As reported by Field of Schemes, it appears we are going to find out the answer to Marine Layer’s recent post and poll question.
The Sacramento Bee has the story and the money quote:
“On the heels of the disappointing – but not surprising – action (or inaction) of the state and Cal Expo board, it is fair to say that the NBA has ceased its activities on the Sacramento arena front,” league representative John Moag said in an e-mail to The Bee. “However, we will continue to monitor and respond to the activities and options of others that might reasonably ensure the competitiveness and viability of the Kings’ franchise.”
Not much in-between line reading to do with that one, now is there?
Mayor Kevin Johnson is proposing an Arco remodel. The Kings and the NBA are flat out rejecting that idea. The NBA is ceasing any activities related to a new arena in Sacramento but looking for a way to reasonably ensure competitiveness of the Kings franchise.
The only question that seems to remain… Will the NBA go for an already built modern facility, like the one in Kansas City, or will they go to a temporary solution, like HP Pavilion or Key Arena, with promises of future renovations? We have a whole season to watch the answer evolve.
For an in-depth analysis on the inadequacies at ARCO, check out this article (PDF).
newballpark.org 
San Jose Kings, here we come.
Have I got an affordable solution. Move them to the Oracle–it’s already set for basketball. Rename the W’s the Oakland Warriors, and rename the Kings The Golden State Kings. Problem solved. It will be like the Lakers/Clippers deal. You’ll have full houses for the W’s, and a few thousand less and deader crowds for the Kings, but it’s working.
@jk-usa – Sure, and if the Kings play better than the W’s and casual fans start wearing purple and stop going to see the worse team, I’m sure Joe Lacob will just sit idly by and not throw a hissy fit.
Start? I’ve been seeing Kings gear in the Bay Area for years, as people jumped the Warriors losing ship.
@pjk – That kind of stopped a few years ago, when the Kings stopped being competitive. I’ve gone to a few Kings-W’s games since then. It’s not like Laker games.
I know some of my co-workers who commute to SJ/SV from the Valley are big Kings fans, so it’s not illogical to think the Kings would do well in either OAK or SJ WITHOUT hurting the Warriors. Again, assuming Vegas remains untouched, San Jose Kings does sound kind of nice! Question R.M., Jeffrey or anyone: would they be better off financially in Seattle or KC than in a shared Bay Area?
@Tony D. – Seattle wins hands down as a market, and KeyArena is still a very good basketball venue. The biggest problem there was the lease. KC would work initially, but if the team sucked attendance would fall off a cliff.
@pjk–I remember the Kings gear all around the bay area years back, but that didn’t last long. It’s way more W’s stuff now.Hopefully, the W’s will get better with the new ownership and the Kings will be Clippers North in SJ, playing 2nd fiddle. SJ can have the Kings, good luck.
Didn’t Seattle pass some “No money for sports team venues” thing a while back? I remember that being the beginning of the end for the Sonics. I just typed “seattle sports venue ban” into google and got nothing. But I remember something about that… Anybody remember this or am I going crazy?
Yes, it’s called Initiative 91 (I-91).
There it is… Ha. I am sure that complicates Seattle’s ability to attract the Kings a bit.
Kansas City is kinda full of sports options as is, and San Jose may become so in the future. There’s nothing really wrong with Key Arena, it was just an Oklahomer’s excuse to move them team to his backyard. Las Vegas…who knows…
@Nam Turk
There are certainly some problems with Key Arena. Having lived a few blocks away from it for 2 years (while the Sonics were still in town), I came up with the following opinion on it. First off, it would be the oldest arena in the NBA. Even with being renovated it still will lack some of the amenities of newer arenas. Second, it would be the smallest capacity. Even smaller than Arco arena in Sac. I’m not sure the number of suites (as Wikipedia didn’t list it for all arenas), but I imagine it would be average or less. Third, it has a terrible setup for hockey (yes, I know that has little to do with how it is for NBA, but it strengthens the point that Seattle needs a new arena). Fourth it has terrible car accessibility (many small 2 lane, 1 way roads all around it and freeway access gets really backed up although they are now working on fixing the Mercer freeway access) and there isn’t very good public transit in Seattle.
