Anaheim Kings?

[JH42XCC]

I honestly think the Kings should move to Vegas instead of Anaheim. That is, after seeing this article about a proposal for the city's $1.6 Billion multi-facility sports complex.

[The_Admiral]

With what money? Nobody has any money.

[IceCap]

This is the only option that makes sense.

[Sport]

Plus both "Kansas City Kings" and "KC Kings" sound really great.

[CubsFanBudMan]

That window seems to have closed. Had Vegas built that stadium 5 or so years ago when things were trending up there and the economy was better, I'll bet the Maloofs would have moved, or at least tried to. However, where would the Kings be now? The first Vegas pro success story? Or (more likely) facing a situation like Memphis and New Orleans, whose Grizzlies and Hornets are constantly mentioned as prime candidates to move again?

One note I saw in an LA Times piece put it in perspective for me:

In Orange County alone, the estimated population of more than 3 million dwarfs metropolitan areas such as Indianapolis (1.8 million), Milwaukee (1.5 million) and Oklahoma City (1.2 million) that are home to NBA teams.

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/mar/04/sports/la-sp-nba-kings-anaheim-20110305

The biggest cities may seem oversaturated, but they likely aren't. They have the people, media outlets and corporate dollars. Only the history works against them, but with time, winning and possibly an improved ability to draw stars, that can be overcome.

As I said before, this move will signal a significant shift in NBA strategy, but maybe it's one they need to do in this era. And it will be interesting to see how far it goes. Will San Jose be the second Bay Area team? Will Newark become the third New York area team? Is Chicago a possibility for a second? Who knows.

The Maloofs don't seem to be willing to wait for an arena to be built. And they aren't willing to sell. So the choices become limited. Interesting that older NHL buildings are suddenly in play. That means the number of cities willing to build new ones may be dwindling, especially if it did nothing for KC thus far.

[McCall]

That window seems to have closed. Had Vegas built that stadium 5 or so years ago when things were trending up there and the economy was better, I'll bet the Maloofs would have moved, or at least tried to. However, where would the Kings be now? The first Vegas pro success story? Or (more likely) facing a situation like Memphis and New Orleans, whose Grizzlies and Hornets are constantly mentioned as prime candidates to move again?

One note I saw in an LA Times piece put it in perspective for me:

In Orange County alone, the estimated population of more than 3 million dwarfs metropolitan areas such as Indianapolis (1.8 million), Milwaukee (1.5 million) and Oklahoma City (1.2 million) that are home to NBA teams.

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/mar/04/sports/la-sp-nba-kings-anaheim-20110305

The biggest cities may seem oversaturated, but they likely aren't. They have the people, media outlets and corporate dollars. Only the history works against them, but with time, winning and possibly an improved ability to draw stars, that can be overcome.

As I said before, this move will signal a significant shift in NBA strategy, but maybe it's one they need to do in this era. And it will be interesting to see how far it goes. Will San Jose be the second Bay Area team? Will Newark become the third New York area team? Is Chicago a possibility for a second? Who knows.

The Maloofs don't seem to be willing to wait for an arena to be built. And they aren't willing to sell. So the choices become limited. Interesting that older NHL buildings are suddenly in play. That means the number of cities willing to build new ones may be dwindling, especially if it did nothing for KC thus far.

Actually I don't think this move here signals anything. This is the first move in a very long time that has a team leaving a small market for a big market. The previous moves, Vancouver to Memphis, Charlotte to NOLA, Seattle to OKC, hell even back in the 80's with the Kings to Sacramento, were either large markets to small market, or mid-small markets to another small. And this is not the NBA moving the franchise. This is based solely on these particular owners who can't get a building and wanna be closer to their business base in Vegas, which they would prefer to go to, but is not a plausible option at this time. It's not as if the NBA is stepping in here saying move the Kings to the LA market.

[bosrs1]

This is the only option that makes sense.

