Come one! Come all!

Welcome to the ultimate tournament of champions: the Sactown Jersey Crown.

Together, we shall determine what threads bring a smile to a fair maiden’s face, and which ones others are best suited for the court jester’s closet (I’m looking at you, weird checkered abominations). Below, you will find a battle between two ranked jerseys. Vote for your favorites! Cast out those that sear the eyes! Comment on the how and why!

BEGIN!

Note: The seeding for this tournament is set by the release date of each jersey, not by our preference. But the StR staff has let you know what we think of each style below. It will work as if it were a 32-team single knockout bracket, with four regions of 8. But as there are only 27 jerseys to chose from, we had to give some of the earliest unis a first round pass. The concept was inspired by a tweet from our friend Brett Huff, who you know as TheBeefer on SB Nation and @bretthuff22 on twitter. First round voting will be open all weekend, so pick your favorites and have fun with it!

Region 1: The Home Jerseys

(#1) 1985 Royal Blues vs. BYE

sportslogos.net

Tim: The white royal blues are dope. The lettering is fun, the color is unique, and it doesn’t look like a soccer jersey. Let’s go back to these.

Richard: Classic. If any jerseys are worthy of a free pass in the first round, it’s these and their road counterpart.

(#2) 1990 Royal Blues vs. (#7) 2016 Block Whites

sportslogos.net

Tim: The smaller lettering is an even better version of the 1985s.

Richard: So clean! These are a great minor update from the original jersey. I really like the logo added to the knee. These might be my all-time favorite.

sportslogos.net

Tim: The block lettering is boring. The scheme is boring. The numbers are boring. This is boring.

Richard: Agree with Tim. I also don’t like the logo on both sides of the shorts. These are just too symmetrical for me.

(#3) 1994 Kings Crests vs. (#6) 2014 Spiky Joints

sportslogos.net

Richard: These are pretty plain from my perspective. But they introduced purple to Sacramento and later brought the franchise it’s only 60-win season. So they get a huge boost for nostalgia. When paired with the black road jerseys, there’s a really nice balance to the set. These are just the lesser half of a nice look.

sportslogos.net

Tim: This one has a bit of a superhero theme to it. The font reminds me of batman, while the two sharp pieces in the middle are spiderman-esque.

(#4) 2002 Crooked Crowns vs. 2008 Sacramentos

sportslogos.net

Richard: These aren’t terrible, but also not great. I like that they went for something a little different with the off-balance crown logo above the player name. It didn’t last long though. Overall it’s pretty ‘meh’.

sportslogos.net

Richard: This one gets lost in the mix for me. It’s another take on the “Sacramento” chest design, so that part is cool but not original. And although it’s the first trim to have the weird spikes on it, they really look better when updated in 2014.

Region 2: The Away Jerseys

(#1) 1985 Baby Blues vs. BYE

sportslogos.net

Tim: Every iteration of baby blue or powder blue sucks.

Tony: Tim is wrong. In the interest of full disclosure, I’ll just come out and say it: I don’t like purple. I’m willing to chalk this up to me not being a native Sacramentan if that makes the hate mail any nicer, but I just don’t have the passion for those colors like some of you clearly do. For as much as I like the black jerseys, they are a little generic at this point. It feels like just about every team has an alternative black jersey these days.

The baby blue, white, and red just works for me. They are my favorite Kings jerseys by a wide margin. They are unique. They are classic. They are simple. They are clean, and when you couple them with the old school baby blue, white, and red court, it’s one of my favorite aesthetics in all of sports. If I could snap my fingers and make those the primary Kings colors moving forward, I would do it in a heartbeat.

(#2) 1990 Royal Blues vs. (#7) 2016 Block Purples

sportslogos.net

Tim: Why haven’t we gone back to royal blue, yet?

Richard: Love.

sportslogos.net

Tim: Death by purple. Pass.

Richard: Just like their home counterpart, these are too modern and symmetrical for me.

(#3) 1994 OG Blacks vs. (#6) 2014 Purple-Blues

sportslogos.net

Tim: I want the Kings to switch back to an updated version of these, but not until they’re winning games and are a contender in the playoffs.

