Anaheim Kings?

[Gothamite]

I think a scenario in which the Ducks and Royals kill each other is more plausible than the Royals outlasting the Clippers.

An excellent point. Unlike the Angels, the Royals will be directly competing with the Ducks for the Anaheim corporate and fan dollars.

[loogodude90]

I think a scenario in which the Ducks and Royals kill each other is more plausible than the Royals outlasting the Clippers.

An excellent point. Unlike the Angels, the Royals will be directly competing with the Ducks for the Anaheim corporate and fan dollars.

I'm not too sure about that. I don't think the average NBA fan roots for the NBA and NHL interchangeably. It's apples and oranges. In DC, NHL fans and NBA fans are two pretty separate groups of fan types. Most Wizards fans don't seem to really like hockey, and most Capitals fans don't seem to like NBA, or even really seem to know that the Wizards exist. If the Wizards left DC, I wouldn't pay any more attention to the Capitals than I do right now (which isn't much).

[The_Admiral]

I think a scenario in which the Ducks and Royals kill each other is more plausible than the Royals outlasting the Clippers.

An excellent point. Unlike the Angels, the Royals will be directly competing with the Ducks for the Anaheim corporate and fan dollars.

And when the Maloofs go teats-up under this scenario, Samueli gets $100 million worth in equity out of his inevitably unpaid loan and gets to run both teams as a package deal.

[Eye]

I think a scenario in which the Ducks and Royals kill each other is more plausible than the Royals outlasting the Clippers.

An excellent point. Unlike the Angels, the Royals will be directly competing with the Ducks for the Anaheim corporate and fan dollars.

And when the Maloofs go teats-up under this scenario, Samueli gets $100 million worth in equity out of his inevitably unpaid loan and gets to run both teams as a package deal.

Great, so under this scenario a scumbag will get to run another team as a result of another scumbag's inability to run a team.

[BBTV]

Finally, suggesting that the Clippers somehow "made a bad situation worse" by moving to Staples is again ludicrous. How many times does it need to be explained that Sterling is getting the cheapest and most favorable lease in the NBA at Staples?

I've gone over this on other message boards. Even after explaining it the conversation goes on and people just repeat the exact same thing. For some reason they can't comprehend that the Clippers are doing fine. It doesn't matter how many times you say otherwise.

I don't think anyone is questioning the Clippers financial viability. It's well known that they're doing fine as far as the bottom line is concerned. It's just that their goal as an organization really isn't to compete nor gain (for lack of a better word) prestige, and that's why they're irrelevant and a joke to most fans. Even you guys can understand that.

As for a market with three teams, while I'm not sure this is the best way to do it, I really don't think that it can't be done. In any major market with multiple teams, there is usually one "marquee" team, and one or more "local" teams. Take NY. The Rangers are the glamor team, despite their relative lack of success. The Islanders will never be "New York's" team, and have more of a local fan base. Same with the Devils. Sometimes some teams get so big that it's hard for people to feel any kind of "connection" to them, so they gravitate to the less-ubiquitous local team. The same goes with NY basketball, Chicago baseball (the Cubs are clearly the marquee team there, with the Sox being more of a "South Side" thing (not exclusively, but certainly not the fan base of the Cubs.)

LA basketball is kind of funny. The Lakers are clearly the marquee team, and I think that there's certainly an opening for a local team (and that's what an Anaheim team would be. That's why Moreno changed the Angels name to "Los Angeles" - so that they could try to avoid being a local team.) I really don't know what niche the Clippers have, but I don't think that it's necessarily a guarantee that the market that the Royals will serve is already being served by the other teams - sure they're Laker fans, but don't discount the attraction of a team "in your backyard". If they market and brand it right, it could work.

[Gothamite]

I think you're confusing "regional" with "local". Regional refers to casting a very wide net for a fanbase, often crossing state borders. The Anaheim Royals will have to do just the opposite, hope there are enough fans for whom the name "Anaheim" will be enough to switch loyalties.

