Mark Cuban on the Sonics situation

Post #1 » by **HMFFL** » Sun Jan 20, 2008 3:43 pm

"The question is whether Seattle even wants the team," he said while working up a sweat exercising. "If they want them, they have to figure out a way for them to stay. And if they don't it's just a question of where. I'd love to see them stay in Seattle. It's a great city, great fans, just a shame, you know? But I guess sometimes the rain gets to people."

Cuban said the people of city should make a bigger ruckus if they don't want the Sonics to relocate to Oklahoma City or another locale.

"It's not one of those things where you can force people to want them to stay," he said. "If they want them to stay, they want them to stay. And if they don't, they don't. It wasn't like it was a big uproar and that's the thing. You can play politics all you want but it wasn't like people we're screaming and that's a shame because it's a great basketball city."

Cuban is not sold that the Sonics are headed for Oklahoma and he said he is open to any new ideas.

"I don't know that they're going to Oklahoma City, we have to see," he said. "At least as far as my personal vote, I am going to keep all options open. It's a question of what's the biggest available market and what's going to help the NBA the most. So we'll see.

"And the more dependent you are on local revenue, the more important your lease and arena deal is. And the more important you're lease and arena deal is, the worst position that Seattle's in competitively. So I think that the piece the people don't quite understand in Seattle. I think they think it's 1996 and if they can do it think they can do it now.

"But the difference between 10 years ago and today, with the economics of the NBA and the way the collective bargaining agreement is structured is night and day. Night and day. That just puts Seattle is a significant competitive disadvantage.

Cuban isn't sold on Oklahoma City and said he will not vote along with other owners just for the sake of agreement.

"Isn't Oklahoma City bigger than Seattle?" he asked. "In a metropolitan city, I don't know. I haven't seen the numbers. But I don't think it's strong enough. If it isn't I'll vote against it. I am not going in with any preset notions, so we'll see what happens, I am open minded like that."

Link

D5150 · Post #2 » by **D5150** » Sun Jan 20, 2008 4:28 pm

uh, does cuban really not know that oklahoma city is NOT bigger than seattle? in terms of poulation and market ranking , seattle IS the bigger city.

okc, a little over a half million people. greater metro are, a littler over 1 million.

seattle, close to six hundred thousand people. greater metro, over 3 million.

seattles ranking in top 50 us media markets in 2006, 13th
okc ranking in 2006, 45th

he then says he doesnt think the okc market is strong enough. good, very perceptive mark. i really hope these owners take a few minutes to do just a little research.

Post #3 » by **HMFFL** » Sun Jan 20, 2008 4:34 pm

Very true, but to Marks defense these questions were asked on the fly, so it's not like he had time (or cared) about any research.

D5150 · Post #4 » by **D5150** » Sun Jan 20, 2008 4:44 pm

i know, but he does have a vote, so i just hope he does some research. it took me about 5 minutes to find those numbers. i am glad someone out there is at least talking about it.

wiff · Post #5 » by **wiff** » Sun Jan 20, 2008 4:52 pm

This is fantastic!

I can easily over look the mistake of not know what city is bigger, but the best little nugget in this article is the fact that...

And if it's not better than Seattle, I'll vote against it.

I know Cuban is a little whack-o. I happen to find the guy hilarious and good for the league plus he is an avid Wiffleball player so the guy can't be all bad.

But as crazy as Cuban is I think most of the owners are in the same boat. If the OKC situation isn't a better money maker than Seattle they will not vote for the move.

Now it's up to the city and whoever else in charge to put forth a competitive arena deal.

Man I want another banner up in the air!

Hiphophead101 · Post #6 » by **Hiphophead101** » Sun Jan 20, 2008 8:39 pm

F*** YEAH! Cubans the man!

D5150 · Post #7 » by **D5150** » Sun Jan 20, 2008 8:50 pm

well..........cuban is an anomaly, a maverick. most of the other owners will likely toe the company line. im not sure how much influence cuban really has. i am glad that he is at least willing to look at it objectively.

wiff · Post #8 » by **wiff** » Sun Jan 20, 2008 9:06 pm

D5150 wrote:well..........cuban is an anomaly, a maverick. most of the other owners will likely toe the company line. im not sure how much influence cuban really has. i am glad that he is at least willing to look at it objectively.

Not to bust your balls D5 but what is the company line? That they will be supportive of a move that ultimately cost "them" money, and seeing the product as a whole take a hit with backlash from fans around the league? I think most savy fans realize that Seattle is being Hi-Jacked.

D5 you have league pass, I'm curious what are the views of most other teams announcers? Are they sympathetic or do they not mention it?

D5150 · Post #9 » by **D5150** » Sun Jan 20, 2008 9:13 pm

by company line i mean whatever stern wants. in the short term the move would likely cost the league money (but dont forget about the relocation fee). long term, who knows? one thing about stern though, he is all about expanding into new markets. i really dont know about backlash from fans around the league, so long as those fans dont loose their team, they really dont have a dog in this fight.

on the anouncers for other teams. it is mentioned on almost every broadcast i watch. most are sypmathetic, you know the "seattle has had a team for 40 years, great city, great fans, blah, blah" kind of talk. as far as what they think will happen, whe probably know as much as they do, so no real insight there. several seem to believe that the team is gone though.