Oklahoma City . . . Sonics?

[The_Admiral]

This is the best news for New Orleans, who need their franchise more than Seattle does.

no

[gosioux76]

Interesting. Apparently a group from San Jose wanted to buy the team for more money but the currenyt ownership group turned the deal down.

(Owner Howard) Schultz said the team turned down higher offers from other bidders who were transparent in their desire to move the team because, he said, the Basketball Club of Seattle wanted to keep the franchise in the Puget Sound area.

Though (team president Wally) Walker would not identify those bidders, a report in The Oklahoman said Larry Ellison offered $425 million and wanted to move the team to San Jose, Calif. That report could not be confirmed.

http://news.bellinghamherald.com/apps/pbcs.../607180356/1004

A proposal like this baffles me, but only because I certainly don't understand the demographics of the Bay Area.

I'm sure Oakland and San Jose are a good hike away from each other, but, to me, this would still be like putting a team in St. Paul or Fort Worth. And it makes even less sense when you consider there's another team in Sacramento and two more in L.A.

Maybe the market's big enough to absorb it, but it just seems like a bit too much.

[rebelx]

Even though I'm not from Seattle, there's something I've always liked about the Sonics. They've been by-and-large successful (.535 winning percentage over their history, three finals appearances, one championship), they've had some very good players throughout their history (with Payton being the best, of course), and I think they deserve to be in Seattle. Besides, Seattle is an awesome city. It's the only place in the U.S. that can make rain seem glamorous. I'm dead serious when I say that I like the idea of keeping the Sonics where they are enough to try to do something about it.

I wonder if it would do any good to petition the owners to make every effort to keep the team in the Seattle metro area, including exploring all options in the surrounding cities like Redmond, Renton, or Bellevue (I hope some of those cities actually are interested). I'm thinking I might actually be the one to create such a petition. Jdub, you seem to be pretty passionate about all of this. Would you be interested in helping me start a petition, by any chance?

[Jimmy!]

...Payton was great in his hey day, and I'm glad he finally got a ring. But fans had a love/hate relationship with the guy. Ray Allen is, by far, the Sonic Favorite Son, and the thought of him playing in OKC angers me. One of my best memories is taking my oldest son to see the Blazers/Sonics courtside. He was so enamoured by the whole experience, and when the ref let him hold the ball, one of the Sonic girls asked him to dance, and Brent Barry gave him a thumbs up, it was arguably one of the best days of his life. For that reason alone, I'd want the Sups to stay.

Ok, I've digressed enough. Yes, ownership has said they'd express every option over the next 12 months. Let's hope they consider Renton. The city certainly has the space.

Reb, I'd certainly be open to explore that possibility.

[BloodAtFirstBite]

Interesting. Apparently a group from San Jose wanted to buy the team for more money but the currenyt ownership group turned the deal down.

(Owner Howard) Schultz said the team turned down higher offers from other bidders who were transparent in their desire to move the team because, he said, the Basketball Club of Seattle wanted to keep the franchise in the Puget Sound area.

Though (team president Wally) Walker would not identify those bidders, a report in The Oklahoman said Larry Ellison offered $425 million and wanted to move the team to San Jose, Calif. That report could not be confirmed.

http://news.bellinghamherald.com/apps/pbcs.../607180356/1004

A proposal like this baffles me, but only because I certainly don't understand the demographics of the Bay Area.

I'm sure Oakland and San Jose are a good hike away from each other, but, to me, this would still be like putting a team in St. Paul or Fort Worth. And it makes even less sense when you consider there's another team in Sacramento and two more in L.A.

Maybe the market's big enough to absorb it, but it just seems like a bit too much.

Oakland and San Jose are only about 40 miles apart. No way the Bay area could support 2 NBA teams and 80 miles up the road we have the Sacramento Kings.

[seattlefan68]

Sorry to bump this inactive thread, but I care about this.

Even if the city were to get a new team after a supposed move, it wouldn't be the same as this team. The current team has a lot of potential to be good and I don't think it would be the same with an expansion team.

Last week, the owner, Clay Bennett, said that KeyArena isn't fit to house the team and that a state of the art facility needed to be built. This is after he toured Safeco Field. Personally, I don't think Bennett has very much intenetion to keep the team in the area and that he'll make it look like there was a genuine effort to keep the team here that failed. It sounds like the governor has FINALLY put her support behind the team staying here but I don't know about it.

It's a complicated issue, because Seattle has already paid for the aforementioned Safeco and Qwest Fields. I don't understand why it's better for the team to be in the 48th largest market in the US rather than the 15th. I have a feeling that if the team stays in the area, it will be in Bellevue or Renton rather than Seattle.

[OMMF]

It's a complicated issue, because Seattle has already paid for the aforementioned Safeco and Qwest Fields.

Against a vote of the people each time, I might add. Also, Qwest Field was paid for by the state, not just the city.

[statebully]

wasn't key arena just built back in the mid - late 90's?

[bullsfan4life]

wasn't key arena just built back in the mid - late 90's?

It was renovated in 1994 but its been up since 1962.

[DG_ThenNowForever]

As a soon-to-be resident of Seattle, I'll throw in my two cents. I know nothing about the local politics, but I'm against public funding of stadiums across the board. I have yet to hear about a city recouping the money in poors into stadiums and I hate the fact that fans not only subsidize the owner's lease, but also pay outrageous ticket prices to see the product.

