Category Archives: Basketball

01.17.11
by

CBA Talk: The NBA’s road to hell is paved with good intentions

It’s generally not well-known that the NBA was the first major pro sport to institute a salary cap. The modern form of it came in 1984, in the midst of the great Celtics-Lakers rivalry and the first season of Michael Jordan. The cap has served David Stern’s league well, controlling costs while incrementally making players richer than their counterparts in the other pro sports (to be fair, they play more than their counterparts as well). Even with a lockout that bit off a third of the 1998-99 season and the retirement of Jordan, the league’s recovery was quick and impressive. As the current season hits the midpoint, both sides are steeling themselves for another protracted battle. This time, it might last a while though it doesn’t have to.

Of the three leagues to have salary caps (NHL, NFL, NBA), the NBA is the only one to have what’s called a soft cap. The hard cap concept is simple – a team’s payroll can’t go over the limit, period. The soft cap allows teams to go over the prescribed limit ($58 million or so) to sign its own free agents for basically as much as they want. There’s also a luxury tax threshold (~$70 million) which creates a dollar-for-dollar penalty for every team whose payroll is above the threshold. Teams can also sign other teams’ free agents while over the cap, though they are restrictions in terms of what they can offer. What was initially designed as a way for teams to keep their franchise cornerstones in place has turned into an ugly monster in which most players are grossly overpaid and teams end up trading players more to get rid of contracts than to attain talent.

Exceptions were created to help teams keep their own players, which would in turn boost competition in the league. Over the past decade or so, the exact opposite has happened. One team has won five championships, another has three, and the others are perennial contenders, leaving most of the rest of league as also-rans. With a relatively short roster and the great impact a single player can have on a franchise, the results are somewhat understandable. What doesn’t make sense is the incredible number of players who get franchise-type money who are clearly best as second or third bananas, guys who really can’t carry teams.

Per Larry Coon’s NBA Salary Cap FAQ, here’s a list of the exceptions teams can use to sign free agents:

  • Larry Bird – Famously misnamed because the Celtics supposedly used it to sign their superstar (not really). Allows teams to sign their own veteran free agents (three years or more on the same team) for any amount up to the max salary. Plenty of players are worthy of the coin, such as Kobe Bryant and Tim Duncan. For every success story, there are at least two huge failures such as Gilbert Arenas, Vince Carter, Tracy McGrady and Andrei Kirilenko.
  • Early Bird (75% raise) and Non-Bird (20% raise) – Players who have been with their teams for two years can sign for a set percentage above their previous salary. These are actually pretty smart exception, though sometimes they act as preludes to big money deals via the Larry Bird exception.
  • Midlevel – Perhaps the most contentious part of the current CBA, this exception allows teams to sign one player every year at the league’s average salary ($5-6 million). This tool has been severely abused and plenty of marginal players have received 5 year, $30 million contracts as a result. Particularly poor examples of these contracts include Vladimir Radmanovic, Brian “The Custodian” Cardinal, Jerome James, and Dan Gadzuric. Not surprisingly, two of the guys I just named are on the Warriors and another was once a Warrior. The exception is also important because in its current form, it’s the maximum teams who are over the cap can offer to other teams’ free agents. The Warriors suffered in the previous CBA when this wasn’t spelled out when they lost Gilbert Arenas to the Wizards, though in hindsight this might not have been such a bad thing. The league wants to eliminate or at least significantly curtail the use of the midlevel, while the players union loves it. Expect it to be available on a much more limited basis, like the next exception.
  • Bi-Annual – Located somewhere between the midlevel and the veterans’ minimum salary, the BAE allows teams to pull in quality bench players for relatively cheap (~$2 million). As the naming suggests, it is only available every other year.
  • Minimum – Allows teams to sign veterans or rookies for minimum scale. Also allows each signee to count only a certain amount against the cap, which could reduce luxury tax payments.