Arco on the other hand was built in 1988. Has excellent freeway access. And yet Sac finds it inadequate. So there’s no way they’d leave Arco for KeyArena. Which leaves KC, SJ, or Vegas. Vegas has a new arena planned, but not built yet, so it’s hard to comment on it. As for the other two compared to SJ, the Sprint Center in KC is newer, has slightly larger capacity, and has no winter tenant to compete with. KC is also a larger MSA than SJ (but in a smaller CSA). And in a larger CSA and MSA than Vegas. Then again, according to a portfolio.com report (see http://www.portfolio.com/resources/SportsChart.pdf ), KC is over extended for sports capacity and couldn’t handle a NBA team, while SJ and Vegas could. If it were between SJ and Vegas, I guess the question would end up being, go for the city that has a decent arena ready (although it will probably need some refurb) or go with the city that has a new arena planned and hope it gets finished (or I guess wait for it to be finished before moving?).
I went to Arco Arena once and it couldn’t believe it was only 5 years older than San Jose’s arena. Like comparing the downtown San Jose Fairmont Hotel to a $40-a-night roadside motel.
@ML- Great article post from 5 years ago. I never knew exactly the problems with Arco Arena until I read that article. It is amazing the Kings have last as long as they have in that dump.
Seattle-Key Arena is outdated as well, not as bad as Arco but still a relic in its own right. The lease was bad but the amenities were not good either there. Once the Seahawks/Mariners got their new places with public money the Sonics were through. NBA will not return to Seattle for at least 10 more years and that is if it is the only option for relocation for team and public $$ becomes available. Nothing 100% privately can get done in this City.
Kansas City- Looks good on paper. Brand new arena and no NHL/NBA tenant for miles. But KC had the Kings before and like St. Louis was deemed years ago a non-NBA city. OKC proved they were an NBA city by supporting the Hornets or team that did not bear its city name during the aftermath of Katrina. That was enough to sway the other owners that OKC was a good place for the NBA and allowed the Sonics to move there.
Anaheim- Looks good to on paper but the Lakers/Clippers will have a cow with a third team in their market. Now if the Lakers had the market to themselves then I say move to Orange County now. But 3 teams in any market is too much except for New York/New Jersey but the Kings to the East coast would unbalance the conferences.
Las Vegas- No arena and the casinos will have a cow if NBA betting is not allowed.
San Jose- Like OKC they had an NBA team “temporarily” and the W’s averaged 15,167 fans per game in San Jose with a 30 win team in 1996-1997. The next 5 years after the Oakland Arena was remodeled the attendance was less than in San Jose as one can see below and then rose again in 2003-2004
Total Average
1996-97 41 621,844 15,167
1997-98 41 500,260 12,201
1998-99 25 335,837 13,433
1999-00 41 509,152 12,418
2000-01 41 591,981 14,439
2001-02 41 593,182 14,468
2003-04 41 665,648 16,235
2004-05 41 670,368 16,350
2005-06 41 749,185 18,272
2006-07 41 742,267 18,104
2007-08 41 804,864 19,630
It took the Warriors 5 seasons to top the attendance (average wise) they got in San Jose even with a renovated Oakland Arena. It became evident that San Jose could support a team as people in the South Bay (including myself) stepped up and purchased season tickets and mini-packs. This was for a team that is not even “their own” and does not bear the San Jose name much like OKC.
Unlike the other cities Seattle, KC, Las Vegas, and Anaheim the NBA has seen proven success in San Jose in the past much like OKC.
One can infer that San Jose would be a good choice based on these #s. Also another key here is the corporate base. The Maloofs gotta be sick of trying to get public money for a new arena as that is the only way in Sacramento.
In San Jose the Sharks/Kings together would easily be able garner private support much like the 49ers/A’s to get a new arena down the road.
I know the Warriors own the Bay Area and get good attendance even though they suck and the argument can be “why mess it up”?
My rebuttal to that is the South Bay and its 2.0 million plus people hardly contribute to the Warriors because of sheer distance much like the A’s. Only 49ers get South Bay fans to show consistently and this because their games are once a week on a Sunday no less.
The Kings have tried so hard in Sacramento and went above and beyond for years and years to get something done out there. I give the Maloofs credit as most owners would have left town years ago but they showed loyalty to the region.
