Kings & Hansen saga

[OzSonic]

I guess OKC just dropping the series to Memphis is a very small prize for us. I've been pretty bummed all day but managed to smile after Tony Allen sunk his 2nd FT.

Hopefully the Sonics Curse can continue for years and years to come.

[Det the Threat]

I don't see us going without a team for the foreseeable future! Hansen is too determined to get the league to give him a team! Stay positive & on board guys!

Can you also see the elves dancing on Sterns and Silvers shoulders?

There's no team coming to Seattle in the forseable future, no matter how nice Silver smiled today and tried to hint that, hey maybe someday, we like you and stuff...

Most teams owners don't want to sell to Hansen, as they don't want to be the bad guys selling to the guy that takes the team and relocates it and the ones who might do know that their current cities just need to look at the blueprint the league created during this process.

BTW: It seems like the SAC group will pay the Maloofs even less then whats expected, as they'll substract money for Sleep Train and the new arena from the $ they'll give them.

Also, the way they did the vote was a joke as well.



1) If Sacramento came to us with this plan one year ago
2) Seattle is a good, viable, better offer
3) Not about better offer, it is about Sacramento

Nice way to put it, given that you like to hide the argument you don't want to be important in the middle and the strongest ones on top and at the end.

Good stuff and, as we know, nobody gives a sh$t about us in the NBA.

[bennith13]

I am going to try and keep from bashing sac, but I thought it was funny too how the media slid in that little nugget about the sac group only paying the malloof's $200 mil and the rest would be made up from an NBA credit line and assuming the Maloofs debt. Lol and all those sac fans were calling me all kinds of nasty names for suggesting they didn't have the money and they would only keep the team because Stern didn't want them to move for sentimental reasons.

[AI]

I am going to try and keep from bashing sac, but I thought it was funny too how the media slid in that little nugget about the sac group only paying the malloof's $200 mil and the rest would be made up from an NBA credit line and assuming the Maloofs debt. Lol and all those sac fans were calling me all kinds of nasty names for suggesting they didn't have the money and they would only keep the team because Stern didn't want them to move for sentimental reasons.

You were right all those times. It's clear that the Sacramento group lacks the appropriate funds, while Hansen's group had enough money. I don't even think Ranadive's net worth is publicized. How much money do these guys truly have? Will they be able to be competitive with the Vivek group, or will it end up being Maloof 2.0 in terms of funding. Stern will soon realize the mistake he has made with this.

[Sweezo]

I hate to talk politics on here... but, for all those people that actually live in the city of Seattle or that have the ability to sway people I think its important for Mayor Mcginn to be re-elected. I disagree with him on almost 100% of the issues, but at least he is honest, straight forward, and open minded. If Peter Stienbrueck, Bruce Harrell, or some other yahoo gets elected we can throw out any idea of the Sonics ever coming back. Politically those people do not differ that much from Mayor Mcginn, but they are radically against professional sports and anything that is perceived to help "millionaires" and "billionaires". I fear that those people would be much close minded and militantly ideological when it comes to trying to bring back the Sonics.

More great news tonight: Steinbrueck and Murray get the democratic endorsement in the 46th District [NOT McGinn], and the Maloofs are set to announce a deal with Randive's group to sell the Kings tomorrow. There's no question Steinbrueck will do whatever is needed to kill the arena deal since...oh, he was a paid consultant for the Port of Seattle to oppose the deal in the first place.

I've already let him know his official Twitter feed [@PeterForSeattle] know I'm a 'nay' vote and I urge everyone else to follow suit.

[bennith13]

I know of stienbrueck from outside of the political sphere and the dude is nuts. There is left leaning politics a then there is way out there. Please Seattle, do not vote for the guy. Besides for the bike lane deal and a few other minor deals McGinnis actually has been alright. But, if you have don't like McGinn there is no way you will like Stienbrueck. From the same ideology only more extreme and militant about his beliefs. There will be no compromise with him. Forget NBA basketball ever if he gets elected.

[bennith13]

I don't live in the city and on top of that I am out of the state right now so I am a little behind on any non sonic news. McGinn isn't out out is he? Because if its down to the two knuckle heads you mentioned then we won't be getting a team. Sports fans have to get more political. We can have all the things we want in our community and still have professional sports, especially with the arena offer Hansen has put on the table... but not with those two candidates. Very narrow minded and short sighted.

[JazzUte88]

So I guess the Bucks are the next team that Hansen & Balmer are targeting?

[dc]

So I guess the Bucks are the next team that Hansen and Ballmer will be used as leverage against to give the NBA another publicly funded arena?