[IceCap]

I'm more convinced than ever that the Clippers don't have much of a fanbase so much as they have people who show up at their games for various reasons (the biggest ones these days being Blake Griffin and low prices). If the Kings show up in an actual rival location (that the Angels and Ducks already share), and field a decent to good team, they could easily surpass the Clippers very quickly.

And therein lies the crux of the issue. Barring some skillful and lucky drafting, the Kings/Royals will not field a decent to good team as long as the Maloofs own the franchise because, again, they cannot afford to sign top flight players.

-------------------------------------------------------

There's only one current example of a traditional "Big 4" league fielding 3 teams in a market-the NHL in New York. And New York has never been able to support all 3 teams adequately. With about 7 million extra people and teams with clearly delineated and theoretically sustainable geographic territories. I know hockey =/= basketball, but if you have trouble making that model work in New York, I just don't see a large enough coalition fan and corporate base organizing to make this a truly viable franchise long term in Los Angeles.

No you're right, without some real delineation long term between the franchises geographically 3 teams probably won't work long term in the LA region. However in that situation I don't think the Royals lose out. The Clippers do. Hell it's the main reason the Clippers have been so marginalized this past quarter century (beyond just fielding pitiful teams). They've got no identity geographically. And they made a bad situation worse when they moved into Staples. They're not LA's team (that's the Lakers), and unlike the Royals they're not the OC's team either.

The Clippers are, and irregardless of if the Royals happen, will remain an abberation. I mean who are Clippers fans? From what I've long read and heard even from Clippers fans, they're people who don't want to be Lakers fans... well how many people like that can there be in LA? Who in LA, the trendiest of towns who love winners, doesn't love the Lakers?

Two things.

First, the Clippers make tons of cash just by being tenants in the Staples Centre. They aren't moving anywhere.

Second of all, who are you counting on to form the Kings' fanbase in Anaheim? You keep asking "who are Clippers fans?" but you have yet to stop to ask yourself "who will be Anaheim Royals fans?" I'd wager most NBA fans in OC are Lakers fans. Who in their right mind will switch allegiances from the Lakers to the fricken Sacramento Kings of Anaheim? Sure, you'll get the over-zealous misguided OC partisans to switch, but I'm guessing they're a small, if vocal, minority in the OC sports fan landscape.

[BBTV]

I think you're confusing "regional" with "local". Regional refers to casting a very wide net for a fanbase, often crossing state borders. The Anaheim Royals will have to do just the opposite, hope there are enough fans for whom the name "Anaheim" will be enough to switch loyalties.

Yes, you are correct - I was using "local" and "regional" interchangeably, when they're really not synonyms. Clearly I meant "local".

[bosrs1]

I'm more convinced than ever that the Clippers don't have much of a fanbase so much as they have people who show up at their games for various reasons (the biggest ones these days being Blake Griffin and low prices). If the Kings show up in an actual rival location (that the Angels and Ducks already share), and field a decent to good team, they could easily surpass the Clippers very quickly.

And therein lies the crux of the issue. Barring some skillful and lucky drafting, the Kings/Royals will not field a decent to good team as long as the Maloofs own the franchise because, again, they cannot afford to sign top flight players.

-------------------------------------------------------

There's only one current example of a traditional "Big 4" league fielding 3 teams in a market-the NHL in New York. And New York has never been able to support all 3 teams adequately. With about 7 million extra people and teams with clearly delineated and theoretically sustainable geographic territories. I know hockey =/= basketball, but if you have trouble making that model work in New York, I just don't see a large enough coalition fan and corporate base organizing to make this a truly viable franchise long term in Los Angeles.

No you're right, without some real delineation long term between the franchises geographically 3 teams probably won't work long term in the LA region. However in that situation I don't think the Royals lose out. The Clippers do. Hell it's the main reason the Clippers have been so marginalized this past quarter century (beyond just fielding pitiful teams). They've got no identity geographically. And they made a bad situation worse when they moved into Staples. They're not LA's team (that's the Lakers), and unlike the Royals they're not the OC's team either.