There are also exceptions such as the Traded Player Exception, in which a team receives what is essentially a voucher if the value of the players they send away in a trade is more than the amount they take in. All of these exceptions work against the league in that they provide no downward pressure on salaries. And that’s bad for a league that doesn’t have enough jobs to create serious competition among players for those jobs. When you look at the number of exceptions that can be used, it’s clear that a team can sign half of their roster even if they are already over the cap. It’s this model that has allowed some serious financial mismanagement among many teams. Of course, it’s easy to say that owners and GM’s don’t have to use these exceptions, but that runs counter to the notion of attempting to compete every year. It’s this desire to compete that pushes teams to put themselves in bad financial positions with contracts, and when those contracts don’t pan out as results on the court, salary dumps for pennies on the dollar.

To combat this, the NBA is trying to shorten maximum contract lengths from six years to five. Previously they had succeeded in reducing them from seven years to six. They’re also looking to reduce the guaranteed percentage the players get as part of the CBA, which currently stands at 57% – the highest of the major four pro sports. While I doubt they can get to 50% as the NFL has done, they could bump it down a few percentage points, which could mean $100 million or more in reduced free agent money every year. If they eliminate some of those exceptions or restrict their usage to once every 2-3 years, money could be spent more wisely and strategically. The owners are also talking about taking additional measures:

Unfortunately for the players, they have little leverage. Some of them could choose to play in Europe for a year, but that’s a hollow threat and wasn’t employed much during the last lockout. In the end, perhaps the biggest thing that the players could allow is the reuse of the amnesty clause, last used in 2005 after the current CBA was ratified. Also known as the Allan Houston rule, the clause allowed teams to get rid of certain highly-paid, injury-ridden players. While the players were still paid and they counted against the cap, they would not count against the luxury tax threshold, which could save teams somewhere in the nine figures if used appropriately. The clause could even be expanded to ensure that those contracts don’t count against the cap, though that’s a much harder sell. IMHO the amnesty clause should be in every NBA CBA going forward, just as a way to clean up garbage contracts on a once-per-CBA basis.

Posturing between management and labor started before the season started, and so far things don’t look good. It’s quite possible that just like the NFL, there will be some kind of work stoppage for the NBA next fall. Unlike the NFL, there are several ways to achieve the better cost certainty that Stern and the owners want to achieve. It’s really just a matter of how greedy they want to get about it.

01.14.11
by

News for 1/14/11

I ducked into a Starbucks in downtown San Jose on Thursday afternoon to finish the latest CBA Talk entry. While I was proofreading it (it happens every so often), a gentleman at the next table over caught a glance at my screen and asked me what I was blogging about. I explained to him what this site was and how long I’d been at it. He then introduced himself as Bill Bradley – not that Bill Bradley – the Bill Bradley who formerly labored as the sports editor for the Sacramento Bee. He just launched a sports news site, 27×7.com, only 10 days ago and he’s already quite prolific. Bradley was in town working the Sharks game, and while he’s based out of the Sacramento area, he has expansion plans in the works (the “27” stands for 27 markets). After he headed out to HP Pavilion, it got me thinking about the incredible amount of downsizing in the news industry. Whether it’s columnists getting cut and going cut-rate to cable networks, or entire content providers like AOL Fanhouse going practically belly-up, it’s a rough time to be in the sports news game. Good luck to Bill and all of the others out there, hopefully your hustling will be kept to a minimum. On to the news.

  • Added 11:13 AM – The Merc’s Tracy Seipel reports that San Jose is racing against the clock, with a deadline to complete its work (sans vote) coming as early as March.

    The ballpark plan in particular could become more difficult if Brown shuts down redevelopment. Last week, San Jose’s agency announced it was selling five parcels of land and using the proceeds to buy other properties within the ballpark site near the main rail station.

    City officials said they’re pushing ahead with the plan to assure Major League Baseball they can complete the site regardless of state politics. Redevelopment chief Harry Mavrogenes said the sale of the agency’s parcels should be done by June 30.

