Would it be that bad if the Kings left Sacramento but stayed in Cali?

[MassachusettsKingsFan]

Hey KF.Com .. Not sure if this warrents its own discussion, but here is an outsiders take on the Kings Arena situation.

I live in Massachusetts obviously, I already mentioned how I became a Kings fan in some other older thread so I wont bother doing it again here, but thats besides the point. Ive stayed in the east coast all my life ( as far as living goes ) Ive been to florida and Belize ( not my heritage, school went on a trip to go over there and build houses ect. ) and thats about it.

So Ive never been to ARCO, never been to sacramento and never been to california.

So what I think may be different that what you guys think on this issue. I would like the kings to stay in sacramento, for you guys more than anything. Just being part of this forum ( I dont know how many of you actually live in sacramento, or have lived there at some point). From what I hear, no offense, there isnt much to do in sacramento and that can drive FA's away from the team. So from one standpoint I want them to stay in SacTown for the fans who live in or around that city, but a part of me wouldnt mind them moving to Aneheim ( I have no idea what kind of city that is ) or some other city in california that Free Agents might be more attracted to.

I know as a boston sports fan, if the celts moved out of boston but stayed in massachusetts it wouldnt be a huge deal for me.

Then there is california in general. I think it would be wrong to move the team out of state, but this seems to be a posibility. Even then it wouldnt be the end of the world for me just because the location isnt why im a fan.

so I guess the point of this topic is this : would you guys care if the team moved out of sacramento? California ?

Keep in mind I dont get much california news out here, I dont know if people are still talking about it frequently, or what exactly the plan is as of now. California is a big state, so to some people living on the borders this might be a bigger deal, because the oposite sides of california is can be hours and hours away.

This is my first remark on the issue, so sorry if its common knowledge .. is this really a big deal over there?

 

[kennadog]

I know as a boston sports fan, if the celts moved out of boston but stayed in massachusetts it wouldnt be a huge deal for me.

Would you mind if they moved to the state of New York? That would be a better comparison. Then NY would have 3 pro NBA teams & MA none.

California is a big state and Northern and Southern California are very different in a lot ways. For comparson, Sacramento to Anaheim is roughly twice as far as Boston to NY.

I've lived in California since I was 3 years old. From 14 on, I lived in SoCal. Since then it's been NoCal all the way. Believe me, the rivalry between NoCal and SoCal is intense and not just sports-speaking.

Moving the Kings would mean So Cal would have 3 pro NBA teams. NoCal would still have the Warriors, but I detest the Warriors almost as much as the Lakers.

I would rather the Kings go to Las Vegas, than anywhere in SoCal , although that's not much better, as Las Vegas has always been Laker Country, too. San Diego might be okay. They have no great love for their neighbor to the north.

For young guys that want a lot of happening night life, high national exposure and celebrities, Sacramento isn't it. But Sacramento is not as bad as the national media often portrays it.

Right now, there just isn't a highly visible "entertainment" area in Sacramento, due mainly to a lack of vision on the part of city leaders. It's more spread out in pockets, making it harder to locate, especially for an out-of-towner in town for a night (ala NBA players). Maybe our new Mayor, Kevin Johnson, can help things along.

 

[Kingzrool]

Southern Ca and Northern Ca might as well be two different states. I know that if they went anywhere near LA, they would lose my fandom period.

I vote for Reno!

 

[Bricklayer]

The thing you are not taking into account is that Californnia is the size of the entire Eastern seaboard from Virginia up to Maine. Moving elsewhere in Massacheusetts the team is still never more than an hour away (unless it moves to some hamlet out near the New York/Vermont border) -- its like moving from Sacto to San Francisco. And unlike even the Sacto to Frisco thing, there is only one city that dominates in Massacheusetts. Does not matter where you play in the state, you are still representing Boston. That's where your fans, money, corporate sponsors etc. are coming from, and Boston will always claim you and have you on TV.

But California is huge, and full of major cities and regions each its own constituency. The in state rivalries in California are like the cross state rivalries in the Northeast -- moving elsewhere in California is like moving states in New England. How close would you feel to the Dover Celtics? When they were never on TV or in the newspaper and the arena was filled with Delawareites?

 

[MassachusettsKingsFan]

Yeah. I get where your coming from now, I didnt realize the rivalry between SoCal and NoCal was that big of a deal. I know California is the size of New England, but then I thought about the New England Patriots and how that works well for the region (although there also based in massachusetts ).

