Jump to content

Seattle Supersonics Resurrection


buckeye

Recommended Posts

Give us 6 new teams:

Seattle, Vancouver and Kansas City in the West.

Nashville, Tampa and maybe St.Louis in the East?

Tampa??? Uh no, maybe Louisville oh no wait Pittsburgh!!! Nashville? Eh idk on that as well Richmond might be a better fit or if Baltimore ever builds a new arena....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 137
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Please... just take the Pelicans.

Fixed. While Milwaukee still shouldn't have a NBA team, it is far more deserving than New Orleans.

Why is everybody(and by everybody, I mean this board) wanting to see the Pelicans off to Seattle? As long as Tom Benson is owning the team, they're staying right where they are. The best chance Seattle has of returning to the NBA is either getting the Bucks or an expansion. Even with the new commissioner and all, I don't see any scenario that results in a SuperSonics revival happening in the next several years(If it ever happens at all).

The reasoning behind that line of thinking is that OKC should have got the Hornets, but the NBA got sentimental and didn't want to add insult to Katrina. The Hornets didn't have great support before that, and with only a small portion of the city returning, there were valid questions on whether they could still support two pro teams. Anyone know if being Pelicans has made a difference yet? We don't get the attendance updates we used to.

Essentially, people who pine for that simply are trying to "fix" history. But now that Benson's involved, that's not going to happen.

Benson is 87, so while I hate to be grim, he's not going to live much longer.

Isn't his daughter poised and ready to take over the Saints and Pelicans when he's gone? I remember reading an ESPN magazine article about her two or three years ago that sounded like she was the next in line for the Benson family's teams.

Also, I have a feeling the Bucks'll be in Milwaukee as long as Kohl is alive. He's no longer in office, but he's still connected to people that are or want to be. While I certainly believe there's some major apathy towards the team, I wouldn't want to be known as someone who didn't stop the Bucks from moving, especially if I had a local or statewide election ahead of me. Maybe I'm just making a mountain out of a green and red molehill here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there another ownership group that could make a play for a team or expansion bid aside from Hansen's? Between the way he acted near the end of the Kings saga and his secret involvement in a plan to derail Sacramento's arena plans I have to think he's burned some bridges among the NBA's leadership.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the Vancouver front, I'm really not sure there's room in the sports market here for the NBA, at least not at the ticket prices that the team may need to charge to be viable. This is a great Canucks town, but it's not that awesome a general sports town, the Lions and Whitecaps don't sell out on a regular basis yet, even with much of the dome tarped off for soccer. Plus, our dollar is trending downward again.

I'd really rather see Seattle get a team back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there another ownership group that could make a play for a team or expansion bid aside from Hansen's? Between the way he acted near the end of the Kings saga and his secret involvement in a plan to derail Sacramento's arena plans I have to think he's burned some bridges among the NBA's leadership.

If there was another group besides Hansen's, perhaps the Sonics don't move to OKC in the first place. Nobody else has stepped up with any serious plan.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there another ownership group that could make a play for a team or expansion bid aside from Hansen's? Between the way he acted near the end of the Kings saga and his secret involvement in a plan to derail Sacramento's arena plans I have to think he's burned some bridges among the NBA's leadership.

His money is green, that's all they care about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the Vancouver front, I'm really not sure there's room in the sports market here for the NBA, at least not at the ticket prices that the team may need to charge to be viable. This is a great Canucks town, but it's not that awesome a general sports town, the Lions and Whitecaps don't sell out on a regular basis yet, even with much of the dome tarped off for soccer. Plus, our dollar is trending downward again.

I'd really rather see Seattle get a team back.

Isn't there a large minority/immigrant population in vancouver? Seems that would be a good base for support.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there another ownership group that could make a play for a team or expansion bid aside from Hansen's? Between the way he acted near the end of the Kings saga and his secret involvement in a plan to derail Sacramento's arena plans I have to think he's burned some bridges among the NBA's leadership.

Flash enough cash and I'm sure the NBA poobahs would say, "Bridges? What bridges?"

cv2TCLZ.png


"I secretly hope people like that hydroplane into a wall." - Dennis "Big Sexy" Ittner

POTD - 7/3/14

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bear in mind, though, that the NBA turned down the move to Anaheim because of how it would backdoor the Samuelis into ownership, ostensibly a precedent for predatory lending--->equity that they did not wish to set. Money isn't everything. And let's not forget how much money Hansen offered for the Kings. he still got turned down.

♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's room for Seattle, but not a second team, unless you want to give Vancouver another whirl (I don't, really). I can't stress enough what a mistake it was to get Oklahoma City at the expense of Seattle rather than New Orleans. I think a lot about how cool the Durant/Westbrook team would be as the Seattle Supersonics. I wonder how much of that same sort of positive, team-first attitude and symbiotic city/team relationship would be in Seattle vis-a-vis the place where they are now. I should like to think around 87.5%.