Location wise, and because they have such a new arena, yes. But unfortunately AEG owns the KC arena, first. And if I'm not mistaken AEG and the Maloofs aren't exactly buddy buddy (nor is AEG potentially offering 100 million to the Kings). Second, KC is a smaller market than the OC on its own not even including the potential the Anaheim Douchebags would have drawing from both the Inland Empire and San Diego.

[IceCap]

Orange County may be a bigger market, but it's a taken market with two NBA teams. The Lakers are one of the league's flagships and the Clippers, though they lose, are entertaining. I really don't see much of a market share there for a bad and boring Kings team.

[The_Admiral]

Anyone who becomes an Anaheim Kings fan on the basis of "it's easier to drive there" or "there names got anaheim in it" will earn my lifelong ire.

[CubsFanBudMan]

That window seems to have closed. Had Vegas built that stadium 5 or so years ago when things were trending up there and the economy was better, I'll bet the Maloofs would have moved, or at least tried to. However, where would the Kings be now? The first Vegas pro success story? Or (more likely) facing a situation like Memphis and New Orleans, whose Grizzlies and Hornets are constantly mentioned as prime candidates to move again?

One note I saw in an LA Times piece put it in perspective for me:

In Orange County alone, the estimated population of more than 3 million dwarfs metropolitan areas such as Indianapolis (1.8 million), Milwaukee (1.5 million) and Oklahoma City (1.2 million) that are home to NBA teams.

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/mar/04/sports/la-sp-nba-kings-anaheim-20110305

The biggest cities may seem oversaturated, but they likely aren't. They have the people, media outlets and corporate dollars. Only the history works against them, but with time, winning and possibly an improved ability to draw stars, that can be overcome.

As I said before, this move will signal a significant shift in NBA strategy, but maybe it's one they need to do in this era. And it will be interesting to see how far it goes. Will San Jose be the second Bay Area team? Will Newark become the third New York area team? Is Chicago a possibility for a second? Who knows.

The Maloofs don't seem to be willing to wait for an arena to be built. And they aren't willing to sell. So the choices become limited. Interesting that older NHL buildings are suddenly in play. That means the number of cities willing to build new ones may be dwindling, especially if it did nothing for KC thus far.

Actually I don't think this move here signals anything. This is the first move in a very long time that has a team leaving a small market for a big market. The previous moves, Vancouver to Memphis, Charlotte to NOLA, Seattle to OKC, hell even back in the 80's with the Kings to Sacramento, were either large markets to small market, or mid-small markets to another small. And this is not the NBA moving the franchise. This is based solely on these particular owners who can't get a building and wanna be closer to their business base in Vegas, which they would prefer to go to, but is not a plausible option at this time. It's not as if the NBA is stepping in here saying move the Kings to the LA market.

You really don't think the NBA has been involved every step of the way? Stern even validated the rumors at the ASG. They may not be pulling the strings, but if they didn't want the Kings in Anaheim, we wouldn't be having this discussion. The next domino that's rumored to fall is San Jose. We'll just have to see, but it feels like a trend. And of that series of moves you mentioned, all but OKC are again on the wrong side of relocation rumors.

[Still MIGHTY]

Orange County may be a bigger market, but it's a taken market with two NBA teams. The Lakers are one of the league's flagships and the Clippers, though they lose, are entertaining. I really don't see much of a market share there for a bad and boring Kings team.

Exactly. It's not like OC just completely shunned the Lakers/Clippers or the NBA in general because they aren't from there, or because it was LA. They were our local options, if your parents weren't transplants (or if they were and you wanted to be a rebel or whatever).

It's not like it's going into a new market that hasn't been served by another team through actual marketing and media or whatever else. People in Orange County in general are Lakers fans or Clippers fans.

