# UPDATE: Kings staying in Sacramento



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

> @WojYahooNBA: The Maloofs are finalizing an agreement to sell the Sacramento Kings to the Hansen-Ballmer led Seattle group, sources tell Yahoo! Sports.


Seattle deserves a team.


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings*

This is fantastic news! I'm pumped for the city of Seattle... as long as they get rid of all their players.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings*

This is why Cousins isn't allowed to be moved?


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings*



> @WojYahooNBA: The Seattle group's plans, with support of the NBA, is to play two seasons in Key Arena before moving into a new Seattle arena, sources say.


..


----------



## The Big Dipper (Oct 23, 2012)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings*



King Sancho Fantastic said:


> ..


The Key Arena is fine I mean for watching basketball it is a great place the seats are stacked high so you always have a good view. They just don't have all the restaurants and parking garages and bars the NBA wants them to have. I mean the 96 finals were played there it is a good place to play. However a new stadium next to the Football and Baseball stadiums would rule!


----------



## 29380 (Feb 23, 2009)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings*



> @dailythunder
> Clay Bennett owns the SuperSonics name and logo, but under the settlement, agreed to turn it over to a new Seattle owner at no cost.


...


----------



## Knick Killer (Jul 16, 2006)

Sad to see how far the Kings have fallen from but if anyone deserves a team it's Seattle.


Sent from my iPhone using Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings*



Knick Killer said:


> Sad to see how far the Kings have fallen from but if anyone deserves a team it's Seattle.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Verticalsports.com Free App


Or Red Deer.


----------



## Cajon (Nov 1, 2012)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings*

Sad for the King fans but happy for the Sonic fans.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings*

Since the Kings/Royals franchise is being abandoned, I wonder who picks it up?


----------



## Gonzo (Oct 14, 2004)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings*



The Big Dipper said:


> The Key Arena is fine I mean for watching basketball it is a great place the seats are stacked high so you always have a good view. They just don't have all the restaurants and parking garages and bars the NBA wants them to have. I mean the 96 finals were played there it is a good place to play. However a new stadium next to the Football and Baseball stadiums would rule!


Somebody's been watching SonicsGate


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings*

Unfortunate for Kings fans, they really show up and support the team when the product is watchable.


----------



## Ron (May 8, 2002)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings*



E.H. Munro said:


> Since the Kings/Royals franchise is being abandoned, I wonder who picks it up?


Very good point...an original franchise nickname is being abandoned. Sad day in that regard, but happy for the city of Seattle.


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings; will likely become the Seattle SuperSonics*

I would love to see a new GM get in there and clean house. I'd hate to see that franchise is Seattle continuing to play selfish basketball with no chance of contending for years to come.


----------



## Bubbles (Nov 12, 2005)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings*



E.H. Munro said:


> Since the Kings/Royals franchise is being abandoned, I wonder who picks it up?


I would think Hansen would own the name and trademarks for the franchise for the time being. If a team is looking to take up the name again in Sacramento I could see him relinquishing the name and trademarks just like Clay Bennett did with the SuperSonics.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings*



E.H. Munro said:


> Since the Kings/Royals franchise is being abandoned, I wonder who picks it up?


I mean, it'd be funny if Jerry Buss relocated and renamed the D-Fenders as one last shot in the rivalry, right?


----------



## BobStackhouse42 (Oct 7, 2010)

Kansas City is the next logical destination for a franchise and they already have Royals.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings; will likely become the Seattle SuperSonics*

Memphis Kings?


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings; will likely become the Seattle SuperSonics*

In a related area, would it make sense to do a division realignment out West to address to ridiculous Northwest Division (which won't include the most Northwestern team anymore)? Something like Seattle, Portland, and the Cali teams in the Pacific; Phoenix, Utah, and the Texas teams in the Southwest; and New Orleans, Memphis, Minny, and Denver in whatever you want to call it? (Midwest Division?)


----------



## Marcus13 (Jul 17, 2002)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings; will likely become the Seattle SuperSonics*

Seattle's rank in attendance;

07 - 25th
06 - 23rd
05 - 21st
04 - 23rd
03 - 20th
02 - 21st

Tough to say Seattle "deserves" a team

Move them to Baltimore.


----------



## l0st1 (Jul 2, 2010)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings; will likely become the Seattle SuperSonics*

Really sucks for Kings fans. Always been a great fan base even when their team has been a mess. Regardless of if Seattle deserves a team or not it really sucks that it's at the loss of another city.


----------



## Gonzo (Oct 14, 2004)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings; will likely become the Seattle SuperSonics*



Marcus13 said:


> Seattle's rank in attendance;
> 
> 07 - 25th
> 06 - 23rd
> ...


Still better than Indiana's


----------



## l0st1 (Jul 2, 2010)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings; will likely become the Seattle SuperSonics*

Apparently now there are reports the Maloof's turned down the offer.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings; will likely become the Seattle SuperSonics*



Gonzo said:


> Still better than Indiana's


I was going to mention that.


----------



## Marcus13 (Jul 17, 2002)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings; will likely become the Seattle SuperSonics*



Gonzo said:


> Still better than Indiana's


I wouldn't be even slightly surprised to wake up one morning and hear the Pacers are moving out of town.


----------



## Gonzo (Oct 14, 2004)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings; will likely become the Seattle SuperSonics*



Marcus13 said:


> I wouldn't be even slightly surprised to wake up one morning and hear the Pacers are moving out of town.


The Pacers' owners just bought that new scoreboard themselves, doubt they're moving anytime soon.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings; will likely become the Seattle SuperSonics*



Marcus13 said:


> I wouldn't be even slightly surprised to wake up one morning and hear the Pacers are moving out of town.


I hope you move out of town you jackass.


----------



## G-Force (Jan 4, 2005)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings; will likely become the Seattle SuperSonics*



Marcus13 said:


> Seattle's rank in attendance;
> 
> 07 - 25th
> 06 - 23rd
> ...


That is not a good way to rank team support. See if you can find the stats for percentage of seats filled rather than number of seats filled.

G


----------



## G-Force (Jan 4, 2005)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings; will likely become the Seattle SuperSonics*

Hearing the news today prompted me to log in for the first time since 2008, shortly after I lost my home team. Back then I was a mod for the Sonics forum. I was also a six year season ticket holder in Seattle.


----------



## The Big Dipper (Oct 23, 2012)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings; will likely become the Seattle SuperSonics*



G-Force said:


> Hearing the news today prompted me to log in for the first time since 2008, shortly after I lost my home team. Back then I was a mod for the Sonics forum.