Bryant: The Kings stopped using these beauties right when I became a fan, and I never understood why they weren’t the default road unis. They still should be. Aside from the font (which desperately needs an update), the black/purple trim is the best combination the kings have had, ever.

sportslogos.net

Richard: Hate.

(#4) 2002 Sacramentos vs. (#5) 2008 Black Lettering

sportslogos.net

Richard: These were the first “Sacramento” kits. And for that, they deserve some cred.

sportslogos.net

Richard: The trim just bothers me. And I’d be happy if I never had to see the “SK” logo again.

Region 3: Alternates

(#1) 1994 Checkerboards vs. BYE

sportslogos.net

Tim: It’s pretty amazing that someone had a disturbed enough nature to create these. It’s even more impressive that an entire organization approved them.

Bryant: Ignore the ignorant even-toed ungulate above me. These are the only “unique” jerseys that worked for the Kings, up until the chainmails showed up in 2016. I was ecstatic to see them brought back a few years ago, and would still love them to be in the rotation.

(#2) 1997 Pure Purples vs. BYE

sportslogos.net

Richard: The perfect third piece to the 1997-2001 triumvirate of white, black, and purple. Crushed it.

(#3) 2005 Gold Standards vs. (#6) 2016 Black Lions

sportslogos.net

Tim: The golds are the jersey equivalent of drafting Georgios Papagiannis 13^th overall: completely unnecessary and should have cost someone their job.

Richard: Hey, where did you get those jerseys? At the toilet store?

sportslogos.net

Richard: Definitely the best of the 2016 set. The gray stripe at least breaks up the monotony, and I like the touch of the lion logo.

(#4) 2011 SK Blacks vs. (#5) 2014 Kings Crest Blacks

sportslogos.net

Richard: They’re extremely similar to the next set, just a touch less appealing to me.

sportslogos.net

Richard: For my money, these are the pinnacle of the ‘pointy’ series.

Region 4: Wildcard

(#1) 2002 Red Stripe Royals vs. BYE

fantasynflstore.com

Tim: Yuck.

(#2) 2010 Blue & Red Royals vs. 2018 NBA Draft All-Black Concept

fantasynflstore.com

Richard: Pretty damn boring, but better than the other Royals throwback.

store.nba.com

Tim: This is the most generic jersey I’ve ever seen. They look like the fake NBA jerseys teams wear in commercials when they don’t have the rights to the real thing.

Richard: Tim makes a good point here. The Kings have never worn these in-game to my knowledge, nor are they likely to do so in the future. These are just a concept used to sell the jerseys of 2018’s first round draft picks. They look more like NBA 2K kits than the real thing. But if you like them, let us know.

(#3) 2014 Rochesters vs. (#6) 2017 “City” Purples

cmfmannapolis.com

Richard: I’m usually a fan of simple and clean, but these are too generic for me. If the football team from “The Replacements” were to play basketball, this would be their jersey.

store.nba.com

Richard: All these block letters are too ‘now’ for me. They fit the current trend, but they seem like the kind of jersey that will look really ugly in a few years.

(#4) 2017 Chainmails vs. (#5) 2017 “City” Baby Blues

store.nba.com

Tim: Chainmail is fun, although a bit gimmicky. I like them as an alternate worn on occasion.

Richard: I really like the concept here. Chainmail originated in medieval times, which is an obvious link to the origins of “kingdom” itself. And the pattern is actually little S’s taken from the Sacramento city flag. It’s very clever. But clever doesn’t equal stylish. They’re a cool alternate, but not an all-time favorite for me.

store.nba.com

Tim: When did Sacramento get an MLS team? These are awful.

Tony: Being the baby blue enthusiast that I am, I was probably higher on these than a lot of folks, but to me the analysis here is fairly simple. I like the colors, but the execution just didn’t work. I don’t love the logo, I’m not sure why they needed gray in there, and when your new version of something is so clearly worse than the older version of said thing, it really doesn’t need to exist, does it? These are fine at best, but aren’t in the same universe as the old school baby blues.

Richard: I really like this logo, or at least the bones of it. But having gray as the dominant color is a little confusing. And the white swatch across the chest looks off to me. I feel like these could be solid if they were reworked, but I’ll pass for now.