Seattle Supersonics Resurrection

[Evil G]

Listen, I guess this isn't going along with the current discussion of cities that have teams that shouldn't have more, but I need to express an opinion on it because I just don't like the idea.

I hate the idea of the Bucks being tossed around as a candidate for Seattle. It really bothers me more than it should. Especially since the deal proposed for an upcoming Sonics deal sounding like the Cleveland Deal. I'm not a Bucks fan and I do agree on the opinion that they should relocate, but I hate the idea of getting rid of such a history like the Bucks history.

The Bucks have a brief but rich history, mainly due to the era of Abdul-Jabbar and Robertson, where they had instant success on the court. They became the most successful NBA expansion (in terms of winning) to ever play, winning a title in just their 3rd season (1971) with a 66-16 record to boot. They had more success and even another title appearance, in which they lost to the Celtics. They soon traded Abdul-Jabbar for a number of players.

It's pretty much why I don't want the Bucks to become the Sonics, there would be no team to claim the era between 1970 and 1975. I'd say move the Pelicans to Seattle, and then move the Bucks somewhere else, like Kansas City.

[Sport]

Seattle and Pittsburgh, If they expand by 2 that be the 2 city's, Las Vegas, KC & stl after.

Pittsburgh is already a small market with three teams. Not gonna happen.

Do people just look at cities with arenas and think to themselves "Hey NBA team go there"? Because that happens all the time with Columbus too.

Yes. I'm surprised buffalo doesn't get suggested sometimes. Often there's little thought and less analysis put in to these things. It's like "oh, city x has a team in sport y, they must be on the list to get a team in sport z", even if city x probably wouldn't even have team y if pro sports was just starting up today.

Portland is another one that gets tossed in this debate, mostly with MLB and NHL expansion/relocation discussions.

I think my favorite is Cincinnati for NBA or NHL. Doesn't happen often, but often enough. It's like "I think the NBA should expand to Cincinnati because the Bengals and Reds."

Hell people here say that from time to time. It's usually "The NBA should come back to Cincinnati because of the Royals."

This ignores several barriers standing in the way of the NBA coming to Cincinnati. 1. The Bengals and Reds are precisely why the NBA will never come back. For most of the Royals' time in the city it was a two sport town. When the Bengals started in 1968 the writing was on the wall for the basketball team. It wasn't a three sport city then and it definitely isn't now. You could make the argument that we're already overextended with the two teams we do have. 2. US Bank Arena is not suitable in the long term for the NBA, which means a new building will have to be built and I highly doubt people would vote for a tax increase in this city and with the way they were blindsided by Paul Brown Stadium Stadium people are going to be weary of public funding of another stadium. 3. The NBA has no interest in a city with an aging population, a decreasing population, and a small TV market.

If MLB and the NFL started today there's no way Cincinnati would be a part of either league.

[teddthebucfan]

Seattle and Pittsburgh, If they expand by 2 that be the 2 city's, Las Vegas, KC & stl after.

Pittsburgh is already a small market with three teams. Not gonna happen.

Do people just look at cities with arenas and think to themselves "Hey NBA team go there"? Because that happens all the time with Columbus too.

Yes. I'm surprised buffalo doesn't get suggested sometimes. Often there's little thought and less analysis put in to these things. It's like "oh, city x has a team in sport y, they must be on the list to get a team in sport z", even if city x probably wouldn't even have team y if pro sports was just starting up today.

Portland is another one that gets tossed in this debate, mostly with MLB and NHL expansion/relocation discussions.

I think my favorite is Cincinnati for NBA or NHL. Doesn't happen often, but often enough. It's like "I think the NBA should expand to Cincinnati because the Bengals and Reds."

Hell people here say that from time to time. It's usually "The NBA should come back to Cincinnati because of the Royals."

This ignores several barriers standing in the way of the NBA coming to Cincinnati. 1. The Bengals and Reds are precisely why the NBA will never come back. For most of the Royals' time in the city it was a two sport town. When the Bengals started in 1968 the writing was on the wall for the basketball team. It wasn't a three sport city then and it definitely isn't now. You could make the argument that we're already overextended with the two teams we do have. 2. US Bank Arena is not suitable in the long term for the NBA, which means a new building will have to be built and I highly doubt people would vote for a tax increase in this city and with the way they were blindsided by Paul Brown Stadium Stadium people are going to be weary of public funding of another stadium. 3. The NBA has no interest in a city with an aging population, a decreasing population, and a small TV market.

