The NBA in OKC Megathread

[Kerry]

It is funny how little some sports writers know about sports. Reading this BLOG on ESPN you would think that Seattle Sonics fans went to bed two nights ago dreaming about lollypops and chocolate streams, and then woke up to a nightmare. The fact is, the events of yesterday were 4 years in the making and the blame for the relocation lies at the feet of Seattle officials. The previous owner tried for over 3 years to have the Key arena lease changed and also asked for new arena that could generate additional revenue streams. Seattle officals said 'No' to EVERY request. So Schultz sold the team and he did Seattle a favor by selling them to Bennett. The only other offer was from Larry Ellison and he was going to move the team to San Jose the day the sale closed. This so-called good faith effort Bennett agreed to was only a side letter to Schultz - AND NO ONE ELSE! For crying out loud - it wasn't even part of the purchase agreement.

The entire NBA world new Bennett wanted to move this team to OKC - Crap, the mission statement of the PBC says right in it "To Bring an NBA Team Oklahoma". What part of this didn't anyone understand. Would Bennett have kept the team in Seattle if they had built a new arena. Yes he would of. That doesn't mean he would have wanted to. People do stuff all the time they don't want to do.

[HOT ROD]

agree Kerry. It's laughable the 'delayed' response of some of these people.

Where were their stories last year, where was the 'reaction' then, when something could have made a difference. People are crying over spilled milk - like the saying goes 'you have to live in the bed you made.!'

[HOT ROD]

The following was posted on the SeaTimes board by "seattle seasparrow".

I suggest Oklahoma Citians also do a campaign to support your right to the NBA and YOUR major-league team!!!

:

Atlanta Hawks: Owner - Michael Gearon

owners@atlantaspirit.com

Boston Celtics: Owner - Wycliffe “Wyc” Grousbeck

Boston Celtics
226 Causeway Street
Fourth Floor
Boston, MA 02114

Charlotte Bobcats: Owner - Robert L. Johnson, Michael Jordan, Cornell "Nelly" Haynes

info@bobcatsbasketball.com

Chicago Bulls: Owner - Jerry Reinsdorf

Chicago Bulls
1901 W. Madison Street
Chicago, IL 60612

Cleveland Cavaliers: Owner - Dan Gilbert, Gary Gilbert, David Katzman, Gordon Gund