Well I heard the Offer is still in talks and a press conference was cancelled so we will see but I do know the arena will be down in SODO, where the SODO showbox is.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings; will likely become the Seattle SuperSonics*



G-Force said:


> Hearing the news today prompted me to log in for the first time since 2008, shortly after I lost my home team. Back then I was a mod for the Sonics forum. I was also a six year season ticket holder in Seattle.


And a season ticket holder to R-Star's heart.


----------



## G-Force (Jan 4, 2005)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings; will likely become the Seattle SuperSonics*

After what went down the last couple of seasons in Seattle, I was unsure how I would respond when a team potentially would come to Seattle. I admit that I am pretty darn excited about it, but I am bummed out for the Kings fans in Sacramento.

From an article today in the Seattle Times, the plan would be for the team to play two years in Key Arena while the new arena was being built. I have no problem with that. Key Arena is a good arena for watching basketball.

G


----------



## The Big Dipper (Oct 23, 2012)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings; will likely become the Seattle SuperSonics*



R-Star said:


> And a season ticket holder to R-Star's heart.


:makeout: get a room


----------



## Marcus13 (Jul 17, 2002)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings; will likely become the Seattle SuperSonics*



G-Force said:


> That is not a good way to rank team support. See if you can find the stats for percentage of seats filled rather than number of seats filled.
> 
> G


G-FORCE!!!!

Man we used to rock the Seattle board during the Ray-Rashard era!


----------



## G-Force (Jan 4, 2005)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings; will likely become the Seattle SuperSonics*

Yeah, I was seriously into the NBA and my Sonics back then. Losing my team broke my heart. It is already starting to feel like old times, posting here instead of being productive at work.

G


----------



## Marcus13 (Jul 17, 2002)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings; will likely become the Seattle SuperSonics*



R-Star said:


> I hope you move out of town you jackass.


I certainly dont WANT the Pacers to leave - I was really excited about moving to Indianapolis because they had an NBA Team - I like going to games, I am thinking about catching the Knicks in town tomorrow


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings; will likely become the Seattle SuperSonics*



G-Force said:


> Yeah, I was seriously into the NBA and my Sonics back then. Losing my team broke my heart. It is already starting to feel like old times, posting here instead of being productive at work.
> 
> G


I can understand how you feel if I compare it to hockey. I've always had to admire basketball from afar. Still never been to an actual NBA game.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings; will likely become the Seattle SuperSonics*



Marcus13 said:


> I certainly dont WANT the Pacers to leave - I was really excited about moving to Indianapolis because they had an NBA Team - I like going to games, I am thinking about catching the Knicks in town tomorrow


They are the greatest team of all time.


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings; will likely become the Seattle SuperSonics*



G-Force said:


> That is not a good way to rank team support. See if you can find the stats for percentage of seats filled rather than number of seats filled.
> 
> G


This is exactly what I was going to say. Total attendance means nothing. Arenas come in different sizes.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings; will likely become the Seattle SuperSonics*



RollWithEm said:


> This is exactly what I was going to say. Total attendance means nothing. * Arenas come in different sizes.*


That's what I tell my wife anyways.


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings; will likely become the Seattle SuperSonics*



R-Star said:


> That's what I tell my wife anyways.


She a big fan of Gilbert's?


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings; will likely become the Seattle SuperSonics*



RollWithEm said:


> She a big fan of Gilbert's?


Penises.


----------



## Ron (May 8, 2002)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings; will likely become the Seattle SuperSonics*



Marcus13 said:


> Seattle's rank in attendance;
> 
> 07 - 25th
> 06 - 23rd
> ...


Baltimore couldn't even keep the Bullets.


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings; will likely become the Seattle SuperSonics*



R-Star said:


> Penises.


I think he prefers guns.


----------



## Ron (May 8, 2002)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings; will likely become the Seattle SuperSonics*



BobStackhouse42 said:


> Kansas City is the next logical destination for a franchise and they already have Royals.


They couldn't keep them. Why is Kansas City a logical destination? The last time they tried that experiment, the ownership group lacked so much confidence they tried to make it a "two-city" team! :lol:

(Kansas City-Omaha Kings)


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings; will likely become the Seattle SuperSonics*



RollWithEm said:


> I think he prefers guns.


_boob reference_


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings; will likely become the Seattle SuperSonics*



Ron said:


> They couldn't keep them. Why is Kansas City a logical destination? The last time they tried that experiment, the ownership group lacked so much confidence they tried to make it a "two-city" team! :lol:
> 
> (Kansas City-Omaha Kings)


Sounds like a smooth smoking new cigarette.


----------



## Headliner (Aug 11, 2011)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings; will likely become the Seattle SuperSonics*

I thought 50 cent was going to buy the team and move them to Queens to compete with Jay-Z. Because NY needs three teams.

Good for Seattle although they never had that great of attendance.


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings; will likely become the Seattle SuperSonics*



R-Star said:


> _boob reference_


_Javaris Crittenton reference_


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings; will likely become the Seattle SuperSonics*

Ah, the Lakers next star point guard.


----------



## Ron (May 8, 2002)

*Deal Rejected*

*Sources: Sacramento Kings to Seattle not a done deal just yet*

The Maloofs have rejected Hansen's offer.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs Reject Hansen's Offer to Buy Sacramento Kings*

Honestly I was surprised that they were getting half a billion for the team. It really isn't in good shape as a basketball operation, they don't have an arena deal and they've alienated their fanbase, so that seems like a really good offer without knowing much about what you can sell a team for.


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs Reject Hansen's Offer to Buy Sacramento Kings*

Does anyone know how much the Maloofs paid for this franchise?


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs Reject Hansen's Offer to Buy Sacramento Kings*



RollWithEm said:


> Does anyone know how much the Maloofs paid for this franchise?


Doing absolutely no research, I'm under the impression they inherited it from their dad.


----------



## Gonzo (Oct 14, 2004)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs Reject Hansen's Offer to Buy Sacramento Kings*

Bottom line on ESPN at halftime of LA/SA said they were hammering out the details...


----------



## hroz (Mar 4, 2006)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs Reject Hansen's Offer to Buy Sacramento Kings*

Maloofs inherited the rockets from their dad. They bought the kings after selling the rockets.


----------



## Cajon (Nov 1, 2012)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs Reject Hansen's Offer to Buy Sacramento Kings*



Bogg said:


> Doing absolutely no research, I'm under the impression they inherited it from their dad.