So is it just a money thing over there? or a location thing? Im sure I could find out in a few minutes by just looking it up, but media can be biased and I just rather ask here haha.

I could care less as far as night life is concerned, there isnt a whole lot to do in boston either IMO .. but that sort of thing seems to matter to some players ..

What about Oakland and San Jose? I know their in Nocal but I dont know what they have for "night life". Would a Oakland Kings or San Jose kings bother you guys?

pardon my geography, but would they even change the name from Sacramento to Oakland or San Jose if the stadium were built there? or in a smaller suburb of sacramento....

This also might be a stupid question, but would something like the san jose sharks stadium be a possibility?

 

[Kingzrool]

For me SF/Oakland would still work, but San Jose would be the other side of the line. Call me crazy, but I draw the line to include Santa Cruz but not San Jose.

Arco is actually in Natomas, so any suburb of Sac would still be called Sac. But if it were moved to SF or San Jose, they def would not call it Sac anymore.

I should add that I am not from Sac but Truckee, about two hours into the Sierras. I have never lived in Sac, so I do not have the same Sac loyalty as those that live there, just NorCal loyalty.

 

[kennadog]

Southern Ca and Northern Ca might as well be two different states. I know that if they went anywhere near LA, they would lose my fandom period.

I vote for Reno!

Actually, I'd like Reno better than Las Vegas , but LV is more likely.

As to Oakland, well that's where the Warriors play, so that would tick me off. They used to be the San Francisco Warriors, but changed it to "Golden State" when they moved across the bridge to Oakland. Guess they wanted to just claim the Bay Area as a whole and didn't want to tick off fans in SF by changing their name to Oakland.

I wouldn't be thrilled with San Jose either, really. To me, it's just a southward extension of the whole Bay Area. I wouldn't say San Jose is a nicer place to live than Sacramento either, personally. I think it's worse.

The only real issue in Sacramento is figuring out a workable plan for a new arena. If we can get that (fingers crossed) we keep the Kings. Yes, the crowds are down, but that's mostly the current economy. Team's bad, ticket prices still a bit on the high side and Sacramento region one of the hardest hit housing markets in the nation.

It's not going to stay that way forever and I can't imagine the economy is good for a move elsewhere right now, either. So, get a new arena planned for the not-too-distant future and Sac's good as gold for the Kings. The support for the Monarchs is decent in Sac, too.

 

[bajaden]

I've never figured out why Sacramento gets such a bad rap. I understand the San Francisco crowd. They've always held their nose as they drove through, but where does the rest of the media get this idea. Sacramento is one of the few places I know that you can ski on saturday, and play golf on sunday. I know, I've done it. Try that in New England.

As far as the Kings moving out of Sacramento. Well, how about West Sacramento. Hell, their more progressive across the river than most of the 200 year old, so called leaders in Sacramento are.

 

[captain bill]

Reno would make a good choice because it is close to Sac and is already Kings country. Problem is a) gambling and b) a significant chunk of the fan base would get shut out from going to games during the winter season if they had to go over the pass to see games. Other high sierra cities would be nice but minus name recognition except for Tahoe, where there is no way the permits could be gotten for that much development in a national forest, and driving there is even worse. As awesome as I think it would be for the Kings to go to Reno, or anywhere in the mountains, I don't think it's gonna happen.

Oakland- I doubt it with the Dubs in town. SF- maybe play in the cow palace? Build a new arena there? It could work. San Jose is the armpit of the Bay, but it is still a big city with a thriving local economy that I think would provide enormous support for an NBA franchise. If coordination is done well the arena could be built next to the new BART extension that just got approved.

Stockton is probably more conceivable than any Bay Area city in terms of building there while remaining the Sacramento Kings. It is worrisome what affect that would have on national draw, however...who would want to sign a contract to play in Stockton of all places? Granted I haven't spent much time there, maybe someone who has could enlighten me.

 

[Trueblood]

Just my 2 cents on the issue. For most of you this is common knowledge but for those who haven't been following the situation, this is it in a nutshell.

The biggest problem with Sacramento is that the arena is old and needs to be replaced. However, in this day and age, you simply can't use tax dollars to build a new arena in California or at least not in Sacramento. Therefore, they are between a rock and a hard place. The league, state, city and developers are being as creative as possible but it's looking more and more like a long shot. I'm keeping my fingers crossed but I just don't know if it can be done.