Cleveland Cavaliers
One Center Court
Cleveland, Ohio 44115-4001

Dallas Mavericks: Owner - Mark Cuban

Dallas Mavericks
The Pavilion
2909 Taylor Street
Dallas, TX 75226

Denver Nuggets: Owner - E. Stanley Kroenke

nuggetsmail@pepsicenter.com

Detroit Pistons: Owner - William Davidson

PISTONS: Contact The Detroit Pistons

Golden State Warriors: Owner - Chris Cohan

Golden State Warriors
1011 Broadway
Oakland, CA 94607

Houston Rockets: Owner - Leslie Alexander

fanear@rocketball.com

Indiana Pacers: Owner - Herbert Simon, Melvin Simon

PacersInsider@Pacers.com

L.A. Clippers: Owner - Donald Sterling

Los Angeles Clippers
1111 S. Figueroa St. Suite 1100
Los Angeles, CA 90015

L.A. Lakers: Owner - Jerry Buss

LOS ANGELES LAKERS
555 N. NASH STREET
EL SEGUNDO, CA 90245

Memphis Grizzlies: Owner - Michael Heisley

Memphis Grizzlies
FedExForum
191 Beale Street
Memphis, TN 38103

Miami Heat: Owner - Micky Arison

Miami HEAT
AmericanAirlines Arena
601 Biscayne Boulevard
Miami, FL 33132

Milwaukee Bucks: Owner / President - Herb Kohl

Milwaukee Bucks
1001 N. Fourth Street
Milwaukee, WI 53203

Minnesota Timberwolves: Owner - Glen Taylor

TIMBERWOLVES: Contact Us

New Jersey Nets: Owner - Bruce Ratner

New Jersey Nets
390 Murray Hill Parkway
East Rutherford, NJ 07073

New Orleans Hornets: Owner - George Shinn

New Orleans Hornets
1250 Poydras Street, Floor 19
New Orleans, LA 70113

New York Knics: Owner - James Dolan

Madison Square Garden
Two Pennsylvania Plaza
New York, NY, 10121-0091

Orlando Magic: Chairman - Rich DeVos

MAGIC: Contact Us

Philadelphia 76ers: Chairman - Ed Snider

Philadelphia 76ers
3601 S. Broad Street
Philadelphia, PA 19148

Phoenix Suns: Owner - Robert Sarver

SUNS: Contact Us

Portland Trail Blazers: Owner - Paul Allen

Portland Trail Blazers
One Center Court, Suite 200
Portland, OR 97227

Sacramento Kings: President - John Thomas Senior VP - John Rinehart

thomas@arcoarena.com
rinehart@arcoarena.com

San Antonio Spurs: Owner - Peter Holt

SPURS: Contact The Spurs Organization

Toronto Raptors: Chairman – Larry Tanenbaum

Toronto Raptors
Air Canada Centre
40 Bay Street, Suite 400
Toronto, Ontario M5J 2X2

Utah Jazz: Owner - Larry H. Miller

Utah Jazz
301 W. South Temple
Salt Lake City, UT 84101

Washington Wizards: Owner - Abe Pollin

Washington Wizards
MCI Center, 601 F Street NW
Washington DC 20004

[solitude]

Nothing wrong with being a little proactive. Great idea, Hot Rod!

[HOT ROD]

thanks solitude.

I figure, as long as Seattle fans are doing this - OKC fans need to counter!

There should not be JUST one message coming on this (and certainly NOT ONLY from Seattle). You might assume that could sway their vote in Seattle's favor.

But we want the owners to KNOW that OKC iwll support the franchise and DESERVES to be major-league!!!!

Whenever I see anything like this pop up on the Seattle forums, I will post them here so that at least we can match and/or make sure the OKC message also exists.

[betts]

"I can't really bash Caple's column on ESPN. The fact is, Bennett has handled this whole thing horribly. It's been a marketing disaster and just because he owns a team that's heading our way doesn't mean he gets a pass. If I was in Seattle, I would be furious. Let's all be honest, we KNOW that this ownership group had one goal in mind and that was bringing the Sonics to Oklahoma City. We ALL know that. Yet, Bennett strung them along with a straight face, assured defeat of various measures that might have got him the arena, and basically has been a jerk to the people of Seattle. I think Caple is right about that. And if we all took three or four steps back, and looked at it objectively, I can't help but think most of us would arrive at a similar conclusion. It's been handled horribly from day one. I just hope he doesn't come here and jerk our chains the same way he's jerked around the people of Seattle. He's always been a steamroller type of businessman in everything he's ever done. He feels entitled. To be honest, the only nice thing I can say about Clay Bennett is that he married well. Very well, indeed. He would be nowhere without marrying into the Gaylord family, and yes, I honestly believe that. He's certainly nothing special as a businessperson, except his very super-special-sized bank account."

No flames, but I disagree entirely. I've been told by friends of three separate owners (remember, Aubrey is only one of eight) that said owners were open to the team staying in Seattle with a new arena, because it would be a great business deal and having a team there also opened up a new market for them, since it allowed them to make contacts in the region. I think they purchased the Sonics because it was a win/win situation for them, unlike the Grizzlies or the Trailblazers. Get a new arena in Seattle and you'll make money; if not, you can move a team to Oklahoma City. From everything I've been told, Clay Bennett has told the truth from day one. Build a new arena and we will stay; don't build an arena and we will go. If that is the case, Seattleites can blame the media for how horribly the whole problem has been handled. They assumed he was lying, and twisted everything to drive a wedge between him and the city. What has he done that proves he lied? I've seen nothing contradictory except for Aubrey's statement, and even Aubrey in the same interview said that if Seattle built an arena the team was staying there.

If the Sonics move here, Clay and the group are going to expect a very nice practice facility, and they will expect a new arena to be in the works at some point during Core to Shore development. He's going to want us to buy season tickets and go to the games. Seems pretty reasonable to me. I am one of the people that think the benefit of having an NBA team here is pretty high, and I'm willing to pay for the privilege because of how great I think the return will be.

I know nothing about his business acumen, but I think Clay did a very nice job hiring Sam Presti. PJ Carlesimo didn't thrill me, but he may be the best that was available. They handled the draft nicely. I've seen nothing that makes me worry about his ability to hire the right people to run a team.