Still a Maloof.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings; will likely become the Seattle SuperSonics*



R-Star said:


> RollWithEm said:
> 
> 
> > R-Star said:
> ...


Marriage must be a bitter disappointment for her then.


----------



## tha supes (Aug 12, 2003)

*Re: Maloofs selling Kings; will likely become the Seattle SuperSonics*



G-Force said:


> Hearing the news today prompted me to log in for the first time since 2008, shortly after I lost my home team. Back then I was a mod for the Sonics forum. I was also a six year season ticket holder in Seattle.


Same here brother, same here. Except I wasn't a mod. And I remember the user Scinos also... proof I indeed was here (or there). :cheers:


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs Reject Hansen's Offer to Buy Sacramento Kings*

We've already got two Sonics fans back? Productive day. Welcome!


----------



## Gonzo (Oct 14, 2004)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs Reject Hansen's Offer to Buy Sacramento Kings*


----------



## 29380 (Feb 23, 2009)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs Reject Hansen's Offer to Buy Sacramento Kings*



> I've heard from reliable source that the Kings' sale to Hansen-Ballmer in Seattle is done deal. Source said price
> of the sale is $525 million. The source said further that the Maloofs will have no stake or decision-making with Seattle team and are out.


- Matt Steinmetz


----------



## Pacers Fan (Aug 25, 2002)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs Reject Hansen's Offer to Buy Sacramento Kings*

Sounds good. I see that the Kings can get the Sonics name and logo, but do they get the Sonics history/jerseys/awards back from the Thunder?

By the way, that avatar's looking good on you, Knicks4life.


----------



## BobStackhouse42 (Oct 7, 2010)

WTF is Knicks fan doing with a pacer logo? Lose a bet?


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs Reject Hansen's Offer to Buy Sacramento Kings*



BobStackhouse42 said:


> WTF is Knicks fan doing with a pacer logo? Lose a bet?


Positive life changing decision.


----------



## 29380 (Feb 23, 2009)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs Reject Hansen's Offer to Buy Sacramento Kings*



BobStackhouse42 said:


> Lose a bet?


Yes


----------



## Ron (May 8, 2002)

*Potential Kings buyer emerges, would keep team in Sacramento*

*Potential Kings buyer emerges, would keep team in Sacramento*


----------



## Gonzo (Oct 14, 2004)

*re: UPDATE: Mayor Kevin Johnson not ready to give up the Kings, yet!*

This shit is confusing

Combined with the random updated thread titles.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: Potential Kings buyer emerges, would keep team in Sacramento*



Ron said:


> *Potential Kings buyer emerges, would keep team in Sacramento*


Well that makes things interesting. I hope it works out.


As much as I'd like to see Seattle get their team back, I really hate seeing cities lose their teams unless they completely take them for granted. 

SacTown had some fun fans and fun teams in the late 90's early 00's.


----------



## Mr. Hobbes (Jul 1, 2005)

*re: UPDATE: Mayor Kevin Johnson not ready to give up the Kings, yet!*

http://www.sactownroyalty.com/2013/1/11/3866124/sacramento-kings-seattle-sonics-rumors-steinmetz-says-deal-is-done

They're coming.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

*re: UPDATE: Mayor Kevin Johnson not ready to give up the Kings, yet!*



Gonzo said:


> This shit is confusing
> 
> Combined with the random updated thread titles.


The worst is when you open a thread for the first time and try to figure out when the discussion matches the title, like I just did now.


----------



## Ron (May 8, 2002)

*re: UPDATE: Mayor Kevin Johnson not ready to give up the Kings, yet!*



Gonzo said:


> This shit is confusing
> 
> Combined with the random updated thread titles.


Competing interests in Seattle and Sacramento for the Kings. Maloofs want a bidding war. Not really that confusing.


----------



## TucsonClip (Sep 2, 2002)

*re: UPDATE: Mayor Kevin Johnson not ready to give up the Kings, yet!*

Should have been assumed that they wanted a bidding war...


----------



## Gonzo (Oct 14, 2004)

*re: UPDATE: Mayor Kevin Johnson not ready to give up the Kings, yet!*



Jamel Irief said:


> The worst is when you open a thread for the first time and try to figure out when the discussion matches the title, like I just did now.


This thread is a classic case of that. Is Ron the only one who updates thread titles? It's like he chooses when to update. But who knows with this Magoof thing


----------



## Ron (May 8, 2002)

*re: UPDATE: Mayor Kevin Johnson not ready to give up the Kings, yet!*



Mr. Hobbes said:


> http://www.sactownroyalty.com/2013/1/11/3866124/sacramento-kings-seattle-sonics-rumors-steinmetz-says-deal-is-done
> 
> They're coming.


You quoted a story that basically says they are staying, not going.

I remember when the Seahawks were coming to L.A., also. Funny how things don't happen.


----------



## Gonzo (Oct 14, 2004)

*re: UPDATE: Mayor Kevin Johnson not ready to give up the Kings, yet!*



Ron said:


> Competing interests in Seattle and Sacramento for the Kings. Maloofs want a bidding war. Not really that confusing.


Done deal, not done deal, done deal, Sac. town buyer "interested"..... confusing.

Thread updated 3 times, should be 4


----------



## Ron (May 8, 2002)

*re: UPDATE: Mayor Kevin Johnson not ready to give up the Kings, yet!*



Gonzo said:


> Done deal, not done deal, done deal, Sac. town buyer "interested"..... confusing.
> 
> Thread updated 3 times, should be 4


Dude, things are being reported on Twitter hour by hour from competing interests and competing media who wants the team in their city. Of course they are going to color or slant it in their direction.

If you are confused about THAT kind of posturing, I'm not sure what to tell you. Moving a pro sports franchise doesn't happen in a day.

Relax and read the chronological entries. The title will be updated as new news occurs.


----------



## G-Force (Jan 4, 2005)

*re: UPDATE: Mayor Kevin Johnson not ready to give up the Kings, yet!*

A deal is not done until the paperwork has been signed by ALL of the required parties. I would be very happy to get a team in Seattle next season, but I can wait awhile. If Sacramento can work out a deal to keep their team, then I will be happy for the Kings fans.

G


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

*re: UPDATE: Mayor Kevin Johnson not ready to give up the Kings, yet!*



> The NBA held a conference call with members of the league's relocation committee to outline deal points on the proposed sale of majority ownership of the Sacramento Kings to a Seattle-based ownership group


League sources told Yahoo! Sports 

Don't give up hope too soon, Sonics fans. You still might get your team.



