Help Me Understand Why Everyone is Down on the Maloofs

[becorz]

Why are so many people calling the Maloofs cheap owners recently?

During the glory years they gave everyone big contracts, like Webber and Bibby.

In 2005 when it became clear our time was coming to a close fast, we decided to trade Webber. Since then, we have officially been in rebuilding mode. My question is, what exactly did you want the Maloofs to do? Spend money on FAs that would harm our rebuilding process?

A generally accepted way to rebuild a team is to get draft picks for a few years, get cap room, and then spend that cap room. We spent all that time trying to get cap room. Would you have signed a player to hurt that cause?

You can't really get on them for trades like the Cassell or Daniels ones...they literally got the Maloofs free money. They would be dumb not to take them.

This offseason, who exactly did you want the Kings to sign. (and this is the issue with the plan of having cap space). Did you think Nene or Gasol or Aaflalo were ever coming here? Not when they can get money from their original teams. We went after guys like Hayes and Kirelinko, who were more in our price range. We got Hayes and Kirelinko decided to stay in Russia. We also took a run at Jamaal Crawford. Who else did you actually want them to shell money out to?

Some people point to the Westpaul signing as being cheap...I don't see that at all. They saw Westpaul did well with young talent on his former teams, so they went that direction. It didn't work out, but at least they tried. I don't think they fired Adelman over money...they fired him over the team being bad.

My whole point is that recently, the Maloofs, at least team building wise, have done everything they could. Team building wise, it made no sense to spend on free agents or hire an expensive coach. They were building a team a way that is generally accepted as a valid rebuilding technique.

Is it because they tried to move to Anaheim? Look, I am as huge of a Kings fan as the next guy (I might go to the city council meeting today), but do you really blame them for wanting to leave Sacramento? The place with the old arena and (at the time) no hope of a new one? I, for one, don’t blame them.

Is there something that I am missing? I really don’t understand…

[kevin44]

The Maloofs were once a wealthy family. They were making money from their beer distribution business, The Palms, & The Kings. Now they have lost their beer distribution business & The Palms. They have been losing money on the Kings for several years & they lost a lot of money in a Vegas real estate venture. We call them cheap b/c they have been spending the min amount of the salary cap every year & they have traded away anyone who makes a lot of money. They won't add any high cost players. The move to Anaheim was for money. They have twice the luxury boxes than Arco.

[becorz]

The Maloofs were once a wealthy family. They were making money from their beer distribution business, The Palms, & The Kings. Now they have lost their beer distribution business & The Palms. They have been losing money on the Kings for several years & they lost a lot of money in a Vegas real estate venture. We call them cheap b/c they have been spending the min amount of the salary cap every year & they have traded away anyone who makes a lot of money. They won't add any high cost players. The move to Anaheim was for money. They have twice the luxury boxes than Arco.

I understand what you are saying, but if they were replaced by Ron Burkle, would they have handled roster construction differently? Personally, I don't think so. Kevin Martin is overpayed, so they traded him. And how would you have them add high cost players? I suggested in another thread that they trade the first round pick for a high quality player and no one liked that idea. If someone gave me an example of an alternate roster construction over the past few years, I would be glad to listen...

As far as moving the Kings to Anaheim, I would have done that too, if you read what I said in my first post. Of course the move was about money! Why stick around in Sacramento, a city in which the Maloofs have no particular connection with, if there is very little hope of getting a new arena?

[artest420]

They lie and are d-bags who tried to move our team in order to save their failing Palms.

Now they are broke and can't afford to help with the arena (reports say a possibility is the NBA will need to front the Maloofs share and the Maloofs will pay the NBA).

They promise us big name FA's and we end up with Chuck Hayes (no offense to Hayes).

To this day, George is still causing issues within the family due to his desire to move to LA (after last year, I don't care to consider Anaheim it's own city - see LA Angels of Anaheim).

The only good thing about the Maloofs is that there is still a good chance that they can't afford to be NBA owners and will have to sell (Burkle).

Edit to add:

To repond to Crawford and AK-47, they were not realistic. From various reports, it seems that AK always had the intent to stay in Russia. Crawford seems nice, but I feel this is dumb from the begining and never a real option seeing how stacked we are with shoot first guards.

[becorz]

I feel like I am going around in a circle.

Can someone please explain to me why the Maloof's shouldn't have tried to move to Anaheim? Look, I am as loyal of a Kings fan as you can get. I would be absolutely devistated if they had to moved. But if I am any owner in the NBA I would have wanted to move the Kings out of Sacramento last year. It looked like there was a 1% chance of the Kings getting an arena then. It's the NBA. If a town can't get a new area, they frankly don't deserve a team...

Can someone explain to me how we were supposed to get a big time free agent? How do you know we weren't knocking on Nene's door at 12:01am at the start of FA.