[solitude]

"I can't really bash Caple's column on ESPN. The fact is, Bennett has handled this whole thing horribly. It's been a marketing disaster and just because he owns a team that's heading our way doesn't mean he gets a pass. If I was in Seattle, I would be furious. Let's all be honest, we KNOW that this ownership group had one goal in mind and that was bringing the Sonics to Oklahoma City. We ALL know that. Yet, Bennett strung them along with a straight face, assured defeat of various measures that might have got him the arena, and basically has been a jerk to the people of Seattle. I think Caple is right about that. And if we all took three or four steps back, and looked at it objectively, I can't help but think most of us would arrive at a similar conclusion. It's been handled horribly from day one. I just hope he doesn't come here and jerk our chains the same way he's jerked around the people of Seattle. He's always been a steamroller type of businessman in everything he's ever done. He feels entitled. To be honest, the only nice thing I can say about Clay Bennett is that he married well. Very well, indeed. He would be nowhere without marrying into the Gaylord family, and yes, I honestly believe that. He's certainly nothing special as a businessperson, except his very super-special-sized bank account."

No flames, but I disagree entirely. I've been told by friends of three separate owners (remember, Aubrey is only one of eight) that said owners were open to the team staying in Seattle with a new arena, because it would be a great business deal and having a team there also opened up a new market for them, since it allowed them to make contacts in the region. I think they purchased the Sonics because it was a win/win situation for them, unlike the Grizzlies or the Trailblazers. Get a new arena in Seattle and you'll make money; if not, you can move a team to Oklahoma City. From everything I've been told, Clay Bennett has told the truth from day one. Build a new arena and we will stay; don't build an arena and we will go. If that is the case, Seattleites can blame the media for how horribly the whole problem has been handled. They assumed he was lying, and twisted everything to drive a wedge between him and the city. What has he done that proves he lied? I've seen nothing contradictory except for Aubrey's statement, and even Aubrey in the same interview said that if Seattle built an arena the team was staying there.

If the Sonics move here, Clay and the group are going to expect a very nice practice facility, and they will expect a new arena to be in the works at some point during Core to Shore development. He's going to want us to buy season tickets and go to the games. Seems pretty reasonable to me. I am one of the people that think the benefit of having an NBA team here is pretty high, and I'm willing to pay for the privilege because of how great I think the return will be.

I know nothing about his business acumen, but I think Clay did a very nice job hiring Sam Presti. PJ Carlesimo didn't thrill me, but he may be the best that was available. They handled the draft nicely. I've seen nothing that makes me worry about his ability to hire the right people to run a team.

I respect that. We have differing opinions on how its all been handled, but we're both - I'm sure - excited about the NBA in Oklahoma City. And one way or another, it WILL happen.

[BG918]

I just hope instead of building a new arena we instead renovate and expand the Ford Center. I'm thinking completely renovating and expanding the team locker rooms and making them as lavish as possible, renovating the suite and club levels and also the concourses. Also the main entrance and lobby areas should be reconfigured especially as the Ford Center will have prime blvd. frontage across from the new convention center and convention hotel. It would be great to see the lobby areas expanded along Robinson with lots of glass and two main entrances: one at the current Robinson and Reno and another at Robinson and the blvd. This is also important because of the proposed mixed-use retail area that would stretch from the blvd. to Reno in between Robinson and Walker. You would want the best frontage to open up to that with a strong presence along Robinson as well as the blvd.

Then build the practice facility/team HQ in a new facility across the street (Reno) where the Cox is. Why? That place will be torn down once the new much larger and nicer CC is built to the south and that's prime redevelopment land, maybe the best downtown. Any practice facility/HQ would be integrated into a mixed-use development there. Imagine how cool it would be to have retail/shops/residential/office/etc. located all around the Ford Center? That area of downtown will be unrecognizable in the next decade if everything comes together.

[betts]

I think the Cox will become the new arena. There's more space available for restaurants and retail, and if we're down to only one arena we have very little chance of continuing to be one of the cities in consideration for the Big Twelve basketball tournament.

[BDP]

I can't really bash Caple's column on ESPN. The fact is, Bennett has handled this whole thing horribly. It's been a marketing disaster and just because he owns a team that's heading our way doesn't mean he gets a pass. If I was in Seattle, I would be furious.