As an example, let's use St. Louis. A market that has other sports teams in it, but no NBA team. There is no truly close option. They aren't and haven't been served by the NBA (ABA is not being included. I know). I'm sure there are basketball fans in St. Louis, but they don't have a viable option for a "local" home team. In theory, they would take a new team as their own because they don't have other influences. It's not like the place is crawling with Bulls/Pacers/Grizzlies/Thunder fans.

OC on the other hand, by itself has no NBA team. But it is crawling with Lakers/Clippers fans.

Anyone who becomes an Anaheim Kings fan on the basis of "it's easier to drive there" or "there names got anaheim in it" will earn my lifelong ire.

I will preface this by saying they will be my second team because of them being an Anaheim team. Will I be die-hard? No. Will I root for them to beat the Lakers? No. Will I go to games or buy a road (or home if they keep up Sacto's stupidity) that says Anaheim on it? Yeah, only to support my home. (And because, I will honestly say I have not ever been to a Lakers game, because I will not pay $50+ for nosebleed seats against crap teams and $80+ for nosebleeds against good teams.)

But, if anyone I know drops the Lakers or Clippers or whatever team they currently support because of that reason, then I totally agree.

[ninersdd]

I know this is a little off topic, but didn't Anaheim a couple of years ago, not sell out some 1st round games against the Sharks(and they are in an affulent area)

[DG_ThenNowForever]

With what money? Nobody has any money.

And when you say "nobody has any money," you mean that no municipalities (excepting Glendale, even though it doesn't really) have money to build stadiums for rich old guys to help them make more money. That era in American history is over for now, and hopefully forever.

There is, however, plenty of consolidated wealth in rich old folks for people to build arenas wherever they damn well please. However, that era seemingly began and ended with Abe Pollin.

[Still MIGHTY]

I know this is a little off topic, but didn't Anaheim a couple of years ago, not sell out some 1st round games against the Sharks(and they are in an affulent area)

Yeah I just looked it up they didn't sell out Games 3 or 4 (they were 900 short in Game 3 and 300 short in Game 4), and they did sell out the deciding Game 6.

In the next round that year against the Red Wings, they did sell out all three games in Anaheim, and even sold 500 standing room seats for Game 4.

Obviously the Wings bring more people in than the Sharks, (although that shouldn't matter in the playoffs, and in your first match-up with an instate rival) but I don't know why those wouldn't sell out. The Ducks did make that late run, so maybe people didn't hop on the early playoff ticket sales. This was two years ago when the financial crisis was a little worse than now. But really, I don't know.

And again this is the NHL. If the Anaheim NBA team ever got into a playoff game with anybody (and with the state of the team, they'd most likely be playing a good team in the first place), I would think they'd sell out based on the NBA is more popular than the NHL.

[IceCap]

I know this is a little off topic, but didn't Anaheim a couple of years ago, not sell out some 1st round games against the Sharks(and they are in an affulent area)

That's a completely different sport, one in which Anaheim supports the area's second hockey team.

The Sacramento Kings would be the third wheel when it comes to basketball.

[CubsFanBudMan]

Someone referred to it as an expansion team. That seems accurate. It will take a while to build a fanbase, banking on an improved ability to attract free agents and simply winning. In the meantime, the corporate dollars and TV deals will take care of the short term.

I would not look down on someone in Anaheim for suddenly being a TV fan of the Lakers or Clippers and choosing to take his or her family of four to a game down the street for half the price and half the time spent in the car.

I've lived in multiple MLB cities, and just because I go to a local game and "root for the home team" (not passionately, but in a polite, golf clap kind of way) doesn't mean I'm less of a Cubs fan because I didn't travel across the country to see my team instead. (And I did that, too, unfortunately for my wallet.) Anaheim to L.A. is a much less extreme case, but I can appreciate anyone who values their time and money a little more these days. Comes with age, I suppose.

There was a time when I thought the Dodgers ran all of L.A., but now I think of the Angels in equal terms because of their success and support. No idea if that is accurate, just my outside perception.

