Hawkfan77
Active member
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2011
- Messages
- 3,280
- Reaction score
- 0
Is it weird that I don't hate Clay Bennett?
NBA returning to Seattle?
- Thread starter grizbob
- Start date
- Status
Hasselbeck
New member
- Joined
- May 2, 2009
- Messages
- 11,397
- Reaction score
- 4
I'm not a Sonics fan, but the Sacramento trolls are hilarious. They do realize their team will still suck right? They do realize the Maloofs are going to run that franchise even deeper into the ground right? :lol:
Throwdown
Well-known member
Hasselbeck":14mbzv14 said:
I mean even if the Maloofs do sell (I believe they will) the team will not ever keep its star players, its a small market team and the Ranadive group said they wouldn't take any of the revenue stream, which would be used to keep their players. Good job, Vivek.
Hawkfan77
Active member
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2011
- Messages
- 3,280
- Reaction score
- 0
This plus I don't think they will be able to build their arena. There are serious questions about where the money is coming from. Heck KJ is getting sued for illegal use of funds and I've read mumblings about some trying to get KJ impeached. Also the group that's trying to get the arena to a public vote has already started getting signatures. Only takes 33,000 to get something on a ballot and we know that once it's on a ballot it almost never passes because who wants to pass huge tax increases?Throwdown":15o14jc8 said:
I've also read that the city of Sacramento is at its debt limit until 2022.
Throwdown
Well-known member
Well, its not our problem so does it matter? lol
NorCal
New member
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2011
- Messages
- 270
- Reaction score
- 0
Why do you guys keep thinking the Maloofs won't sell to Ranadive? Even George Maloof debunked that report
CANHawk
New member
Hawkfan77":67kdu9qx said:
And barely anyone there has a job.
You can't tax unemployed people and you can't tax the businesses that have already left town (just had a flashback to diamond Joe Quimby and his leaving town tax. Lol). From what I've read, as the capital city of the state most of the work force is made up of government workers. Well we've all heard how prosperous California has been in recent years... not. All the recent budget and program cuts to the state and local governments have been leading to mass layoffs in the government work force that makes up the majority of Sac's population. So with all these people not working and all these jobs not coming to town, where the hell is all this mystery money going to come from..?
I seriously fail to see how any of this makes any economic sense.........
a review of Sac's glowing economy
Oh and yes it is very wrong of you to not hate Clay Bennett
Also, just thinking about it... What I haven't heard mentioned is that Sacramento is barely an hour's drive to Oakland (ie. Golden State). Next closest team to seattle is Portland, and that's what... almost 3 hours drive? Why the F can't Sacramento people just watch games in Oakland..?
hawkcrazzed
Well-known member
cause the 2000 ppl that want the kings there don't want to have to buy new merch.
I'm still stuck between waiting for expansion and wanting to see HBN go nuclear over the Kings.
Just the cynical side of me, I guess. I've seen too many big projects in Seattle get blown up to be confident that the MOU will survive the full 5 years. And I can't take anything the NBA says about expansion seriously without something TANGIBLE in writing - until then, it's just too easy to dismiss as the NBA's attempt to keep HBN on the hook so they can just use is as leverage in the next city.
Because the more I've thought about it, the more I've realized that the ONLY valid reason the NBA has for not officially granting us expansion yesterday is because they still need us as leverage to make the Kings deal come together.
The TV deal by itself is a lame excuse, because think about the timeline - it's going to take 1-2 years to get the arena built. HBN needs the guarantee of the team as soon possible to start building so that they're ready to start play when the new deal goes into effect. And if there really ate going to be 31 teams, the NBA is going to want to show that as a fact when they start negotiations with the networks, because it will justify a higher asking price.
IMO, it makes the potential sale of the 20% a big-time show of faith - and that's probably why Hansen still wants to go through with it, as a way to hedge his bets and a test to see if the NBA truly means what they say about expansion.
Still a lot of shoes left to drop over the next few days.
Just the cynical side of me, I guess. I've seen too many big projects in Seattle get blown up to be confident that the MOU will survive the full 5 years. And I can't take anything the NBA says about expansion seriously without something TANGIBLE in writing - until then, it's just too easy to dismiss as the NBA's attempt to keep HBN on the hook so they can just use is as leverage in the next city.
