VF21: Kevin Johnson is not a puppet. He bargained in good faith...
You: Sorry, he is a puppet. That is ok. Everyone that is an owner is. I know that is hard to take....
Unanimous vote to block relocation!!!!
- Thread starter Revrag
- Start date
VF21: Kevin Johnson is not a puppet. He bargained in good faith...
You: Sorry, he is a puppet. That is ok. Everyone that is an owner is. I know that is hard to take....
butteredbiscuit
G-League
Seattle problem is this kingsfan23, they feel like because they had a signed agreement that they should win. They had the signed paperwork and the court system should make it in favor of them. But it didnt happen! It is like the OJ Simpson trial. They had the blood but then the jury made it go the other way. The way that made the legal system look bad. Here in this case, Seattle people thought they had everything lined up and should be an easy win and it didnt happen.
The point is that Seattle's position is to come back and get the Kings. Will they get them? No! But these guys arent going to let them go because in Seattle, Hansen is a god to them. They are national heroes to them up there. I was reading some comments a few weeks ago on another site and this person asked what would happen if another person came in and wanted to pay for everything in regards to the arena what would you do? Most people were like we still want Hansen. Even if it was free,they still want Hansen. Hansen to me is their source to bring the NBA back. But there are other people who want the Seattle team like John McCaw, Jr. Bob Whitsitt group, Gary Payton group. They dont have the money like Hansen though. But once you get blacklisted, they all come into play. Hansen should let the Kings go and just wait for another team. New CBA will make some owners want to sell (except Glen Taylor)
fOR YOU, who do you think will move?
butteredbiscuit
G-League
Sorry Jose, I should have separated it after ok. It would have made it seem like that.
I'm saying every owner is a puppet. Im not saying KJ is an owner. Im saying he is a puppet to the system. But see Jose, that is just my opinion. People might not agree but thats ok. That is what the board is about. The object of the board is to bring ideas to other people's attention ( right or wrong) and have reaction. I dont call people names or say bad things about others. I can have a civil conversation and back up why I say what I say. VF1 didnt agree with the arena idea I mentioned. I enjoy her comments because she knows a lot like Gary, Factorial and many others. She explained why she didnt agree with some other comments I dont need to address. I enjoy different views. makes you a more rounded person.
Back to KJ, Doesnt mean he is a bad guy or he is a horrible mayor. He is a great guy! No one else cared more than he did. Clay Bennett is a puppet. emails to David Stern during the 2008 year proves it. But see the Maloofs and Larry Ellison arent puppets. They want to do whatever they want and the NBA goes along with what they do. Example Maloofs approving Kings to go to Anaheim without NBA approval. Maloofs still went along with still forcing themselves to make the NBA accept their move. Working with Henry Samueli to make it happen! DENIED! Ellison was told, the Grizzlies were going to stay in memphis but he still wanted to talk to Hensley about buying the team and then buying out the arena debt to move them to San Jose. This to me is how it works: David Stern is the boss. He tells you what to do. It isnt the other way around. When Stern says do this and that and it will happen.
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
You know, you can have shared interests, have alliances, without anybody involved being a puppet.
The only path to non-puppettude isn't necessarily being a contrarian *******.
butteredbiscuit
G-League
I am going to address the real situation here.Please comment... I want to ask you was the KC model a bad one? Now their revenue is 7th in the world without securing any pro teams. You had to find a replacement for Kemper Arena and your having an arena that has over 100 events and making that kind of money should tell you something. They dont have a big market. They are 31st. You sourced KC Sprint Center right? So why would the mayor agree to build it?
Another is just like Quebec City. Quebec City is building an arena now ( started last Sept) They are building a brand new arena without NHL approval but yet they believe they will get another team on the future. Why are these 2 cities building or have built arenas for? Whats the point? Also Ballmer said he could have built an arena with his own money but the NBA told him he had to work with the city? Why?
But if that Sprint Center was in a bigger market like Seattle, they would have a team. Hockey like Phoenix Coyotes would be there. Plus with all the events that can come to seattle, their profits would be huge. But building an arena without a pro team is stepping out of the box. They are 12th biggest market with an arena there makes them more attractive to get a team. Now many people say that the NBA with new bargaining agreement might make some owners sell their team.
I don't know anything about Quebec City, or virtually anything else about arena development in other areas. My heart and passion are the Sacramento Kings. I only brought up Kansas City as a perfect example of a city with a beautiful arena which has no anchor tenant. The last time I even heard mention of an attempt at a team was right after Katrina when there was some discussion of using KC's arena as a temporary home for New Orleans.
Building an arena isn't in and of itself enough to draw in a team. And building an arena without a pro franchise tenant is risky at best.