Fixed

[Sweezo]

I don't live in the city and on top of that I am out of the state right now so I am a little behind on any non sonic news. McGinn isn't out out is he? Because if its down to the two knuckle heads you mentioned then we won't be getting a team. Sports fans have to get more political. We can have all the things we want in our community and still have professional sports, especially with the arena offer Hansen has put on the table... but not with those two candidates. Very narrow minded and short sighted.

No, it's just an endorsement so McGinn's still in it. McGinn's in 3rd place so far in terms of funds raised, and I believe the Seattle mayoral race has an open primary where the top two candidates advance [regardless of party affiliation]. McGinn's still in it but he's never been overly popular.

I think you and I are probably normally on the opposite side of the fence. I'm an educated voter, but I definitely vote progressive on just about everything. While some of Steinbrueck's platforms would be appealing to me [here's some personal info: I went to law school for the purpose of doing environmental law in a non-profit capacity], I remain skeptical about him as a candidate on the whole.

Although that said, after telling him I was not inclined to vote for him on Twitter his campaign did respond to me asking if an article in the Times where Steinbrueck said this:

Peter Steinbrueck, the only mayoral candidate to oppose the Sodo location for a new arena because of its proximity to maritime jobs, repeated his calls for a thorough evaluation of alternate sites including KeyArena.

“I fully support bringing an NBA team to Seattle. I also support an open, objective and public process for deciding where the sports arena for the team will be built,” Steinbrueck said.

I responded by pointing out that I'm in line with many of his other policies but the only thing that would really change my mind is a signed pledge to honor the MOU and the approval [not necessarilly an endorsement] from H/B/N.

I hold this position not as someone who is just a Sonics fan but as a person who's also spent hours upon hours studying environmental codes and regulations. I do not truly believe that building an arena in the SODO location will do anything to negatively impact the environment [any more than an arena would at any other location]or truly bring harm to the Port of Seattle. It's an argument that just falls flat and yet it come up in the political churn with regularity.

[Sweezo]

So I guess the Bucks are the next team that Hansen & Balmer are targeting?

I don't see that happening based on recent events. Hansen needs to get in as a minority owner somewhere, built relationships and familiarity with people in the league, and push for expansion if the NBA's willing to negotiate their new TV deal ahead of time. Reading the tea leaves that seems to be the only thing that's really being considered IMO. The league has shown that, as good an offer as H/B/N might make, if the team they're looking to buy/move makes an effort they'll give the advantage to keeping a team where it was originally.

The Bucks have been in Milwaukee nearly 50 years. They have a championship under their belt. It's where Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Sidney Moncrief, Oscar Robertson, Bob Lanier, and Ray Allen played. That franchise shouldn't go anywhere. A Kings' fan may look at that statement call me a hypocrite but that time-frame history is eerily similar to the Sonics' time-line. Taking the Bucks would feel like taking the Sonics away.

[Det the Threat]

So I guess the Bucks are the next team that Hansen & Balmer are targeting?

I don't see that happening based on recent events. Hansen needs to get in as a minority owner somewhere, built relationships and familiarity with people in the league, and push for expansion if the NBA's willing to negotiate their new TV deal ahead of time. Reading the tea leaves that seems to be the only thing that's really being considered IMO. The league has shown that, as good an offer as H/B/N might make, if the team they're looking to buy/move makes an effort they'll give the advantage to keeping a team where it was originally.

The Bucks have been in Milwaukee nearly 50 years. They have a championship under their belt. It's where Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Sidney Moncrief, Oscar Robertson, Bob Lanier, and Ray Allen played. That franchise shouldn't go anywhere. A Kings' fan may look at that statement call me a hypocrite but that time-frame history is eerily similar to the Sonics' time-line. Taking the Bucks would feel like taking the Sonics away.

The Bucks currently are pretty much the Sonics 2006 - 2008.

A great franchise with a championship, great history, an outdated arena and no political will the spend any money on a new one.
They also have front office that loves those 40 win seasons which net you either the #12 pick or a first round beating in the playoffs.
Making it really hard to root for them, given that you know the outcome of the season even before it starts and therefore hardly anyone's attending games.

I just don't like the fact that they could be the team replacing the Sonics, as it would be just like you said, like taking the Sonics away.


BTW: The NBA offered to pay back those $30 mil that Hansen/Ballmer gave to the Maloofs but they refused to take it back and also won't sue.
It's also been rumored that they're still talking to the league and some hope that the end of Stern might be a good point for some better news.

I'm not really sure what to make of it but I certainly won't get my hopes up, at least not as long as there isn't a guarantee for a team in writing.

[Sweezo]

BTW: The NBA offered to pay back those $30 mil that Hansen/Ballmer gave to the Maloofs but they refused to take it back and also won't sue.
It's also been rumored that they're still talking to the league and some hope that the end of Stern might be a good point for some better news.