If MLB and the NFL started today there's no way Cincinnati would be a part of either league.

Heck, one could argue that the only reason the Bengals exist is because of Paul Brown's desire to spite Cleveland for firing him.

[Jimmy!]

Seattle and Pittsburgh, If they expand by 2 that be the 2 city's, Las Vegas, KC & stl after.

Pittsburgh is already a small market with three teams. Not gonna happen.

Do people just look at cities with arenas and think to themselves "Hey NBA team go there"? Because that happens all the time with Columbus too.

Yes. I'm surprised buffalo doesn't get suggested sometimes. Often there's little thought and less analysis put in to these things. It's like "oh, city x has a team in sport y, they must be on the list to get a team in sport z", even if city x probably wouldn't even have team y if pro sports was just starting up today.

Portland is another one that gets tossed in this debate, mostly with MLB and NHL expansion/relocation discussions.

I think my favorite is Cincinnati for NBA or NHL. Doesn't happen often, but often enough. It's like "I think the NBA should expand to Cincinnati because the Bengals and Reds."

Hell people here say that from time to time. It's usually "The NBA should come back to Cincinnati because of the Royals."

This ignores several barriers standing in the way of the NBA coming to Cincinnati. 1. The Bengals and Reds are precisely why the NBA will never come back. For most of the Royals' time in the city it was a two sport town. When the Bengals started in 1968 the writing was on the wall for the basketball team. It wasn't a three sport city then and it definitely isn't now. You could make the argument that we're already overextended with the two teams we do have. 2. US Bank Arena is not suitable in the long term for the NBA, which means a new building will have to be built and I highly doubt people would vote for a tax increase in this city and with the way they were blindsided by Paul Brown Stadium Stadium people are going to be weary of public funding of another stadium. 3. The NBA has no interest in a city with an aging population, a decreasing population, and a small TV market.

If MLB and the NFL started today there's no way Cincinnati would be a part of either league.

Small TV market might not float with Cincinnatiites who might bring up the 45th largest TV market, channel their inner Russell Wilson, and proclaim, "Why not us?"

[OMMF]

Does Seattle Arena talk go in here or the NHL thread? Anyway, KING 5 is reporting that the mayor has said the city is on the short list of candidates to host the 2016 DNC. Given the criteria set by the DNC about the arena hosting, Seattle would have to have a new building for that to happen. So either the DNC is hoping an arena gets built or the plans to build it are already in motion. If they are already in motion, that means that either the NBA, NHL or both have unofficially told the city that a team is coming because the arena isn't getting built without a tenant. That would still leave some MOU language to deal with, etc. The convention would be in September 2016 or about 30 months from now.

[rams80]

Does Seattle Arena talk go in here or the NHL thread? Anyway, KING 5 is reporting that the mayor has said the city is on the short list of candidates to host the 2016 DNC. Given the criteria set by the DNC about the arena hosting, Seattle would have to have a new building for that to happen. So either the DNC is hoping an arena gets built or the plans to build it are already in motion. If they are already in motion, that means that either the NBA, NHL or both have unofficially told the city that a team is coming because the arena isn't getting built without a tenant. That would still leave some MOU language to deal with, etc. The convention would be in September 2016 or about 30 months from now.

Probably NHL because the timeline really doesn't work for the NBA and "OITGDNHL."

[monkeypower]

I'm a very casual basketball fan so I don't know if there have been any changes, but I believe that the Ducks owner still wants a team in Anaheim. After the Kings stayed in Sacramento, the Honda Center renovated and one of the reasons for it was to attract the NBA's attention.

I don't know if having three NBA teams that close together would work and from just skimming through this thread, Anaheim doesn't seem to be on the NBA's radar anymore.

[ANAHEIM_Bound27]

I'm a very casual basketball fan so I don't know if there have been any changes, but I believe that the Ducks owner still wants a team in Anaheim. After the Kings stayed in Sacramento, the Honda Center renovated and one of the reasons for it was to attract the NBA's attention.

I don't know if having three NBA teams that close together would work and from just skimming through this thread, Anaheim doesn't seem to be on the NBA's radar anymore.

Also, the Honda Center still needs more renovations(I.e. The UGLY and outdated jumbotron) to hold a NBA team. You are right, Anaheim really isn't on the expansion list anymore, but it is a good arena for a relocation. The best shot is the "ANAHEIM" Clippers, but Donald Sterling doesn't like the idea of the Clips in the OC and they recently signed a new lease with Staples Center, so it will take time before they start crawling to Anaheim.