Too bad loyalty doesn’t translate in to $$$$.
@Ezra- Great chart! It shows clearly which markets can handle a team. San Jose gets a 100 score for an NBA team even with the Warriors nearby. Although the 64 score for MLB does not look good on the surface but this # assumes a 3rd MLB team in the CSA.
Las Vegas gets 100 for the NBA while Kansas City even with a new arena gets a 0 for NBA and NHL.
Good stuff!
@Sid–yes, the W’s drew well (90% of capacity) that year in SJ, and can probably support another team there. But you fail to mention that they sold out the previous 7 years at the old arena at 15,025 per. The next 5 years at the new Oracle, with much higher tix prices, they were horrible, winning only 19,21,19,17 and 21 games.
arco was built cheaply. somebody above mentioned that HP was built just a few years later, the same could said about the palace in det which was built around the same time as arco and it’s still clearly a more than up to standards.
if sac just put a little bit more money into that arena even 20+ years ago, it still would be more than adequate for the kings. now with it looking as there isn’t gonna be a new arena built and or that arco can’t be renovated like oracle was back in the mid 90s, they’re gonna lose their team.
Even if they could renovate ARCO, it’s way out in the middle or nowhere. A fading landmark in a big field on the Route 90 drive from the Bay Area to Lake Tahoe.
Route 80
@Sid, I think we need to be careful when we characterize the Warriors as Oakland’s team, or the Sharks as San Jose’s team. They are both regional teams, which draw fans from all corners of the Bay Area.
.
I don’t live in the south bay, so I have to admit I don’t know to what degree south bay fans follow the Warriors. I will say though that we are Warrior season ticketholders, and we sell a good number of our tickets to buyers in the south bay. So FWIW, there are fans that will make the drive up to Oracle.
15K for a 30 win team is pretty good, but I wonder how many of those 15K were fans that followed the team down to San Jose for that one year?
From what I remember, Warrior STH’s were required to buy tickets during the SJ year, or else lose their seating priority.
So I’m not sure those people would be San Jose Kings fans.
What we do know is that Larry Ellison tried to buy the Sonics and move them to San Jose—in fact he offered $50M more than the OKC boys…but they promised to keep the team in Seattle for 3-years and try to work out a deal…we now know that was all smoke and mirrors and they moved after 1—point though is that Larry E. was comfortable that the SJ/Silicon Valley would support his team if he got it—
Again, maybe it’s because I don’t live in the south bay, but is there really a big disconnect between the Warriors and the south bay. Is it the distance, the performance of the team, or just a desire to have your city’s name on the front of the jersey? Seems to me if you are a fan of the Warriors, you’d have no interest in seeing another NBA team move into your area. Kind of like if the Pittsburg Pirates were to move to San Jose, would you give up being an A’s fan?
Personally not an NBA fan anymore…prefer college hoops…so going to a Warriors game is absolutely out of the question for me—not willing to make the drive—but if there was a local team that was exciting I would go since the Tank is easy to get to for me—from what I can tell in the circles I hang with….Warriors don’t register as a big draw—cant think of anyone I know who has season tix—yet that same group has A’s, Sharks and even some ‘9er season tix.
@FC- Good points but the reason why South Bay fans buy your season tickets is because they do it on a “one off” basis. It is much to far to invest in a whole season so South Bay fans go to games here and there.
For example My brother works in Hayward and lives in San Jose with me. He gave up his season tickets because getting to Oakland from Hayward was OK but driving all the way back to San Jose after the game was such a pain that he gave up.
Because of this he dropped me 6-7 games over the course of the season for free because of the sheer distance got to him at a certain point. It turned out to be a waste of money and we both agreed that Oakland is too far for us and that we wish San Jose had an NBA team.
If the Kings move to San Jose we both would be still Warriors fans but when the Kings-Warriors play each other the “civic pride” of have San Jose on the jersey would make us both root for the Kings. Plus playing in the same division creates a good atmosphere around a rivalry.
