Sacramento Kings moving franchise to the OC, CA.

While I totally agree with your overall point... I'll throw out the 2003-4 Pistons.

 

See, that's one thing that I don't think Stern is looking at. He's telling cities to go fuck themselves. They won't forget that.

Look at Charlotte. They were selling out the Hornets every game for a decade, until Shinn got caught with his pants down and Bobby Phills died.

But then Shinn whined about wanting a new arena, even though the arena wasn't even 20 years old, Stern let him move, and now there's another team that has never cracked the top 20 in the league in attendance.

 

Probably no Hall of Famers, but a couple who will get close.

 

Baron, if you can find it read "In the Hornet's Nest" by Joe Drape about the genesis of the Charlotte Hornets and how Shinn brought the team to the city. Knowing what we know now, reading that book made me want to puke. The NBA (and Shinn) crapped on that city once, I don't blame Charlotteans (or is it Charlottonians? I have no idea) for not supporting the Bobcats and developing another emotional bond with another NBA basketball team.

 

Sounds like a very interesting book. I'll keep an eye out for it when I peruse my local bookstores.

The Bobcats should be a lesson for Stern, not that he'll every admit to learning from it. You can't keep burning bridges.

Think Seattle will support a new franchise longer than a couple of seasons if the team isn't winning? Heck no. Oklahoma City got caught up in the excitement of having the Hornets temporarily, and got rewarded for it by having Durant and a good developing team. If the Sonics/Thunder stunk by now, they'd be drawing 13K like a lot of the bottom feeders and Stern would be trying to get them moved again.

 

Arco was a dump when it was first built. When the team first moved from KC they played in an arena that was later turned into a hospital.

There are only a few professional franchises that legitimately need new stadiums. The Vikings, San Francisco 49ers, Sacramento Kings are three that immediately jump to mind.

 

Also, A's/Raiders and Chargers. Common thread is that most of them are in Calif., and unfortunately for them, the Giants showed that a stadium can be built without public money and the population isn't much inclined to give such a bribe.

 

Well, the Giants built their stadium when the economy was still good. As broke as California is, good luck getting any taxpayer money used for a stadium.

Agree on the Chargers and kind of on the A's/Raiders.

 

NY Post had a very interesting story, picked up by Bay Area columnist Monte Poole, that Selig could be casting an eye toward contracting the A's and Devil Rays and giving their owners first rights to the Dodgers and Mets. It's a 98 percent chance that it's just hot air, but interesting nonetheless.

 

If you don't have enough money to operate the Rays and A's, you sure as hell don't have enough money to buy the Dodgers or Mets. Each of those teams probably has 200 years of litigation for mega-damages their current owners hid in their balance sheets.