The Clippers are, and irregardless of if the Royals happen, will remain an abberation. I mean who are Clippers fans? From what I've long read and heard even from Clippers fans, they're people who don't want to be Lakers fans... well how many people like that can there be in LA? Who in LA, the trendiest of towns who love winners, doesn't love the Lakers?

Two things.

First, the Clippers make tons of cash just by being tenants in the Staples Centre. They aren't moving anywhere.

Second of all, who are you counting on to form the Kings' fanbase in Anaheim? You keep asking "who are Clippers fans?" but you have yet to stop to ask yourself "who will be Anaheim Royals fans?" I'd wager most NBA fans in OC are Lakers fans. Who in their right mind will switch allegiances from the Lakers to the fricken Sacramento Kings of Anaheim? Sure, you'll get the over-zealous misguided OC partisans to switch, but I'm guessing they're a small, if vocal, minority in the OC sports fan landscape.

First, I know the Clippers are financially viable. No where in my comment did I question that. Their financial situation is not what I was referring to, rather I was and continue to refer to their lack of a recognizable fanbase due to having nothing setting them apart geographically. And on the court other than a few people whose attention has been garnered by Griffin they've never had anything.

[IceCap]

I'm more convinced than ever that the Clippers don't have much of a fanbase so much as they have people who show up at their games for various reasons (the biggest ones these days being Blake Griffin and low prices). If the Kings show up in an actual rival location (that the Angels and Ducks already share), and field a decent to good team, they could easily surpass the Clippers very quickly.

And therein lies the crux of the issue. Barring some skillful and lucky drafting, the Kings/Royals will not field a decent to good team as long as the Maloofs own the franchise because, again, they cannot afford to sign top flight players.

-------------------------------------------------------

There's only one current example of a traditional "Big 4" league fielding 3 teams in a market-the NHL in New York. And New York has never been able to support all 3 teams adequately. With about 7 million extra people and teams with clearly delineated and theoretically sustainable geographic territories. I know hockey =/= basketball, but if you have trouble making that model work in New York, I just don't see a large enough coalition fan and corporate base organizing to make this a truly viable franchise long term in Los Angeles.

No you're right, without some real delineation long term between the franchises geographically 3 teams probably won't work long term in the LA region. However in that situation I don't think the Royals lose out. The Clippers do. Hell it's the main reason the Clippers have been so marginalized this past quarter century (beyond just fielding pitiful teams). They've got no identity geographically. And they made a bad situation worse when they moved into Staples. They're not LA's team (that's the Lakers), and unlike the Royals they're not the OC's team either.

The Clippers are, and irregardless of if the Royals happen, will remain an abberation. I mean who are Clippers fans? From what I've long read and heard even from Clippers fans, they're people who don't want to be Lakers fans... well how many people like that can there be in LA? Who in LA, the trendiest of towns who love winners, doesn't love the Lakers?

Two things.

First, the Clippers make tons of cash just by being tenants in the Staples Centre. They aren't moving anywhere.

Second of all, who are you counting on to form the Kings' fanbase in Anaheim? You keep asking "who are Clippers fans?" but you have yet to stop to ask yourself "who will be Anaheim Royals fans?" I'd wager most NBA fans in OC are Lakers fans. Who in their right mind will switch allegiances from the Lakers to the fricken Sacramento Kings of Anaheim? Sure, you'll get the over-zealous misguided OC partisans to switch, but I'm guessing they're a small, if vocal, minority in the OC sports fan landscape.

First, I know the Clippers are financially viable. No where in my comment did I question that. Their financial situation is not what I was referring to, rather I was and continue to refer to their lack of a recognizable fanbase due to having nothing setting them apart geographically. And on the court other than a few people whose attention has been garnered by Griffin they've never had anything.

You claimed that the three team model won't work in LA, and that the Clippers, not the Royals, will lose out. The implication is that they'll be forced to move.