It makes sense why the document Ezra posted stated San Jose a 100 for a potential NBA team. The Bay Area is a 2 team market and the Kings should take advantage of this for their long term health. The Warriors need the competition in the area to “breed improvement”.
http://www.athleticsnation.com/2009/3/25/810333/why-the-a-s-will-never-be#storyjump
Nobody’s going to Vegas. Read the attached post on AN, and replace “A’s” with “Kings”, and “baseball” with “basketball”. Pretty much everything else still applies.
With regards to existing arena-style facilities, there are three: Thomas & Mack Arena on the UNLV campus; the Mandalay Events Center and the MGM Grand Garden Arena. MGM Resorts own the last two, and has repeatedly made it clear that they are not interested in any sports franchises as tenants. The T&M was deemed unsuitable for an NBA franchise by David Stern during the 2007 All-Star Game. Even if it was, the National Finals Rodeo takes over the T&M between Thanksgiving and the third week of December every year.
Oakland to San Jose at 10 o’clock at night aint that bad.
@jesse- Try it after working a 9 hour day and and drinking a few beers at the game. On top of all of this you live in South San Jose. Try it and tell me what you think then…
If you’re gonna live south, might as well keep driving and live in Santa Cruz or Monterey. I need water close by, and the Guadalupe River don’t cut it for me.
The Kings aren’t going anywhere. They’ll end up building a new arena in Natomas.
jeepers… how? How does it get paid for? You live out there right? I lived there from 1999 until 2007. This “they will build a new one and get it done” thing has gone through several iterations.
Jeepers, Mr. Wilson, who’s gonna pay for the shiny new arena in Sack?
Totally OT – I’m listening to Chris Townsend on the post game show. He keeps mentioning the uncertainty surrounding 860. Can anyone shed some light on what might be happening, both in terms of ownership and programming? Are the A’s trying to purchase the station?
Congrats Giants! And hey, .500 aint all that bad!
fc, here’s my proposal: the A’s should migrate over to KNBR 1050 as part of a deal for the rights to SCCo./SJ. Making KNBR the station for both MLB teams and “helping” the Giants bottom line in the process. Again, I don’t think the Giants should get crap for the rights to SCCo./SJ, but a deal for SJ is almost a certainty.
Tony,
.
I don’t think the Giants would go for that. I think they only want the Giants’ name associated with KNBR. They will try to do whatever’s possible to keep the A’s down. No doubt moving over to 1050 would be an improvement for the A’s over 860.
@Tony D. – The Giants need 1050 as overflow for 49ers and Warriors games. The A’s wouldn’t fit into that scheme.
This is totally off topic for this article, but it was Giants Fever everywhere I went this weekend. The power of strong fan support is priceless. I’d hear KNBR from cars passing by. I’d overhear people talking about Zito or Jonathan Sanchez. Bars were crammed with orange and black with everyone’s eyes glue on flatscreen TV’s.
A good ballpark, media support and excellent rapport with fans is something the A’s could really learn from the Giants. I know each of those components are complicated to achieve and not necessarily the A’s fault. Either way, 2011 is a good time to increase those efforts.
Congrats to the Giants and their fans. The guys in uniform played to their potential and earned this. Their fans definitely deserve it. Oh, and congrats to the Sacramento River Cats. They did a great job of filling in for the Oakland Athletics this season. This 2010 team has honestly been my favorite A’s team since 2006.
Briggs, no doubt Giants Fever was everywhere.
.
I think 2011 will be a turning point for the A’s, either good or bad. Hopefully the ballpark issue will be resolved, both in terms of TR and voter approval. It also sounds like there may be some rumblings on the radio front. Whatever the case, the A’s PR department will have to work their butts off as no doubt the Giants will try to capitalize on their success.
@susanslusser
Briggs and fc,
I have a lot of friends/co-workers who love their Giants AND WHO ALSO want to see the A’s in a new yard in downtown San Jose. Along those lines, I think it’s great that the Giants are having the kind of success they are, because they’re proving each and everday that they don’t need to hold San Jose hostage to be financially sound. And when their debt-service on AT&T Park sunsets in 2017, they’ll be in even better shape. Can’t wait to experience at Diridon/SJ what Giants fans are experiencing at China Basin/SF!
I don’t know how, otherwise I’d tell you. I can tell you that when political will exists (which wasn’t the case before Kevin Johnson), and will still exists amongst ownership, things get done.