NBA back to Seattle? NHL too?

[rams80]

San Diego has a history with pro ice hockey that dates back to the 1940s. In fact, since 1944, major-pro (WHA) and minor-pro (PCHL, WHL, PHL, IHL, WCHL, ECHL) teams have taken to the ice in 35 seasons over 62 years. The 1950s and 1980s were basically the fallow periods.

San Diego Skyhawks - Pacific Coast Hockey League - 1944-45 through 1949-50

San Diego Gulls - Western Hockey League - 1966-67 through 1973-74

San Diego Mariners - World Hockey association - 1974-75 through 1976-77

San Diego Mariners - Pacific Hockey League - 1977-78

San Diego Hawks - Pacific Hockey League - 1978-79

San Diego Gulls - International Hockey League - 1990-91 through 1994-95

San Diego Gulls - West Coast Hockey League - 1995-96 through 2002-03

San Diego Gulls - ECHL - 2003-04 through 2005-06

Not exactly a ringing endorsement of bringing the NHL to SD...

To be fair, the 1990s-2000s Gulls shut down more as a result of San Diego's arena being a piece of crap that needed to be (and was planned to be) torn down than any attendance issues; IIRC the Gulls were actually one of the ECHL's attendance leaders.

[NJTank]

San Diego has a history with pro ice hockey that dates back to the 1940s. In fact, since 1944, major-pro (WHA) and minor-pro (PCHL, WHL, PHL, IHL, WCHL, ECHL) teams have taken to the ice in 35 seasons over 62 years. The 1950s and 1980s were basically the fallow periods.

San Diego Skyhawks - Pacific Coast Hockey League - 1944-45 through 1949-50

San Diego Gulls - Western Hockey League - 1966-67 through 1973-74

San Diego Mariners - World Hockey association - 1974-75 through 1976-77

San Diego Mariners - Pacific Hockey League - 1977-78

San Diego Hawks - Pacific Hockey League - 1978-79

San Diego Gulls - International Hockey League - 1990-91 through 1994-95

San Diego Gulls - West Coast Hockey League - 1995-96 through 2002-03

San Diego Gulls - ECHL - 2003-04 through 2005-06

Not exactly a ringing endorsement of bringing the NHL to SD...

The NHL in San Diego may be even dumber than the NHL in Arizona.

[bosrs1]

So, if Seattle gets another NBA team, that will likely mean:

-The new Seattle team will claim the Sonics' history, which is "shared" with the Thunder, essentially making them the Sonics Jr.

-The Thunder are the Sonics Also and have been since they moved to Oklahoma City.

-The team that moves to Seattle will have their history in Seattle, but likely ignored by the new Seattle franchise, who has that team's original history, while also claiming/having the history of the original franchise that played in Seattle, which now plays in Oklahoma City and also has the history of the original franchise that played in Seattle.

Good job, Cleveland!!

New Seattle Sonics = New Winnipeg Jets

Not really. The New Winnipeg Jets share nothing officially with the previous Jets other than the name. The new Sonics, whomever they end up being, will officially share the history of and be a continuation of the former Sonics. Problem is the odd way the NFL chose to do it the reborn Sonics will also share the old Sonics history with the OKC Thunder who also share that history. So two teams will have for instance their record games played held by Gary Payton. The added twist is that if the Sonics aren't an expansion franchise they'll also have the history whatever franchise moves to Seattle brings with them. However since it's Seattle and they already have their own history no one has really said what will happen to the incoming team's history but it will presumably be ignored in favor of the Sonics history.

What should have happened is either a Winnipeg Jets style thing where only the name holds over, or they should do it full Cleveland style where the Thunder lose all ties to the Sonics history (though that only solves one of the problems). In any event a team playing now is about to have whatever history it has erased (which in the case of the Hornets isn't much of a loss).

[Brian in Boston]

To be fair, the 1990s-2000s Gulls shut down more as a result of San Diego's arena being a piece of crap that needed to be (and was planned to be) torn down than any attendance issues; IIRC the Gulls were actually one of the ECHL's attendance leaders.