Well no, they wouldn't be forced to move. They make enough money to live comfortably as the Lakers' junior partner in LA. I'm guessing that most people who go to Clippers games aren't the OC crowd, but people who live closer to the city centre who have been priced out of Lakers tickets. So even if the Royals do manage to rally most of the OC sports crowd I don't see the Clippers taking a huge loss, attendance wise. They'll also be able to stay profitable thanks to their lease with the Staples Centre. So really, I don't see how the Clippers will lose out. They have a better team then the Kings. They have a more marketable marquee player then the Kings, who also keeps them relevant in the minds of most sports fans. They have a better relationship with corporate LA, having had thirty years to establish relationships. If the three team model doesn't work in LA, which I argue it won't, I don't see the Clippers losing out.

The only argument I've heard in the Kings/Royals' favour is that LA likes a winner, and that they could jump into the number two spot if they win. Well as rams80 has pointed out, the owners cannot afford to build a winning team. In the end, I maintain the allusions to the NHL sunbelt expansion are valid. Like that experiment, this one isn't based on anything tangible, but rather the potential of things to work out. That's not a solid base to build a franchise on.

[MadmanLA]

I think I know where bosrs1 is going as far what sets the Clippers and Lakers apart regionally in Southern California...from my own assessment as someone who has lived in L.A. most of my life, there's no denying that the Lakers have a huge fan following throughout Southern California, even as a Clipper fan, I can't and won't deny that, despite how much I loathe the Lakers and their fans (even moreso).

As far as where to find a good concentration of Clipper fans, a good part of the L.A. Westside (basically anywhere north of LAX) and then eastward toward Downtown and South Los Angeles (essentially the inner city), you'll find some Clippers fans. That pretty much goes back to the days of the Clippers playing at the Sports Arena; for a lot of people that around the Exposition Park/Coliseum area (almost entirely black and Latino), they were the neighborhood team. The rest of the area, without a doubt, is a huge concentration of Laker fans, especially in the South Bay area. The old (Great Western) Forum in Inglewood is within driving distance, whether by surface streets or highway, from other South Bay cities like Torrance, Hawthorne, Gardena, the Beach Cities (Hermosa, Manhattan, Redondo), El Segundo, and Lawndale. Owning to the fickle nature of the L.A. fans, and the Clippers' own historical ineptness, their fanbase numbers have gone up and down through the years, and certainly having Blake Griffin has helped trend those numbers upward.

[Brian in Boston]

It's more "is there enough corporate money to be spent in Anaheim" and "are they going to be able to attract enough fans in Anaheim willing to spend money to go to games and buy merchandise". Neither of which is as much a slam-dunk (if you'll permit me) as "(are) there are enough people".

Actually, to be more specific, it isn't simply about the corporate base of Anaheim or the number of fans living in Anaheim. To be most accurate, it is about targeting and landing both corporate and fan support throughout Orange County. Anaheim, Fullerton, Huntington Beach, Irvine, Newport Beach, Orange, Santa Ana and the rest of Orange County's municipalities are all in play. As a result, residents and corporations throughout the county - as well as in Northern San Diego County and nearby sections of Los Angeles, San Bernardino and Riverside Counties - would be targeted by management of the Anaheim Royals.

I can think of numerous Orange County-based corporate entities that would likely step-up and support an NBA franchise playing out of Anaheim: Allergan, Beckman Coulter, Behr Paint, Broadcom (clearly a "slam-dunk", given ownership of the arena), Core Logic, First American Financial, Ingram, PacSun, Standard Pacific Homes, Targus. And that's just for starters.

Again. I'm not saying that the Anaheim Royals would be the NBA's most profitable franchise. However, there is an opportunity for the Maloofs to do better in Anaheim - even as the third NBA team to enter the Greater Los Angeles-Orange County Metro Area - than they're currently doing in Sacramento.

[The_Admiral]

Do you know if the corporations you mentioned are already doing business with the Lakers and/or Clippers?