Because the more I've thought about it, the more I've realized that the ONLY valid reason the NBA has for not officially granting us expansion yesterday is because they still need us as leverage to make the Kings deal come together.
The TV deal by itself is a lame excuse, because think about the timeline - it's going to take 1-2 years to get the arena built. HBN needs the guarantee of the team as soon possible to start building so that they're ready to start play when the new deal goes into effect. And if there really ate going to be 31 teams, the NBA is going to want to show that as a fact when they start negotiations with the networks, because it will justify a higher asking price.
IMO, it makes the potential sale of the 20% a big-time show of faith - and that's probably why Hansen still wants to go through with it, as a way to hedge his bets and a test to see if the NBA truly means what they say about expansion.
Still a lot of shoes left to drop over the next few days.
Hawkfan77
Active member
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2011
- Messages
- 3,280
- Reaction score
- 0
Depending on how the financial votes go, it definitely could be.Throwdown":1ut4u97x said:
Hawkfan77
Active member
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2011
- Messages
- 3,280
- Reaction score
- 0
Not quite. Maloofs said they wouldn't rule it out and that they would meet as a family and discuss keeping the team. George also said he is loyal to Chris.NorCal":odlzzjx3 said:
Hawkfan77
Active member
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2011
- Messages
- 3,280
- Reaction score
- 0
Followed by
Sounds like Hansen might be forcing his way into the NBA's "club" and I love it. Maloofs still standing by Hansen which is great. This thing is not over. Not by a long shot.
JOz56
Member
vedthree":3len2tda said:
I love reading your stuff because you an always put it more succinctly than I ever could. I'm still pissed, but I want to see if the NBA is legitimate in their desire to expand via them talking about the TV deals earlier. It'll be interesting to see what Hansen does at this point.
NorCal
New member
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2011
- Messages
- 270
- Reaction score
- 0
Hawkfan77":kaeq9llp said:
You can't honestly believe that the NBA is going to approve a sale of 20% to Hansen at this point with the Maloofs still in charge? No way that happens.
THe only way I can see Hansen getting 20% is if he is in the Ranadive group. which would be really weird, but hey, it gets him in the "club" right?
JOz56
Member
NorCal":3uv11fod said:
That's what I'm wondering. Maybe he's trying to get an in to work some of the owners for Seattle's favor down the line. It would be weird, but if he feels thats what it would take to get the team I could see it.
Throwdown
Well-known member
Maybe Hansen does a favor in Sac for the NBA like Bennett did for them when he got OKC to host the Hornets after Katrina?
I understand the hate for Stern, he's a king douche bag, but why no hate for your own civic leaders in Olympia and Seattle who pretty much kicked Stern in the ass? You have to ask yourself, if only our local guys would have just shown they would try would the Sonics be gone? Right now I would bet good money Stern wouldn't have let the Sonics move had they just tried a little bit, hell the Sac group has an agreement for a new Arena that is as stable as RGIII ACL, and we offered at least double what the Kings are worth, and they aren't moving.
Hawkfan77
Active member
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2011
- Messages
- 3,280
- Reaction score
- 0
Who says we don't hate those "leaders"? Again if you're not a fan then you don't understand. Don't tell us how to feelCPHawk":2u292a5i said:
m0ng0
Well-known member
Yep, like him or not KJ played this nearly perfectly.CPHawk":ouinqu2q said:
twisted_steel2
Active member
CPHawk":2ajdh9w5 said:
Try? They approved Hansen's arena deal right? I know its 5 years later and a lot of different politicians. But I think it shows with the right leadership from the sports/private sector side, and a good arena deal, things can get done.
At the time, the city, county and state were not going to just give away 600 million of public money for some new billionaire in town demanding it.
So I'm not sure what you mean by 'try'.
I'll add to this, I don't think its the city's job to cater to these sports owners, its not the city's job to build their arena's for them. It's not the city's job to plan it all for the sports ownership.
Do they need to help when approached with a good plan that they will benefit from? Sure. So I guess I don't place too much blame on the Sonics leaving on the local politicians as most people do. I want them and our taxes focused on the important things, infrastructure, police, fire dep. etc. My blame mostly falls on Schultz and Bennett.
- Status