I'm not really sure what to make of it but I certainly won't get my hopes up, at least not as long as there isn't a guarantee for a team in writing.

So much of what happened in the last go round serves as a painful reminder of the importance of power and influence in relation to liquid assets. Money can do a lot of things but it can't do everything. When you hear that the owners preferred Seattle's plan but still voted to keep the team there, there's definitely a reason. So many people who owe so much to Stern and others in power doing things lock-step with his ideology.

Flat out buying a team didn't work. Now HBN work to curry favor. Waiving a $30 million fee does the NBA owners a favor and leaves $1 million in each owner's pocket. It demonstrates that the financial commitment HBN offered wasn't a farce. Same with not pursuing a lawsuit. This is the 'back-scratching' portion of things...HBN capitulated, and now we see what the NBA does.

Do the TV contracts suddenly come into play a little sooner? Do we hear Silver speak more openly about expansion once the season's finished? If the NBA is seriously considering expansion--and who knows if there are--they are certainly aware that it would be more beneficial to the league to consider it now, while a deep-pocketed ownership group is begging to join the party, instead of waiting 2-3 years and seeing if the interest remains.

[OzSonic]

I've got no interest in the Bucks at all. If the league fought so hard for Sacramento I would hope they would fight even harder for a team with such a rich and long history. Don't want any part of it and I'm pretty sure the current owner have no interest in selling to an outside group.

[Supersonics41]

So I guess the Bucks are the next team that Hansen & Balmer are targeting?

I honestly feel that expansion is the way we get a team. I highly doubt H/B/N want to go down the relocation route again. So say they buy the Bucks, then a local buyer steps up & matches Hansen's offer again. The league allows the team to relocate? I don't know about that. Which is why, I fully believe Hansen see's expansion as the only logical avenue at this point. I think once the league explores the TV deals (hopefully over the summer) & the EIS comes to a close, that we start to hear rumblings of expansion for the 2014-15 or 15-16 seasons.

[richboy]

So I guess the Bucks are the next team that Hansen & Balmer are targeting?

I don't see that happening based on recent events. Hansen needs to get in as a minority owner somewhere, built relationships and familiarity with people in the league, and push for expansion if the NBA's willing to negotiate their new TV deal ahead of time. Reading the tea leaves that seems to be the only thing that's really being considered IMO. The league has shown that, as good an offer as H/B/N might make, if the team they're looking to buy/move makes an effort they'll give the advantage to keeping a team where it was originally.

The Bucks have been in Milwaukee nearly 50 years. They have a championship under their belt. It's where Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Sidney Moncrief, Oscar Robertson, Bob Lanier, and Ray Allen played. That franchise shouldn't go anywhere. A Kings' fan may look at that statement call me a hypocrite but that time-frame history is eerily similar to the Sonics' time-line. Taking the Bucks would feel like taking the Sonics away.

Not sure the people in Milwaukee feel that way. I think there was a poll recently about the top events in the Bradley center. Don't know the exact details. I do know that the Bucks didn't make the list. It was full of concerts and WWE events I believe.

Plus there some level of what is the future of Milwaukee basketball. Players do not want to play in Milwaukee. It become the place you threaten to trade players too. Is it an asset to the league having a team in Milwaukee. This is a business. What Kareem did in the 70s isn't going to pay the bills now. Oh yeah Kareem didn't even want to play there and that was back in the 70s. I never thought my future kids wouldn't know what a Twinkie was. This is business though. If Milwaukee is a viable franchise they would have time to prove it. Not saying Seattle needs to go get the Bucks. If Milwaukee not going to build them an arena then they should move. They can't stay there just because they use to have some great players who didn't want to play in Milwaukee.

Heard they talking about moving the Olympic Basketball Arena in London to Milwaukee. I didn't even know that was possible.

[Det the Threat]

Plus there some level of what is the future of Milwaukee basketball. Players do not want to play in Milwaukee. It become the place you threaten to trade players too. Is it an asset to the league having a team in Milwaukee. This is a business. What Kareem did in the 70s isn't going to pay the bills now. Oh yeah Kareem didn't even want to play there and that was back in the 70s. I never thought my future kids wouldn't know what a Twinkie was. This is business though. If Milwaukee is a viable franchise they would have time to prove it. Not saying Seattle needs to go get the Bucks. If Milwaukee not going to build them an arena then they should move. They can't stay there just because they use to have some great players who didn't want to play in Milwaukee.

Heard they talking about moving the Olympic Basketball Arena in London to Milwaukee. I didn't even know that was possible.

1) Players love going to Sacramento or sign with the Kings? When has that ever happened?

2) And it's an asset for the league to have the Kings? A team that's a receipient of revenue sharing year in and year out and had the new ownership group guarantee to the league that they won't take it anymore, no matter what.

