Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Indy 500: Coverage of the 'Greatest Spectacle In Racing'

Seattle officials released the outline Thursday of a proposal to build a new NBA arena in the city.

The arena would be funded with $300 million in money from San Francisco hedge fund manager Chris Hansen and a group of investors, along with $200 million in bonds issued by the city of Seattle and King County. Those bonds would be paid back by rental payments from arena tenants and tax revenue generated by the facility, said Mayor Mike McGinn.
As for which NBA team is in Seattle's sights, McGinn said he was not speaking with the league and was leaving that up to Hansen. Officials said the arena would not be built without an NBA tenant.

3 months ago Demarcus_thornton_tiny Aykis16 188 comments 0 recs  | 

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Also the deal between the NBA and Sacramento was

that they’d get to keep the team if they could finance an arena. Is the NBA supposed to take Seattle on its word that they’ll magically build an arena with no problems if they allow a team to move there?

Author of NBA Mashups. Follow me on Twitter here.

by Aykis16 on Feb 16, 2012 3:28 PM PST up reply actions   1 recs

I am trying really hard not to be upset with Seattle's announcement.

But, I am.
Perhaps it is the timing of their announcement, just two weeks before our deadline date of March 1.
Why was it so important to announce this now? Couldn’t they have waited just a couple of weeks? What was their rush?

Asked if the Kings had any intention of trading Cousins, basketball president Geoff Petrie said, "No."

by Slam_Dunk on Feb 16, 2012 3:37 PM PST up reply actions  

If Sacramento fails, there will plenty of time for Seattle to make their pitch.

Why does it feel as though they are trying to influence the outcome here in Sacramento?

Asked if the Kings had any intention of trading Cousins, basketball president Geoff Petrie said, "No."

by Slam_Dunk on Feb 16, 2012 3:49 PM PST up reply actions  

Because they are

But they’re also trying to insert themselves into the discussion ahead of Anaheim or any other takers as well. First come-first serve as it were.

by athletics68 on Feb 16, 2012 3:50 PM PST up reply actions  

That is more than merely being a net.

They are trying to be the fly in the ointment.

Asked if the Kings had any intention of trading Cousins, basketball president Geoff Petrie said, "No."

by Slam_Dunk on Feb 16, 2012 3:54 PM PST up reply actions  

Because they are

They are trying to get the NBA’s attention. If our city passes the term sheet, the NBA, Maloofs, and AEG still have to agree to it.

@dampania | Section 103 Row V

by dampania on Feb 16, 2012 3:51 PM PST up reply actions  

They do so with the hope that all of our efforts will fail.

Asked if the Kings had any intention of trading Cousins, basketball president Geoff Petrie said, "No."

by Slam_Dunk on Feb 16, 2012 7:10 PM PST up reply actions  

of course they do

if they don’t get in front of the list of cities though and get aggressive about it they aren’t ever getting a team. They aren’t going to politely take a team from another city, they are going to try and dangle carrots at any owner they can.

by wallywagon11 on Feb 16, 2012 7:18 PM PST up reply actions  

The question is, does Seattle have something going with the Maloofs?

I like your Jimmer very much. I do not like your JimmerJihadis™. - Ghandi Sims

Rocks are free, and slingshots easily stolen. And for a limited time, every third person who follows me on Twitter (andy_sims) gets a free ice cream cone.

Which I will eat.

by andy sims on Feb 16, 2012 3:57 PM PST up reply actions  

Only if they are willing to sell

They can’t afford the relocation fee either.

by SacKing4Ever on Feb 16, 2012 3:59 PM PST up reply actions  

Does Seattle have money

Then the Malindas are listening, it ain’t Anaheim but it ain’t Kansas City.

by betweentheeyes on Feb 16, 2012 6:22 PM PST up reply actions  

Exactly.

Asked if the Kings had any intention of trading Cousins, basketball president Geoff Petrie said, "No."

by Slam_Dunk on Feb 16, 2012 7:13 PM PST up reply actions  

No, I don't want them to try to take the team from us.

All this work, at at the 11th hour they suddenly spring this. If Sacramento fails in its efforts to keep the team that is one thing, but this is just nasty.

Asked if the Kings had any intention of trading Cousins, basketball president Geoff Petrie said, "No."

by Slam_Dunk on Feb 16, 2012 7:16 PM PST up reply actions  

If the tables were turned. I don't think we would do that to them.

Asked if the Kings had any intention of trading Cousins, basketball president Geoff Petrie said, "No."

by Slam_Dunk on Feb 16, 2012 7:20 PM PST up reply actions  

I think we would

@dampania | Section 103 Row V

by dampania on Feb 16, 2012 7:28 PM PST up reply actions  

With the intention of trying to spoil another city's efforts that is at the brink of getting approval?

No, I don’t think we would. I don’t think we would play the role of being the spoiler. Call me naive, but I just don’t see that.

Asked if the Kings had any intention of trading Cousins, basketball president Geoff Petrie said, "No."

by Slam_Dunk on Feb 16, 2012 7:41 PM PST up reply actions  

So you honestly don't think

if Sacramento lost the Kings they would never dare to announce a public/private plan to bring a major league sports team around the time where there are potentially 4 teams possibly looking at relocating? Or even 3? Or 2?

by wallywagon11 on Feb 16, 2012 7:42 PM PST up reply actions  

This is two weeks before getting a well-publicized vote of the

city council. The timing has me baffled.

Asked if the Kings had any intention of trading Cousins, basketball president Geoff Petrie said, "No."

by Slam_Dunk on Feb 16, 2012 7:46 PM PST up reply actions  

I find it upsetting. Am I the only who feels this way?

Asked if the Kings had any intention of trading Cousins, basketball president Geoff Petrie said, "No."

by Slam_Dunk on Feb 16, 2012 8:07 PM PST up reply actions  

I don't like it one bit.

But am I surprised or do I think they shouldn’t have done it? No.

HERE WE STAY

THIS IS OUR TEAM

by kangsfan on Feb 16, 2012 9:52 PM PST up reply actions  

It is upsetting to us (from our perspective), but It's just the way it is.