What gets me is seeing "New York vs Oklahoma City", or "Chicago vs Oklahoma City", or "Los Angeles vs Oklahoma City", etc. It just does't belong in the same sentence let alone box score as most other cities, and reduces the credibility of the league, which has taken lots of hits on other fronts lately.

I could say the same about many other cities, but most have been around for so long that they're "accepted" as "big league", and also you have to have team to have a league, so you need to have teams located in smaller places, but the line needs to be drawn somewhere. New Orleans would be the next most obvious offender, but again the perception is that it's a big league town, even though market size and economics would say otherwise.

"The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stern's NBA loved building teams in tier 2 markets like San Antonio, Sacramento and, yes, OKC. It makes sense to be the biggest game in town, especially when you're trying to sell out 41 home games a year in a league where half the teams are garbage. I don't know if Silver will keep that model or what.

The NBA said no to Seattle because having a subsidized arena in Sacramento is more valuable to them than a one-time cash dump from Chris Hansen. There will be other bones to pick at soon enough though, so it's not like Seattle is off the table indefinitely. The team left in 2008 and I wouldn't be surprised if it took a decade to come back.

1 hour ago, ShutUpLutz! said:

and the drunken doodoobags jumping off the tops of SUV's/vans/RV's onto tables because, oh yeah, they are drunken drug abusing doodoobags

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't imagine expansion happening anytime soon, there are already too many poor teams devoid of talent.


Well if the NBA did not have 5-6 teams with all the talent cause of "big market", this would not be a issue.

This is dumb, small-market sports talk radio nonsense. The four best teams in the NBA are Indiana, Oklahoma City, San Antonio and Miami. There is seemingly zero correlation right now between market-size and competitive imbalance. I can't believe people still think New York and Los Angeles are the reason the Bucks and Jazz stink.

Top Television Markets in the U.S.

1 - New York City

19-30 (Knicks)

21-25 (Nets)

2 - Los Angeles

34-18 (Clippers) *good team, longshot contender

17-32 (Lakers)

3 - Chicago

24-24 (Bulls)

4 - Philadelphia

15-35 (Sixers)

5 - Dallas

29-21 (Mavericks) *solid, not a contender

6 - Bay Area

29-20 (Warriors) *solid, not a contender

7 - Boston

17-33 (Celtics)

8 - Atlanta

25-23 (Hawks)

9 - Washington DC

24-24 (Wizards)

10 - Houston

33-17 (Rockets) *good team, longshot contender

11 - Detroit

19-29 (Pistons)

12 - Phoenix

29-20 (Suns) *solid, not a contender

15 - Minneapolis

24-25 (Wolves)

16 - Miami

35-13 (Heat) *two-time defending champs, three straight finals appearances, in a mid-size market

17 - Cleveland

16-33 (Cavs)

18 - Denver

24-23 (Nuggets)

19 - Orlando

14-37 (Magic)

20 - Sacramento

17-32 (Kings)

22 - Portland

35-15 (Blazers) *good team, longshot contender

24 - Charlotte

22-28 (Bobcats)

25 - Indianapolis

38-10 (Pacers) *contender

33 - Salt Lake City

16-32 (Jazz)

35 - Milwaukee

9-40 (Bucks)

37 - San Antonio

36-13 (Spurs) *contender

45 - Oklahoma City

40-11 (Thunder) *contender

48 - Memphis

26-22 (Grizzlies) *solid, not a contender

53 - New Orleans

21-27 (Pelicans)

Didn't include Toronto, but they'd be in the top 10 if they were in the US, and the Raptors are 3 games above .500

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's room for Seattle, but not a second team, unless you want to give Vancouver another whirl (I don't, really). I can't stress enough what a mistake it was to get Oklahoma City at the expense of Seattle rather than New Orleans. I think a lot about how cool the Durant/Westbrook team would be as the Seattle Supersonics. I wonder how much of that same sort of positive, team-first attitude and symbiotic city/team relationship would be in Seattle vis-a-vis the place where they are now. I should like to think around 87.5%.

What gets me is seeing "New York vs Oklahoma City", or "Chicago vs Oklahoma City", or "Los Angeles vs Oklahoma City", etc. It just does't belong in the same sentence let alone box score as most other cities, and reduces the credibility of the league, which has taken lots of hits on other fronts lately.

No wonder you were so against the NHL going back to Winnipeg.

Do fans in Oklahoma City support the team financially? Yes? Ok. Do the economics of Oklahoma City allow them to compete, financially, with the rest of the league? Yes? Ok then. I don't see a problem with the market,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The NBA is unique in that it has so many awful teams that appear to have no hope whatsoever, and that's with a salary cap, which is supposed to be helping these "small market" teams. The last thing the league needs is expansion, so if the Sonics come back, it should be by relocation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Teams aren't supposed to exist in "fly over states", apparently. Only on one of the coasts.

Colin Cowherd, is that you posting in McCall's absence?

MofnV2z.png

The CCSLC's resident Geelong Cats fan.

Viva La Vida or Death And All His Friends. Sounds like something from a Rocky & Bullwinkle story arc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.