3) But what Webber and Divac did was so great that it will pay bills and is worth more then what Kareem did?

Those points are not made to make fun at Sacramento or what not(their fans deserve their team), but it's pretty easy to argue the way with the Kings like you did with the Bucks.

Also the Bucks just signed a lease extansion for five more years and their owner is a state politician who dedicated a lot to the state of Wisconsin, Milwaukee and the Bucks. I have a hard time seeing him being the one that would sell to Hansen and therefore be OK with the team moving.
But he's also already nearly 80 years of age or so and you never know what could happen.

Thoug, I think the team(if Hansen/Ballmer do look at another try at relocation) being #1 on the list will be the Pacers.
Their lease will be up next summer, they can't draw anyone even though they're winning and they bleed money on the leases the city gives them.
Also, Herb Simon(owner) was seen smiling and shaking hands with the Maloofs after the decision to deny Hansen. He was also the guy that argued heavily with Stern during the break before they made the actual vote, meaning that he probably didn't like the precedence set, that owners can't choose whom to sell to and can't make the most money of that transaction.


BTW: Another thing I'd like to say.
I can't wait for the next CBA negotiations between the owners and players.
Last time around the owners cried foul that they needed more money, so they could have a revenue sharing and help teams in smaller markets to stay "competitive".

Not even two years later they deny a relocation that would put a team into a bigger market, make them more money and add an ownership group that would most likely pay into revenue sharing nearly every season.
And on top of it, they also make a deal with Sacramento(a revenue share taking team most of the time) to never take any money from revenue sharing, setting a precedence on what cities will have to agree to, if they want to have/keep a team.

[richboy]

Plus there some level of what is the future of Milwaukee basketball. Players do not want to play in Milwaukee. It become the place you threaten to trade players too. Is it an asset to the league having a team in Milwaukee. This is a business. What Kareem did in the 70s isn't going to pay the bills now. Oh yeah Kareem didn't even want to play there and that was back in the 70s. I never thought my future kids wouldn't know what a Twinkie was. This is business though. If Milwaukee is a viable franchise they would have time to prove it. Not saying Seattle needs to go get the Bucks. If Milwaukee not going to build them an arena then they should move. They can't stay there just because they use to have some great players who didn't want to play in Milwaukee.

Heard they talking about moving the Olympic Basketball Arena in London to Milwaukee. I didn't even know that was possible.

1) Players love going to Sacramento or sign with the Kings? When has that ever happened?

2) And it's an asset for the league to have the Kings? A team that's a receipient of revenue sharing year in and year out and had the new ownership group guarantee to the league that they won't take it anymore, no matter what.

3) But what Webber and Divac did was so great that it will pay bills and is worth more then what Kareem did?

Those points are not made to make fun at Sacramento or what not(their fans deserve their team), but it's pretty easy to argue the way with the Kings like you did with the Bucks.

Also the Bucks just signed a lease extansion for five more years and their owner is a state politician who dedicated a lot to the state of Wisconsin, Milwaukee and the Bucks. I have a hard time seeing him being the one that would sell to Hansen and therefore be OK with the team moving.
But he's also already nearly 80 years of age or so and you never know what could happen.

Thoug, I think the team(if Hansen/Ballmer do look at another try at relocation) being #1 on the list will be the Pacers.
Their lease will be up next summer, they can't draw anyone even though they're winning and they bleed money on the leases the city gives them.
Also, Herb Simon(owner) was seen smiling and shaking hands with the Maloofs after the decision to deny Hansen. He was also the guy that argued heavily with Stern during the break before they made the actual vote, meaning that he probably didn't like the precedence set, that owners can't choose whom to sell to and can't make the most money of that transaction.


BTW: Another thing I'd like to say.
I can't wait for the next CBA negotiations between the owners and players.
Last time around the owners cried foul that they needed more money, so they could have a revenue sharing and help teams in smaller markets to stay "competitive".

Not even two years later they deny a relocation that would put a team into a bigger market, make them more money and add an ownership group that would most likely pay into revenue sharing nearly every season.
And on top of it, they also make a deal with Sacramento(a revenue share taking team most of the time) to never take any money from revenue sharing, setting a precedence on what cities will have to agree to, if they want to have/keep a team.

Never implied that the Kings had those things. Fact is the city did enough to keep them. Honestly if there were 3 pro sports teams in that city Sacramento would have let them leave. Everything was set up well for the Kings. One sports team. Former player as the mayor with big time connections. I don't know what is going to happen in Milwaukee. If they don't do what they need to keep the Bucks I don't feel like they have some amazing history that makes it sad to see them go. This isn't the Greenbay packers.