That's correct. During the San Diego Gulls' three seasons in the ECHL, only the Florida Everblades (6,220 fans-per-game) and Gwinnett Gladiators (5,534) enjoyed higher average attendance than the Gulls (5,515). It was a similar story for the Gulls in the IHL, where only Milwaukee (9,141), Fort Wayne (7,524), and Kansas City (7,074) had higher four-year attendance averages than San Diego (6,359). And no club in the WCHL enjoyed higher average attendance over the entirety of the Gulls' eight-year run than San Diego (6,165).

Now, does any of this mean that San Diego would suitably support an NHL franchise? Of course not. That said, there is a core audience of ice hockey fans in San Diego.

[pmoehrin]

I can't see how the NHL in San Diego could be any worse then Nashville or Carolina.

A much larger population to work from and a pretty extensive history of minor league hockey, so you will at least have some kind of core fanbase coming in. I think there's better options out there, but San Diego would be a better choice then alot of cities that already have teams in my opinion arena issues notwithstanding.

[DaytonBlue]

If an existing team moves to Seattle, would there be any consideration for keeping the name or is Sonics 2.0 and its even more messed up franchise history than Jets 2.0 pretty much a certainty?

[bosrs1]

If an existing team moves to Seattle, would there be any consideration for keeping the name or is Sonics 2.0 and its even more messed up franchise history than Jets 2.0 pretty much a certainty?

Pretty sure the Sonic's history mess is a certainty. Seattle sued specifically to make sure it happens. They won't drop that. The city could care less about the history of some other city(s) franchise(s). And honestly who could blame them. One of the teams they might get, the Hornets, have no appreciable history to speak of despite existing nearly 20 years since they've sucked much of it so it's not a huge loss (and hell a better use of the Hornets name and history might be to ship it back to NC as people have suggested). And the Kings have largely been losers over their 50 years (though the length of time means losing their history would be a much bigger loss).

[rams80]

If an existing team moves to Seattle, would there be any consideration for keeping the name or is Sonics 2.0 and its even more messed up franchise history than Jets 2.0 pretty much a certainty?

Pretty sure the Sonic's history mess is a certainty. Seattle sued specifically to make sure it happens. They won't drop that. The city could care less about the history of some other city(s) franchise(s). And honestly who could blame them. One of the teams they might get, the Hornets, have no appreciable history to speak of despite existing nearly 20 years since they've sucked much of it so it's not a huge loss (and hell a better use of the Hornets name and history might be to ship it back to NC as people have suggested). And the Kings have largely been losers over their 50 years (though the length of time means losing their history would be a much bigger loss).

Once upon a time, a player named Oscar Robertson played for that franchise. You may have heard of him.

[bosrs1]

If an existing team moves to Seattle, would there be any consideration for keeping the name or is Sonics 2.0 and its even more messed up franchise history than Jets 2.0 pretty much a certainty?

Pretty sure the Sonic's history mess is a certainty. Seattle sued specifically to make sure it happens. They won't drop that. The city could care less about the history of some other city(s) franchise(s). And honestly who could blame them. One of the teams they might get, the Hornets, have no appreciable history to speak of despite existing nearly 20 years since they've sucked much of it so it's not a huge loss (and hell a better use of the Hornets name and history might be to ship it back to NC as people have suggested). And the Kings have largely been losers over their 50 years (though the length of time means losing their history would be a much bigger loss).

Once upon a time, a player named Oscar Robertson played for that franchise. You may have heard of him.

I have. Though the Cincy Royals never won the title while he played for them and really only have 2 really good seasons while he played for them. Individually he was still great, but one individual does not a good history make. That said, I would hope the Kings aren't the Seattle bound team for that very reason, their long, eclectic and extensive, if not very illustrious history.

The Hornets by comparison have much less history to lose.

[The Giant Pacific Octopus]

It would be cool seeing Seattle land an NHL franchise. They were supposed to get a expansion team in 1976/77 (Seattle Totems) but the NHL called off the planned 1976 expansion (which would have included Denver as well). They relocated teams that year instead.