He definitely shouldn't get a free pass, and he obviously isn't going to get one. The reality is that any owner that moves a team is vilified by that market and, usually, the press in general. I am in no way a Clay Bennett fan and I think Aubrey's statement has turned out to be the biggest liability of them all. These guys typically operate with unchecked hubris and their political backgrounds do nothing to help their credibility, but the real problem is the fact that these sports teams are so heavily subsidized in the first place. It's very much a case of dancing with the devil. Once those deals are made, the people of the city feel they are owed unconditional loyalty beyond what would be expected in any other normal business agreement. This happens even in non-athletic agreements with municipalities or states.

Let's all be honest, we KNOW that this ownership group had one goal in mind and that was bringing the Sonics to Oklahoma City. We ALL know that. Yet, Bennett strung them along with a straight face, assured defeat of various measures that might have got him the arena, and basically has been a jerk to the people of Seattle.

You may be right, but as shifty as they are, I can't in anyway imagine that this ownership would leave the Puget Sound if they got what they are asking for. In fact, no NBA owner would approve a move if Seattle built a new facility. The NBA wants to be in Seattle, but Seattle doesn't like their terms. It's really not as complicated as the emotional reactions make it out to be. The onwers want the money of a market like Seattle, but they aren’t going to stick their neck out to take a stand against demands that they themselves have either made or very much want to reserve the right to make.

I do believe they want a team in Oklahoma City, but they are not going to give up the hundreds of millions they would stand to make in Seattle with a new arena and, again, neither would the NBA. If anything, they'd sell the team and invest those proceeds in the next NBA opportunity that came along. People can whine about the group and what they have done, but Seattle and Washington were very clear from the beginning: They did not want to sign any checks and they did not want to help in any real way. They didn't even vote on it. In fact, all they did was pass a measure that made it HARDER to make money in Seattle, not easier. They took a principled stand and now, faced with the results of that stand, they want to force a money losing business to stay. This would be like Oklahoma City placing performance requirements on GM and then suing them to stay when it became too hard for GM to make money operating in Oklahoma City.

And if we all took three or four steps back, and looked at it objectively, I can't help but think most of us would arrive at a similar conclusion. It's been handled horribly from day one.

I can't say that. Objectively, a market went stale and a business in that market is trying to move into a new up-and-coming market with more market potential. That is the only objective outlook, really. The real problem is the issue of public subsidy. Seattle wanted out of that game, and I 100% respect that, but, unfortunately for Seattle, that didn't stop the professional sports industry (or many large industries to be fair) from still playing by those rules. Seattle said they were done with the racket, so the racket said they were done with them. End of story. It's not Oklahoma City's fault that that happens to be how the story goes or that it happens to be a pretty ugly story to begin with.

I just hope he doesn't come here and jerk our chains the same way he's jerked around the people of Seattle. He's always been a steamroller type of businessman in everything he's ever done. He feels entitled.

Well, if by jerking our chains you mean demanding public assistance, get ready to have your chain jerked. This is the nature of this businesses. Very few markets don't bend to the requests of owners and there are several markets, some larger, that would jump at the chance to give them more than what they'll ask from us (Kansas City... Las Vegas maybe...). We don't have the luxury of being a slam dunk market, like Los Angeles, that can get this stuff done privately. And even some of the the slam dunk markets help their teams out. Again, Seattle has drawn the line with Football and Baseball. They are done playing the game. That leaves the NBA out and, naturally, they're going to go market shopping. Bennett's group’s desire to move to Oklahoma City is only partially emotional. They see a chance to be a huge fish in a small pond. This is not a failing model, but they will use their leverage for sure.

To be honest, the only nice thing I can say about Clay Bennett is that he married well. Very well, indeed. He would be nowhere without marrying into the Gaylord family, and yes, I honestly believe that. He's certainly nothing special as a businessperson, except his very super-special-sized bank account.

Well, he did marry well, but I can't say that it's the only reason for his success. The reality is that he fits the mold for a professional sports team owner. He has no problem throwing his weight around. But I do think they know the value of the team in Seattle with a new facility and there is no way they would sabotage that directly. They set the bar very high, probably too high, but we have to remember that Seattle's answer was not "that's pretty rich, can we come down a bit", it was "you'll get nothing and like it".

