Supersonics coming back?!

[rdub78]

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...5_arena08.html

Looks like this is actually a decent probability. Kings move to Seattle?

[youvalss]

If Winnipeg can get the Jets back, anything is possible.

[DonkeyJote]

Seattle getting a team back was always a pretty good possibility. I think an arena should get done - the fact is, Key Arena is not a very good venue. It's okay for basketball (though small), but it's bad for concerts, and there is zero parking (though there wouldn't be much, if any parking for a SoDo arena, unless they used Safeco's parking garage). A new arena could be good for the city. I truly believe Seattle is only of the great cities in this county, and we have one of the top 5 baseball stadiums, imo, and the football stadium is even better. There should be an arena to match it. The NBA belongs in Seattle. I'm not sure if they'd be called the Sonics. Oklahoma City isn't allowed to use the name, but they share the history of the franchise with the city of Seattle (not sure how that's going to work if there's a team here), so I'm not sure if that means that a Seattle team can use the name and colors. They could just stay the Kings (it's King County, after all).

[Ermolli]

As I said in the NBA Offtopic thread, why would they get the Kings instead of the Hornets when the NBA is looking for a new owner for that team? That's something I don't understand.

[DonkeyJote]

Quote: Originally Posted by Ermolli

As I said in the NBA Offtopic thread, why would they get the Kings instead of the Hornets when the NBA is looking for a new owner for that team? That's something I don't understand.

I think it's an issue of them thinking short term. The Kings are very likely to move first. Whoever buys the Hornets is probably going to have to at least make a show of trying to keep the team in New Orleans. But Sacramento got their one-year reprieve (and they got that because of how ugly things got in Seattle), and haven't done anything with it. If an arena deal in Seattle could get done quickly, the Kings could be playing in Seattle this October. With the Hornets, it wouldn't be until 2013 at the earliest, more likely 2015 or so. This is probably the Kings last year in Sacramento, whether it be to move to Anaheim, Kansas City, or Seattle. The Hornets will probably have at least one more year.

Also, I don't think people have stopped feeling sorry for New Orleans for Katrina. So taking away that city's team (even though they realistically can't support it any longer) may have a lot of backlash.

In a perfect world, the Kings would stay in Sacramento - it's a great city, imo. It's the #20 market in the country. The only markets larger without teams are Seattle and Tampa (and Orlando is pretty close to Tampa). I don't think it's a city that deserves to lose it's team.

[CableGuy]

Quote: Originally Posted by Ermolli

As I said in the NBA Offtopic thread, why would they get the Kings instead of the Hornets when the NBA is looking for a new owner for that team? That's something I don't understand.

Let's face the NBA should have never gone back to New Orleans. It was a mistake

And as much as I want to argue that kings should stay in Sacramento their attendance has been abysmal the past couple years.

I think Las Vegas would embrace a NBA team

[Vaporub83]

I thought they claimed all the gambling in Vegas made a team there an issue.

[mvb34]

Quote: Originally Posted by Vaporub83

I thought they claimed all the gambling in Vegas made a team there an issue.

I think still is if wasn't the Kings would be there by now..