I guarantee that KJ would do the exact same thing if the other way around. And while might feel a little dirty about it, we’d still be chomping at the bit hoping something breaks our way as well. There are only so many teams to go around, and its not everyday that they face the prospects of being moved.

@dampania | Section 103 Row V

by dampania on Feb 17, 2012 7:50 AM PST up reply actions  

*we might feel a little dirty about it….

@dampania | Section 103 Row V

by dampania on Feb 17, 2012 7:51 AM PST up reply actions  

If there was any chance for Sacramento to "steal" the A's from Oakland

you don’t think that most folks here would jump at the opportunity?

I miss Big Mike and his Arco Thunder monologue.

by RJinFairOaks on Feb 16, 2012 8:00 PM PST up reply actions  

Yeah, that too.

And we stole the Kings from Kansas City.

by Kfan in Korea on Feb 16, 2012 8:08 PM PST up reply actions  

He's right!

Let’s steal Olympia from Washington!

The beer, at least.

I like your Jimmer very much. I do not like your JimmerJihadis™. - Ghandi Sims

Rocks are free, and slingshots easily stolen. And for a limited time, every third person who follows me on Twitter (andy_sims) gets a free ice cream cone.

Which I will eat.

by andy sims on Feb 16, 2012 8:20 PM PST up reply actions  

Every time I drive through Benicia I roll my window down and yell out

SCOREBOARD, BITCHES! Then I’m overcome by fumes from the refineries and roll it back up.

No mikev, no peace
Know mikev, know peace

by Mike Garza on Feb 17, 2012 7:19 AM PST up reply actions   2 recs

Linkage

http://www.library.ca.gov/history/previous-ca-capitals.html

You may be thinking about the Placer County Courthouse in Old Town Auburn…it looks like it could have once had capital potential.

I miss Big Mike and his Arco Thunder monologue.

by RJinFairOaks on Feb 16, 2012 9:58 PM PST up reply actions  

I believe you, it was just something I heard when I was a kid

And yea, I was told that was the old capital building lol. Gotta love the days before the internet when rumors couldn’t be quickly dispelled. On the other hand I guess they couldn’t be spread as quickly either.

Interesting note about Benicia. I’ve obviously never heard that before.

HERE WE STAY

THIS IS OUR TEAM

by kangsfan on Feb 16, 2012 10:02 PM PST up reply actions  

When I first saw that building in Auburn

I thought the exact same thing.

I miss Big Mike and his Arco Thunder monologue.

by RJinFairOaks on Feb 16, 2012 10:03 PM PST up reply actions  

Yup, the March on Baseball thing we did in the ’80’s I remember…

by VirginiaKingsFan on Feb 17, 2012 6:44 AM PST up reply actions  

This just gives our city council more urgency.

If the vote fails they are gone anyway, so I think the timing of the announcement is great and hopefully really drives it home to the the council.

The NBA: "Where 27 free throws happens"

by lodisacfan on Feb 17, 2012 6:28 AM PST up reply actions  

It's simple.

The announcement of $300 million dollars in private funding for the arena in Seattle was designed to affect the debates in Sacramento. This is certain to raise pressure from skeptical Sacramento council members and they will demand to know why similar private funding isn’t being offered for a Sacramento stadium. This is a good, if slightly evil, tactical move from business people.

Side Note: I really want my Sonics back, but I don’t want to steal a team from a city that supports them. That being said, if you don’t get an arena deal in place and it looks like your team is moving anyway, I sure as hell want them to come here over Anaheim. I would love to have Isaiah Thomas back home where he belongs.

Sounders 'til I die

by SounderJunkie on Feb 17, 2012 2:08 PM PST up reply actions  

The $500 million is just for the arena.

Then Chris Hansen would buy the team with his group for whatever price that is.

You’re right that we have nothing to do with Sacremento’s situation. It’s if your arena proposal fails that we become interested in trying to get the team from the Maloofs.

by UW11Bowdown on Feb 16, 2012 3:28 PM PST up reply actions  

That makes more sense that $500 million is just for the arena.

But an NBA team will cost upwards of $300 million. And the relocation fee will be another $30 to $50 million. That’s a lot of dough. I wish you guys the best though.

Author of NBA Mashups. Follow me on Twitter here.

by Aykis16 on Feb 16, 2012 3:31 PM PST up reply actions  

The best thing about all of this from our end is that Chris Hansen apparently has no interest in making money on this.

He’s going to put in his money solely to bring a team back to Seattle. In fact, the city would own the arena, despite the fact that he would pay for over half of it. We are very lucly to have someone so interested in bringing a team to Seattle.

We don’t want to “steal” the Kings, but if they are leaving anyways I’m sure there will be a huge push to get them to Seattle. Personally I don’t see why we can’t just buy the Hornets.

by UW11Bowdown on Feb 16, 2012 3:36 PM PST up reply actions  

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Apparently Chris Hansen apparently has no interest in making money on this.

I’m sorry, that just makes me laugh. People don’t become as rich as Hansen do without being interested in making money. I understand he wants there to be a team in Seattle and has Seattle roots, but he’s going to want to make a profit on this one way or another, whether its by development rights around the arena or something else.

Author of NBA Mashups. Follow me on Twitter here.

by Aykis16 on Feb 16, 2012 3:39 PM PST up reply actions  

Nothing about the proposal allows him to make gobs of money.

He’s giving a ridiculous amount of concessions to the city. Until I see otherwise I’m treating this like a $500 million donation for a new library or something like that, except this time it is an NBA team.

by UW11Bowdown on Feb 16, 2012 3:44 PM PST up reply actions  

The fact is there isn't a proposal yet

It’s one thing to say “We’re going to spend such-and-such on an arena” and it’s another to actually spend it and get the money. It’s the process that the city of Sacramento has been spending the last year working on and is almost close to finalizing.

Author of NBA Mashups. Follow me on Twitter here.

by Aykis16 on Feb 16, 2012 3:45 PM PST up reply actions  

You can't be serious

Sacramento Kings - helping feed NBA fans across the country since 2011

by otis29 on Feb 16, 2012 3:50 PM PST up reply actions  

As a wise man once said...