It may be gross, and it may be a reason to avoid professional sports or large cap industries altogether, but if you're going to indict Bennett's group, like Capel did, he will have to hand out indictments to most of the league and almost all of professional sports, which, when I think about it, he probably should. Taking it out on one owner though seems misguided and uninformed, and certainly less than “objective”.

[HOT ROD]

Pretty quiet Sonics wise up here lately guys.

I should tell you that we had elections today, and we passed an initiative which now requires 2/3rd majority for any tax proposal, be it voters OR the leg.

This will significantly affect the arena situation, thereby guaranteeing that we WILL NOT build one. there is NO WAY there would ever be 2/3rds majority approve an arena here, not the leg and certainly not in the voters.

I imagine Stern would have his committee selected soon. Im guessing it will be compiled as follows:

Spurs rep
Hornets rep
Mavericks rep
Grizzlies rep
Jazz rep

whatever the case, I bet the following WONT BE a rep

Portland
LA Lakers
Golden State/Oakland
Boston
Washington Wizzards

[okclee]

It looks like with the elections that the city of Seattle had a chance to speak with their votes in regards to the Sonics and the city spoke loudly with the new initiative.

[Kerry]

I gotta say - I applaude them for opposing taxes. If OKC leaders were spending money the way their politicans do I would want it stopped also. They don't have money for a new Sonics arena but they approved $240 million for 10 miles of bike paths.

[metro]

What's wrong with bike paths? If OKC were more pedestrian/bike friendly, we'd probably have a better economy.

[JWil]

What's wrong with bike paths? If OKC were more pedestrian/bike friendly, we'd probably have a better economy.

OKC can never be like that because it's too spread out.

[okclee]

[QUOTE=Kerry;118639]I gotta say - I applaude them for opposing taxes. If OKC leaders were spending money the way their politicans do I would want it stopped also. They don't have money for a new Sonics arena but they approved $240 million for 10 miles of bike paths.[/QUOTE]


Seriously $240 million for 10 miles!! Wow!!

For the last few years Okc has been building bike paths all along the metro areas. We are spending estimated $23 million for 200 miles of bike paths.

City of Oklahoma City | Trails Master Plan

[JWil]

I just hope instead of building a new arena we instead renovate and expand the Ford Center. I'm thinking completely renovating and expanding the team locker rooms and making them as lavish as possible, renovating the suite and club levels and also the concourses. Also the main entrance and lobby areas should be reconfigured especially as the Ford Center will have prime blvd. frontage across from the new convention center and convention hotel. It would be great to see the lobby areas expanded along Robinson with lots of glass and two main entrances: one at the current Robinson and Reno and another at Robinson and the blvd. This is also important because of the proposed mixed-use retail area that would stretch from the blvd. to Reno in between Robinson and Walker. You would want the best frontage to open up to that with a strong presence along Robinson as well as the blvd.

Then build the practice facility/team HQ in a new facility across the street (Reno) where the Cox is. Why? That place will be torn down once the new much larger and nicer CC is built to the south and that's prime redevelopment land, maybe the best downtown. Any practice facility/HQ would be integrated into a mixed-use development there. Imagine how cool it would be to have retail/shops/residential/office/etc. located all around the Ford Center? That area of downtown will be unrecognizable in the next decade if everything comes together.

I disagree. Here's why:

-- The convention center needs to stay close to hotels. I realize moving it a block or two wouldn't be that big of an idea, but I'm much more in favor of razing Cox for a huge convention center (without an arena) in its spot.

-- OKC will eventually need a new arena. It's no secret the plan for the then-MAPs Arena was to "build it and they will come... we'll figure out something else if someone does come." Well, the NBA came and loved it. While the Ford Center is a very nice arena, it's designed off the previous generation's arena setup. What do I mean? Look at the Ford, the Savvis Center in St. Louis or the Arrowhead Pond in Anaheim and you'll see what I'm talking about. Then, look at Staples in LA or AAC in Dallas or KC's Sprint Center. In another 15 years, the Ford will look downright prehistoric. My hope is that a new arena will be built on the south side of the new surface street that will replace I-40. There's a ton of open area there already, and having it south of that new street would mean people could filter out of downtown both on that avenue and the new I-40, since it would only be 4-5 blocks south. Then there's room to attach team offices and a practice area for the team within or next to the arena (I think Phoenix's US Air Center has that).