As for the bay area, the other posters have it right. The Warriors play in Oakland. The poster who said that the "Golden State" moniker was created in order to reach out to the whole bay area and not alienate businesses in SF is right although it would make more sense to name the team after the bay area as opposed to the entire state. "Bay Area Warriors" would make a lot more sense.

The Warriors would prefer to play in San Francisco and call themselves the SF Warriors but getting an arena done in SF is even tougher than Sacramento.

Forget the Cow Palace for either the Warriors or Kings. That place is tiny and way outdated. It was considered obsolete for the NBA in the 70's.

San Jose is a possibility for the Kings as there is already an NBA caliber arena in place that houses the San Jose Sharks called HP Pavillion. In fact, when Howard Schultz was trying to sell the Seattle Sonics, Larry Ellison offered to pay $425 million for the team which was higher than what Clay Bennett offered. Bennett offered $350 and eventually got the team. I believe Schultz wanted the larger bid but Stern probably told him that he wouldn't allow the sale to go through because he would prefer to reward Oklahoma City with a team after saving the Hornets from bankruptcy as opposed to screw up the Warriors by putting in a 2nd team in the bay area that would just create unnecessary competition. Because of that, I don't see the Maloofs coming to San Jose.

The likely targets are Vegas and Anaheim. Despite the gambling issue, I see Stern and the Maloofs favoring Vegas for the same reasons that they don't want San Jose and did want OKC. Putting a team in Anaheim would just clutter up the LA market even more. It would give the LA metro area a 3rd team and that just isn't needed. It would hurt the Clippers as well as be tough for the Maloofs as they would have to battle with the Ducks for the entertainment dollar. Vegas would just be easier as they would be the only show in town. Getting an arena done in Vegas is as good as done as the local government is dying for a team and will do what needs to be done to get an arena done. Not to mention that Vegas is where the Maloofs probably have wanted to be all along but have done their due diligence in Sacramento and have tried their best to make it work as a favor to the league which likes the Sac market.

 

[Oscar]

Now that Gavin Maloof has had a serious health problem with an aneurysm, do the brothers start to think that life is too short and not pursue an arena deal altogether, or seriously consider moving?

 

[uolj]

Now that Gavin Maloof has had a serious health problem with an aneurysm

Huh?

 

[kennadog]

He had a very small stroke, not an aneurysm.

 

[uolj]

... and it was Joe, not Gavin. Which is why I was confused. I wasn't sure if Oscar's question was serious or not.

 

[Oscar]

... and it was Joe, not Gavin. Which is why I was confused. I wasn't sure if Oscar's question was serious or not.

My bad, I got the brothers mixed up and I had also heard it was an aneurysm, but it's still a legitimate concern. Do the brothers decide that enough is enough and life is too short, and decide to move on?

 

[uolj]

I guess it's possible, but I honestly don't think it's likely given the brothers pattern of behavior. I'd imagine they might even want to try harder to get something done if it had any impact at all.

 

[pkballr]

I may still be a fan. But it wouldn't be the same. If the situation ended up the same way the Sonics did, consider me an ex-Kings fan. It's not like this franchise hasn't moved before, so what's to say it wouldn't move again. I'd just be heartbroken is all.

 

[TheFifthMookie]

This one's easy for me. Unless the Kings moved elsewhere in northern California (somewhere in the bay, I guess), I'm done with them if they move away. Los Angeles and the rest of southern CA is like another state to me anyway. I'm a fan of the Kings because they are my local hometown team. If that ends because they choose to leave, I'm done with them. I suppose I'd start rooting for Portland more at that point, since that's my second 'home' city these days.

 

[TheFifthMookie]

And, because I'm curious - anyone know the name of the Portland Trailblazers message board? a google search let me down.

 

[VF21]

You might check the realgm board for the Portland section and ask them...

 

[Gary]

And, because I'm curious - anyone know the name of the Portland Trailblazers message board? a google search let me down.

http://www.clubblazers.com/ is the only one I could really find that was a fan site..

 

[TheFifthMookie]

Thanks, that site looks like a great starting place!

 

[northerncaliboi4]

That iz a horrible idea for one there iz nowhere else in california that the kingz could go. becauze northern cali mite as well be a seperate state 4rm southern cali. they would get no support in so-cal because the lakerz fanz hate the kingz and kingz fanz hate the lakerz. and sacramento iz the bezt place 4 them we have supported them through good and bad.