Imma tell you, like Wu told me, cash rules everything, around me, saying dolla dolla billz y’all, dolla dolla billz y’all.

"Crescit cum comercio civicas"

Throw it around the back so it look fly when I pass//
Just to avoid the block go high off the glass//
I'm killing them out there they gon' have to bring caskets//
This all I hear after the baskets *swoosh*//

by HarveySpecter on Feb 16, 2012 3:49 PM PST up reply actions   3 recs

I think you're overlooking some things

1. Sacramento is two weeks away from VOTING on a term sheet. It’s in no way a lock to pass yet. Particularly with the recent political maneuvering being done by parties on the council that could very easily derail the process, particularly if they ultimately try to get it to a public vote.

2. Seattle is expecting to build an arena for 500 million, the tenant would be a separate issue and the cost would of course depend on who they buy, the Hornets, or the Kings.

3. While the Kings aren’t for sale, the Maloofs are also flat broke (for rich guys) and very well might entertain offers if Anaheim no longer seems viable and Sac falls through. Remember the plan in Sac is calling for them to cough up 85 million dollars. Do we know if they even have that kind of money left?

by athletics68 on Feb 16, 2012 3:34 PM PST up reply actions  

Not saying it's a lock to pass

But if Sacramento comes up good on their side of the deal, there is no way the NBA is letting the Maloofs move the team. They’ll either be forced to sell to someone who will keep the team here, or they’ll have to fork over the money needed.

I’m not worried about Seattle at all. If anything, it just provides us Sacramentans with another rallying point, and something to point to to show that what we have is rare and coveted by many.

Author of NBA Mashups. Follow me on Twitter here.

by Aykis16 on Feb 16, 2012 3:44 PM PST up reply actions  

Ok, wait a second...
Particularly with the recent political maneuvering being done by parties on the council that could very easily derail the process, particularly if they ultimately try to get it to a public vote.

This “maneuvering” failed last week by a vote of 5-4. If the city council is going to use the parking as an asset, they have every right to do so without a public vote. The council needs a 5-4 vote to pass any other hurdle going forward.

2. Seattle is expecting to build an arena for 500 million, the tenant would be a separate issue and the cost would of course depend on who they buy, the Hornets, or the Kings.

First up, neither the Hornets or the Kings are for sale right now. Secondly, Hansen allegedly has pledged $500 million for both a stadium and a team, $300 of which was pledged to stadium today. $200 million doesn’t buy an NBA franchise.

3. While the Kings aren’t for sale, the Maloofs are also flat broke (for rich guys) and very well might entertain offers if Anaheim no longer seems viable and Sac falls through. Remember the plan in Sac is calling for them to cough up 85 million dollars. Do we know if they even have that kind of money left?

What the Maloofs have or don’t have is speculation. None of us know what their family bottom line is. But, lets say that they are cash strapped. Do you think that David Stern would prefer that Hansen, a gentleman who runs a $800 million Hedge fund who want to relocate the team, over giving Sacramento a chance to bring in an owner like billionaire Ron Burkle? If the Kings are for sale, Sacramento will have every chance to find a buyer, especially since the city owed $70+ million as part of the 1997 loan.

Again, if the Maloofs are cash strapped, it will cost someone upwards of $100 million just to get the franchise out of Sac ($70 mill owed to the city and $30 mill relocation).

The world is not your Trade Machine.

-Ziller

@James_Ham
www.cowbellkingdom.com

by jjham15 on Feb 16, 2012 3:52 PM PST up reply actions   3 recs

The Hornets aren't for sale?

I don’t know about that. I don’t see how Stern could justify the NBA’s continued ownership of them if there is a willing buyer with an arena deal in place.

by UW11Bowdown on Feb 16, 2012 3:55 PM PST up reply actions  

Larry Ellison says hi

@dampania | Section 103 Row V

by dampania on Feb 16, 2012 3:56 PM PST up reply actions   2 recs

They aren't for sale until they secure that #1 overall pick in the draft next year.

"First we get jobs, then we get the khakis, then we get the chicks."

by Wonderchild on Feb 16, 2012 3:57 PM PST up reply actions   1 recs

May I ask why?

I know it is a sad story there in New Orleans, but post-Katrina (hell, even marginally pre-Katrina), that region is just not large enough for a major league sports franchise.

C’mon, it is barely bigger than Fresno at this point. I know that there is a ton of history there, and people don’t think of it as a “small city”, but it makes Sacramento look like Seattle population-wise.

I miss Big Mike and his Arco Thunder monologue.

by RJinFairOaks on Feb 16, 2012 6:53 PM PST up reply actions  

That's my point.

I miss Big Mike and his Arco Thunder monologue.

by RJinFairOaks on Feb 16, 2012 8:01 PM PST up reply actions  

…I have travelled to NO quite a bit over the years. It’s not a NBA city IMHO. It’s a Saints town and the Hornets are a novelty act in that city that have survived at the box office due to Chris Paul and visiting out-of-towners. The NBA would do well to get out of NO now.

by VirginiaKingsFan on Feb 17, 2012 6:49 AM PST up reply actions  

The NBA is slow playing the Hornets.

Revenue sharing just made the Hornets a profitable venture for the league. You need to look at the Hornets as a league investment. They will hold onto this team until the right situation presents itself. So far, the team gave the league a valuable vote in the CBA negotiations. They will figure out the separation of church and state that caused all the uproar over the Chris Paul situation.

The world is not your Trade Machine.

-Ziller

@James_Ham
www.cowbellkingdom.com

by jjham15 on Feb 16, 2012 4:12 PM PST up reply actions  

Seattle is completely putting the cart before the horse on this.

As a Seattle area resident, I’ve been listening to this story for a couple weeks now. The only reason they mention getting the Kings is because of the precarious situation the franchise is in. Nobody in the media up here has mentioned anything about ANYBODY having any sort of discussions with the Maloofs. In fact many outlets think they are loaded with cash. I’ve heard Joe and Gavin referred to as Classier Mark Cubans.

by BPaoliano on Feb 16, 2012 4:19 PM PST up reply actions  

Here's ya classier


too many to chose from, but I will go with this one first.

by betweentheeyes on Feb 16, 2012 6:30 PM PST up reply actions  

leopard print on right

is that one a zombie? nice belly tat too

by mtmoore55 on Feb 16, 2012 7:01 PM PST up reply actions  

I'm getting deja vu

Wasn’t this photo posted here before, with the same response about the woman in the leopard print?

