League Expansion and the Kings, maybe?

[CruzDude]

Brian Scalabrine made some interesting comments in the Boston Globe today regarding the Sonics, who he thinks will move. Then he added:

"Here's my speculation, which means nothing. [Las] Vegas and Seattle will try to bring two teams in. Those two teams will go to the [Western Conference], and maybe two other teams will get pushed to the East."

Well, now I'll add my speculation that if Vegas and Seattle get expansion teams, the two teams likely to move to the eastern conference would be the Bucks and Grizzlies. The Bucks were in the east a few years ago and were moved west to even out the two conferences. And the Griz are just overpowered by the west and need a chance to compete and the east gives them that.

So Seattle gets a team. Wonder which team would end up in Las Vegas? They are planning a new, very state-of-the-art, multi-purpose arena definitely oriented to an NBA team. It's too hot there for football or major league baseball and their AAA team does ok.

Hmmm, makes you wonder that if this scenario persists and the Arena discussions in Sacramento drag on about putting an NBA arena in a State Fair grounds that the Kings don't bubble up to the front page of moving discussions. How long can the Maloof's afford to wait on that arena mess? How long can they not be profitable with the Kings in Sacramento? I don't like it and I suspect the Maloof's don't like it either but the handwriting is on the walls folks.

Wonder if there is anything we fans can do to help keep the Sacramento-Placer-El Dorado Kings in Sacramento?

 

[est.1999]

the bucks are an eastern conference team

 

[NoBonus]

I doubt pro sports will ever have a legitimate shot at existing in Nevada.

 

[DocHolliday]

Brian Scalabrine made some interesting comments in the Boston Globe today regarding the Sonics, who he thinks will move. Then he added:

"Here's my speculation, which means nothing. [Las] Vegas and Seattle will try to bring two teams in. Those two teams will go to the [Western Conference], and maybe two other teams will get pushed to the East."

Well, now I'll add my speculation that if Vegas and Seattle get expansion teams, the two teams likely to move to the eastern conference would be the Bucks and Grizzlies. The Bucks were in the east a few years ago and were moved west to even out the two conferences. And the Griz are just overpowered by the west and need a chance to compete and the east gives them that.

So Seattle gets a team. Wonder which team would end up in Las Vegas? They are planning a new, very state-of-the-art, multi-purpose arena definitely oriented to an NBA team. It's too hot there for football or major league baseball and their AAA team does ok.

Hmmm, makes you wonder that if this scenario persists and the Arena discussions in Sacramento drag on about putting an NBA arena in a State Fair grounds that the Kings don't bubble up to the front page of moving discussions. How long can the Maloof's afford to wait on that arena mess? How long can they not be profitable with the Kings in Sacramento? I don't like it and I suspect the Maloof's don't like it either but the handwriting is on the walls folks.

Wonder if there is anything we fans can do to help keep the Sacramento-Placer-El Dorado Kings in Sacramento?

Doesn't matter what Las Vegas wants. The commissioner has to give his official blessing, and I believe the owners of the teams have a say as well if I remember correctly.

 

[Kingzrool]

Please, no more expansions. There are too many games and too many teams already. I see more expnansion as more dilution. In their haste to make more $$, they will ruin the NBA. It already happened to baseball.

 

[AriesMar27]

the bucks are in the east... the grizz and hornets would be the teams to move... or the twolves maybe...

 

[CruzDude]

the bucks are an eastern conference team

Whoops!! You are so right. Then maybe the Timberwolves, eh?

 

[CruzDude]

Like it or not, David Stern has already spoken in favor of expansion. Europe maybe? possibly, but not before places like Seattle (replacement team) and Las Vegas. The NBA betting in Las Vegas would only have the local team off the books at all times, a trivial drop in a big bucket.

Vegas has become a 1.1M population year round now and growing all the time. Even the down economy hasn't stopped many folks from going there. And with the housing market there so overbuilt it is a buyers dream now and a lot of builders are holding on to houses as well that haven't made it to market.

Like it or not, Las Vegas is a big TV market: it is ranked 43rd ahead of Oklahoma City (45th), Memphis (47th), and New Orleans (53rd). Sacramento is still ranked 20th (Sacto-Stockton-Modesto). Las Vegas is somewhat of an island in the desert, sort of the same situation as Denver, an island in the mountains. Neither is very close to major cities like all the others ranked in the top 50.

