Interesting... wont happen though

FOX Sports on MSN - NBA - Report: Microsoft CEO to make bid for Sonics (http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/7878668?MSNHPHMA)

"They do the same thing every year. They come in at the last minute," said House Majority Leader Lynn Kessler, D-Hoquiam. "I don't see it happening."

that quote says it all about how their legislators do business. They don't have any plans to help anybody with public funds. This is why they are losing their team.....

Just throwing this out there.......because I certainly don't know.

Could this - possibly - be part of a deal that would keep the team in Seattle while some way Bennett, the NBA and Shinn have worked out a way for the Hornets to come back here?

Thinking while typing really, but could it be?

Edit: I also just saw the post about the NBA executives coming to OKC. They could be coming to talk about facilities, etc but possibly logistics of some sort of team swap deal as well?

Just throwing this out there.......because I certainly don't know.

Could this - possibly - be part of a deal that would keep the team in Seattle while someway Bennett, the NBA and Shinn have worked out a way for the Hornets to come back here?

Thinking while typing really, but could it be?

I think there are multiple possibilities, including the Hornets. Although it seems farfetched, it still doesn't seem out of the realm of possibility that OKC gets awarded an expansion franchise. The only thing I base this on is prior comments by David Stern regarding an expansion franchise in Las Vegas. Since he didn't seem opposed to an expansion franchise there in principle, but rather more in regard to gambling issues in LV, I don't think it's completely off the wall that there would be two more teams created, one in OKC and eventually one in LV, when enough pressure has been brought to bear to solve the gambling issues. I know a lot of people disbelieve the expansion franchise option, but his comments, athough vague, convinced me that it's not completely out of the question.

I simply do not feel that OKC will be left out of the NBA when all the questions are settled, and I'm usually pretty pessimistic about such things.

I simply do not feel that OKC will be left out of the NBA when all the questions are settled, and I'm usually pretty pessimistic about such things.

I agree with you betts, 100% There will be an NBA team - one way or another.

I think there are multiple possibilities, including the Hornets. Although it seems farfetched, it still doesn't seem out of the realm of possibility that OKC gets awarded an expansion franchise. The only thing I base this on is prior comments by David Stern regarding an expansion franchise in Las Vegas. Since he didn't seem opposed to an expansion franchise there in principle, but rather more in regard to gambling issues in LV, I don't think it's completely off the wall that there would be two more teams created, one in OKC and eventually one in LV, when enough pressure has been brought to bear to solve the gambling issues. I know a lot of people disbelieve the expansion franchise option, but his comments, athough vague, convinced me that it's not completely out of the question.

I simply do not feel that OKC will be left out of the NBA when all the questions are settled, and I'm usually pretty pessimistic about such things.

I think it's very possible...... Bennett could be the man that forced Seattle to upgrade their facility and he may make some money on the whole endeavor if the local ownership turns up. And Shinn has an attendance out at NO but it comes with a catch..... a LARGE lease buyout AND relocation fee. And since he is reportedly cash poor right now it would be a good time for him to find a majority owner to partner with - possibly Clay and the OKC group at that point. I know Stern would be more than happy to get rid of Shinn and this may be a good way to at least limit his involvement in the NBA.

Just another theory.... but I seriously doubt Stern and the NBA will leave OKC and/or Clay Bennett wanting after everything that both parties did for the Association in that scenario = helping the hornets & resolving what Stern called the worst lease in the league in Seattle......

There will be NO DEAL IN SEATTLE. Stern has been adament that a Key Remodel WILL NOT WORK. Seattle is only interested in a remodel. He said this as late as yesterday.

From the sounds of it, the Hornets are getting better at filling the seats down there and should be on their way to hitting their attendance goals. I think for everyone considered...an expansion is the way to go - much less drama.

OK, Seattle is in panic mode and I don't know why. None of what has happened has been a surprise in any way. I just don't understand why they are doing all of this now, when they have had as much time as is left on their lease to do this stuff before. Where was Ballmer when Shultz wanted to sell?

Really this is it, if the NBA approves the move:

Bennett maintains that the team is not for sell and says they're moving this year or in 2010. At which point, you have three possible scenarios:

1) Seattle continues to spend money on lawsuits to force the team to stay in Seattle for two more season. During that time, the Sonic's owners lose money and Seattle loses an opportunity to get rid of some debt early.

