towards them than necessary. And honestly, they pretty much have given warnings...

p.s. i had to censor myself there... do we really allow the word 'jack***es' on this board? hmm...

 

[Diabeticwonder]

There has been a lot of indications that the Kings might leave. Your assumption that the public will know in advance is absolutely wrong. Teams leave cities with little or very short warning all the time. It would be stupid for management to make anything public- obviously they want to stay in town, to keep a good thing going, but if things don't turn around in terms of an arena deal, they probably will seriously consider it. All the article says is that the Kings have considered moving the team. And at this point it's almost impossible to refute that- if they're discussing how to get an arena done, and what their alternative are, it would be stupid not to consider, if this falls through, can we move the team? Attitudes like yours- that the national media hates Sacramento and wants to see the Kings leave, shooting down every bit of information that indicates or postulates whether the Kings will leave, and having blind faith in ownership's desire to stay- is what makes a team leave. If the people in the community think they have a right to a team, that team will leave, because other regions understand they need to fight to keep a team around. The Cleveland Browns left because people in Cleveland thought they had enough history and allegiance to the team to ignore warning signs that the team would leave and not try to change things. The same thing is happening in Sac- brushing off things like this makes it all the more likely that it will actually happen.

Attitudes like mine???? All I said was that Sheridan's article lumped the Kings in a group of other teams that have publicly made it known that they might leave their current home town. That's it. I completely understand what is going on and that there is more than a puncher's chance that they will leave town and that as fans we cannot rest on our past history of being the so-called best fans in the league and the sellout streaks, etc. I completely understand what happened to the Browns, Colts, and the other professional franchises that left their towns where they had so much success. I also believe that it would be very Maloof like to stay completely silent on the issue and for them to come out of nowhere and announce that a deal to relocate has already been done. Again, all I have stated was that I had a problem with Sheridan lumping the Kings into a group when all of those teams, excluding the Kings, have publicly made it known that they may leave town.

 

[Venom]

If they move, it won't be to Las Vegas. There are a number of reasons, so let me break it down:

1. Stern is not budging on the gambling issue. . .

2. And neither is the Gaming Commission. While the NBA does not attract the kind of action that the NFL does, there is no way that the casinos will completely remove the NBA from the books. Remember, the casinos are doing fine w/out a pro team in Vegas. The big push for a team is coming from the city government (Mayor Goodman), local radio personalities, and the Maloofs.

3. Lack of a venue. Thomas and Mack is great for college games, but not much above Arco Arena in terms of luxury boxes and similar accoutrements. Moreover, it is booked solid. UNLV has to take a two week road trip every year for the rodeo.

4. Las Vegas demographics. Nobody is from Las Vegas. There is no ingrained fan base. The people might come out to see the big names like Lebron, but would certainly not sell out every game. Counting on casino comps and tourists to make up the difference is ridiculous, especially considering the plethora of entertainment options in Las Vegas. Attendance at the minor league hockey and baseball games is average at best, and abysmal for UNLV football and basketball w/ the exception of major football rivalries like UN-Reno. Las Vegas does not support the franchises it has, why would that be different for an NBA team? Las Vegas is the best city in the world at putting on events, which is why they got the All-Star Game, and why that will become an annual event. But there will not be an NBA team in Las Vegas for at least as long as Stern is the commish, and likely even beyond that.

 

[Bricklayer]

Not one person from the Kings has ever said that they were looking to move the team nor has anyone given the city an ultimatum.

By the time they do that, it might be too late.

Most alarming quote though actually was this one:
"I always viewed leaving a city as a failure," Stern said last week in New Orleans. "I now understand these things go in cycles."

That's scary. Because heretofore David Stern was basically an ally interested in maintaining the status quo. If he's loosened up, that just makes it all the easier.

 

[VF21]

There has been a lot of indications that the Kings might leave. Your assumption that the public will know in advance is absolutely wrong. Teams leave cities with little or very short warning all the time. It would be stupid for management to make anything public- obviously they want to stay in town, to keep a good thing going, but if things don't turn around in terms of an arena deal, they probably will seriously consider it. All the article says is that the Kings have considered moving the team. And at this point it's almost impossible to refute that- if they're discussing how to get an arena done, and what their alternative are, it would be stupid not to consider, if this falls through, can we move the team? Attitudes like yours- that the national media hates Sacramento and wants to see the Kings leave, shooting down every bit of information that indicates or postulates whether the Kings will leave, and having blind faith in ownership's desire to stay- is what makes a team leave. If the people in the community think they have a right to a team, that team will leave, because other regions understand they need to fight to keep a team around. The Cleveland Browns left because people in Cleveland thought they had enough history and allegiance to the team to ignore warning signs that the team would leave and not try to change things. The same thing is happening in Sac- brushing off things like this makes it all the more likely that it will actually happen.