Edit to repond to your edit
My whole point is that, however unrealistic AK47 and Crawford were, it shows that the Kings were at least trying to get whoever they could to come here. Honestly, what you said kind of helps my point. Sacramento, especially with the way it is right now, isn't a hot spot for free agents. I don't think we have any chance at grade A FAs...

[deNIEd]

I feel like I am going around in a circle.

Can someone please explain to me why the Maloof's shouldn't have tried to move to Anaheim? Look, I am as loyal of a Kings fan as you can get. I would be absolutely devistated if they had to moved. But if I am any owner in the NBA I would have wanted to move the Kings out of Sacramento last year. It looked like there was a 1% chance of the Kings getting an arena then. It's the NBA. If a town can't get a new area, they frankly don't deserve a team...

The Maloofs already thought about moving the team before they were even majority owners. They wanted to move back in '98 (I believe)...

They've never wanted to be in Sacramento and have been looking for the first way out since they took over.

That's why I'm down on the Maloofs.

[artest420]

The Maloofs already thought about moving the team before they were even majority owners. They wanted to move back in '98 (I believe)...

They've never wanted to be in Sacramento and have been looking for the first way out since they took over.

That's why I'm down on the Maloofs.

Like a delayed Clay Bennett. Burkle came out and said he wanted to buy the team and he could make a profit in a small market after the Maloofs made Sac seem like a poor hopeless dump. I think my biggist issue with the Maloofs is how they went about it. They lied to everyone until David Stern called them out, then they skip all Kings games, then they give their seats to Laker fans for what we thought was the last game ever at Arco. I believe they also made comments about how KJ needs to stay out of their business or else - something that implied a threat.

I think we all understand LA makes more money than Sac, but why buy the Sac Kings in the first place if they didn't want to deal with a small market. Plus, I believe the were willing to default a $70 million loan leaving the city of Sac without a team and without the $70 mil we were owed.

[becorz]

The Maloofs already thought about moving the team before they were even majority owners. They wanted to move back in '98 (I believe)...

They've never wanted to be in Sacramento and have been looking for the first way out since they took over.

That's why I'm down on the Maloofs.

Like a delayed Clay Bennett. Burkle came out and said he wanted to buy the team and he could make a profit in a small market after the Maloofs made Sac seem like a poor hopeless dump. I think my biggist issue with the Maloofs is how they went about it. They lied to everyone until David Stern called them out, then they skip all Kings games, then they give their seats to Laker fans for what we thought was the last game ever at Arco. I believe they also made comments about how KJ needs to stay out of their business or else - something that implied a threat.

I think we all understand LA makes more money than Sac, but why buy the Sac Kings in the first place if they didn't want to deal with a small market. Plus, I believe the were willing to default a $70 million loan leaving the city of Sac without a team and without the $70 mil we were owed.

I can see why you would hate them for wanting to move the team back in the day. That one makes sense.

I also understand you not liking them for the lieing, although I would say that it is more withholding the truth than lieing.

Honestly, do you think the Maloof's are dumb enough to give away those Kings tickets to Lakers fans on the last Arco game on purpouse? I am convinced that was a mistake and not a slight on Sacramento.

As far as the city loan goes, they were never walking away. They were going to pay it while occupying the Anaheim arna. There was so many protections in the loan that they couldn't just walk away, at least according to Kevin Johnson at the time.

[artest420]

As far as the city loan goes, they were never walking away. They were going to pay it while occupying the Anaheim arna. There was so many protections in the loan that they couldn't just walk away, at least according to Kevin Johnson at the time.

Valid points, but I'm not sure on this one. I believe the terms of the $70 mil loan was if they left Sac, they are required to pay it in a lump sum before they leave. The other option was a default on the loan that would have left Sac with a useless Arco. Sure we get to keep the land or could attempt to sell Arco, but I doubt we would get full value back. When Sac (I don't recall if it was the city manager or someone else) requested a written commitment that they would pay it back, the Maloofs denied

When this news broke, it was generally accepted that the Maloofs were broke and didn't have the means to pay back this debt on top of all the debt from the Anaheim move. I belive this was proven true by the fact the Maloofs currently only own 2% of the Palms..

[blind prophet]

A little history here, posted some of this in a different thread will repost some here and add more.

The Maloofs got busted talking about relocation to Annaheim, way back in 1998 when they were minority owners.
http://articles.latimes.com/1998/aug/23/sports/sp-15940

Sacramento is decently sized city and capable of 1 professional franchise, the move to Anaheim was not necessary.

