National Basketball Association

[Bellaboo]

Why did each of those cities lose their franchises? Does OKC have the same problems as those franchises?

Absolutely not. We have a waiting list for season tickets. The franchise is making money. A better than average product. This franchise will be here in 20 years. It's the only professional show in the state.

[SoonerDave]

In 1998, the low point and deep into the Blake era, OU averaged over 70,000 fans a game. Not only is that not bad, it's really impressive. Any other examples? Average attendance never dipped below 66,000 at any time during the 1990s.

And that is one of the single biggest pieces of fiction OU has ever produced, which I'm sure is tickets sold, not bodies in the seats. I went to games in that era and I remember walking in, fully ready to buy a ticket, and a guy hands me a 50-yard-line, upper deck, chairback seat, and there wasn't a soul around me. The north and south endzones were all-but empty on a gorgeous Saturday afternoon. 70K in attendance? Give me a physical break. Not even close. OU, insofar as that goes, really only cares about paid attendance, and there are undoubtedly plenty of ways to manufacture/bend/inflate those numbers for whatever PR purpose might be at hand, but as far as people actually there? No way.

[SoonerDave]

Well I guess we know who will win the title again next year if GS stays the same with no significant injuries. I just can't see how this is good for the NBA.

As long as the ratings are going up for the finals, the NBA doesn't give a darn. The NBA is learning what the NFL learned, but forgot, from about 20 years ago - fans love dynasties. The NFL became what it is by virtue of dynasties like the Cowboys, the 49ers, and the Steelers. Right now, the Patriots are the love-em-or-hate-em franchise of the NFL for precisely the same reason, and the fact they've created this dynasty in the era of free agency is all the more phenomenal.

So if you look to the NBA for a solution to the "superteam problem," remember *they* don't see it as a problem. Their ratings are up, no matter how lopsided the quality of competition is.

[SoonerDave]

Average paid attendance. But I guess that's what matters to the business end. There were lots of games actual attendance wasn't near that. I went to many.

Bingo.

[SoonerDave]

Why are we any different than New Orleans and Memphis with similar per capita incomes and smaller population? Those cities don't seem to fret. Why do we so much?

Last I checked, New Orleans existed because the NBA wanted it to for political reasons, not because they were fiscally successful. Memphis is in a boat similar to OKC, but they have a natural draw as an entertainment region that OKC doesn't have...it's gotten *fantastically* better in the last decade, to be sure...

[Laramie]

You're correct Dan.

Oklahoma City has a strong local Oklahoma ownership group headed by an Oklahoman who has had a dream since childhood to own a major league franchise and brand it with our city's name.

Seattle became venerable when they neglected the NBA for MLB & NFL. The Emerald City have top 5 facilities for MLB & NFL; KeyArena did not possess money-making amenities to sustain the NBA long-term.

The only cities that pose any threat for NBA relocation at this time are Seattle, Mexico City & Louisville. Louisville's demographics almost mirror those of OKC & Memphis, because it is a strong basketball market capable of NBA support with an NBA-ready city owned facility.

Below is a link with an index that rank markets according to:

Market Size
Fan Support (percentage of arena filled per game)
Future Market Growth
Team Heritage (franchise history, including years spent in market and playoffs/titles)
All-Time Winning Percentage
Fan Cost Index
Market Competition (considering other attractions and pro teams competing for dollars)

Link: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1...power-rankings

[dcsooner]

Sure, but you're just measuring it by OU's very high standards. 6,000-8,000 empty seats looks like a lot, but there that still results in 66,000 in attendance. Even if you argue another few thousand bought tickets and didn't show, I don't think OU ever dipped below 60,000 average. Even today, OU's worst attendance in the '90s would rank third in the Big 12 last season (OSU was third with an average of 57,688).

My point is, if people in this thread have been to other NBA arenas, they'd realize that NBA arenas are half empty all the time. Like, literally half empty. A number of teams in small markets had an average of 4-5,000 seats that went unpaid on average for the entire season... OKC hasn't even had a single non-blizzard game like that ever. Yet, people are already talking about them moving with both great attendance and loyal ownership. The demand for new arenas was sparked by the move towards new suites so that's not really a factor yet either. The Peake is fine until there's some new money-making arena amenity. I don't understand this thread besides some kind of self-depricating woe-is-me attitude. There are just no signs OKC's franchise is in any danger at all.