I hope the Sonics don't move, because I consider them to be a cornerstone franchise in the NBA for above-mentioned reasons. I only plan on living in the Emerald City for two years, so I don't have to worry about pro basketball leaving while I'm there. However, a lame duck franchise is a sad story all the way around and I think a community that has supported a winning team for 40 years deserves better than what they're getting.

[rebelx]

According to something I read on ESPN (it might have been written by Mark Kreidler of the Sacramento Bee), some of Howard Schultz's co-investors actually wanted to keep going with the venture instead of selling the team. I just wish he had listened to them...

[FiddySicks]

Interesting. Apparently a group from San Jose wanted to buy the team for more money but the currenyt ownership group turned the deal down.

(Owner Howard) Schultz said the team turned down higher offers from other bidders who were transparent in their desire to move the team because, he said, the Basketball Club of Seattle wanted to keep the franchise in the Puget Sound area.

Though (team president Wally) Walker would not identify those bidders, a report in The Oklahoman said Larry Ellison offered $425 million and wanted to move the team to San Jose, Calif. That report could not be confirmed.

http://news.bellinghamherald.com/apps/pbcs.../607180356/1004

A proposal like this baffles me, but only because I certainly don't understand the demographics of the Bay Area.

I'm sure Oakland and San Jose are a good hike away from each other, but, to me, this would still be like putting a team in St. Paul or Fort Worth. And it makes even less sense when you consider there's another team in Sacramento and two more in L.A.

Maybe the market's big enough to absorb it, but it just seems like a bit too much.

Oakland and San Jose are only about 40 miles apart. No way the Bay area could support 2 NBA teams and 80 miles up the road we have the Sacramento Kings.

Are you kidding me? If theres any area that can support multiple sports teams that dont already have them, the bay area is the place. Look at SJs support of the Sharks, I doubt theyd have any issue supporting an NBA team. Although I will say San Fran would probably work better than SJ.

[DG_ThenNowForever]

Are you kidding me? If theres any area that can support multiple sports teams that dont already have them, the bay area is the place. Look at SJs support of the Sharks, I doubt theyd have any issue supporting an NBA team. Although I will say San Fran would probably work better than SJ.

You think so? The A's have been threatening to move for a while now, and the you can never trust Al Davis with the Raiders. I don't know about Oakland's long-term viability as a professional market. The Warriors are 15-minute trip from SF, traditionally belonged to San Francisco, and I just can't see SF/Oakland needing or supporting two NBA teams.

I can't speak to San Jose, but that'd be three teams within an hour and a half from one another. That's basically the same situation with New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia, but at those cities have the necessary population to support those teams. Can NoCal handle all of that?

Dunno.

[nwtrailtrekker]

So, does this mean the Seattle Hornets will be showing up in 2007?

try the Seattle TrailBlazers

[FiddySicks]

Are you kidding me? If theres any area that can support multiple sports teams that dont already have them, the bay area is the place. Look at SJs support of the Sharks, I doubt theyd have any issue supporting an NBA team. Although I will say San Fran would probably work better than SJ.

You think so? The A's have been threatening to move for a while now, and the you can never trust Al Davis with the Raiders. I don't know about Oakland's long-term viability as a professional market. The Warriors are 15-minute trip from SF, traditionally belonged to San Francisco, and I just can't see SF/Oakland needing or supporting two NBA teams.

I can't speak to San Jose, but that'd be three teams within an hour and a half from one another. That's basically the same situation with New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia, but at those cities have the necessary population to support those teams. Can NoCal handle all of that?

Dunno.

Personally I think the Bay Area would accept another basketball team with open arms. And the thing with the A's is that theyve been threatening to move, but I think it has more to do with them not getting the funding form the city for a new ballpark, and theyd move, but would remain within the Bay Area. And yeah, cant trust Davis. And ill admit, theres some bias on my side, but I feel that San Jose would be a perfect spot for another franchise. But hey, I also feel that Sacramento is a perfect spot for an MLB team.

[seattlefan68]

Also, why do owners mess with Seattle fans so much? There was the Pilots fiasco, the whole move the Seahawks to Anaheim overnight deal, threats to move the Mariners to Tampa Bay and now this. Leave Seattle alone.

Also, I knew that both the Safeco Field and Qwest Field bills were shot down and at least one was paid by the state, I just failed to mention it.

[Original6]

No local ownership for a team sucks. The owner can pick up and move anytime they want. This guy who owns the sonics right now has been trying to get a pro team in OKC for years. It definitely does not look good for the Sonics.

[The_Admiral]

Having NBA teams in Oakland, Sacramento, AND San Jose is oversaturation, even though I've never actually seen a Golden State Warriors fan.

[zoraK]

Are you kidding me? If theres any area that can support multiple sports teams that dont already have them, the bay area is the place. Look at SJs support of the Sharks, I doubt theyd have any issue supporting an NBA team. Although I will say San Fran would probably work better than SJ.

Isn't six pro teams in four leagues enough for you Bay Area folk? Spread the love around.

[Original6]

I hate relocation that is based on "Potential" sports used to be about pride at one time! Now it is basically all about money (not just being able to make profit, but greed), and character cities like Seattle/Pittsburgh may be getting screwed. I've already seen one team go that has been in a city for 35+ years (in the expos) and I don't know about you guys, but I am getting fed up with all these small to average market teams being in threat to lose their franchises.