> The call detailed what NBA officials described as "a non-binding set of deal points" on a $525 million sale of majority ownership to the Chris Hansen-Steve Ballmer group, sources said.
> 
> Discussions have continued in the past week to push the purchase to toward completion and ultimately clear the way for the franchise to move to Seattle, sources told Yahoo! Sports.


I'm pulling for it to happen. Seattle deserves a team.


----------



## Jace (Sep 26, 2005)

*re: UPDATE: Mayor Kevin Johnson not ready to give up the Kings, yet!*

Nice analrapist avy.


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

*re: UPDATE: Mayor Kevin Johnson not ready to give up the Kings, yet!*



> Mayor Kevin Johnson said this morning that he has received approval from NBA Commissioner David Stern to present a counter offer for the Kings directly to the NBA's board of governors. Calling a reported $525 million offer for the team that's being floated by a Seattle group "outrageous," the mayor said during the annual State of Downtown address that he has developed a strategy to keep the Kings in Sacramento. Johnson said he is looking for potential owners who would keep the team in Sacramento to bid against the Seattle offer led by hedge-fund manager Chris Hansen.


http://blogs.sacbee.com/city-beat/2...-counter-offer-for-kings-directly-to-nba.html


----------



## The Big Dipper (Oct 23, 2012)

*Re: UPDATE: Mayor Kevin Johnson not ready to give up the Kings, yet!*

BREAKING NEWS!

Mister Swackhammer of the Nerdlucks intends on buying the Kings and moving them to his amusement park Moron Mountain.


----------



## Floods (Oct 25, 2005)

*Re: UPDATE: Mayor Kevin Johnson not ready to give up the Kings, yet!*



> Marc Stein ‏@ESPNSteinLine
> Just going online now: Maloofs have struck deal to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle for $525 million, sources say





> Marc Stein ‏@ESPNSteinLine
> Kings deal to Seattle group still requires formal NBA ratification but Hansen group intends to file for relocation by March 1 if approved


..


----------



## BobStackhouse42 (Oct 7, 2010)

Seattle should be pumped. Congrats.


----------



## Jace (Sep 26, 2005)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*



> @*WojYahooNBA*  With sale finalized, NBA's Relocation Committee will approve Kings move to Seattle for next season, sources tell Y! "Formality," source says


This history thing is going to be interesting. Haven't read this thread much so I don't know if it's been discussed a lot. I wouldn't mind them being the Seattle Kings. If they try to be the Sonics without getting their history back from OKC (back, not "shared"), it'll feel weird. If they take OKC's SEA history, what happens to SAC's long and geographically promiscuous history? Hell, why not just give it to OKC? Make them become the OKC Kings, since the Thunder identity is kinda whack. OK King Kevin Durant sounds cool, no?


----------



## Dee-Zy (Jan 12, 2006)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*

I wonder how that is going to affect divisions...

Seattle in the pacific division?


----------



## Dee-Zy (Jan 12, 2006)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*

OKC should just be OKC as if they were an expansion franchise.

Seattle get their Sonics back if they want.

Sucks for the kings, but oh well...


----------



## roux (Jun 20, 2006)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*

1. I feel bad for Kings fans
2. I am happy for Sonics fans
3. I am relived as a Bucks fan


----------



## Floods (Oct 25, 2005)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*



Dee-Zy said:


> I wonder how that is going to affect divisions...
> 
> Seattle in the pacific division?


I think Utah to the pacific with Seattle in the northwest is the most logical solution.

They could also do it so the pacific is Seattle, Portland, and the 3 Cali teams, but that would mean shifting Phoenix to the SW and then Memphis to the NW, but that's a little more complicated than is really necessary. That would make some in-division road trips pretty shitty for Memphis too.


----------



## Floods (Oct 25, 2005)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*



> J.A. Adande ‏@jadande
> True RT @DaRealBradC: Key fact: Sac Mayor Kevin Johnson told by David Stern he could present counter offer to board of governors meeting.


..


----------



## Jace (Sep 26, 2005)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*



Dee-Zy said:


> OKC should just be OKC as if they were an expansion franchise.
> 
> Seattle get their Sonics back if they want.
> 
> Sucks for the kings, but oh well...


Though not sterling, the Kings have one of the longest histories in the NBA. They pre-date the NBA, if I'm not mistaken. Just having their history sit in SAC waiting for another team to move there doesn't sit right with me.


----------



## Floods (Oct 25, 2005)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*

I doubt another NBA team will ever be in Sacramento so I don't think it's necessary to tie the brand to that city. That said the Kings' history is pretty forgettable, regardless of length. I'd much rather have the Sonics back. Leave the Kings brand and history up for grabs for the next time the league expands or some other historically relevant team relocates, regardless of the destination.


----------



## Jace (Sep 26, 2005)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*

Starting to wonder if I actually care, now. I'd rather see the Sonics back, actually. **** the Kings history.

EDIT: Posted this before seeing your post Floods :cheers:


----------



## King Sancho Fantastic (Jul 19, 2005)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*



> @KingJames So the Kings getting sold for 525M!! And the owners ain't making no money huh? What the hell we have a lockout for.


..


----------



## Ron (May 8, 2002)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*



Floods said:


> ..





> Marc Stein ‏@ESPNSteinLine
> Just going online now: Maloofs have struck deal to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle for $525 million, sources say





> Marc Stein ‏@ESPNSteinLine
> Kings deal to Seattle group still requires formal NBA ratification but Hansen group intends to file for relocation by March 1 if approved


..

Okay, according to Forbes Magazine, the Kings are valued at $293 million.*

So, paying $525 million for this team at full value is ****ing insane. But to pay $525 for 65% of this team ($190.45 million)...that doesn't make any sense.

*
*Sacramento Kings team value*


----------



## Jace (Sep 26, 2005)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*

LeBron would've been eviscerated for that tweet two years ago. What did the Maloofs pay for them?


----------



## Gonzo (Oct 14, 2004)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*


----------



## Jace (Sep 26, 2005)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*

Oh my. Never saw this. Skipped through everything after the crying, because it was awful.



> @*KingJames*  And from what I hear the 525M isn't even the whole % of the team! Smh. One thing is I can't hate on their hustle though. Crazy


Stern just wants to fine LeBron's face off right now. But seriously, if arguably the worst franchise in the NBA can be sold that high over its value, the owners had less of a gripe than I had already thought.

In other news, what does this do to Kevin Johnson's legacy? He's ****ed.