Agree, I think Oklahomans are insecure. Support the Thunder as "our" team while winning big or losing ( which can and will at some point occur) and they will not leave. The value of the Thunder is not only in wins and losses but for me "pride" that MY home State is home to one of only 30 NBA teams that so many other cities covet.

[Bellaboo]

Agree, I think Oklahomans are insecure. Support the Thunder as "our" team while winning big or losing ( which can and will at some point occur) and they will not leave. The value of the Thunder is not only in wins and losses but for me "pride" that MY home State is home to one of only 30 NBA teams that so many other cities covet.

+1

[FighttheGoodFight]

Listening to a podcast today about how owners are now a lot less likely to go over cap in the next years as the Warriors are so dominate they feel it isn't worth it to overpay for no chance at a title. Now thats a big impact of a league with little parity.

[Jersey Boss]

Seattle
Vancouver
Kansas City *
San Diego *

The last four cities that lost their franchises. It can happen.

* Same franchise. KC relocated to SD.

[Jersey Boss]

And that is one of the single biggest pieces of fiction OU has ever produced, which I'm sure is tickets sold, not bodies in the seats. I went to games in that era and I remember walking in, fully ready to buy a ticket, and a guy hands me a 50-yard-line, upper deck, chairback seat, and there wasn't a soul around me. The north and south endzones were all-but empty on a gorgeous Saturday afternoon. 70K in attendance? Give me a physical break. Not even close. OU, insofar as that goes, really only cares about paid attendance, and there are undoubtedly plenty of ways to manufacture/bend/inflate those numbers for whatever PR purpose might be at hand, but as far as people actually there? No way.

They were counting arms and legs.

[warreng88]

It will be interesting to see what GSW will do to keep their people together. KD, Klay and Draymond are the only ones signed through next year, almost everyone else is an UFA. This includes Curry, Iggy, Livingston, Zaza, Varejao, David West and McGee. With their current roster, they are at $107.5MM and that is without the increases that KD, Klay and DG get next year. I know they will sign Steph to max, they have to and with as big of an idiot as he has been in the past, McGee definitely made himself some money this post season. I am not sure what they are going to do with Iggy or the others, but I am not 100% sure it matters. If they can keep the big four, they will have people knocking down their door to get on the team, just to win a championship.

[FighttheGoodFight]

It will be interesting to see what GSW will do to keep their people together. KD, Klay and Draymond are the only ones signed through next year, almost everyone else is an UFA. This includes Curry, Iggy, Livingston, Zaza, Varejao, David West and McGee. With their current roster, they are at $107.5MM and that is without the increases that KD, Klay and DG get next year. I know they will sign Steph to max, they have to and with as big of an idiot as he has been in the past, McGee definitely made himself some money this post season. I am not sure what they are going to do with Iggy or the others, but I am not 100% sure it matters. If they can keep the big four, they will have people knocking down their door to get on the team, just to win a championship.

Check this article:
http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/1...017-nba-finals

They will have two years of pretty bad tax bills (barring another cap hike happens) then they trade away Klay and are good to go with the big 3.

[Bellaboo]

* Same franchise. KC relocated to SD.

I always thought that KC went to Sacramento ?

[king183]

Check this article:
http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/1...017-nba-finals

They will have two years of pretty bad tax bills (barring another cap hike happens) then they trade away Klay and are good to go with the big 3.

What if they're willing to pay that tax bill in order to keep winning? GSW owners are raking in cash. With the new arena, they'll be raking in even more cash. Perhaps they'll decide to pay the tax and view it as an investment in multiple titles and the money that brings.

[FighttheGoodFight]

What if they're willing to pay that tax bill in order to keep winning? GSW owners are raking in cash. With the new arena, they'll be raking in even more cash. Perhaps they'll decide to pay the tax and view it as an investment in multiple titles and the money that brings.

Oh for two years the will pay the tax bill no problem. Then I imagine they would trade away Klay and still be in the tax but it all depends on how much they sign Durant and Curry for this summer.