But this is all tangential to the topic at hand, which is Hansen still trying to find a way to salvage this mess. In all honesty, his best bet is to retreat to fight another day. It would be poetic justice if he actually found a way to sue the Maloofs, but he wouldn't get anything but a bunch of cake-flavored vodka for his trouble.
Last edited:
Kingsfan23
All-Star
The revenue sharing is going to make it easier for struggling teams/markets to stay in the black though
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
Yeah, not sure where that came from. The last CBA was a big win for the owners, and made a lot of formerly struggling franchises much more viable.
Gary
All-Star
So that basically means everyone is a puppet, the way you use the word. Except for maybe a head of a large company..... but wait! There are restrictions and rules that they must follow too. So basically you're trying to say that everyone in the USA that follows any sort of rules not imagined by themselves is a puppet then?
If you agree then at lest I know you are using the term very loosely.
KJ is not like a mop and he's not like a puppet, but OH MAN! So to answer your question, I don't know.
If anyone gets that reference then 100 points for you. (I added the KJ flavor)
ninjabiscuit
Bench
Buttered Biscuit: Seems like this could be a much more civil discussion if you would just unilaterally retract the word "puppet" from your statement. Your point appears to be that as an owner, or a potential owner, your choices are either to "play nice" with the NBA or fail to get what you want. I think that based on what I've seen, that's a fairly safe statement.
Stern said clearly when this all began: "each team owns its team in its market, and that is why, when a team wants to move, it becomes the province of the board, rather than ownership".
That is Seattle's problem - they are trying to steal a team from a viable market. Nothing to do with arenas, nothing to do with who has more money, or who claims to have the better proposal. This team BELONGS to the Sacramento market. As long as it's a viable market, it ain't moving.
Gary
All-Star
Last edited by a moderator:
Kingsfan23
All-Star
Again, what happens if the vote is 15/15 on relocation (not that I expect anyone besides the slime balls and probably Paul Allen to vote for relocation)?
I'm guessing that Stern would cast the deciding vote BUT it will never come to that point. The unanimous vote from the relocation committee sent a very clear message. You can ask about this happening but it's the kind of thing one of the Seattle people would try to use. There simply aren't 15 owners who will support moving the team over the recommendation of the relocation committee.
Interesting thought. Makes me wonder if there is no provision to solve a tie vote... Maybe it's more like half + 1?
ockingsfan
Starter
Seattle would have to win the vote 16-14 or better to be allowed to relocate.
sauce-26
Starter
yes
That's silly if you ask me. Why should owners that are leaving the league be allowed to vote on something that affects the league once they are gone?
They're still owners of the league. They have the right to vote as long as they are, especially since the sale of the Kings is not yet a done deal. You cannot take away someone's right to participate in a vote because at some point later down the road they will cease to be eligible to vote.
But the whole vote centres around an issue brought about by them! If they aren't selling there's no talk of relocation. To even vote on relocation is to basically acknowledge that they are no longer going to be owners of the league
I'm questioning the logic behind the process, not whether its what actually happens or not. Something being "that simple" does not mean there's good reason behind it. I'm sure someone with your experience is well aware that there are many things in the world that happen with no good logic behind it. Giving the Maloofs a vote is equivalent to putting a criminal on his own jury. To me a more sensible rule would be to exclude the owners who are selling the team due to conflict of interest. The same thing happens in Company Law - directors have to declare a conflict of interest and would normally be precluded from related votes.
Last edited:
Let me esplain. No, there is too much. Let me sum up:
The relocation committee voted unanimously to reject relocation by a 7-0 vote. The 5 member finance committee was also in attendance but didn't take part in this vote.
On May 15th the BOG in full will vote on relocation and are widely expected to follow the committee's recommendation.
The next issue is that of the sale. Chris Hansen has vowed to keep fighting which initially means he will continue lobbying for the full BOG to vote yes on relocation. If that fails then the question of ownership comes up. The rumor is that even if relocation is denied Hansen will lobby for his groups sale offer to still be accepted. Seattle fans see this as a possibility but I don't see how. If Hansen pushes for an actual vote, 8 or more members of the BOG voting against him would negate the sale to Hansen/Ballmer/Nordstrom.
Assuming that happens, the Kings backup offer is considered binding by Stern and theoretically the Maloofs would sell to the Ranadive/Mastrov group. In the meantime the prospective Kings owners are pushing forward with arena plans and the NBA was on the ground in Sacramento looking at Sleep Train Arena, presumably to see what upgrades were needed to keep it functioning for the next few seasons.
That's my view of where things stand today.
Section 101
All-Star
Actually, it was just tweeted that the 5 of the relocation committee are on the finance committee too. Relo committee = 7 people, finance = 10 people.
Similar threads
- Sacramento Kings On SI
- Kings News Links
- Yahoo! Sports - NBA - Sacramento Kings News
- Kings News Links
- Sacramento Kings On SI
- Kings News Links
