Refresh my memory. Were the Kings under brand new ownership? I do remember the Maloofs. Was the threat of the Kings moving directly connected to new ownership? I don't recall.
Yeah he is the newly appointed CEO of Vulcan Sports. I don't think that it was a coincidence this happened in the last month.
There is no expansion plans at the moment. A team (Portland, obviously) is likely going to be for sale soon.
There aren't even enough hotel rooms to hold a fucking All-Star Weekend in Portland. Vegas, with no team in place, had an all star game like a decade ago already (and it was a shit show).
Yeah. I know. However, my statement still is not incorrect. There is definitely something to be said about moving a thriving team from a burgeoning market. It really is a bad look. I do think that matters after the Seattle debacle. I see both sides of the spectrum. My point is this - it's very short sighted to think the Blazers are untouchable, but I think they stay. Vegas could likely cherry pick a different franchise in the future that would have less of a blowback than taking Portland. In my heart, I believe the NBA wouldn't approve it for that reason.
There would be tremendous blowback. However, the Vulcans can poison the well. How much fan support would be lost if the Blazers traded Lillard to the Lakers? Make the Blazers a 20 win team, what happens to attendance? All in the name to "make the franchise attractive to sell". Olshey's the kind of used car salesman GM that would orchestrate such a campaign. Don't tell me you can't see him going along with something like this and then rationalizing it afterwards as he is so good at doing? The Owners would absolutely gain by having a high profile franchise in Las Vegas. What do they get from having a great locally supported team in the Northwest? Feel good points?
So if a new expansion team (or other team not OKC) pops up in Seattle - does anyone know what the NBA policy is on team history? Would the 'new' Seattle team be able to acquire the rightful SuperSonics history/records/branding from OKC ownership?? Really sucks that all that great PNW history is stuck in CowTown OKC at the moment. . .
I believe that part of the deal was that the history/etc stayed in Seattle, much like the Browns situation. Maybe not as concrete as that, but similar.
Maloofs literally had an agreement signed and handshook agreement to a Seattle group led by developer Chris Daniels and Steve Ballmer for at the time was a record price. The Seattle group had no secrets they wouldn’t keep the team in Sacramento. They kept that 100% from the start. Only thing left was for the NBA to ok it. Now according to you guys that would and should be a done deal right? The kings located in cow town little ol Sacramento, the Sonics get to return to a bigger more lucrative market in Seattle right? Simple enough right? Not so fast, the NBA vetoed that shit on the basis of learning their lesson from the Sonics leaving debacle. This will be the same thing for Portland. Trust me
If a team ends up in Vegas, it'll be through expansions. It's likely that the league expands 7 to 10 years from now, and I don't understand why the NBA wouldn't wait for that and simply allow a team to move out of a great market (where they'd likely return an expansion team to)... makes no sense. You'll get Vegas and Seattle, Memphis will move to the East, and you'll have 16 team conferences.
I thought I was on ignore (as you stated yesterday, then announced that you put me back on it). I guess a mod deleted that whole exchange though because it was not a good look. Ignore doesnt really work if you constantly have to turn it off and on for a poster. I should really charge you rent for the space I take up in your head.