Sacramento being seriously vetted and other news, rumors, etc.

#1
Carmichael Dave ‏@CarmichaelDave 1m
So here's the update- the big question is no longer CAN the King stay. They control their own destiny. NBA aggressively vetting group.


Looks like a lot of you were right (and I was maybe wrong?) but it looks like those few extra days were needed in order to get the group vetted?

Anyone notice how KJ and company have not really said much recently? I am wondering if that was because their deal is binding now or is it because the NBA basically said that they get the Kings and they needed them to hush until it's announced.
 
Last edited:

VF21

#KingsFansForever
Staff member
#3
From Twitter:

Carmichael Dave ‏@CarmichaelDave 1h

The question is, CAN the local group fulfill all the tasks the NBA is laying out? Very short timeline. If they fulfill, the team will stay.
----------------------------------------
Dave mentioned this at the same time as the tweet in the OP. My answer to the question is Hell YEAH! KJ and group have done everything required of them thud far and I do not see the NBA asking anything that is beyond their ability to complete. They're dotting i's and crossing t's and making sure there are no missing pages, etc.

I know it's not over, fellow Kings fans, but I'm going to enjoy this weekend and look forward to Monday.

I LOVE THIS TRAM!!!
 
#4
I LOVE THIS TRAM!!!
I love THIS tram:
RT+Light+Rail+elk+Grove.jpg

I'm hoping CD is right and that all that remains is vetting and making sure the Sacramento group can do what they've promised.

As much as I love the Kings, I think I've gotten more attached to the notion of revitalizing downtown. I'm cautiously optimistic today.
 
#5
Carmichael Dave ‏@CarmichaelDave 1m
So here's the update- the big question is no longer CAN the King stay. They control their own destiny. NBA aggressively vetting group.


Looks like a lot of you were right (and I was maybe wrong?) but it looks like those few extra days were needed in order to get the group vetted?

Anyone notice how KJ and company have not really said much recently? I am wondering if that was because their deal is binding now or is it because the NBA basically said that they get the Kings and they needed them to hush until it's announced.
kings fans often labor under the assumption that the board of governors was always going to give sacramento a fair shot. david stern has been in sac's corner for some time now, but it was never a guarantee that the owners would follow suit. just as the maloofs could not have anticipated the sheer force of will of KJ's last ditch effort to keep the team in sacramento, the league's owners were undoubtedly blindsided, as well. they likes things neat and tidy. they like to keep it simple. a league-record valuation and sale/relocation to the hansen/ballmer group should have been a no-brainer, and it really is kind of hard to believe that KJ and co. were able to put together their bid in such a short amount of time. that said, of course the league is "aggressively vetting" the sacramento ownership group. now that it's clear just how untidy this situation will end up, they must do the diligence. sacramento has a strong and truly competitive offer and proposed arena deal on the table. we can speculate about the possibility of expansion as much as we'd like, but i imagine the nba is taking its time vetting both groups because it's in the best interest of the nba to do so. we just have to hope that, when it's all said and done, sacramento comes out looking like a winner...
 
#6
I love THIS tram:
View attachment 4267

I'm hoping CD is right and that all that remains is vetting and making sure the Sacramento group can do what they've promised.

As much as I love the Kings, I think I've gotten more attached to the notion of revitalizing downtown. I'm cautiously optimistic today.
Same.. My niece moved downtown in 2012 and she's really excited (as excited as a 22 year old can get) that she will be able to walk to Kings games, and that the whole area will be changed.
 

VF21

#KingsFansForever
Staff member
#8
kings fans often labor under the assumption that the board of governors was always going to give sacramento a fair shot. david stern has been in sac's corner for some time now, but it was never a guarantee that the owners would follow suit. just as the maloofs could not have anticipated the sheer force of will of KJ's last ditch effort to keep the team in sacramento, the league's owners were undoubtedly blindsided, as well. they likes things neat and tidy. they like to keep it simple. a league-record valuation and sale/relocation to the hansen/ballmer group should have been a no-brainer, and it really is kind of hard to believe that KJ and co. were able to put together their bid in such a short amount of time. that said, of course the league is "aggressively vetting" the sacramento ownership group. now that it's clear just how untidy this situation will end up, they must do the diligence. sacramento has a strong and truly competitive offer and proposed arena deal on the table. we can speculate about the possibility of expansion as much as we'd like, but i imagine the nba is taking its time vetting both groups because it's in the best interest of the nba to do so. we just have to hope that, when it's all said and done, sacramento comes out looking like a winner...
I agree that our (meaning the fans, the city and the businesses of Sacramento) aggressive defense of OUR team must have come as somewhat of a surprise to some of the BoG members. I do think, however, that Johnson put them all on notice when he made his first presentation. His passion and his drive were unmistakeable. When the news of the sale to Seattle first leaked, I can't help but believe there were some owners who were just waiting to see what KJ could come up with to fight back.
 