[rvrdgsfn]

EDIT:

Put this on the NHL Relocation topic found a different article about Seattle's plans so far...

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2017426859_arena05m.html

A wealthy San Francisco hedge-fund manager and officials in the Seattle mayor's office have been working behind the scenes for eight months to bring an NBA team back to the city as early as next fall and build a new arena, according to emails and documents that reveal a far more concerted effort than previously known.

A Dec. 13 agenda for a meeting between the parties shows they were talking about details such as a "Review of Basic Deal Structure," "Financing Issues," including "City Debt Capacity," and "Security for Public Financing."

The documents, released Friday to The Seattle Times under a public-disclosure request, also provide the first glimpse of how the largely unknown hedge-fund manager, 44-year-old Seattle native Christopher Hansen, approached the city about his desire to buy an NBA team and build an arena south of Safeco Field.

[Evil Doctor]

It would be cool seeing Seattle land an NHL franchise. They were supposed to get a expansion team in 1976/77 (Seattle Totems) but the NHL called off the planned 1976 expansion (which would have included Denver as well). They relocated teams that year instead.

I think part of the charm for those who are students of the history of hockey, is that Seattle was the first American based team to win the Stanley Cup (the Seattle Metropolitans.) It is interesting that, I think, this is the only time in which the west coast of the US had top level pro teams before the east coast in a particular sport...

[dbadefense1990]

So, if Seattle gets another NBA team, that will likely mean:

-The new Seattle team will claim the Sonics' history, which is "shared" with the Thunder, essentially making them the Sonics Jr.

-The Thunder are the Sonics Also and have been since they moved to Oklahoma City.

-The team that moves to Seattle will have their history in Seattle, but likely ignored by the new Seattle franchise, who has that team's original history, while also claiming/having the history of the original franchise that played in Seattle, which now plays in Oklahoma City and also has the history of the original franchise that played in Seattle.

Good job, Cleveland!!

New Seattle Sonics = New Winnipeg Jets

If we use the logic of the NFL in 1995...

new Seattle Sonics = Baltimore Ravens

OKC Thunder = Indianapolis Colts

Sacramento Kings = old departed Cleveland Browns

[dfwabel]

Even with a new facility, I am not sure how someone (or an ownership group) will see an quick ROI for both sports. That is just because the NBA used their "accounting" to illustrate that between 17 to 22 of the 30 teams are losing money. If the Kings relocate, but the Maloofs keep ownership, then it would be easier for the owner (Maloof) to become profitable because there is less debt incurred plus luxury seat money and the possibility of a larger TV contract. Even is a tech billionaire buys the team to move them, there will still be no ROI for years. Granted, it could be a tax advantage, but it would be best seen after they sell the team for a profit and thus, a capital gain.

On the NHL side, after the 2010 season, they "claimed" that 16 of the 30 teams lost money which is down from their pre-lockout claims (claims that the salary cap is still too high is one reason). WAS (teams and facility) is now under the full control of Ted Leonsis and Winnipeg bought a team and has TV money and guaranteed sellouts for four season, so I will take WAS off the list to leave 15 teams since there was also the relocation fee. DAL just got sold, but I don't know if any share of the AAC went to Cuban for him to have event control. I realize that NHL is much more dependent on attendance than the NBA, but the TV/new media money seems still more important to profitability.

I just think that an owner only makes money when they sell the team. The time and capital outlay spent is just to be part of a very exclusive club.

[Viper]

San Diego has a history with pro ice hockey that dates back to the 1940s. In fact, since 1944, major-pro (WHA) and minor-pro (PCHL, WHL, PHL, IHL, WCHL, ECHL) teams have taken to the ice in 35 seasons over 62 years. The 1950s and 1980s were basically the fallow periods.