Asked if the Kings had any intention of trading Cousins, basketball president Geoff Petrie said, "No."

by Slam_Dunk on Feb 16, 2012 7:34 PM PST up reply actions  

Really?

I think my Sharon Stone got tapped by Section.

Asked if the Kings had any intention of trading Cousins, basketball president Geoff Petrie said, "No."

by Slam_Dunk on Feb 16, 2012 7:59 PM PST up reply actions  

Your Sharon Stone.

Is that what the young women are calling their private parts these days? And shame on you for not knowing who is tapping your Sharon Stone.

by Kfan in Korea on Feb 16, 2012 8:06 PM PST up reply actions  

No, I posted a Sharon Stone gif the other night, which disappeared.

Asked if the Kings had any intention of trading Cousins, basketball president Geoff Petrie said, "No."

by Slam_Dunk on Feb 16, 2012 8:12 PM PST up reply actions  

Yeah, I figured that. Was just being silly.

I didn’t really think you had sex with Section and were unsure about it.

by Kfan in Korea on Feb 16, 2012 8:18 PM PST up reply actions  

I know. I was just making a little joke.

Asked if the Kings had any intention of trading Cousins, basketball president Geoff Petrie said, "No."

by Slam_Dunk on Feb 16, 2012 8:20 PM PST up reply actions  

That does make me feel better.

I like Sharon Stone and thought the gif would make it under the radar.

Asked if the Kings had any intention of trading Cousins, basketball president Geoff Petrie said, "No."

by Slam_Dunk on Feb 16, 2012 8:24 PM PST up reply actions  

Wasn't me

SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!

by section214 on Feb 16, 2012 9:49 PM PST up reply actions  

(Wasn't me)

Heyyyyy. Am not! Shaggy’s actually been pretty popular these days, at least amongst us college-age kids, surprisingly. That song doesn’t seem to go away.

"Crescit cum comercio civicas"

Throw it around the back so it look fly when I pass//
Just to avoid the block go high off the glass//
I'm killing them out there they gon' have to bring caskets//
This all I hear after the baskets *swoosh*//

by HarveySpecter on Feb 16, 2012 11:16 PM PST up reply actions  

My bad, I assumed it was your tapper...

someone stole the cookie from the cookie jar…

Asked if the Kings had any intention of trading Cousins, basketball president Geoff Petrie said, "No."

by Slam_Dunk on Feb 17, 2012 7:24 AM PST up reply actions  

wouldn't worry too much about it

sometimes there are glitches and other times stuff is just quietly removed but not really necessary for you to get a warning or anything.

I made a reference to a Naked Gun joke a few weeks ago that I stupidly didn’t realize might be taken completely the wrong way but didn’t get a warning or anything although it was removed, and can understand why (and yes, if anyone out there remembers and was offended seriously I’m sorry and sadly didn’t see how it could have been interpreted).

by wallywagon11 on Feb 17, 2012 7:27 AM PST up reply actions  

Not a big deal.

It was intended to be provocative in a humorous sort of way, but I suppose someone could have taken offense to it.

Asked if the Kings had any intention of trading Cousins, basketball president Geoff Petrie said, "No."

by Slam_Dunk on Feb 17, 2012 8:01 AM PST up reply actions  

Classier Mark Cubans?

Ring Ring! Oh what’s that? The 2000s called. They’d like their time-traveling reporters back, please.

Cuban has seemingly become the classy one, and the brothers Magoof…not so much.

"Crescit cum comercio civicas"

Throw it around the back so it look fly when I pass//
Just to avoid the block go high off the glass//
I'm killing them out there they gon' have to bring caskets//
This all I hear after the baskets *swoosh*//

by HarveySpecter on Feb 16, 2012 5:05 PM PST up reply actions   3 recs

In hindsight that is laughable. Mark Cuban (winner) > Maloofs (losers)

Asked if the Kings had any intention of trading Cousins, basketball president Geoff Petrie said, "No."

by Slam_Dunk on Feb 17, 2012 8:06 AM PST up reply actions  

And I would like to add

it’s no shocker that the arena won’t be built without a tenant already. They can’t if the rumors are true that a big chunk of the funding is coming from a network deal.

Do they have to buy the team or can they just poach one? It’s not going to be easy to poach because again those network revenues are going into the arena when they are usually considereing revenues for the franchise owner. Granted, here in Sac we likely aren’t offering much in parking revenue and apparantly want a chunk of the gamday ticket revenue and some of the ad revenue (and it seriously adds up and might be a problem) but depending on the chunk of the “private investment” coming from the tv deal up there, it makes it less attractive.

And furthermore,I would think (and could be wrong) that they’d have to figure out the Key Arena angle before they can pursue much. They are likely going to need Key as a temporary home while they build the arena for 2 years (because again, can’t build and then poach. Have to poach and build) and need to figure out how they are going to renovate it not only for the team they try and bring but also have a plan for later.

Yeah if the arena deal here goes to crap and the team is stuck here for one more really awkward season because they can’t fight there way to either Anaheim, Louisville, or Kansas City then yeah maybe Seattle can leap frog all of those parties. Other than that, I have a hard time seeing it.

Either way though, yeah the stuff here needs to be shored up in the next 2 weeks and 60 days.

by wallywagon11 on Feb 16, 2012 3:59 PM PST up reply actions  

and another thing

the fact that they made a comment about property taxes. What the heck was that? They own the property how the heck are they going to collect property taxes? Furthermore, heck an arena doesn’t likely bring in enough revenue on it’s own for $200 million worth of bonds unless the tenant really likes not making money (on top of not making TV money already). The fact that the revenues “from the arena” are covering so much and they said property taxes (and I believe sales tax as well which is odd to mention too but not as odd) sure as heck sounds like a TIF. And no clue if that can even work there legally due to the referendum they passed there 6 years ago requiring a return on investments.