I think you're wrong, but only in assuming the Maloofs will sneak out like thieves in the night.

Of course they'll consider moving the team IF they run out of options. But they're not going to sneak out. They love the fanbase here and you don't find that by just sticking your finger on a map...

Right now, the onus is on the City Council to get their heads out of their arses and come up with a realistic plan to get a new arena built for Sacramento that will also be a new home for the Kings.

Yes, there is a chance the Kings will move. But I truly think the Maloofs will start making some ultimatums to the city before it happens. That's what happened in Houston and it's what happened in San Antonio, both of which are NBA towns. The examples you stated were NFL franchises. There is a bit of a difference, including the fact that David Stern really wants to see the Kings stay in Sacramento. Why wouldn't he? Over 300 sellouts in a row? Rabid fans? A rivalry with the Lakers that draws major attention?

This is big business, not fantasy league or Sims. The Maloofs have a lot invested here; they're not going to walk away until/unless they have no other choices. BUT, having said that, we cannot assume they will stay forever.

The need for a new arena is obvious. The need for the city council to realize it isn't just about the Maloofs is just as obvious. This is the SECOND article to pop up in the national media recently...

I don't know about anyone else, but I have to wonder if there's a reason why it's getting national press now. Could it be the tip of an iceberg? Could this, in fact, be the first hint of letting the public know things are going to heat up in the near future over this?

Questons to ponder...

 

[Andriod_KiNg]

Atleast the Kings would be able to draw big name free agents.

 

[Diabeticwonder]

Atleast the Kings would be able to draw big name free agents.

Once the common sentiment, but no longer. Sacramento is not the Siberia that it was once considered to be and the CBA is structured to encourage free agents to stay with their current teams.

 

[VF21]

Atleast the Kings would be able to draw big name free agents.

The Kings could draw "big name" free agents now if there wasn't such a thing as a salary cap and luxury tax.

It's not about players not wanting to come here. That, in fact, is arguably the LEAST of the problems.

 

[KingKong]

Anybody see this pic?

Seems like BSPN is really pushing for the move. This is on the front page of their website today.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/index

 

[Diabeticwonder]

Seems like BSPN is really pushing for the move. This is on the front page of their website today.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/index

If the Kings ever move to Vegas and Pauly Shore is still headlining, then there's more wrong with this world then we could ever imagine.

 

[MrBiggs]

If the Kings ever move to Vegas and Pauly Shore is still headlining, then there's more wrong with this world then we could ever imagine.

Hahahahaha! Good eye.

 

[CruzDude]

Well, the Las Vegas Kings would not be a giant suprise. One way to stop that from coming true AND to increase Sacramento's stature in the sports and entertainment world is to get a new entertainment complex built. And for the sake of convenience and central location, the downtown rail yard is the only place to do it.

Another item that keeps dropping thru the crack is the fact the Kings only use an arena for 50-55 home games a year. The other 310+ days a year can be for other things: pro hockey, mucho better entertainment venue, conferences and conventions. So the Kings are a 15% tenant: using the arena itself only 15% of a year.

The city then becomes the big BIG benefactor of the increased entertainment and business venues that can then occur.

..... hmmmm, San Jose Kings.................. nice downtown location, rail and bus center across the street, freeway access and Silicon Valley big $$ and a ton of corporations in the area would fill the boxes just great. And its only 30 minutes from Santa Cruz

 

[quick dog]

First of all, businesses and government agencies don't always make rational decisions. Emotion plays a part in far more decisions than one would think. That said, I would assume that the maloofs would have to think long and hard about moving a team that has had an extremely loyal fan-base and more than 300 consecutive sell-outs. It may happen, but I would assume that moving the Kings to Anaheim or Las Vegas would be a complex and potentially troubling decision. There are, afterall, NBA teams located in major cities that do not have significant fan-bases. Plus, the Maloofs are very image-conscience.

If the locals here don't get their act togetner and build a new multi=purpose arena, I suspect the Maloofs will move the team. If that happens, I suspect the Maloofs will never regain their sterling image. People still remember the Browns, Rams, and Raiders. Images of Al Davis and Barbara Frontieri will continue to be placed on dart boards all over California. They will die being hated by thousands of former fans.

 

[Merdiesel]

Like i said before, if the kings ever move out of Sac, I will no longer be a fan.

 

[JB_kings]

The bottom line is that the Sacramento Kings future in this city is directly tied to approving and building a new arena. Without one, the Kings will leave. With one - they stay. There is no third option. So until that issue is settled, it's going to be open season on moving speculation articles like this.

 

[quick dog]

I thought it was amusing when Kobe said in an interview the other night on Channel 10 that he hopes they keep ARCO Arena because of the vibrant atmosphere. He did not use that word.