-- The Ford is still a solid place. There's no need to tear it down, as it's paid for and has a long life ahead of it. Keeping the Blazers in there, holding concerts and hosting the Women's Big 12 Tournament are reasons enough to keep from razing it. Having two new multi-purpose arenas would be a great thing for OKC.

That's my take on things, anyway. At the end of the day, we already know that the Ford is a great place, but not viable for the next 70 years. That's what we're looking for here and I fully expect a new arena to be part of a Core to Shore/MAPs3 project. I think we'll see the new arena by 2016. After the freeway moves, we'll see tons of new construction south of Reno. I'd love to have a new convention center, Ford Center and new arena all in a row. Then connect that skyway to them all and all three places are joined to downtown.

[JWil]

This is something I would usually post in its own topic on other boards, but in the tradition of 45-page threads, here's something loosely-based to the Sonics situation that will generate its own talk.

Here's the ultimate reason to keep the Sonics name: Oklahoma City sonic boom tests - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Pete]

I mentioned the sonic booms and the Tinker tie-in with the name in that long thread.

I was a little kid when that was going on and remember them well.

[metro]

[QUOTE=okclee;118659]

I gotta say - I applaude them for opposing taxes. If OKC leaders were spending money the way their politicans do I would want it stopped also. They don't have money for a new Sonics arena but they approved $240 million for 10 miles of bike paths.[/QUOTE]


Seriously $240 million for 10 miles!! Wow!!

For the last few years Okc has been building bike paths all along the metro areas. We are spending estimated $23 million for 200 miles of bike paths.

City of Oklahoma City | Trails Master Plan

okclee, I don't think you understand what bike LANES are. The bike paths you are referring to are TRAILS that currently connect Lake Hefner to Lake Overholser and eventually with the Oklahoma River and Lake Stanley Draper.



Bike LANES are dedicated lanes for bicycles that run in the road next to the lanes of traffic.





Big Difference. Bike Lanes are what commuters want when deciding to give up driving to work. This is what bikers get to work safely on through city streets.

[okclee]

^^ Either way $240 million for 10 miles is the point.

[Kerry]

Yes, $24 million per mile cost more than rail! However, most of the money is going to advertising and raising awarness. The citizens also voted down a $3.5 billion transit plan. Seattle - like San Francisco - is now a dead city. They simply can't raise the money they need to continue to function. Their expenses far out-weigh their residents ability to pay. This is why OKC needs to plan 20 years out for highways, rail, airport, and other transit needs.

[solitude]

We're getting a little off-topic here, but, San Francisco is hardly a, "dead city.' I don't know about Seattle, but San Francisco is doing just fine. In fact, they are on a rebound. Tourist money, tourist money, more tourist money and a tax base that benefits from a continued renewal in the high tech industry has brought back San Francisco to the point where they are again trying to spend money on all the silly things San Francisco likes to spend money on. San Francisco - a "dead city?" Late eighties I would have worried about SF, but today? Not on your life.

[Kerry]

Yes we are way off topic but let me explain what I mean by dead. Places like Seattle and San Francisco have reached their maximum size. Infrastrucutre improvements are almost cost prohibitive and that will greatly reduce their ability to attract new business and residents in the future. In these cities the only growth will be in the suburbs. Compare them to some place like Atlanta or Phoenix that are experience simultanious city proper and suburban growth.

I am not sure about Seattle's student population but San Francisco only has 50,000 K-12 students. Compare this to say OKC Public Schools that has 40,000 students but has nearly half the population. Throw in the other school districts inside the OKC city limits and OKC has way more children. Where is San Fran's next generation going to come from? The city simply won't have the next generation of wage earners and business to support the tax expenditures.

This is the same reason Seattle will not be able to build a new arena. They just don't have the money available. Their leadership either made bad decisions in the past or punted on tough choices. They can't even afford to replace a bridge that everyone says is a top priority.

[Luke]

This is something I would usually post in its own topic on other boards, but in the tradition of 45-page threads, here's something loosely-based to the Sonics situation that will generate its own talk.

Here's the ultimate reason to keep the Sonics name: Oklahoma City sonic boom tests - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

How about a nod to our states's history in a couple of ways:

Sonic Boomers.