Manocad wrote:Why wouldn't they move? Because the owner can't just move the team; the move has to be approved by the league. The Supersonics moved because the fans didn't care about the team; attendance sucked when the team was good, and that's the only reason the Pistons' attendance sucks right now--because the team sucks. And don't play the ticket prices game; I was there in 1988-91. You weren't getting ANY ticket at the Palace at face value unless you bought it at the box office and even then they weren't cheap. The prices dropped when the team got bad; in the heyday of the Palace tickets were just as expensive (adjusted for inflation) as they are now at LCA. Not attending games when the team sucks does not equal historical lack of fan support.
The Pistons have the 22nd-best record in the NBA from 2007-17. The teams with worse records during that time period are (in descending order) the Wizards, Bucks, Knicks, Hornets/Bobcats, Nets, 76ers, Kings and T-Wolves. How many of those teams moved? How many won championships? How many truly contended for a championship? The Detroit Pistons are nowhere near the level of lack of fan or ownership support that the league would approve a move. Like I've said before, in sports Detroit is still a keystone/major market city. ThePistons made the playoffs only five times from 1963-83, were horrible during some of those years, and no one was talking about moving the team then. The fans have clearly showed over the years that when the team is good they'll pay the money to go to games.
Some of you either don't pay any attention to history, have Chicken Little syndrome or are continuing to beat that "See? I told you the move downtown was a failure; now the team might move" drum just because you don't like it that the team moved back downtown. Maybe all three.
You can be pretty condescending at times.
I know perfectly well that the team had good attendance when it was good. The two of us both witnessed that history in the mid-late 00s while being posters on this site. I also know that it's overall revenue even in those days was still small compared to a better market even when the team is terrible.
Is it likely that the team will be moved? No. Simply because the league has a general aversion to moving teams in general. This was demonstratively true in the David Stern era and there's little evidence to suggest Silver has a different attitude.
Is a move unthinkable? No. Might another potential owner who hasn't invested a ton into the team being in Detroit might see it as a potentially attractive option to consider? I think it's naive to think that's not the case. I think we're as strong a potential candidate for a potential move as any. Detroit is a second or third tier city that still the big four teams it had when it was a first tier city. They're all established brands with proud histories (well, except for the Lions). It's not pleasant to think that movement might happen, but I think its naive to completely and condescendingly dismiss the notion.
I don't think anyone here is saying a move is imminent. I'm not even saying it's all that likely, and think there's zero likelihood of it happening with this ownership, as I said in an above post. Just saying the situation of the team is such that it can be a valid part of the conversation.
Of course, I've never lived in Detroit and have only visited once in my life, so I'm a lot less emotionally invested in the team remaining in Detroit as someone else might be. So there's less of that clouding my judgement here.