[Sodboy13]

I think a scenario in which the Ducks and Royals kill each other is more plausible than the Royals outlasting the Clippers.

An excellent point. Unlike the Angels, the Royals will be directly competing with the Ducks for the Anaheim corporate and fan dollars.

And when the Maloofs go teats-up under this scenario, Samueli gets $100 million worth in equity out of his inevitably unpaid loan and gets to run both teams as a package deal.

Great, so under this scenario a scumbag will get to run another team as a result of another scumbag's inability to run a team.

Only The Goddamned NH... hey, wait!

[Brian in Boston]

Do you know if the corporations you mentioned are already doing business with the Lakers and/or Clippers?

I don't know the details for the entire list.

I have close friends/clients who work in an executive capacity for at least four of the companies I've mentioned. In at least two cases, the companies don't currently do on-going business with either the Lakers or Clippers, but will inquire about establishing a relationship with the Kings/Royals for the same reason they currently do business with the Ducks: because the commute to events at Anaheim Arena isn't as off-putting as a trip to downtown LA, and they're inclined to support a fellow Orange County-based entity over an LA-based company when possible. Another of my friend's companies is planning to drop its current luxury-suite lease and group-ticket purchases with the Lakers in favor of partnering with the Kings/Royals on similar plans. The third firm will maintain some level of its current partnership with the Lakers, but will downsize said relationship and establish an additional partnership with the Kings/Royals.

Anecdotal, but an indication of what is certainly possible within the Orange County business community.

[Still MIGHTY]

See, as a Ducks fan, it's things like that that make me so readily acceptable to the Royals moving in.

They are going to add another ring of suites to the upper level of the Pond. Those suites are now more valuable with an NBA franchise. More corporations buy the suites because of NBA games and in turn makes them buy for the NHL games (and whatever other events). So more money is going to the Anaheim Arena Management and into the Ducks.

More corporate dollars brought in to the Pond and to the Ducks.

[CubsFanBudMan]

Here's a pretty good rundown of the situation in Q+A form by ESPN LA's Sam Amick:

http://sports.espn.go.com/los-angeles/nba/news/story?id=6270605

I don't think anyone posted that yet. The short version: "Follow the money."

[tp49]

Here's a pretty good rundown of the situation in Q+A form by ESPN LA's Sam Amick:

http://sports.espn.go.com/los-angeles/nba/news/story?id=6270605

I don't think anyone posted that yet. The short version: "Follow the money."

Here's a counterpoint from Marcos Breton of the Sac Bee whom I generally disagree with and usually don't read but he makes valid points in this piece from a few days ago.

http://www.sacbee.com/2011/03/27/3506318/marcos-breton-maloofs-deal-looks.html

[CubsFanBudMan]

Some very interesting stuff there, from the Sacramento perspective. Looks like the Maloofs are banking on a big TV deal. And it seems Samueli will be there to swoop in if "needed." He's keeping a lot of control, which should protect him and the Ducks.

(And maybe it's just me, but I wonder how long it will be before the Maloofs cry poor because of the "terrible" terms of the lease in Anaheim.)

[MadmanLA]

Some very interesting stuff there, from the Sacramento perspective. Looks like the Maloofs are banking on a big TV deal. And it seems Samueli will be there to swoop in if "needed." He's keeping a lot of control, which should protect him and the Ducks.

(And maybe it's just me, but I wonder how long it will be before the Maloofs cry poor because of the "terrible" terms of the lease in Anaheim.)

If anything initially, the Royals might get a local TV deal on par of what the Clippers currently get. I remember the Clippers' previous broadcast deals with KTLA and Prime Ticket, they were pulling in a combined $20 million a year (give a take a million), and their current deal with Prime Ticket is reportedly significantly larger than that deal; those numbers, as far as I can find, were never made public. It's almost a certainty that the Royals will ink a deal with Fox Sports West/Prime Ticket, but they still have to find to an over-the-air TV partner for those nights when any combination of the Lakers, Clips, Kings, Ducks, or college sports teams are playing.