There certaintly is smoke I just don’t see the fire being more than a spark yet.

by wallywagon11 on Feb 16, 2012 7:34 PM PST up reply actions  

One more thing about the Seattle thing and I'll shut up

It has to be a TIF and not just arena revenues.

If they really expect to back up $200 million worth of bonds they are going to need somewhere between $13 million and $14.5 million annually for 30 years worth of revenues. Either that or two different tenants (kind of like Sacramento wanting $9 million from both AEG/Maloofs every year).

by wallywagon11 on Feb 16, 2012 9:16 PM PST up reply actions  

Bonds vs. parking fees for public financing commitment.

Interesting strategy by Seattle for a very similar $200 million public commitment that Sacramento has been asked to provide as well. Bonds would seem to be a safer but slower way to secure the public money upfront, and there wouldn’t be the risk of the city’s general fund being reduced like the proposed Sacramento parking deal may. I sure hope the parking fee strategy is still seen as a better option than bonds in 2 weeks when the details of the parking plan are made available for further review.

by SacKing4Ever on Feb 16, 2012 3:30 PM PST reply actions  

Bonds are a bigger risk for the project's successful completion, and just as much of a risk to the general fund.

First of all, they are subject to a public referendum. This is a deal breaker in Sac.

Second, the risk to the city’s general fund is still there. If revenues at the arena fall short of paying the principal and interest on the bonds, where do you think the money comes to make those payments? The general fund. By monetizing the parking assets you are trading an unknown and potentially changing number (difference between arena revenue and bond payments) for a known number ($9.1m that parking currently contributes to the GF)

The devil is dryhumping the details - Tom Ziller

by rpmonkey on Feb 16, 2012 3:55 PM PST up reply actions   1 recs

The impact is simple, inasmuch as there is no impact

If we get our deal done by the timeline granted, this news has zero impact. If we don’t, the Kings are gone, and at that point, who among us really cares where they go?

SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!

by section214 on Feb 16, 2012 3:38 PM PST reply actions  

If anything, this is good news

a fresh reminder that there are other bidders out there ready to take the Kings if we don’t get our deal done.

SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!

by section214 on Feb 16, 2012 3:39 PM PST up reply actions  

Good point

And frankly it should motivate people even more to make it happen than the threat of Anaheim even did. At least in Anaheim the “Royals” would have maintained the long history of the Royals/Kings/“Royals” franchise going back to Rochester. Whatever team goes to Seattle be it the Kings, Hornets, whomever is going to lose their entire history and have it replaced with the Sonics history.

by athletics68 on Feb 16, 2012 3:42 PM PST up reply actions  

Unfortunately OKC already has our history.

All Seattle will be able to do is retire some numbers and change the team name.

by UW11Bowdown on Feb 16, 2012 3:44 PM PST up reply actions  

No way

Certainly everything post 08 belongs to OKC, but pre 08 history belongs to whatever team goes to Seattle.

by LightningStrike5 on Feb 16, 2012 3:48 PM PST up reply actions  

Not quite

You guys also get the history. The way the NBA structured it is that a future Seattle Sonics, and the OKC Thunder will share the pre 2007 Sonics history equally. Both will have all the titles, players, records, stats, etc… It’s entirely convoluted and ridiculous but it’s also the way they set it up.

by athletics68 on Feb 16, 2012 3:49 PM PST up reply actions  

Huh, I hadn't heard that about the sharing thing.

Seems ridiculous to me that there would be two franchises with the same historical records, but of course the entire Seattle-OKC situation was ridiculous, so it isn’t surprising.

Does this mean we’ll get our trophy back?

by UW11Bowdown on Feb 16, 2012 3:54 PM PST up reply actions  

I would assume so

At least the “title” will return to you. Whether you get the physical trophy back is another issue.

by athletics68 on Feb 16, 2012 4:45 PM PST up reply actions  

I still can't imagine what Bennet or any OKC fans want with it.

Don’t they want to build their own history? It isn’t like they are going to have to wait very long for their own championship the way things are looking right now.

by UW11Bowdown on Feb 16, 2012 4:51 PM PST up reply actions  

You say that, but 20 years ago it would have been odd for a team to NOT want to keep old trophies

Even if won in another city. The feeling you’re expressing is a relatively new idea since the Cleveland deal.

by athletics68 on Feb 16, 2012 5:08 PM PST up reply actions  

Along the same lines, what does Baltimore do with the Browns history?

Did the new Browns start from scratch in ’99? Or did the Ravens leave the Browns history behind in Cleveland?

Gonzaga Bulldogs - 11 straight WCC regular-season championships. 13 straight NCAA tournament appearances.

by zag392009 on Feb 16, 2012 3:57 PM PST up reply actions  

Browns started from scratch in 1999.

They were listed as an expansion team.

"First we get jobs, then we get the khakis, then we get the chicks."

by Wonderchild on Feb 16, 2012 3:58 PM PST up reply actions  

And had to form from the worst expansion draft known to man...

Sound the trumpets, Raise the drawbridge, and drop the Oldsmobile

by Balky Needs on Feb 16, 2012 4:07 PM PST up reply actions  

Incorrect

The Browns history, records, statistics, name, colors, etc… all are still listed as having begun in 1946. Their history has a 3 year gap in it, nothing more. Baltimore’s history begins in 1996 and they have no claims to anything prior. Historically the Ravens were the expansion team. Functionally the Browns are an expansion team but they have claim to everything before they left, the Ravens have none.

by athletics68 on Feb 16, 2012 4:43 PM PST up reply actions  

Ravens left the Browns history behind

As far as the NFL is concerned the Brown that started play in 1999 are the same team that stopped play in 1996. They just took a 3 year hiatus. The Ravens history begins in 1996.

by athletics68 on Feb 16, 2012 4:42 PM PST up reply actions  

Not cool

I remember something about that on SonicGate. Clay did some shady things during that time.

by SharkKings49 on Feb 16, 2012 3:50 PM PST up reply actions  

Weird

I always thought it’d be set up similar to the NFL’s Cleveland Browns relocating to the Baltimore to become the Ravens. The Browns essentially became “deactivated”, and when Cleveland eventually got another team, it retained all the Browns’ name, colors, and history.