----------



## Jace (Sep 26, 2005)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*



> @*WojYahooNBA*  The $525 million price is a "valuation" on the total franchise. For 65 percent, Seattle group would pay approximately $340 million.


Not as bad.



> @*WojYahooNBA*  The plan has always been for the franchise to reclaim the Sonics name upon returning to Seattle.


----------



## Gonzo (Oct 14, 2004)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*



> Team Name.
> Subject to NBA approval and applicable rules, regulations
> and requirements of the NBA, and subject to the ability of ArenaCo or an affiliate of ArenaCo to
> obtain the rights to the name and trademarks under from the current owner thereof, any NBA
> ...


Page 19:
http://seattle.gov/arena/docs/120516PR-MOU.pdf


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

Congrats to fans of Seattle who are getting a team back. Sucks for Sacramento fans.


----------



## Maravilla (Jul 6, 2010)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*

Why would Kevin Johnson's legacy be screwed?


----------



## Mattsanity (Jun 8, 2003)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*

only if the kings won the 'ship 10 years ago...


----------



## Jace (Sep 26, 2005)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*



Basel said:


> Congrats to fans of Seattle who are getting a team back. Sucks for Sacramento fans.


Yeah its weird having the Kings subbed out for the Sonics, but I always had more of a fondness for the Sonics growing up. Besides, now we get the potential SEA-OKC rivalry. If they ever play in the playoffs, you know Clay Bennett's not going to the road games.

Thanks for that Gonzo. Good to see they get everything back, but I wonder if they still technically hold onto the Kings history also.



chilltown said:


> Why would Kevin Johnson's legacy be screwed?


joke


----------



## 29380 (Feb 23, 2009)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*



> Close to impossible to imagine the Board of Governors voting down the Kings sale that would result in the team
> moving to Seattle next season.
> 
> A sale that would have sent the team to Anaheim, possibly, because there was strong resistance to a third team in the Los Angeles market. A sale that would have meant relocation to other locations that had been mentioned through the years? Maybe.
> ...


http://sulia.com/channel/basketball/f/09eeebcb-37fb-4c0f-b98d-1050ac52007d/?source=twitter


----------



## tha supes (Aug 12, 2003)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*

As a Sonics fan my whole life for 26 years, I must say this really is bittersweet. On one side, i'm truly so happy I get my one team back that I've ever REALLY cared about and supported. On the other, I am a little sad for Sacramento, because I know exactly how it feels, I've felt it for 5 years up until now. It's one of the worst feelings, especially if you REALLY love that team and havefor years. If it really is official and the sale goes through, all I can say to Kings fans is don't give up hope, keep supporting even though their gone, it'll better your chances and make for a brighter future.


----------



## Jace (Sep 26, 2005)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*

If it means anything, your Sonics were champions a decade before the Kings even moved to SAC.

Here's some more on the Thunder-Sonics implications.



> The Seattle group led by Hansen has jumped all necessary hurdles, the biggest one getting an arena deal approved. That isn’t set to be finished for a few years so reportedly the plan would be for the team to play in Key Arena for a couple seasons, which was deemed unfit to house an NBA team by the league five years ago.
> 
> I know what you’re asking: What does this mean for the Thunder?
> 
> ...


*More*


----------



## Jace (Sep 26, 2005)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*

_Mr. Lacob, any thoughts on the Kings leaving Sacramento?_

















> @*BringBackSonics*  There's also more word coming out that Phil Jackson will have a front office role with the team. Most likely not as coach though. #*Sonics*


Would be interesting. They need some sort of stability. There's been a lot of untapped talent on that roster, but the infrastructure of the organization hasn't lead to a vital situation.


----------



## roux (Jun 20, 2006)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*



tha supes said:


> As a Sonics fan my whole life for 26 years, I must say this really is bittersweet. On one side, i'm truly so happy I get my one team back that I've ever REALLY cared about and supported. On the other, I am a little sad for Sacramento, because I know exactly how it feels, I've felt it for 5 years up until now. It's one of the worst feelings, especially if you REALLY love that team and havefor years. If it really is official and the sale goes through, all I can say to Kings fans is don't give up hope, keep supporting even though their gone, it'll better your chances and make for a brighter future.


Must have been brutal watching your sonics turn into what they did in oklahoma city with durant and westbrook.. you will be starting at square one with these kings coming up north.. but congrats on getting your team back..im just glad it wasnt my team going there


----------



## Jace (Sep 26, 2005)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*

Losing Kevin Durant might be worse than losing the actual team. OK, probably not, but shit. That had to have hurt.

I will say this, there are rosters I'd certainly pick after SAC's. With a competent coaching staff, and the right vet or two, you could have a pretty competitive team. A lot of potential among Thomas, Evans, Cousins, Thompson, Robinson, and even the now-playing-well Fredette. Some work needs to be done around those guys, and clearly there's no Kevin Durant there, but there's something to work with, at least.


----------



## roux (Jun 20, 2006)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*



Jace said:


> Losing Kevin Durant might be worse than losing the actual team. OK, probably not, but shit. That had to have hurt.
> 
> I will say this, there are rosters I'd certainly pick after SAC's. With a competent coaching staff, and the right vet or two, you could have a pretty competitive team. A lot of potential among Thomas, Evans, Cousins, Thompson, Robinson, and even the now-playing-well Fredette. Some work needs to be done around those guys, and clearly there's no Kevin Durant there, but there's something to work with, at least.


Dont be suprised if the kings clean house prior to the move.. i dont think they are married to the idea of keeping evans or cousins. when new owners come in that usually means new gm, new coach, and a new basketball philosophy


----------



## G-Force (Jan 4, 2005)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*

When the Sonics moved to OKC, I eventually claimed the Thunder as my team. They were just playing in another state. ;-) True, Clay Clay Bennet will never get a Christmas card from me, and Stern will not either. But I have been happy for the success of the Thunder players.

Now it looks like I have another group of young players to call my own.

G


----------



## tha supes (Aug 12, 2003)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*

I could never support OKC. Never. They're to blame for this situation we have now, as well the relocation in '08.


----------



## Gonzo (Oct 14, 2004)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*

Yeah after watching Sonics Gate I don't know how a Seattle fan could ever support the Thunder.


----------



## Gonzo (Oct 14, 2004)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*

*Seattle owners could target R.C. Buford or Larry Bird to run franchise*

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/nba--s...or-larry-bird-to-run-franchise-073354007.html



> Bird, the NBA's 2011 Executive of the Year, stepped away from the Pacers in the spring to take care of some health issues, but had planned to return in 2013 or '14. Bird wants to work again and there's nothing contractual that binds him to the Pacers. Donnie Walsh and Kevin Pritchard are running the Pacers' front office now.