The economy of Sacramento, ranks 59th in the world.
http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlat ... kings.html

Sacramento is 20th highest nation in broadcast rights.
http://www.sportstvjobs.com/resources/l ... s-dma.html

The price of kings tickets is not based on payroll, In my opinion the seat prices should be semi comparable to team payroll

Back when they were good they spent some money and the prices increased, no one minded

breakdown by year
2001 kings 4th highest payroll
http://content.usatoday.com/sportsdata/ ... /team/2001

2002 4th highest
http://content.usatoday.com/sportsdata/ ... /team/2002

2003 still at 4
http://content.usatoday.com/sportsdata/ ... /team/2003

bottom of league lowest payroll in 2007
http://content.usatoday.com/sportsdata/ ... /team/2007

So by 2007 they had the lowest payroll, but kept the seats high in price, and magically the arena is no longer packed.

Then they chase a hall of fame coach out of town,

bottom dwell, lie to us about moving desires, lie to us about intentions to improve and spend money,
stay stubborn about ticket prices.

Then they piss off season ticket holders by sometimes selling tickets at lower face value game day than the season ticket holders paid.

By 2007, they wanted to keep the team young and safe, and to some of us this raises an eyebrow. It is almost like they want the team to be bad enough so the team just breaks even, find a way to get out of town, then make moves and spend in that new place but not here.

Kevin Johnson and his staff found support all over the place to invest in the kings, within a few months the owners had a decade to do.

Bottom line, we don't like guys who seem to want to take our team away, and are operating at a fraction of the wealth other owners have.

[becorz]

Very good post, blind prophet.

[kevin44]

Owners of professional sports have to have deep pockets. The Maloofs did at one time & were willing to spend & over spend. They almost got a ring. Now they have empty pockets & are waiting for the best deal for themselves with a new arena or a move to Anaheim. They do have to pay all 70 million if they leave right away. Bottom line is if you want to have a winning team you have to spend over the cap & add great players. The Maloofs have made it clear they have no plans to do either & they should sell the team.

[SacKingZZZ]

See what effect the new CBA has. It's already had quite an effect even Mark Cuban put away the pocket book this summer. Any other year he would have signed Barea to a 50 mil contract and Tyson would have gotten the max.

[deNIEd]

See what effect the new CBA has. It's already had quite an effect even Mark Cuban put away the pocket book this summer. Any other year he would have signed Barea to a 50 mil contract and Tyson would have gotten the max.

Not if you were planning on targeting FA in the next summer. Let's see what Cuban and "rich" owners do this upcoming offseason to see the actual effect of the new CBA

[Bobo the King]

I agree with blind prophet's post from top to bottom. I will also point out the same thing that I do whenever this topic comes up: If the Maloofs had requested a new arena in 2000-2004 (as they should have), the city of Sacramento would have bent over backward to accommodate them. Instead, they waited until both the team and the economy had completely tanked before putting up a half-assed effort to keep the team in Sacramento with a sudden sense of urgency that they hadn't conveyed up to that point. If they were earnest about keeping the team in the city, they handled it as poorly as any of their other business ventures. Instead, I suspect blind prophet is right and they are trying to deliberately botch the deal with Sacramento so that they can move to Anaheim.

[ICMTM]

I agree with blind prophet's post from top to bottom. I will also point out the same thing that I do whenever this topic comes up: If the Maloofs had requested a new arena in 2000-2004 (as they should have), the city of Sacramento would have bent over backward to accommodate them. Instead, they waited until both the team and the economy had completely tanked before putting up a half-assed effort to keep the team in Sacramento with a sudden sense of urgency that they hadn't conveyed up to that point. If they were earnest about keeping the team in the city, they handled it as poorly as any of their other business ventures. Instead, I suspect blind prophet is right and they are trying to deliberately botch the deal with Sacramento so that they can move to Anaheim.

They were asking for one since they got here.

The issue with the arena is the Maloofs only wanted it on one condition. They pay ZERO out of pocket and make ALL the profits. NOBODY in their right mind can support this. The public sector said no. The private sector said no. In all proposed scenarios the Maloofs were essentially asking for a free arena. Land swaps (Tsokopoulos), taxation (two ballot measures), trading locations with Cal Expo...they all failed and for one reason. The Maloofs

The reason why this arena deal is gaining traction is the Maloofs won't be the only ones to profit AND they will have to pay their fair share for what proceeds they will collect.

[deadenddude]

They’re cheap

They’re broke (by rich guy standards)

They’re liars

They meddle in Petrie’s affairs

I’ll give them they at least TRIED to spend this year but that doesn’t excuse the cheapness of past years or the passive approach to the 2010 free agent class, which was one of the best ever.

[OGSactownballer]

They have one lSt golden opportunity here to make things right for this city.

They need to find a way to come up with their share of the arena financing - $85 million which is more than fair - or show the world what useless turds they really are having totally destroyed their fathers legacy.