#9
I agree that our (meaning the fans, the city and the businesses of Sacramento) aggressive defense of OUR team must have come as somewhat of a surprise to some of the BoG members. I do think, however, that Johnson put them all on notice when he made his first presentation. His passion and his drive were unmistakeable. When the news of the sale to Seattle first leaked, I can't help but believe there were some owners who were just waiting to see what KJ could come up with to fight back.
that much is true. and now that the owners are on notice, they're taking the sacramento group's bid very seriously. let me put it this way: it's one thing for owners to hear news coming out of sacramento that the city is actively behind a bid to keep the kings in town. it's another thing entirely to have the city's exuberant mayor, a supportive california state senator, and their stacked ownership group itself appear before the league's owners and aggressively pursue the purchase of that team. i don't want to diminish the importance of the fans' collective enthusiasm, but it's also important to take a step back sometimes. we're very close to these proceedings, so we often forget to think about it as an nba owner might. prior to KJ's initial presentation to the board of governors, all the owners had to go on were rumors and media reports, often diluted through the chain of "sources." but now that they've been made sufficiently aware of the competitiveness of the sacramento group's offer (which really could have been considered an unlikelihood in and of itself considering the brief timetable and the enormity of the record valuation of the team set by hansen/ballmer), the owners must give it their full consideration...

edit: all this is to highlight the fact that nobody expected a potential come-from-behind victory for sacramento this time around. it's like that utterly improbable 35-point deficit the kings overcame against chicago a couple of seasons back; ya just don't see it very often in professional sports. and, for an nba owner, there was simply no reason to believe that the sale of the kings to the hansen/ballmer group would stall due to competition from a local group. it really has been a herculean effort from KJ and co. we're truly dealing with mythical proportions here...
 
Last edited:
#10
Would be the only team with a jersey retired for a player that has never played for us?


Let me rephrase, Would we be the only team that has never been employed by the team in any way or played for the team in any way that has had his jersey retired for said sports team?
 
Last edited:

HndsmCelt

Hall of Famer
#12
There are no rules to retiring jerseys but there are traditions. eg If one team retires a player's jersey the other teams he played for do not retire it. I honestly think that the best thing is to put a statue of him out front flanked by Mitch Richmond and Chris Webber. (a triple violation of the principal that you should never erect statues to living people.)
 
#13
I think it means people in Seattle's heads will explode, they will continue to hate Stern beyond any measure and the Sounders can breathe a little easier knowing they suck this season.
 
#14
There are no rules to retiring jerseys but there are traditions. eg If one team retires a player's jersey the other teams he played for do not retire it. I honestly think that the best thing is to put a statue of him out front flanked by Mitch Richmond and Chris Webber. (a triple violation of the principal that you should never erect statues to living people.)
I would like to erect 3" statues of the brothers Maloof inside the men's urinals.
 
#15
The Seattle forums don't seem to be too worried.. What exactly does this mean for us(and seattle)?
Which forum? Sonicsrising pretty much went from "when we get the Kings" to "I would be happy with an expansion". They know deep down they aren't getting the Kings. Not if they are in the process of vetting the new Kings owners.
 
#19
Jim Crandell ‏@JimCrandell 31m
From AECOM, proposed arena will be "basketball first", but "professional hockey will be accomodated"...

Wouldn't that be awesome is we not only took Seattle's NBA hopes but their NHL hopes as well?
 

Warhawk

The cake is a lie.
Staff member
#20
There are no rules to retiring jerseys but there are traditions. eg If one team retires a player's jersey the other teams he played for do not retire it. I honestly think that the best thing is to put a statue of him out front flanked by Mitch Richmond and Chris Webber. (a triple violation of the principal that you should never erect statues to living people.)
I would add Lukenbill to the list of statues.
 

Warhawk

The cake is a lie.
Staff member
#22
Jim Crandell ‏@JimCrandell 31m
From AECOM, proposed arena will be "basketball first", but "professional hockey will be accomodated"...

Wouldn't that be awesome is we not only took Seattle's NBA hopes but their NHL hopes as well?
I would love to see some local pro hockey. We go down to see the Stockton Thunder on occasion and really enjoy it. And I am fine with that if we don't get a team here. But Sacramento would be a much bigger market for it and the Thunder usually have only half an arena full, at most. Hmmmmmm.......nah, ain't going there. ;)
 

Mr. S£im Citrus

Doryphore of KingsFans.com
Staff member
#23
Would be the only team with a jersey retired for a player that has never played for us?


Let me rephrase, Would we be the only team that has never been employed by the team in any way or played for the team in any way that has had his jersey retired for said sports team?
Miami retired #23 when Jordan retired. Or, at least, they hung it up in the rafters. No idea on whether or not it's still there.

EDIT - It is.
 