Speaking of that, what happened to the Winnipeg Jets? Do they keep all their history/lore/etc. or did it stay with the Phoenix Coyotes?

by Ricardo Audain on Feb 16, 2012 3:57 PM PST up reply actions  

Being a Browns fan (ugh) I can tell you that it took a great deal to make that happen.

Lawyers and court and a lot of struggle to win that one. It is not the norm, however. Also, I can tell you being a Browns fan is a lot like being an abused child.

Sound the trumpets, Raise the drawbridge, and drop the Oldsmobile

by Balky Needs on Feb 16, 2012 4:00 PM PST up reply actions  

Oh so being like a Kings Fan

Founder of Isaiah as Mogwai..

by Widowwolf on Feb 16, 2012 4:43 PM PST up reply actions  

Eh, pretty much.

Sound the trumpets, Raise the drawbridge, and drop the Oldsmobile

by Balky Needs on Feb 16, 2012 4:53 PM PST up reply actions  

True

But other than the name the Jets share nothing with the previous Jets. The NHL made it very clear the old Jets history remains with the soon to be former Phoenix Coyotes.

by athletics68 on Feb 16, 2012 4:46 PM PST up reply actions  

The only Kings history I'm concerned with is the present.

…so to speak.

Sound the trumpets, Raise the drawbridge, and drop the Oldsmobile

by Balky Needs on Feb 16, 2012 3:57 PM PST up reply actions  

I'm not so concerned about the effect upon Sacramento...

I am concerned about the effect this could have upon the Maloofs and NBA in coming up with the money needed by Sacramento. It isn’t like the Maloofs have been highly motivated to remain here.

I don’t see this outside interference as being good news. I would much rather they let us work our deal out. If it falls through, then by all means let them have at it.

Asked if the Kings had any intention of trading Cousins, basketball president Geoff Petrie said, "No."

by Slam_Dunk on Feb 16, 2012 4:04 PM PST up reply actions  

If the only thing stopping the arena deal is that the

Malindas don’t want to contribute anything then I think the NBA might have to step in and tell them to deal with it and if they can’t then gtfo.

by Lotusprime on Feb 16, 2012 4:12 PM PST via mobile up reply actions   1 recs

Think Big and the NBA...

have had plenty of discussions. Both sides know what is possible and what is not. This number the city just threw out there is well thought out. So is the attempt to gain land at the Natomas site. Something #biggerthanbasket is in the works. This sounds like a mini-convergence plan all over again. The city will look to convert land in Natomas into development dollars. Nice move in a down economy…

Or maybe the city wants to get their hands on the baseball stadium, finish it and move the Mariners to Sacramento : )

The world is not your Trade Machine.

-Ziller

@James_Ham
www.cowbellkingdom.com

by jjham15 on Feb 16, 2012 4:20 PM PST up reply actions   1 recs

I have no doubt that the number thrown out there has been well-thought out.

My only concern is the Maloofs trying to weasel out of something if they feel there is something better for them with less commitment on their part. I don’t like anything coming along to muck up all the good work you and others have done.

It is like some suitor trying to swoop in to make a last minute pitch before Sacramento and the Maloofs tie the knot.

Asked if the Kings had any intention of trading Cousins, basketball president Geoff Petrie said, "No."

by Slam_Dunk on Feb 16, 2012 4:28 PM PST up reply actions  

It all depends on how much leverage Stern has over the Maloofs

The best case scenario for Stern with all of this is a new arena in Sac with the Kings and a new arena in Seattle at some future point with some team (Charlotte?). If Stern thinks that the Sac plan is a good one and totally doable with a reasonable team owner, Stern will ask the Maloofs if they would like to be that reasonable owner, or if they would like to sell to someone who will be. If Stern isn’t so sure about the Sac deal, the next-best thing for him would be for the Kings to go to Seattle. It’s also quite possible that Stern could think the Sac deal is good and tell the Maloofs to take it or sell and the Maloofs tell him to eff off and file for relocation anyways, but that could be really ugly for everyone.

"If you're going to lead the orchestra, you have to turn your back on the audience." -Geoff Petrie

by AnotherStupidSN on Feb 16, 2012 5:13 PM PST up reply actions  

Like you, I hope Stern has a lot of leverage over the Maloofs.

But, I don’t see how he could force the Maloofs to sell their team.

Asked if the Kings had any intention of trading Cousins, basketball president Geoff Petrie said, "No."

by Slam_Dunk on Feb 16, 2012 6:41 PM PST up reply actions  

For one thing, there's the relocation fee, which appears to have unlimited flexibility.

If the Maloofs still try to move the team to Anaheim, Stern can work with the major market owners to craft a huge relocation fee. The fee could be high enough that the Maloofs decide they’re better off selling. Or, they could try to borrow the money for the relocation fee (from Samueli?), but there may be a way that Stern could stop them from doing that if there’s some provision that says that the league’s owners can only carry so much debt. I’d imagine that Stern is frustrated as hell with the Maloofs as owners, anyways, considering their team’s recent salary levels. Also, I’ve suggested that perhaps he could impress upon the boys that a graceful exit from the league would be very much in their best interest as opposed to whatever would result from a battle with the league. In any case, no one would’ve guessed that Stern could or would pull off the Chris Paul stuff, but he did that, so I don’t think we can assume anything about Stern’s abilities to run the league.

"If you're going to lead the orchestra, you have to turn your back on the audience." -Geoff Petrie

by AnotherStupidSN on Feb 16, 2012 7:08 PM PST up reply actions  

yeah but the Chris Paul thing likely had the support of a majority of owners

and a lot is determined by what an owner chooses to do in response.

(that being said, yeah wouldn’t bet on the Maloofs getting their way if I had to bet but I would prefer not to have to bet in the first place)

by wallywagon11 on Feb 16, 2012 7:12 PM PST up reply actions  

I know it's a different league.

But this could become like the situation w/McCourt & the Dodgers.