[Eric]

I always thought that KC went to Sacramento ?

I show that KC went to Sacremento. SD went to LA (Clippers).

[dankrutka]

GS will pay a huge tax bill, but even for them, but there's a point where it become untenable. First, the owners are paying for the new arena, which is extremely expensive and cuts into their profits and spending. Second, there are CBA rules that limit how they can spend money. The real advantage that they'll have is that ring-chasing veterans are going to play there for the minimum to get a title.

[SoonerDave]

It will be interesting to see what GSW will do to keep their people together. KD, Klay and Draymond are the only ones signed through next year, almost everyone else is an UFA. This includes Curry, Iggy, Livingston, Zaza, Varejao, David West and McGee. With their current roster, they are at $107.5MM and that is without the increases that KD, Klay and DG get next year. I know they will sign Steph to max, they have to and with as big of an idiot as he has been in the past, McGee definitely made himself some money this post season. I am not sure what they are going to do with Iggy or the others, but I am not 100% sure it matters. If they can keep the big four, they will have people knocking down their door to get on the team, just to win a championship.

It could be one of the most disproportionately superior teams among most professional sports ever; if not, it sure puts them in that discussion. It's even more telling that other GM's are basically saying, "why bother" if you realize you are struggling to get one, maybe two star players on your squad, and then realize you're fighting a team with arguably four-plus. It's like fighting a hurricane with an eye dropper.

Also, I did see that while finals viewership numbers were up, overall NBA viewership was down for the year.

[Jersey Boss]

I always thought that KC went to Sacramento ?

My bad. I was mixing up California cities beginning with the letter "S". With a little thought on my part I would have seen the linkage between Sacramento Kings and Kansa City Royals. San Diego was in Buffalo prior to moving sometime in the early 70's.

[warreng88]

It could be one of the most disproportionately superior teams among most professional sports ever; if not, it sure puts them in that discussion. It's even more telling that other GM's are basically saying, "why bother" if you realize you are struggling to get one, maybe two star players on your squad, and then realize you're fighting a team with arguably four-plus. It's like fighting a hurricane with an eye dropper.

Also, I did see that while finals viewership numbers were up, overall NBA viewership was down for the year.

It will be interesting to see what happens in the years to come. I remember watching "The Decision" where LeBron went to Miami and wanted to build a dynasty with Bosh and Wade and everyone jumped on the bandwagon to get on that team to win a championship. Then LeBron left, Bosh had a lot of personal injuries and Wade left a few years later and they finished 41-41 in 16-17 not going to playoffs for the first time in almost ten years.

I wonder if when they sign Curry long term if any one of those four will want to branch back out and do something different. They all have their championships, so at what point in time does Draymond want to go back to Michigan where he is from, KD to DC or Klay to LA (Clips or Lakers)? I don't know what goes through these guy's heads, but they have more money than they could spend in 10 lifetimes and do they just want to be on a team that is an HOV lane for a championship? I know a lot of them are very competitive and that might affect their decisions in the future.

[Jersey Boss]

From 538. com and Nate Silver

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...cid=538twitter

..According to this metric, the Warriors are running slightly behind the NFL-best 2007 New England Patriots — and neither has anything on Joe DiMaggio and the 1939 New York Yankees, who compiled 106 wins and swept the Cincinnati Reds in the World Series.

I would have thought the 27 Yanks. Interesting chart in the link comparing Warriors to teams in other pro sports( NHL not included).

[dankrutka]

Just getting ready to post that 538 link. Interesting analysis.

[Eric]

From 538. com and Nate Silver

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...cid=538twitter

..According to this metric, the Warriors are running slightly behind the NFL-best 2007 New England Patriots — and neither has anything on Joe DiMaggio and the 1939 New York Yankees, who compiled 106 wins and swept the Cincinnati Reds in the World Series.

I would have thought the 27 Yanks. Interesting chart in the link comparing Warriors to teams in other pro sports( NHL not included).

The baseball teams are generally more impressive in my book. The reason I say this is that your best pitcher doesn't play every day like in the NBA, NFL, etc.

[AP]

Considering there is no salary cap in baseball, I don't find it impressive at all. Just buy all of the best players.