Conrad.

2012-13 NBA Logo & Uniform changes

Recommended Posts

The Rochester/Cincinnati/Kansas City/Sacremento Royals/Kings pre-date the NBA.

They should keep the Kings name. It would be a shame to see that lineage just disappear just so the team can pretend to be the Super Sonics.

The team is more the city's than the owner's regardless of what a piece of paper says. Owners come and go while the fans remain for year after year. It's ludicrous to think that OKC has anything to do with 40 years of history in Seattle, really insane. If fact it's beyond me why it's even being argued.

It's not just about owners, it's about franchises, organizations, legal entities. The entity that was the Seattle SuperSonics left town. The team that won the 1979 NBA Championship, if you follow the lineage of players, coaches, etc..., is now in Oklahoma City. Did Oklahoma City have anything to do with the franchise while it was in Seattle? No. The team that played in Seattle for all those years, however, is in Oklahoma City now, for better or worse.

You know what I find insane? That you could take a team like the Sacramento Kings, a team that's been around since before the existence of the league they play in, and strip of them of the identity they've had for decades upon decades and then pretend like they're the same team that won the 1979 NBA Championship. The level of disconnect one has to have from reality to pull that off mentally is astounding.

As for who owns a team? The owners do. Unless it's the Green Bay Packers the notion that a fanbase or community owns a team is naive at best and delusional at worst. You want to belittle "what a piece of paper says"? Again, that's either naive or delusional. Take the Seattle Sounders to court. Claim that as a fan and member of the community you have "ownership" of the team and thus deserve a portion of the revenue they generate. Go ahead and make that claim, and see how far you get. I'll honestly be amazed if you manage to find a lawyer willing to take that case. Not to mention it even going to court.

The Seattle SuperSonics are Seattle's team.

No. They were a basketball team that played in Seattle. Seattle didn't own them. The team now uses a different name, in a different city, but it's still the same franchise, the same organization, the same entity.

The Kings are Sacramento's. It's really not that difficult people.

They are? What about Rochester? Cincinnati? Omaha? Kansas City? See, this is where the whole "teams belong to the community!" argument falls flat. The Kings' franchise lineage is nothing to scoff at. They pre-date the NBA, and they have two league championships to their name. One NBA Championship and one NBL Championship. In fact they're one of only three current NBA teams that has a NBL Championship to their name. The other two are the Detroit Pistons and the Los Angeles Lakers. Not bad company to keep. They were founded in 1945, and adopted the Royals name in 1947. Since then they've kept the royal themed identity, changing from Royals to Kings when they moved to Kansas City. It's a lineage with a lot to it.

Yet if you had to peg it to a single city you couldn't. They won their NBL and NBA Championships in Rochester, but they've spent more time in Sacramento then any of their other previous locations. So basically you can't say the Kings "belong" to any one city. They've literally travelled from coast to coast. You could put them anywhere, really, and it wouldn't be a betrayal of the team's legacy. So if the Kings don't "belong" to any one city who does their legacy belong to? Well to themselves. The team owns it, and thus whoever owns the team owns it. Not any single city they've played in, but the team. The communities they've played in, they were just along for the ride. They didn't own a single G-ddamn thing about the team.

Which is my point across the board, really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would love to see them as the Sonics but adopt the Seattle template colors that the Sounders and Seahawks have.

I was thinking that too. A double green (forest/neon) with navy would be really cool IMO.

Green and yellow is cool just a bit too lemon lime ish. But then again I'm sure Seattle fans love it so idk.

Well, I tried doing a quick mock-up of what the Seahawks colours would look like (although I'm absolutely certain somebody could do a better job than me):

avjxv7.png

Meh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel bad for Sacramento fans, but it will be great for us to have the Supersonics back. Seattle Kings, meh. Yea there's argument that it should be that way and our city fits the name, but we want our Sonics back so badly. To me, the Seattle Kings would be like the Washington Expos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I'm on the side of leaving history to the cities. No one in that building is going to care what the Rochester Royals won. They care what the original Sonics won. To me sports is ultimately about the culture of it, and that's based on geography, not team name. The current Kings get their fans from their city, not from people who've followed them since their Kansas City days. They're not going to follow their team to Seattle; instead, they will actively hate it.

I do wish that expansion could be used to placate screwed-over fanbases, but I think that the NBA is at a point where further expansion won't be happening any time soon. No doubt more markets could support NBA teams, but there's not enough pro-level talent to go around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I'm on the side of leaving history to the cities.

Then who gets the Kings' history? Or the Rams' history for that matter? What city has a rightful claim on the football Cardinals' history? Fans in Indianapolis may or may not care what the team did while in Baltimore but to say that, after twenty-nine years, they don't care about the Colts and their history is asinine.