#24
Jim Crandell ‏@JimCrandell 31m
From AECOM, proposed arena will be "basketball first", but "professional hockey will be accomodated"...

Wouldn't that be awesome is we not only took Seattle's NBA hopes but their NHL hopes as well?
I thought one of our reasons for us keeping the Kings was because Sacramento was a one sport/team city? I'm indifferent to it, cause I'm not a hockey fan, but thought that was interesting.
 

VF21

#KingsFansForever
Staff member
#25
Jim Crandell ‏@JimCrandell 31m
From AECOM, proposed arena will be "basketball first", but "professional hockey will be accomodated"...

Wouldn't that be awesome is we not only took Seattle's NBA hopes but their NHL hopes as well?
Nope. No way. If this whole thing has opened my eyes to anything, it's that I'll never support an effort to take away someone else's hopes.

To me, we didn't take away their basketball hopes. They were trying to take away our TEAM, and all the hopes, dreams and memories that go with it. If Seattle can find a way to get an arena deal done for an NHL team, i wish them all the luck in the world. Personally, I'm more interested in the possibility of the Maloofs buying an NHL team. After all the fuss they raised about Burkle, how ironic would it be if his vote was the one that kept them out of his "club"? ;)
 
#26
I thought one of our reasons for us keeping the Kings was because Sacramento was a one sport/team city? I'm indifferent to it, cause I'm not a hockey fan, but thought that was interesting.
Back in the Arco days in the 90s we used to have a couple San Jose Shark games here a year which would all be total sellouts and standing room only. I went to them, and although I am not a fan of Hockey, I would probably become a fan if we got a team. Personally, I would have thought that the NHL would have gave us a team based on our attendance at the Sharks games. This would be a great Hockey town.
 
#27
Nope. No way. If this whole thing has opened my eyes to anything, it's that I'll never support an effort to take away someone else's hopes.

To me, we didn't take away their basketball hopes. They were trying to take away our TEAM, and all the hopes, dreams and memories that go with it. If Seattle can find a way to get an arena deal done for an NHL team, i wish them all the luck in the world. Personally, I'm more interested in the possibility of the Maloofs buying an NHL team. After all the fuss they raised about Burkle, how ironic would it be if his vote was the one that kept them out of his "club"? ;)
The old saying "Cry and I'll give you something to cry about" comes to mind when I think of Seattle. They are basically crying about possibly being screwed twice (as if this was their team to lose), so basically if it came down to Sac and Seattle in talks with an expansion franchise for Hockey I would have no problem if we got it over them. That would be something to cry about. Not this, because they are losing anything here yet they cry as if they are.
 
#28
Nope. No way. If this whole thing has opened my eyes to anything, it's that I'll never support an effort to take away someone else's hopes.

To me, we didn't take away their basketball hopes. They were trying to take away our TEAM, and all the hopes, dreams and memories that go with it. If Seattle can find a way to get an arena deal done for an NHL team, i wish them all the luck in the world. Personally, I'm more interested in the possibility of the Maloofs buying an NHL team. After all the fuss they raised about Burkle, how ironic would it be if his vote was the one that kept them out of his "club"? ;)
I hope Seattle gets a team, and I definitely don't want to take away anyone else's.
 
#29
Nope. No way. If this whole thing has opened my eyes to anything, it's that I'll never support an effort to take away someone else's hopes.

To me, we didn't take away their basketball hopes. They were trying to take away our TEAM, and all the hopes, dreams and memories that go with it. If Seattle can find a way to get an arena deal done for an NHL team, i wish them all the luck in the world. Personally, I'm more interested in the possibility of the Maloofs buying an NHL team. After all the fuss they raised about Burkle, how ironic would it be if his vote was the one that kept them out of his "club"? ;)
I agree, for now. Is something came up in a couple of years then I would support getting an NHL team. The Monarchs will be back and why not consider Arena Football.
 

HndsmCelt

Hall of Famer
#30
Nope. No way. If this whole thing has opened my eyes to anything, it's that I'll never support an effort to take away someone else's hopes.

To me, we didn't take away their basketball hopes. They were trying to take away our TEAM, and all the hopes, dreams and memories that go with it. If Seattle can find a way to get an arena deal done for an NHL team, i wish them all the luck in the world. Personally, I'm more interested in the possibility of the Maloofs buying an NHL team. After all the fuss they raised about Burkle, how ironic would it be if his vote was the one that kept them out of his "club"? ;)
IF we were talking about a NHL team they already had, then I would agree. As is we are talking about a group of people who feel entitled to take what ever they like and to hell with the other guy. Sort of a steelers keepers losers weepers mentality. Now if someone were to try to buy and move an NHL team from say Phoenix to Sacramento I would cry foul and sympathies for the people of Phoenix. For the salivating scavengers up north awaiting their carrion to feast upon I say too bad.