C'mon Woj, Walsh is just keeping Larry's seat warm.


----------



## G-Force (Jan 4, 2005)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*



Gonzo said:


> Yeah after watching Sonics Gate I don't know how a Seattle fan could ever support the Thunder.


I lived through Sonicsgate personally, very personally. I was a six-year season ticket holder and a mod here in the Sonics forum. The Sonics were a huge part of my life. It hurt like heck to lose them to OKC, especially the way the whole disgraceful mess went down.

I adopted the Celtics as one of my teams for awhile. I felt like I needed to have someone as my team. So I chose Boston because I like and respect Ray and KG.

At first, I did not pay allot of attention to the Thunder, but I eventually forgave Bennett and Stern and Schultz and the local politicians for their part in screwing over local Sonics fans. I forgave then, but I will never trust them again, especially Seattle and King County government.

In a couple months I will turn fifty and my first son will have his second birthday. I want him to enjoy NBA basketball like I have, and I hope that he will never have to live through losing "his team" like we lost the Sonics.

I feel for the Sacramento Kings fans. They have been through years of drama, hope and ultimately disappointment. I have already been through what they are experiencing now, and I am sorry that they are losing their team. It is unfortunate that in professional sports, the decisions of a few powerful individuals can be so detrimental to thousands of loyal fans.

G


----------



## FreeMason Jr. (Jul 12, 2004)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*

Stay away from Buford, Seattle. He's ours :rant:


----------



## FSH (Aug 3, 2002)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*

First thing the new owners got to do is sit down with Cousins and tell him he is the future of that team and to grow the hell up. Cousins has shown he is gonna be a beast in the league if he would just mature...I think if these new owners sit down with the guy and tell him they want him to grow up and be the face of that team it would help him alot

Also bring in a guy that will help him Mature. Either a veteran to add to the roster or a guy in the front office


----------



## FSH (Aug 3, 2002)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*

Also try to shed these horrible contract. Garica/Salmons/Brooks/Thorton/Outlaw and keep Tyreke if they can because i think he will bounce back will a owner that shows he cares about the team


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*

Keeping Cousins is a mistake. You're a brand new team, you don't want to start with that immature cancer as their star player. They have some good looking big men waiting to get big minutes anyways. Trade Cousins to the highest bidder and build some character, something the Kings have been missing for years.


----------



## FSH (Aug 3, 2002)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*



R-Star said:


> Keeping Cousins is a mistake. You're a brand new team, you don't want to start with that immature cancer as their star player. They have some good looking big men waiting to get big minutes anyways. Trade Cousins to the highest bidder and build some character, something the Kings have been missing for years.


You really gonna find anyone with as much potential as Cousins? Your right that Kings dont have character but that is the reason why Cousins is still immature. The Maloofs didnt seem to care about bringing in someone to lead this team but the new owners im betting will. If Cousins see a new city that wants a basketball team badly and will support the team like crazy. Bring in some Vets to lead the team and a owner that will help Cousins mature i think he will be fine

He is still really young i think if the new Owners sit down with him and show him they are gonna build around him i think he will grown up


----------



## roux (Jun 20, 2006)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*



R-Star said:


> Keeping Cousins is a mistake. You're a brand new team, you don't want to start with that immature cancer as their star player. They have some good looking big men waiting to get big minutes anyways. Trade Cousins to the highest bidder and build some character, something the Kings have been missing for years.


I couldn't agree more.. when you are buying something as big as an nba team you are going to want total control over the direction its going to go... clean house, get rid of bad contracts and trade anything worth a damn and try to stockpile draft picks


----------



## FSH (Aug 3, 2002)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*



roux2dope said:


> I couldn't agree more.. when you are buying something as big as an nba team you are going to want total control over the direction its going to go... clean house, get rid of bad contracts and trade anything worth a damn and try to stockpile draft picks


Once again who are you gonna find that has as much potential as Cousins? Sactown as a whole was a cancer and so where the Maloofs. If the new Owners show Cousins that the city want a good basketball team and they want him to be the face of it i think he will grow up. 

But ya would be a great idea for a new team to trade a 22 y/o 18/10 guys :uhoh:


----------



## FSH (Aug 3, 2002)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*

Unless Seattle can get f'n Kyrie Irving i dont see why you wouldnt atleast give Cousins a chance to grown up in a new City. I think being in Sacramento with that ownership was a bring reason Cousins is still immature

Best chase i think would be keeping Cousins atleast for a year. Trading off the trash that the Maloofs have collected. Then drafting either Trey Burke or Michael Carter-Williams so the team has a real PG and not 9 undersized SG playing PG and starting Cousins/Robinson together next year


----------



## roux (Jun 20, 2006)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*



FSH said:


> Once again who are you gonna find that has as much potential as Cousins? Sactown as a whole was a cancer and so where the Maloofs. If the new Owners show Cousins that the city want a good basketball team and they want him to be the face of it i think he will grow up.
> 
> But ya would be a great idea for a new team to trade a 22 y/o 18/10 guys :uhoh:


Vin Baker was a young 18/10 guy.. this doesnt make him a franchise cornerstone... and it would clearly depend on what you could get for him too, i am not saying give him away for nothing, but if you can get a stockpile of firsts for him its not that crazy


----------



## FSH (Aug 3, 2002)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*



roux2dope said:


> Vin Baker was a young 18/10 guy.. this doesnt make him a franchise cornerstone... and it would clearly depend on what you could get for him too, i am not saying give him away for nothing, but if you can get a stockpile of firsts for him its not that crazy


Lets be serious Cousins has more potential in his left finger then Vin Baker ever had. Unless they can get a top 5 pick for Cousins there is no one in the draft with his potential and there isnt many in the NBA


----------



## roux (Jun 20, 2006)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*



FSH said:


> Lets be serious Cousins has more potential in his left finger then Vin Baker ever had. Unless they can get a top 5 pick for Cousins there is no one in the draft with his potential and there isnt many in the NBA


All i am saying is i watched Vin Baker do exactly what Cousins is doing on similarly bad teams.. unless you think cousins is the next patrick ewing i dont think he has an enormous amount of untapped potential.. I mean how much do you think he can statistically improve?


----------



## FSH (Aug 3, 2002)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*



roux2dope said:


> All i am saying is i watched Vin Baker do exactly what Cousins is doing on similarly bad teams.. unless you think cousins is the next patrick ewing i dont think he has an enormous amount of untapped potential.. I mean how much do you think he can statistically improve?