[DaytonBlue]

Random thoughts on the last couple pages:

-Hopefully the Cleveland Deal is in the past. The Winnipeg Way is the future. (Sonics 2.0 perhaps, Hornets 2.0 next year).

-The only way NBA works in STL is if the same guy owns NBA and NHL. The guy leading the Blues current ownership group, Tom Stillman, is already stretching to own the Blues.

-If hosting a political convention is what gets the Seattle arena built, I weep for the future.

-NBA will be in Europe...right after a successor to Concorde is planned, built, and allows for two hour flights across the Atlantic.

-Clearly the Grizzlies will be moving to Columbus, Bucks to Seattle, Clippers to Anaheim, and expansion teams will be given to Louisville, Vancouver, Pittsburgh, , Virginia Beach, London, Madrid, Paris, Tokyo, Moscow, Sydney, and Chattanooga.

[BBTV]

You forgot Lisbon.

Everybody forgets Lisbon.

[Gothamite]

No, it has to be Monte Carlo, Beverly Hills, London, Paris, Rome, and Gstaad.

[Lights Out]

I'm a very casual basketball fan so I don't know if there have been any changes, but I believe that the Ducks owner still wants a team in Anaheim. After the Kings stayed in Sacramento, the Honda Center renovated and one of the reasons for it was to attract the NBA's attention.

I don't know if having three NBA teams that close together would work and from just skimming through this thread, Anaheim doesn't seem to be on the NBA's radar anymore.

Also, the Honda Center still needs more renovations(I.e. The UGLY and outdated jumbotron) to hold a NBA team. You are right, Anaheim really isn't on the expansion list anymore, but it is a good arena for a relocation. The best shot is the "ANAHEIM" Clippers, but Donald Sterling doesn't like the idea of the Clips in the OC and they recently signed a new lease with Staples Center, so it will take time before they start crawling to Anaheim.

Any possibility of the Clippers moving to Anaheim died when the Staples Center opened. Also, Sterling and Buss would probably try to block any other team moving to Anaheim anyway.

[OMMF]

Apparently the DNC situation was all smoke, no fire.

SEATTLE -- Seattle was one of dozens of cities invited by the Democratic National Committee to bid on hosting the 2016 national convention that will nominate the party's candidate for president.

A spokesman for the mayor's office says the city decided not to bid.

Spokesman Jeff Reading says the city does not meet requirements for hotel rooms, convention space and other amenities

The Seattle Times reports the city also lacks a suitable arena. KeyArena doesn't have enough seats or luxury boxes to meet the party's criteria.

Seattle also is not among the eight finalists to host the 2016 Republican National Convention.

http://www.king5.com/news/politics/Seattle-passes-on-2016-Democratic-National-Convention-248258241.html

[Tigers6884]

Move Memphis back to Vancouver and give Seattle an expansion team. Add St Louis and Pittsburgh in the east.

[PhantomDreamer]

Move Memphis back to Vancouver and give Seattle an expansion team. Add St Louis and Pittsburgh in the east.

No NBA expansion, not enough talent. Bucks to Seattle, a little revenge for Milwaukee stealing the Pilots decades ago.

[rams80]

Move Memphis back to Vancouver and give Seattle an expansion team. Add St Louis and Pittsburgh in the east.

No NBA expansion, not enough talent. Bucks to Seattle, a little revenge for Milwaukee stealing the Pilots decades ago.

How can you steal that which is in danger of going out of business?

[illwauk]

Move Memphis back to Vancouver and give Seattle an expansion team. Add St Louis and Pittsburgh in the east.

No NBA expansion, not enough talent. Bucks to Seattle, a little revenge for Milwaukee stealing the Pilots decades ago.

Like you were around back then... and the Ray Allen trade was more than enough retribution.

[Evil G]

I'd be fine with the Kansas City Bucks anyways. Seattle can take an expansion/the Pelicans if it turns out Rita is rational.

[PhantomDreamer]

The NBA should never even think about expanding again, not in this lifetime or the next. The Bucks are the NBA team most likely to relocate so that is where the focus should be.

So because someone "wasn't around" when a team was stolen means you shouldn't care? Huh?

[BlackBolt3]

"Stolen" is a strong word. Mostly teams move because of arena issues or ownership problems. I can't say New Orleans stole the Hornets 1.0 because George Shinn wanted to move, and Charlotte didn't want to build a new arena.