I just think that as the Kings and the NBA are putting the puzzle pieces together, the numbers are still adding up to what they want. There are more factors to consider than existing teams, and the Clippers provide a unique situation by being content to make money directly in the shadow of the Lakers rather than create their own niche in OC. Does it make Anaheim less viable? Perhaps. But maybe the Clippers stay just as irrelevant despite Blake Griffin and the Kings are neck and neck with them for No. 2 before long.

Unfortunately, it's more complicated than "KC has a new arena, go there" or "Seattle has a better fanbase, go there."

EDIT: And coming up a few hundred short on first-round playoff games shouldn't be an indictment of a market. Ask the Atlanta Braves. (I've also heard that the first round is the hardest to sell in any sport because of the quick turnaround, lack of time for fans to plan their schedule around, and the hope/expectation of a second, third, etc. round.) Not trying to sound like an Anaheim supporter here, because I'd rather the Kings stay in Sacramento. Just find all of this very interesting, even if I am reading too much into it.

[IceCap]

Well my desire to see them go to KC isn't just based on the city having a ready to go rink. It also has to do with the city not having a NBA team (Orange County is part of a market that has two) as well as the city and the Kings having some prior history. Really, it seems like a move to KC is the least complicated option out there. It's only being made complicated by the Kings' owners who want to go to Anaheim simply so they have a shorter commute when they want to leave Vegas to attend the games.

You say it'll take a while to build a fanbase. Aside from the fact that this is the kind of thinking that's kept the Coyotes in Phoenix long after the point when they should have left, why go somewhere where you'll have to build a fanbase at all? KC offers a market with no NBA team. They would be it. Live in KC? Fan of NBA basketball? The Kings would be your team, no questions asked. Heck, they'd have the winter sports season all to themselves, as the city lacks an NHL team too. In Anaheim they have to build up a fanbase in a market who's fanbase is already split two ways.

admiral said it best. If you're a Lakers fan in OC you have fond memories of being a Lakers fan. If you're a Clippers fan then you're likely in for the long haul. Which is why the Kings will never surpass the Clippers as the number two team. The Clippers fans that are left aren't jumping ship (pardon the pun) now. There's not much room for a third fanbase.

[TBGKon]

Louisville? St. Louis? Anything but Anaheim Teams from Anaheim just don't feel legit.

Yea, 2 teams in different sports winning championships within the last 10 years doesn't feel legit at all.

Anaheim teams are surrounded by people who have a ton of disposable income, in (or very close to) one of the top 5 largest media markets in the US and are surrounded by some of the most prized real estate in the world (not to mention that the weather is a dream compared to almost everywhere else in the world)

If you were an owner of ANY professional sports team, you'd be a fool not to take advantage of an opportunity to get into Anaheim.

The market already has two NBA teams. Thus why a NBA team in Anaheim "doesn't feel legit."

True, but on the other hand the New York metro area has 3 NHL teams (Rangers, Isles, Devils)

[IceCap]

The Devils have historically struggled with attendance. Also, and this is just coming from observation, it seems like Newark is more then just a suburb of New York City. Orange County, on the other hand, is a clearly part of the LA metro area.

[crashcarson15]

Louisville? St. Louis? Anything but Anaheim Teams from Anaheim just don't feel legit.

Yea, 2 teams in different sports winning championships within the last 10 years doesn't feel legit at all.

Anaheim teams are surrounded by people who have a ton of disposable income, in (or very close to) one of the top 5 largest media markets in the US and are surrounded by some of the most prized real estate in the world (not to mention that the weather is a dream compared to almost everywhere else in the world)

If you were an owner of ANY professional sports team, you'd be a fool not to take advantage of an opportunity to get into Anaheim.

The market already has two NBA teams. Thus why a NBA team in Anaheim "doesn't feel legit."

True, but on the other hand the New York metro area has 3 NHL teams (Rangers, Isles, Devils)

And the Islanders are drawing about 10,400 a game this season.