"Good Lord, Sacramento is a messy, sloppy, drippy whirling mass of talent"

by richie88 on Feb 17, 2012 12:53 AM PST up reply actions  

Agree that this, like a pending execution, might help to focus the minds of Sacramento politicians.

by ExPFCWintergreen on Feb 16, 2012 4:53 PM PST up reply actions  

"Why don't you have a seat right over there."

Sound the trumpets, Raise the drawbridge, and drop the Oldsmobile

by Balky Needs on Feb 16, 2012 4:02 PM PST up reply actions  

So is Chris Hansen a Seattle guy and his fund is based out of SF?

Because if he’s a SF guy, why wouldn’t he want to get involved in an Arena in Sac that already has a team? Or is he willing to buy a team and then contribute to an Arena?

"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom
The greatest impact player in NBA History - Tim Donaghy

by HighTops on Feb 16, 2012 4:19 PM PST reply actions  

He's a Seattle guy who moved to sf

And he would like to buy a team. So, yes and yes.

by Lotusprime on Feb 16, 2012 4:22 PM PST via mobile up reply actions  

He's an English guy who came to fight the Turkish.

I like your Jimmer very much. I do not like your JimmerJihadis™. - Ghandi Sims

Rocks are free, and slingshots easily stolen. And for a limited time, every third person who follows me on Twitter (andy_sims) gets a free ice cream cone.

Which I will eat.

by andy sims on Feb 16, 2012 4:34 PM PST up reply actions   2 recs

Great for Seattle to do this now.

Not sure if Seattle wants this to happen, but I think it helps Sacramento shore up its deal to keep the Kings here, and places Seattle in a great position to help get New Orleans out of NBA receivership and back up to Seattle. Winning!!

by ExPFCWintergreen on Feb 16, 2012 4:51 PM PST reply actions  

I have trouble being upset with Sonic fans because I remember just how classy some of them were during Kings fans darkest hour:

That’s a nice looking cowbell.

Get those guys a (non-Sacramento) team!

Dribble, dribble, dribble, dribble, dribble, dribble, dribble, dribble, dribble, dribble, dribble, dribble, dribble, dribble, dribble, dribble, dribble, dribble, dribble, dribble, dribble, dribble, dribble...

by The Crown Royal Gentleman on Feb 16, 2012 5:03 PM PST reply actions   1 recs

Absolutely this.

I wrote Sonicsgate an email after this and they wrote me back a nice one as well. I think we’ve learned a lot of lessons from Seattle and we wouldn’t be in the position where we are now if we hadn’t learned those things.

by jveezy on Feb 16, 2012 6:04 PM PST up reply actions  

But, would the Sonics be so admirable if another city was trying to grab their team? I don't think so.

Asked if the Kings had any intention of trading Cousins, basketball president Geoff Petrie said, "No."

by Slam_Dunk on Feb 16, 2012 6:47 PM PST up reply actions  

Funny you should mention that

pretty sure the picture above here is one of the Sonicgate guys during the Nuggets/Thunder playoff series last year heckling the heck out of the Thunder players.

by wallywagon11 on Feb 16, 2012 7:16 PM PST up reply actions  

Yes it is.

And, as pictured above, they brought cowbells in support of Sacramento keeping the Kings.

Dribble, dribble, dribble, dribble, dribble, dribble, dribble, dribble, dribble, dribble, dribble, dribble, dribble, dribble, dribble, dribble, dribble, dribble, dribble, dribble, dribble, dribble, dribble...

by The Crown Royal Gentleman on Feb 16, 2012 8:32 PM PST up reply actions  

I might sound crazy

but if the kings wound up leaving Sac for Seattle, I’d probably be OK being a Sonics fan. Not so much if they went to Anaheim. Definitely hoping it doesn’t come to all that though

by mtmoore55 on Feb 16, 2012 7:08 PM PST up reply actions  

As a Seattle resident

I don’t want anybody to go through what we went through up here, but I don’t think it will happen. If we get an arena, I think the Hornets will move. They’re league owned and their city doesn’t want them. Stern, spawn of Satan that he is, will realize a basketball city with 40+ years history of NBA fans will provide the money and that’s all he cares about.

by Skeptical Dawg on Feb 16, 2012 7:40 PM PST reply actions  

If we lose ours I hope you guys get it

If we lose ours I will be pissed

35 and 31. I'm calling it now. Reke and Cousins 1-2 in most improved award both All-stars. Jimmer leads rookies in scoring, passing and Ole's. Make 2nd round of playoffs and Salmons is not here by seasons end.

by ElRonToro on Feb 16, 2012 7:43 PM PST up reply actions  

Agreed.

Losing the Kings would be brutal beyond belief. But I’d rather they go to Seattle where they’d be appreciated by a loyal, worthy fan base.

And wet. It rains a lot here.

by BPaoliano on Feb 16, 2012 9:10 PM PST up reply actions  

I have been ruminating, and think I have this whole Seattle thing figured out.

The plan is for Seattle to specifically target the Sacramento Kings so that the franchise will move up North to Starbucks country so that they can put a Seattle jersey on that former Portland player so as to draw fans away their NorthWest competitor and wave it in their faces.
Yes, I am playing the Travis Outlaw card.

by betweentheeyes on Feb 16, 2012 7:44 PM PST reply actions  

They need a team first.

Asked if the Kings had any intention of trading Cousins, basketball president Geoff Petrie said, "No."

by Slam_Dunk on Feb 16, 2012 7:51 PM PST up reply actions  

Not sure if anyone comments on the ESPN boards under their stories, but on the story about the new arena funding in Seattle, everyone seems to be thinking they’re getting our Kings! I’m trying my best to promote #HereWeStay and actually give facts on the arena plan, but it seems like not too many Kings fans go over. Anyone want to help?

by JuMowbray on Feb 16, 2012 8:37 PM PST reply actions  

ABORT, i repeat ABORT

I miss Big Mike and his Arco Thunder monologue.

by RJinFairOaks on Feb 16, 2012 8:40 PM PST up reply actions   1 recs

Why?

wow what a shocker a sports page that caters to a national audience thinks Seattle is going to get back an NBA team immediatelly upon hearing about a plan that hasn’t been fully disclosed.

Doesn’t matter.

by wallywagon11 on Feb 16, 2012 8:57 PM PST up reply actions  

Let them have the Hornets.