If he grows up and the team brings in a real PG and another scorer to help him...Alot


----------



## G-Force (Jan 4, 2005)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*

Hopefully the new owners will be able to find and acquire a good GM and coach from the beginning. Build up a team with quality, high-character players over time. If a player does not get into the new direction of the team, trade him away. Do the Kings still have all of their future first round draft picks?


----------



## G-Force (Jan 4, 2005)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*

Also, who are good candidates for GM and head coach?


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*



FSH said:


> Lets be serious Cousins has more potential in his left finger then Vin Baker ever had. Unless they can get a top 5 pick for Cousins there is no one in the draft with his potential and there isnt many in the NBA


No he ****ing doesn't. Vin Baker had crazy potential when he was young. And look what happened. 

I'll go out on a limb and say Vin's career will be better than Cousins.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*

And as far as what you get back for Cousins, how the hell is Kyrie Irving the high water mark? That trade would never happen. You can name off endless bad attitude big men who had endless potential but ended up being a negative for their teams. No ones giving up a star for Cousins. The best you could hope for is a Rudy Gay type of return, which the Kings should take.

FSH is over rating the shit out of Cousins here. Hes a low FG% offensive big man who can grab rebounds. He doesn't defend well. Can't block. Isn't a good passer. Oh, did anyone mention he has the worst attitude in the league? And when I said low FG%, I mean its ****ing terrible.


I wouldn't take him on the Pacers for free.


----------



## FSH (Aug 3, 2002)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*



R-Star said:


> FSH is over rating the shit out of Cousins here. Hes a low FG% offensive big man who can grab rebounds. He doesn't defend well. Can't block. Isn't a good passer. Oh, did anyone mention he has the worst attitude in the league? And when I said low FG%, I mean its ****ing terrible.


Seriously the best players he has around him is Isiah Thomas. Let that sink in. This team is terrible the Maloof signed a bunch of trash and put nothing into this team. You would be jumping up and down shouting off roof tops if Hibbert was putting up the numbers Cousins was. Im not overrating anything Cousins is a good player that people like to hate one because of him being immature

And really who does he have to give him the ball? Who does he have to pass the ball to when he is double teamed? Also Cousins is a pretty good passer guy is averaging almost 3apg and dam close to leading the Kings in apg. Also he is top 20 in the league in PER that everyone drools over


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*



FSH said:


> Seriously the best players he has around him is Isiah Thomas. Let that sink in. This team is terrible the Maloof signed a bunch of trash and put nothing into this team. You would be jumping up and down shouting off roof tops if Hibbert was putting up the numbers Cousins was. Im not overrating anything Cousins is a good player that people like to hate one because of him being immature
> 
> And really who does he have to give him the ball? Who does he have to pass the ball to when he is double teamed? Also Cousins is a pretty good passer guy is averaging almost 3apg and dam close to leading the Kings in apg. Also he is top 20 in the league in PER that everyone drools over


Roy Hibbert is one of the best big men in the league at defense. He sucks at offense this year, but if he was averaging 17ppg on 43.6% shooting I wouldn't want anyone to give him the ball.


You bring up that Cousins has no one to pass to, well who does Kyrie have to pass to? You don't see him crying. You don't see John Wall crying. The fact that you are trying to blame everyone but Cousins is odd. Also just as odd is you haven't mentioned defense once so far in a post.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*

Come on, guys like Cousins enter the league every couple of years, and there's no predicting whether they're going to pan out. Derrick Coleman and Vin Baker spent some years putting up good stats before falling off but never really "put it together". Zach Randolph had to bounce around for a few years and have three different franchises give up on him before becoming a real building block in Memphis. Eddie Griffin was such a problem he wasn't able to even stick around as a roleplayer and wound up dead. Andray Blatche is finally becoming a useful player on a playoff team eight years in and after being amnesty'ed. Nobody knows if Beasely is ever going to get it, but it looks like franchise number three is already looking to give him away. Josh Smith has managed to stay borderline sane long enough to be a borderline all-star for years without ever actually getting there. 

I think this is the wrong time for the Kings/Sonics ownership group to make a decision on Cousins. Wait until the summer, when teams have more cap space and newly-drafted rookies to trade, and a make a decision as to whether you want to ship out some of the "supporting" cast there and get stable vets who can throw a decent entry pass around the Cousins/Thompson/Robinson frontcourt or if it's time to move on from Cousins and avoid giving him the chance to sour the fans in Seattle further.


----------



## edabomb (Feb 12, 2005)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*

Not sold on this - feel really bad for Sacramento.

Great to see G-Force back, now we just need Scinos to pop up.

I always left a link to the Sonics forum in my bookmarks - http://www.basketballforum.com/seattle-supersonics/


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*

I'm actually fairly excited about this potential move. I never truly adopted a favorite NBA in my life, but the Sonics were the closest I came to it in my childhood. I will be paying close attention to everything that goes down with this move.


----------



## 29380 (Feb 23, 2009)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*

*These dozen owners hold sway over decision on Kings' future
*


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

Going to be interesting.


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*

Herb Simon's personal connection to Seattle certainly makes this more interesting. Also, Larry Tanenbaum seems like a potentially influential wild card in this whole battle given what he did for the NHL. 

I'll be personally pulling for Seattle, but it will be interesting to see how it all plays out either way.


----------



## letsgoceltics (Aug 19, 2012)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*

Feel badly for Kevin Johnson.


----------



## 29380 (Feb 23, 2009)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*



> WojYahooNBA The NBA committees have voted no to relocation of Kings to Seattle, sources tell Y! Sports.


...


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

*Re: UPDATE: Maloofs to sell 65 percent of Kings to Chris Hansen group in Seattle*



> ‏@WindhorstESPN Just filed to http://ESPN.com : Sources tell ESPN a committee of NBA owners voted against moving the Kings to Seattle today.


...


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

*Re: UPDATE: NBA committees have voted no to relocation of Kings to Seattle*

I have to say I'm glad to hear it. Seattle needs to have an NBA team. The big problem here is the players. They are not close to being competitive. Major roster reconstruction project.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

*Re: UPDATE: NBA committees have voted no to relocation of Kings to Seattle*

Well, the NBA is about to get sued I am guessing.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

*Re: UPDATE: NBA committees have voted no to relocation of Kings to Seattle*

If someone local can come up with an acceptable offer that puts it to bed. So long as the team remains with the Maloofs there are bound to be legal implications. 