I actually just checked out the histories of all current NBA teams. The Sacramento Kings are the second oldest team in the league, behind only the Detroit Pistons. That only amplifies my point. Wiping away that history so the team can pretend they're a team they're not in the name of short-sighted nostalgia is insulting to the historical record of the game of basketball.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its pretty simple these entities are really not something tangible their intangible you can't grab a team & hold it.

With that being said Sacramento's fan base holds their lineage because they care if there is anyone left that followed or cares about Rochester they get to keep what they remember & so on & so on.

This discussion is about emotions & feelings because thats what makes a team if not enough people care about it then the teams will cease to exist ask the UFL & many other defunct leagues & teams.

Bottom line is if Seattle gets their Sonics back then it is their team & they will remember the 1979 title because it was a part of the Seattle franchise they remember.

It is not changing history the championship was won for the Seattle SuperSonics not anyone else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#OITGDNBA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the name/colors/uniforms should stay with the original city and fanbase. They are the ones who supported it, wore it, and still continue to support it even though the team is gone.

No way to please everyone though. Some look at teams as family trees / bloodlines. I say keep the records in the original city. So when the Jets moved to Phoenix, history stayed in Winnipeg...when the Jets came back leading scorer isn't Kovalchuk, it's Hull. Meanwhile, Thrashers lay dormant, Kovalchuk is still the leading scorer in Atlanta. Phoenix established their own history and records. This would make history / timeline purists cringe, but it keeps you from having the mess where Kovalchuk is the leading scorer for the Winnipeg Jets having never worn that teams sweater, and Hull is the Coyotes leading scorer, having never played a minute in Phoenix.

Is it factually correct to do this? No. But it is much easier to say the Browns went on pause, Ravens started up, then to try to wrap you head around mixing records and histories when teams return.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the name/colors/uniforms should stay with the original city and fanbase. They are the ones who supported it, wore it, and still continue to support it even though the team is gone.

No way to please everyone though. Some look at teams as family trees / bloodlines. I say keep the records in the original city. So when the Jets moved to Phoenix, history stayed in Winnipeg...when the Jets came back leading scorer isn't Kovalchuk, it's Hull. Meanwhile, Thrashers lay dormant, Kovalchuk is still the leading scorer in Atlanta. Phoenix established their own history and records. This would make history / timeline purists cringe, but it keeps you from having the mess where Kovalchuk is the leading scorer for the Winnipeg Jets having never worn that teams sweater, and Hull is the Coyotes leading scorer, having never played a minute in Phoenix.

Is it factually correct to do this? No. But it is much easier to say the Browns went on pause, Ravens started up, then to try to wrap you head around mixing records and histories when teams return.

Very well written. I agree 100 percent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know Kings was used by the soon to be previous team in Sacramento, and probably shouldn't be used in Seattle, but I think it fits the city well. Look. Seattle had the King Dome. Seattle is in King County, so wouldn't it kind of be an appropriate name to call them the Kings?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So when the Jets moved to Phoenix, history stayed in Winnipeg...when the Jets came back leading scorer isn't Kovalchuk, it's Hull.

Actually, Phoenix does recognize their time in Winnipeg. Steen and Hull are both on the team's "Ring of Honor".

How foolish would it be for the Jets 2.0 to recognize Shane Doan's stats with the Jets 1.0, despite Doan having never been traded or signed by another team?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still think cities can honor the history of their previous teams without pretending that their new team is the same one. The St. Louis Rams honor NFL Cardinals, and it sounds like the new Winnipeg Jets are doing it right.

Honor the actual franchise and the memories of the city. There's a way to do it without playing make-believe. This all might be moot if a "Sacramento deal" comes out of this. The NBA has a lot fewer unstable franchises than just a few years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How foolish would it be for the Jets 2.0 to recognize Shane Doan's stats with the Jets 1.0, despite Doan having never been traded or signed by another team?

Quite foolish, considering he only played like one season with the original Jets. He spent more years of his career bitching about Winnipeg than being in Winnipeg.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could the Sonics be the first team to have two separate histories? Baring some suing in Sacramento, they'll literally own the histories to both clubs.

Sonics banners still hang in the Key arena.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the name/colors/uniforms should stay with the original city and fanbase. They are the ones who supported it, wore it, and still continue to support it even though the team is gone.