"We're not talking about me and Darko in the same sentence." - Chris Webber vs KAHN!

by caseycheesecake on Feb 16, 2012 9:05 PM PST reply actions  

Both Cities End Up With Teams

As I mentioned in a previous thread, I feel strongly that we will keep the Kings, AND Seattle will get a team (assuming an arena plan gets worked out in BOTH cities).

And yes, the Hornets seem to be a good fit for Seattle.

By the way, remember Stern said the Sonics name would remain in Seattle – guaranteed. So if the Hornets do move there, they’ll still end up being the Sonics. As it should be.

And, by the way, the reason I am very sure about these matters is that its clear that’s what Stern himself wants. And what Stern wants he tends to get. He may have been complicit in letting the Sonics go to OKC. But he hasn’t slept well on that move since then. I think he sees his tenure coming full circle when there’s a team back in the Emerald City.

Enough said.

by Darren King on Feb 16, 2012 9:12 PM PST reply actions  

Okay, glad you agree. Some people don’t. They think it’ll be one or the other.

by Darren King on Feb 16, 2012 10:30 PM PST up reply actions  

well considering the Seattle plan likely REQUIRES a pro sports tenant to even "work" well by the nature of working they will have a team

and considering Sacramento is not building this arena without the Kings then if the deal here works then by the nature of working they will have the Kings.

It’s like saying if I freeze water I will have ice.

by wallywagon11 on Feb 16, 2012 10:43 PM PST up reply actions  

You misunderstand what I’m saying. The point I’m making is that one city getting a team is not predicated on the other losing one. Period.

by Darren King on Feb 16, 2012 10:54 PM PST up reply actions  

And in other news..

I just saved a bunch of money on my car insurance by switching to Geico…

by HeuristicLineup on Feb 16, 2012 11:01 PM PST reply actions  

I enjoyed this post and recommend and would read again

Thanks for the kind words, hope things work out for you up there with a non-Kings NBA team!

Sacramento Kings - helping feed NBA fans across the country since 2011

by otis29 on Feb 17, 2012 4:46 AM PST up reply actions   1 recs

If Seattle gets and arena and a new Sonics team (Hornets),

I’ll be making a trip up for the first game. That will be a crazy game to remember.

by SharkKings49 on Feb 17, 2012 9:26 AM PST up reply actions  

Yeah, But...

I can see your point, but right now I don’t see the NHL as having committed to moving a team to Seattle (and they aren’t going to expand at this point). In Phoenix there are a few developments still on the table. So, until those are exhausted, (and I mean REALLY, TRULY exhausted) I don’t think the NHL is committing the Coyotes to anywhere else but Glendale.

by Darren King on Feb 17, 2012 9:30 AM PST up reply actions  

On Seattle

Paraphrasing:

Thought about what happened today, about Seattle. Stayed up half the night thinking about it. Then something occurred to me… fell into a deep peaceful sleep, and haven’t thought about it since. Do you know what occurred to me?

Sacramento holds its fate in its own hands. Step up, Kings stay. Fail to step up, it doesn’t matter where they go because they’d be gone.

February 28th. Everyone who can be there needs to be there. Fill the council chamber, fill the surrounding streets. Show the council that Sacramento is mobilized and vocal in favor of the ESC.

There will always be the Sheedys of the world, playing political games. But do you know what influences the Sheedys of the world? Vocal, organized groups of voters.

Never forget, I'm a complete idiot.

Follow me on Twitter
Author of Inside-Out Game

by Exhibit G on Feb 17, 2012 6:49 AM PST reply actions   1 recs

If Seattle is going to get a team, it'll be the Hornets.

Hassen wants to buy the team, and there’s a team owned by the NBA and openly ON THE MARKET.

by LightningStrike5 on Feb 17, 2012 10:02 AM PST reply actions  

Local Only

Agreed. My understanding is that, at this point, its only on the market for owners planning on keeping the team where it is.

by Darren King on Feb 17, 2012 10:30 AM PST up reply actions  

However, that said, I do think Stern would be willing to, pretty quickly, make an exception if the destination is Seattle. Perhaps he’ll put out an ultimatum “if we don’t have a local buyer by such and such a date we will have to look at relocating…”.

by Darren King on Feb 17, 2012 10:34 AM PST up reply actions  

I think he is just trying as best he can to keep the teams where they are before letting a team move

The Zombie Sonics only left after almost a decade of arena negotiations fell short. Same with Charlotte when the Hornets left there, and the same almost happened here.

"First we get jobs, then we get the khakis, then we get the chicks."

by Wonderchild on Feb 17, 2012 11:03 AM PST up reply actions  

Another Seattle fan here, just had to wait out the registration period to post.

Just wanted to say that there is an overwhelming sentiment amongst Seattle fans of “we don’t want it to happen this way.” I’m not sure if there’s a way for Seattle to get the Sonics back without another city losing their team, but if there is, that’s the scenario we’re rooting for. And if it does end up being the Kings that get moved, at least you know it’s going to a city that isn’t going to accuse you of not supporting your team, or insinuate that you didn’t deserve a franchise in the first place. Sacramento is a great basketball town.

Best of luck guys.

by jhmg16 on Feb 18, 2012 3:47 PM PST reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to Sactown Royalty, the best community of Sacramento Kings fans in the universe. That's not my opinion; it's scientific fact.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Small
Kyle Lowry
Small
A Learning Experience on Loyalty For Sacramento Via Golden State
Lionel_small
#HereWeStay
Small
Francisco Garcia Wallpaper/Illustration (UofL days)
Kings_sports_illustrated_small
Funny story
Small
As I sit here and watch the OKC Thunder come back against the Lakers
Waymantisdale-tz-150_small
the owners called down the thunder
Chief_petty_officer_small
Maturity in Sacramento Debacle
Small
Ryan Anderson to the Kings - Petrie's Gotta Give It A Thought
Chief_petty_officer_small
Open letter to the Maloofs

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Editor

Loofie_small Tom Ziller

Joe_kleine_small section214

Demarcus_thornton_small Aykis16

Associate Editor

Coachie_small rbiegler

Banana2_small Exhibit G