Surprised that the league isn't willing to do what it takes to be rid of the brothers Maloof honestly,


----------



## tha supes (Aug 12, 2003)

*Re: UPDATE: NBA committees have voted no to relocation of Kings to Seattle*

I'm happy for Sacramento, but I'm really sad because this is likely the last of Chris Hansen's attempts to bring Pro Basketball to Seattle, and he was the only guy who could've got it done.

NBA is deciding it's done with Seattle for good, or for now, which is awhile. But in doing so, they're "controversially" doing the right thing by not righting a wrong, by not prying another team to replace a team.

There's good and bad, as there would have been either way.



RollWithEm said:


> I have to say I'm glad to hear it. Seattle needs to have an NBA team. The big problem here is the players. They are not close to being competitive. Major roster reconstruction project.


building around Isiah Thomas (returning to Seattle) and Cousins who could've got his head on straight with a fresh start in a new city (remains to be seen if he can do it in SAC) would've been alright.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

*Re: UPDATE: NBA committees have voted no to relocation of Kings to Seattle*

Devastating for the Kings franchise at this point. Hansen and Balmer would be great owners and Seattle is a great city. Not that I don't like Sacramento, but you have two owners that have shown they want to really get behind the team. The longer this thing is in the hands of the Maloofs (who wanted to sell to Seattle) the worse it is for the team and for the NBA as a whole.

Not sure I follow the committee's logic here.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

*Re: UPDATE: NBA committees have voted no to relocation of Kings to Seattle*

that's too bad, just going to stay a welfare team and feed off the Laker teat


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

*Re: UPDATE: NBA committees have voted no to relocation of Kings to Seattle*

Everyone is expecting big changes in Sacramento now, but I don't see it. Nobody wants to go play there. They need to draft well and just keep building around Cousins (assuming he can ever get his head on straight). Get rid of Tyreke Evans who looks like he doesn't want to be there at all (plus he's not quite the player everyone thought he was during his rookie season).


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

*Re: UPDATE: NBA committees have voted no to relocation of Kings to Seattle*

and meanwhile check out sacramento's picks owed to other teams - somehow they're almost worse off than the Lakers in this regard

http://basketball.realgm.com/nba/draft/future_drafts/detailed


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

*Re: UPDATE: NBA committees have voted no to relocation of Kings to Seattle*

Damn. Who did they get for those picks that they thought was worth it? At least their first round pick next year is Top-12 protected, and I'm sure they'll be in the Top 12.


----------



## JonMatrix (Apr 8, 2003)

*Re: UPDATE: NBA committees have voted no to relocation of Kings to Seattle*

They aren't giving up that first rounder anytime soon.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

*Re: UPDATE: NBA committees have voted no to relocation of Kings to Seattle*

Their first round pick is top 10 protected all the way through 2017. Should they not have fallen below by then, it turns into a second round draft pick. Kings are ok on that front.


----------



## tha supes (Aug 12, 2003)

*Re: UPDATE: NBA committees have voted no to relocation of Kings to Seattle*

UPDATE: Seattle group ups the value of the Kings to 675 million, 100 million more then the original offer that the SAC group plans to match, but SAC group are reportedly still looking for additional investors.


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

*Re: UPDATE: NBA committees have voted no to relocation of Kings to Seattle*

Going to be very interesting to see how this all plays out.


----------



## JonMatrix (Apr 8, 2003)

*Re: UPDATE: NBA committees have voted no to relocation of Kings to Seattle*

I kinda feel bad for Kevin Johnson, he keeps coming up with miracles that make it look like the Kings are staying and then something else always happens to keep that from happening.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

*Re: UPDATE: NBA committees have voted no to relocation of Kings to Seattle*

Can the league just give Seattle an expansion team already? They can't lose this investment group, but Sacramento's a great basketball market when the Kings are good.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

*Re: UPDATE: NBA committees have voted no to relocation of Kings to Seattle*

F- that, the league is already overexpanded and full of crap teams as it is - send the bobcats to seattle and send Memphis to the eastern conference


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

*Re: UPDATE: NBA committees have voted no to relocation of Kings to Seattle*



e-monk said:


> and meanwhile check out sacramento's picks owed to other teams - somehow they're almost worse off than the Lakers in this regard
> 
> http://basketball.realgm.com/nba/draft/future_drafts/detailed


One non lottery first rounder and 3 second rounders won't hurt them. I mean its not like Evans, Thomas Robinson, cousins, Jason Thompson and hummer frediate are turning them around either. 


Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

*Re: UPDATE: NBA committees have voted no to relocation of Kings to Seattle*

just indicative of bad management and poor decision making


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

*Re: UPDATE: NBA committees have voted no to relocation of Kings to Seattle*



> Fate of the Sacramento Kings to be decided today in Dallas
> 
> For the last 28 months, we here at Cowbell Kingdom have had the privilege of covering the most interesting bad basketball team in the NBA. That’s how long we have been mired in relocation chatter – 28 months. We have covered the Anaheim fiasco, the attempt to build a new arena in the Rail Yards, the Virginia Beach situation and now the battle with Seattle.
> 
> ...


http://www.cowbellkingdom.com/2013/05/15/fate-of-the-sacramento-kings-to-be-decided-today-in-dallas/


----------



## Floods (Oct 25, 2005)

*Re: UPDATE: Fate of the Sacramento Kings to be decided today in Dallas*

I thought them staying in Sacramento was already decided?


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

Kings are staying in Sacramento.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

Unfortunate that they're Balmer/Hansen aren't getting the team. They would have provided the coin necessary to make the Kings (Sonics) a competitive team. This hodgepodge group of owners in Sacramento are going to keep the Kings near the bottom 10 for the foreseeable future. Tough day.


----------



## JonMatrix (Apr 8, 2003)

Hibachi! said:


> Unfortunate that they're Balmer/Hansen aren't getting the team. They would have provided the coin necessary to make the Kings (Sonics) a competitive team. This hodgepodge group of owners in Sacramento are going to keep the Kings near the bottom 10 for the foreseeable future. Tough day.


So are you saying that this group is going to be like the ownership of the Hawks in the mid 00's?


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Hibachi! said:


> Unfortunate that they're Balmer/Hansen aren't getting the team. They would have provided the coin necessary to make the Kings (Sonics) a competitive team. This hodgepodge group of owners in Sacramento are going to keep the Kings near the bottom 10 for the foreseeable future. Tough day.


at least they'll get to keep their picks...


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/9286584/mayor-says-deal-sell-sacramento-kings-signed

Kevin Johnson is claiming that the deal to sell the Kings to a local group has been signed.


----------