And Las Vegas has an enormous transient population that will attract visitors to see their team play while they too are playing.

 

[CruzDude]

I doubt pro sports will ever have a legitimate shot at existing in Nevada.

Las Vegas has had a AAA baseball team for more years than the River Cats have been in Sacramento, and both teams are in the same division. And as I indicated above, it may only require taking a Las Vegas NBA team off the books for all their games to clear that hurdle.

There has been a big time college basketball team UNLV there for more than 40 years and they have won the NCAA championship as well. Heck, Coach Theus played there!!!

 

[kennadog]

Las Vegas is actully pretty darn close to LA. With all the celebrity idolizing there, I see it as a "Little LA." Still there is a certain "distance," of some sort I guess. To me it would be like 3 teams in SoCal. I think Denver is the center to a much larger geographical region than Las Vegas.

If it would be an expansion team, then it wouldn't be the Kings moving there. The Maloofs and Stern aren't going to talk of moving the Kings until the Cal Expo plan fails. Then I'm sure the Kings are gone to somewhere.

 

[Geoff]

Las Vegas is actully pretty darn close to LA. With all the celebrity idolizing there, I see it as a "Little LA." Still there is a certain "distance," of some sort I guess. To me it would be like 3 teams in SoCal. I think Denver is the center to a much larger geographical region than Las Vegas.

If it would be an expansion team, then it wouldn't be the Kings moving there. The Maloofs and Stern aren't going to talk of moving the Kings until the Cal Expo plan fails. Then I'm sure the Kings are gone to somewhere.

I don't see another expansion team a la Charlotte Bobcats in the NBA's near future. The season is pretty long enough already and talent dilution is a big complaint as well.

 

[Packt]

If the team in Seattle moves, they wont' get another team for a long time.

As far as Vegas, it's not the the gambling that is of concern, it's the image of the city itself. The city's image is the complete opposite of what Stern is trying to do right now. The NBA in LV would be unlike the slogan-- "What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas". The good will stay in Vegas, the bad won't. Small market with big market disaster, without the payoff.

Stern's goal has been clear for the past few years. Clean up the image and make the game more worldly. LV doesn't fit into that.

 

[CruzDude]

Gotta agree a bit with PACKT. After what happened in Vegas at All-Star weekend last year (a big mess mostly with non-allstar attendees), you may be right. But there seems to be no incentive for the City of Sacramento to get off the dime and in this down economy some incentive is needed.

 

[Löwenherz]

Along the lines of what Packt said, Stern has indirectly squashed hopes of Seattle getting an expansion team if the Sonics move.

But I found this really interesting:

"Asked if he would consider expending the league to 32 teams if the Sonics move to Oklahoma City as a way to provide Seattle with an NBA team, Stern said the league is not looking to expand, but he may consider shuffling franchises if the matter is broached by NBA owners during their meeting in New York on April 17-18."

-March 28, 2008, Eric D. Williams, The News Tribune
-Expansion team unlikely for Seattle if Sonics leave town
http://www.heraldnet.com/article/20080328/SPORTS/572314527/1004/SPORTS

Did I read that right, or am I just being a Chicken Little here? Are we looking at a mulitple-city team exodus partially triggered by the Sonics' move?

If so, what teams (besides the Sonics) do you think are at risk? Off the top of my head I'm thinking Kings, Bucks, Hornets, Grizzlies and maybe even the Hawks and T-Wolves.

And where would they go?

 

[Kingzrool]

Asked if he would consider expending the league to 32 teams if the Sonics move to Oklahoma City as a way to provide Seattle with an NBA team, Stern said the league is not looking to expand,

Yes. Please. Thank you. Expansion = dilution of the NBA = VERY BAD IDEA. I am surprised I am the only one chiming in on this. NOONE ELSE thinks that expansion of any sort is a bad idea? I would wager that the NBA actually lets teams go before they take on more. Not $$, but how about signatures? haha, I love the typo "expending" it is perfect.

 

[uolj]

You're not the only one against expansion, but since Stern himself said the league is not looking to expand I'm not sure what else there is to talk about.