2) Microsoft CEO puts together an ownership group that offers Bennett's group an amount that can not be refused. Bennett's group makes an absurd amount of money and the Seattle based group tries to figure out how to finance the 75 million they promised the city for renovations after just overpaying for a marginally supported team.

3) Seattle accepts a buyout of the lease which includes some debt relief for Key arena and the Sonics move to Oklahoma City two years earlier and everyone is richer for it.

Now, if I was in Seattle with two great well supported major league professional organizations with fairly new state of the art facilities and good support and someone was offering to relieve some public debt on our sub-par facility in exchange for just two years, I would be pissed at our mayor for holding out for those two years, after which we'll still be in debt and without an NBA team. Stoopid.

This is great news IMO. Bennett is NOT selling the Sonics. However, as reported earlier, he will leave the "Sonics" name and the records in Seattle.

If the Washington lawmakers approve the legislation, Seattle will more than likely accept a buyout of the current lease and in return receive monetary compensation, retention of the Sonics brand, and "hope" that the next relocated or expansion franchise would be theirs.

The legislation asks for public funding for the Sonics OR another NBA franchise. They know that Clay isn't selling, but he will throw them a bone.

Stern made it clear that if Seattle attempts to "bleed" the PBC and the NBA that they will NEVER get another franchise. They know this and are preparing to part ways with the current team while keeping the Sonics infrastructure and legacy intact.

I honestly am rooting for this legislation to pass. If it does, I think we're looking at the NBA in OKC in 2008-2009.

If the Board of Governors approves the move, the Sonics are moving here, either this year or in two years. Period.

What I think is happening now is that everyone with any money and interest in keeping the Sonics in Seattle is throwing out offers as a way to throw the Board of Governors off balance and possibly sway some votes. Mark Cuban hinted that OKC would have to look a lot better than Seattle for him to be willing to vote to move the team, and they're doing everything the can to influence any other voters who might be on the fence as well.

The Washington legislature adjourns in 8 days, and I think tomorrow or Saturday is the last day a bill can be introduced. I'm pretty sure the city of Seattle's hands are tied with I-91, so it's got to come from the state. So, in two days we'll know more. Frank Chopp, Speaker of the House, was decidedly uninterested last year. Let's see what happens this year.

From the sounds of it, the Hornets are getting better at filling the seats down there and should be on their way to hitting their attendance goals. I think for everyone considered...an expansion is the way to go - much less drama.

An expansion team is definitely the least amount of drama, but it's also the least likely option. The Hornets are getting better at filling seats, but they're still averaging a thousand below their benchmark and they're one of the best teams in the NBA. Last night they only had 12 and a half thousand people at the Hawks game, so they're turning out for the other good teams. I still think there's a possibility they'll be moving.

Completely hypothetical, but I think this is the best option.

Bennett moves his franchise and leaves the Sonics name behind. The "New ownership group" buys the Memphis Grizzlies, moves them to Seattle and rebrands them as the Seattle Supersonics.

Oklahoma City now has its team, and the organization that Bennett has formed including players, management, and general office.

Memphis is the loser in this deal, but the owner is looking to sell from what I understand. Memphis scares me, as it could be a look into the future for the Oklahoma City team.

Back to the lurking shadows I go.

Could happen that way with the Hornets as well.

I had seen Memphis mentioned so I started looking in to their lease and found this story......


"Yes, I know, all contracts can be broken. But this one looks to be harder -- and more expensive -- to break than most.

There's a separate non-relocation agreement, for starters, stating that "during the first 10" seasons in FedExForum, the team "shall not relocate from the City of Memphis."

That's a simple "shall not relocate." Enforceable by injunction. Hard to see how the team would get around that.

Starting in year 10 -- which is a full six years from now -- the team can move only if certain ticket and suite sales minimums are not met.

Even then, the city and county have the right to step in and buy enough tickets or suites to meet the minimums.

But say the city and county pass on that one. Say someone wants to buy the team and move it out of town. The city and county would still have the opportunity to find a local buyer to match the purchase price.

The hurdles are starting to stack up, aren't they, Velma? And we haven't even started talking about money yet.

Any out-of-town buyer would also have to pay off the debt service on FedExForum, a number that doesn't dip below $100 million until 2015. And the buyer would have to pay back FedEx for a portion of the naming rights.