 

[northerncaliboi4]

Yeah. I get where your coming from now, I didnt realize the rivalry between SoCal and NoCal was that big of a deal. I know California is the size of New England, but then I thought about the New England Patriots and how that works well for the region (although there also based in massachusetts ).

So is it just a money thing over there? or a location thing? Im sure I could find out in a few minutes by just looking it up, but media can be biased and I just rather ask here haha.

I could care less as far as night life is concerned, there isnt a whole lot to do in boston either IMO .. but that sort of thing seems to matter to some players ..

What about Oakland and San Jose? I know their in Nocal but I dont know what they have for "night life". Would a Oakland Kings or San Jose kings bother you guys?

pardon my geography, but would they even change the name from Sacramento to Oakland or San Jose if the stadium were built there? or in a smaller suburb of sacramento....

This also might be a stupid question, but would something like the san jose sharks stadium be a possibility?

well sacramento and oakland are pretty far off 4rm eachother and oakland already haz the warriorz so that wouldnt be a good fit. and San Jose im not really sure how they would imbrace the kingz. but it deffinatly wouldnt work in socal because itz more than a sportz rivalry over here.

 

[hoopsfan]

That iz a horrible idea for one there iz nowhere else in california that the kingz could go. becauze northern cali mite as well be a seperate state 4rm southern cali. they would get no support in so-cal because the lakerz fanz hate the kingz and kingz fanz hate the lakerz. and sacramento iz the bezt place 4 them we have supported them through good and bad.

Do you know what school is?? That was hard to read.

 

[Warhawk]

well sacramento and oakland are pretty far off 4rm eachother and oakland already haz the warriorz so that wouldnt be a good fit. and San Jose im not really sure how they would imbrace the kingz. but it deffinatly wouldnt work in socal because itz more than a sportz rivalry over here.

Read the posting rules. We are not text messaging here. If you can't write somewhat coherently (you know, with proper spelling and all), your posts will be removed.

http://www.kingsfans.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12978

See the last part of rule no. 1.

 

[Bibby.10]

It would be horrible if we moved to Southern Cali. I really wouldn't mind Oakland, San Fran or San Jose. I would much rather them stay in Sacramento, but 2 hours away is better then them moving to another state or down South.

 

[DocHolliday]

Hey KF.Com .. Not sure if this warrents its own discussion, but here is an outsiders take on the Kings Arena situation.

I live in Massachusetts obviously, I already mentioned how I became a Kings fan in some other older thread so I wont bother doing it again here, but thats besides the point. Ive stayed in the east coast all my life ( as far as living goes ) Ive been to florida and Belize ( not my heritage, school went on a trip to go over there and build houses ect. ) and thats about it.

So Ive never been to ARCO, never been to sacramento and never been to california.

So what I think may be different that what you guys think on this issue. I would like the kings to stay in sacramento, for you guys more than anything. Just being part of this forum ( I dont know how many of you actually live in sacramento, or have lived there at some point). From what I hear, no offense, there isnt much to do in sacramento and that can drive FA's away from the team. So from one standpoint I want them to stay in SacTown for the fans who live in or around that city, but a part of me wouldnt mind them moving to Aneheim ( I have no idea what kind of city that is ) or some other city in california that Free Agents might be more attracted to.

I know as a boston sports fan, if the celts moved out of boston but stayed in massachusetts it wouldnt be a huge deal for me.

Then there is california in general. I think it would be wrong to move the team out of state, but this seems to be a posibility. Even then it wouldnt be the end of the world for me just because the location isnt why im a fan.

so I guess the point of this topic is this : would you guys care if the team moved out of sacramento? California ?

Keep in mind I dont get much california news out here, I dont know if people are still talking about it frequently, or what exactly the plan is as of now. California is a big state, so to some people living on the borders this might be a bigger deal, because the oposite sides of california is can be hours and hours away.

This is my first remark on the issue, so sorry if its common knowledge .. is this really a big deal over there?

Yes

-The End

 

[kennadog]

It would be horrible if we moved to Southern Cali. I really wouldn't mind Oakland, San Fran or San Jose. I would much rather them stay in Sacramento, but 2 hours away is better then them moving to another state or down South.

Well to some in NoCal, SoCal would be moving to another state. (Couldn't resist.)

 

[KCKingsCountry]

From a Missouri standpoint - if one of our teams moved to St. Louis from Kansas City. It would be down right awful. I would imagine its the same in California sans the Raiders.