San Diego Skyhawks - Pacific Coast Hockey League - 1944-45 through 1949-50

San Diego Gulls - Western Hockey League - 1966-67 through 1973-74

San Diego Mariners - World Hockey association - 1974-75 through 1976-77

San Diego Mariners - Pacific Hockey League - 1977-78

San Diego Hawks - Pacific Hockey League - 1978-79

San Diego Gulls - International Hockey League - 1990-91 through 1994-95

San Diego Gulls - West Coast Hockey League - 1995-96 through 2002-03

San Diego Gulls - ECHL - 2003-04 through 2005-06

Not exactly a ringing endorsement of bringing the NHL to SD...

Hell, they have bigger things to worry about in San Diego at this point, like keeping the Chargers from heading back to LA.

[Gothamite]

Once upon a time, a player named Oscar Robertson played for that franchise. You may have heard of him.

Ah, yes. The famous Milwaukee Buck.

[DG_ThenNowForever]

http://publicola.com/2012/02/15/late-afternoon-fizz-arena-announcement-expected-tomorrow/

Mayor Mike McGinn is expected to announce a deal to bring a new NBA arena to Seattle sometime tomorrow. The Sacramento Kings are viewed as the team most likely to move here, since the city of Sacramento is under a March 1 deadline to either come up with an arena proposal or lose the team. Seattle has been without an NBA team since 2008, when the Seattle Supersonics moved to Oklahoma.

From a sucky local news blog, but could be exciting. Our mayor is a total buffoon, however, so I'm cautiously optimistic.

[RedSox44]

http://publicola.com/2012/02/15/late-afternoon-fizz-arena-announcement-expected-tomorrow/

Mayor Mike McGinn is expected to announce a deal to bring a new NBA arena to Seattle sometime tomorrow. The Sacramento Kings are viewed as the team most likely to move here, since the city of Sacramento is under a March 1 deadline to either come up with an arena proposal or lose the team. Seattle has been without an NBA team since 2008, when the Seattle Supersonics moved to Oklahoma.

From a sucky local news blog, but could be exciting. Our mayor is a total buffoon, however, so I'm cautiously optimistic.

I'd prefer if this was coming from a (more) legit source, but exciting news nonetheless.

Sucks for Kings fans, though.

[DG_ThenNowForever]

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2017517805_hansen16m.html

Christopher Hansen, the wealthy San Francisco mystery man who wants to build a sports arena in Seattle to lure NBA and NHL teams, will unveil his proposal at a news conference Thursday, according to two city sources.

"We're very close to announcing our offer to the city. That's why I'm here," the 44-year-old hedge-fund manager said in a Wednesday interview with The Seattle Times, though he declined to discuss the timing He met with three Seattle City Council members Wednesday to talk briefly about his desire to bring an NBA franchise to Seattle.

Hansen told The Times he is only reluctantly stepping forward now because of the intense interest and speculation around his arena proposal, the details of which are still not known. The news conference is scheduled for 2 p.m.

But Hansen, speaking in self-effacing tones, did talk about his deep Seattle roots, his modest upbringing in the Rainier Valley and his desire to help a city where he still closely follows all the professional sports teams.

Check back soon for more details from the exclusive interview with Hansen.

[RedSox44]

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2017517805_hansen16m.html

Christopher Hansen, the wealthy San Francisco mystery man who wants to build a sports arena in Seattle to lure NBA and NHL teams, will unveil his proposal at a news conference Thursday, according to two city sources.

"We're very close to announcing our offer to the city. That's why I'm here," the 44-year-old hedge-fund manager said in a Wednesday interview with The Seattle Times, though he declined to discuss the timing He met with three Seattle City Council members Wednesday to talk briefly about his desire to bring an NBA franchise to Seattle.

Hansen told The Times he is only reluctantly stepping forward now because of the intense interest and speculation around his arena proposal, the details of which are still not known. The news conference is scheduled for 2 p.m.

But Hansen, speaking in self-effacing tones, did talk about his deep Seattle roots, his modest upbringing in the Rainier Valley and his desire to help a city where he still closely follows all the professional sports teams.

Check back soon for more details from the exclusive interview with Hansen.

In all seriousness, great, fantastic, phenomenal news.