No way to please everyone though. Some look at teams as family trees / bloodlines. I say keep the records in the original city. So when the Jets moved to Phoenix, history stayed in Winnipeg...when the Jets came back leading scorer isn't Kovalchuk, it's Hull. Meanwhile, Thrashers lay dormant, Kovalchuk is still the leading scorer in Atlanta. Phoenix established their own history and records. This would make history / timeline purists cringe, but it keeps you from having the mess where Kovalchuk is the leading scorer for the Winnipeg Jets having never worn that teams sweater, and Hull is the Coyotes leading scorer, having never played a minute in Phoenix.

Is it factually correct to do this? No. But it is much easier to say the Browns went on pause, Ravens started up, then to try to wrap you head around mixing records and histories when teams return.

That's easier? Really? Easier to "wrap your head" around the Browns "pausing" while most of their players move to an "expansion" Ravens team?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, I think the Kings should move to Chicago. Makes the most sense.

It's where the Latin Kings gang originates.

NBA wants to sell merch, right?

Dead horse, beaten.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So when the Jets moved to Phoenix, history stayed in Winnipeg...when the Jets came back leading scorer isn't Kovalchuk, it's Hull.

Actually, Phoenix does recognize their time in Winnipeg. Steen and Hull are both on the team's "Ring of Honor".

How foolish would it be for the Jets 2.0 to recognize Shane Doan's stats with the Jets 1.0, despite Doan having never been traded or signed by another team?

I was saying that as a scenario, not what really happened.

In this scenario, Doan's stats with Winnipeg 1.0 would stay in Winnipeg, and would start over fresh with Phoenix. I don't see this as any more ridiculous than having Ilya Kovalchuk as the leading scorer of Winnipeg 2.0.

It robs the fans of their history. Who would Winnipeg fans rather see honored after they retire...leading scorer Ilya Kovalchuk or Shane Doan?

People have to stop treating sports teams as bloodlines. This isn't the royal family.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the name/colors/uniforms should stay with the original city and fanbase. They are the ones who supported it, wore it, and still continue to support it even though the team is gone.

No way to please everyone though. Some look at teams as family trees / bloodlines. I say keep the records in the original city. So when the Jets moved to Phoenix, history stayed in Winnipeg...when the Jets came back leading scorer isn't Kovalchuk, it's Hull. Meanwhile, Thrashers lay dormant, Kovalchuk is still the leading scorer in Atlanta. Phoenix established their own history and records. This would make history / timeline purists cringe, but it keeps you from having the mess where Kovalchuk is the leading scorer for the Winnipeg Jets having never worn that teams sweater, and Hull is the Coyotes leading scorer, having never played a minute in Phoenix.

Is it factually correct to do this? No. But it is much easier to say the Browns went on pause, Ravens started up, then to try to wrap you head around mixing records and histories when teams return.

That's easier? Really? Easier to "wrap your head" around the Browns "pausing" while most of their players move to an "expansion" Ravens team?

I think so. No way that Baltimore should have any claim to Bernie Kosar, Jim Brown or Otto Graham. Those legacies do not belong to them. They belong to the city of Cleveland and the people who sat in a crappy stadium in downtown Cleveland. It would be an insult to the fans, history, and team to have Baltimore own those records.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So when the Jets moved to Phoenix, history stayed in Winnipeg...when the Jets came back leading scorer isn't Kovalchuk, it's Hull.

Actually, Phoenix does recognize their time in Winnipeg. Steen and Hull are both on the team's "Ring of Honor".

How foolish would it be for the Jets 2.0 to recognize Shane Doan's stats with the Jets 1.0, despite Doan having never been traded or signed by another team?

I was saying that as a scenario, not what really happened.

In this scenario, Doan's stats with Winnipeg 1.0 would stay in Winnipeg, and would start over fresh with Phoenix. I don't see this as any more ridiculous than having Ilya Kovalchuk as the leading scorer of Winnipeg 2.0.

It robs the fans of their history. Who would Winnipeg fans rather see honored after they retire...leading scorer Ilya Kovalchuk or Shane Doan?

People have to stop treating sports teams as bloodlines. This isn't the royal family.

But that's what actually happened. And the Jets are an example of a team that does it right. They don't try to pretend that they're the same team that is currently playing in Glendale, but they still honor the past players that played in Winnipeg. Evander Kane even asked Bobby Hull for permission to wear #9 even though he never played for that organization. If teams really belonged to the city then Shane Doan would have moved back up to Winnipeg when the Thrashers did. Yeah the fans were there to watch everything, but the only ones that actually have any ownership of it are in Green Bay. Nobody is taking the memories away from people that watched that team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well said Billy B.

Who would Winnipeg fans rather see honored after they retire...leading scorer Ilya Kovalchuk or Shane Doan?

I'd say Kovalchuk, seeing as Shane Doan threw a hissyfit when it looked like the Coyotes might move back to Winnipeg.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.