And the buyer would have to get the NBA's approval and pay the NBA's relocation fee, which would surely be a good deal more than the $25 million the Grizzlies had to pay to leave Vancouver."

Grizzlies aren't going anywhere : Columnists : Commercial Appeal (http://commercialappeal.com/news/2008/feb/29/grizzlies-are-not-leaving/)

Concerning the original topic, heres some quotes from this earlier today.......

House Speaker Frank Chopp, a strong opponent of public subsidies for a privately owned NBA team, deferred to Rep. Jeff Morris, D-Anacortes, to speak for the Democratic caucus.

Morris said it is simply too late to bring up a controversial bill - one that has not in fact been drafted yet - in this year's legislative session, which is scheduled to adjourn next week.

"There is absolutely no chance of us considering it this legislative session," Morris said.

But Rep. Morris said "because we are within the last week of session, it takes a two-thirds vote to actually get something on the floor for consideration.

"Just looking at the controversy of the other packages we've seen, there's no way we could line up a two-thirds vote to even consider it this."

Morris said the latest offer has more merit and there is "a lot more interest in pursuing something but our plans at this point are to look at it during the interim and bring it back during the 2009 session."

"More than three quarters of the money is being put up by the private sector. These are very credible people with a very credible offer on the table to move the Sonics forward to stay in Seattle. The public component is really a small part of the overall package and our hope would be that they would give us the time to hone a really good package for the $75 million and bring it back for 2009," Morris said.

Ballmer spearheading KeyArena bid, but Legislature balking (http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/basketball/354005_arena07.html)

Memphis scares me, as it could be a look into the future for the Oklahoma City team.




Something tells me we will do better than this...

Memphis Grizzlies (1995 - ) Attendance by Year (http://www.databasebasketball.com/teams/teamatt.htm?tm=Mem&lg=n)

Most definitely.

I'm thinking season tickets sales alone will come close to that orginally and in any year where they're projected to be in the playoffs...

Smells like Ballmer is just grabbing for some good PR is all this is..Waiting until the very end of the session knowing good and well nothing can get done that quickly

Pretty easy to see through this thing

You are 100% correct Easy. Some local Seattle businessmen try some last minute PR moves that don't cost them anything. How transparent is that.

You know i just have to say that I find it absolutely hilarious that cities as big as Seattle can end up in debt with their arenas. Why in the world do they build these things before they have the cash for them, and then try and recoupe the cost over 2 decades? I Just don't understand why they would be that dumb. Here we are in OKC, debt free on every venue we've built with MAPs money, and we'll be debt free on the improvements, so OKC will only be MAKING money on the Ford Cetner...like we have been. Are the local folks in places like Seattle just that stupid that they don't fund a project before it's built?

You know i just have to say that I find it absolutely hilarious that cities as big as Seattle can end up in debt with their arenas. Why in the world do they build these things before they have the cash for them, and then try and recoupe the cost over 2 decades? I Just don't understand why they would be that dumb. Here we are in OKC, debt free on every venue we've built with MAPs money, and we'll be debt free on the improvements, so OKC will only be MAKING money on the Ford Cetner...like we have been. Are the local folks in places like Seattle just that stupid that they don't fund a project before it's built?

The big difference is they use hotel and rental car taxes instead of sales taxes..... That could be the reason why it takes so long. Just a guess.

not only do they have to pay the original cost of the improvements but also the 20 years of interest. Interested in seeing how much interest that is? Just take a look at a home loan and see how much interest you pay over 30 years. Answer - it is a lot.

Well the Memphis move might have been one of the worst moves ever in NBA history. That thing has never really worked there from the start. But, from reading what's above, it looks like they'll be there a long time, so the league will just have to live with that. The Grizz should have moved to St. Louis or Louisville.

As for this 11th hour stuff... it makes me laugh. It's totally for posturing and they know the Sonics ship has sailed. Leave them the name and history and lets get rolling with the OKC Thunderbirds.

Why do we think Memphis is a worse market for the NBA than OKC? I don't really know the situation in Memphis.

They seem to like college basketball better than the NBA for one thing. The Grizzlies until last year had been a playoff team, but couldn't make it deep into the playoffs. But even playoff games weren't sold out. For a few of the Memphis University games regular season that I know of, their arena was completely sold out.

There are also NFL and NHL in Nashville. They also had minimal support when the Oilers played there.