    State finance officials, however, said Tuesday that if the Legislature were to vote as early as March to disband the agencies, it could issue an order to halt all agency contracts immediately and not wait until the next fiscal year begins July 1.

    Even if Mavrogenes beats the state’s deadline — and baseball officials agree that the Oakland A’s should be allowed to move south — voters would have to give permission for the city to use the downtown land for a ballpark. It’s an open question whether they’d be as inclined to bless a park if there were fewer limitations on how proceeds from agency land sales could be used.

    Mayor Chuck Reed said the council will fight Brown’s proposal, which state finance officials say will return at least $1.9 billion annually to schools, cities, counties and special districts around the state beginning in 2013.

    This paints a worst case scenario, but it shows how serious the redevelopment collapse is, and how its implications are far-reaching. Brown talked about turning off the tap for projects that weren’t already under contract. San Jose is definitely not there yet. Already, LA has allocated $883 million of its own RDA funds to projects in anticipation of a raid and shutdown. LA has also agreed to convert the current RDA into a city-run non-profit entity after the agency is officially disbanded (there is an allowance for a successor, though what form it would take is unclear). I suspect that Wolff has communicated the gravity of this situation to Selig. Will it matter to Selig and the owners?

  • There are plenty of reasons to dislike Ignacio De La Fuente, such as his being a career machine politician. His DUI arrest on Christmas Day was not the result of a smart decision. That was followed by a lot of bile, people hoping IDLF would lose his job, people wishing the worst on him – mostly because he dared vote against the Oakland City Council’s $750k expenditure for the Victory Court EIR. Well, now he won’t be charged because of a “lack of evidence.” Officially, IDLF didn’t comment on the matter, but I imagine on the inside he was going, “How ya like me now, haterz!”
  • Speaking of the Oakland City Council, Larry Reid was elected Council President. You may not remember that Reid proudly proclaimed that he’d stake his career on the Coliseum North plan. Thankfully for him, when that plan fizzled out Reid’s career was not irreparably damaged. If there’s a person on the City Council who can be described as the most gung-ho about Oakland’s pro sports franchises, it’s Reid. Having Reid lead the charge won’t make up for a loss in redevelopment funds. Can Reid deliver in other ways? We may find out in due course.
  • Lew Wolff took time to shoot down rumors – made up out of whole cloth by Buster Olney – that he might be interested in buying the Dodgers from the legally challenged McCourts. The most interesting exchange regarding this non-news came from the Boston Globe:

    “Lew was in touch with me as soon as he became aware of the rumor that started to circulate a few days ago to make sure that I knew there was nothing to it,” McCourt wrote in a text.

    McCourt saw Wolff at the owners’ meetings in Phoenix and they discussed it again.

    “I have no idea where this one originated,” said Wolff from his cell phone at the owners’ meetings. “It’s completely untrue. We’re right in the middle of trying to get the go-ahead from Commissioner Selig about moving our franchise to San Jose. That’s all I’m thinking about. The Dodgers have an owner.”

    But we like our conspiracy theories, Lew! /s

  • Union Pacific bought 160 acres of land at the north and south ends of NUMMI. Hope all the NIMBYs there like the prospect of a railyard in their backyard. Because if it’s an intermodal hub like in West Oakland, the potential health issues could create a volcano of outrage the size of which will make the ballpark hubbub look like a neighborhood bridge game. Note: South Fremont is home to large warehouse/light industrial area, which makes it prime for such an operation.
  • The not final A’s promotional schedule is out. It includes bobblehead days for Rickey (4/30), MC Hammer (7/17) and Ray Fosse (8/13). Remember when the A’s also did collectable figurines for a spell? Did anyone like those?
  • I expect to renew my Fielders Choice season ticket plan, though I will be moving to the Value Deck.

The rest of the CBA Talk series will be posted throughout the weekend.

01.12.11
by

Sad Sac Kings

I was barely an adult the first time I ventured into ARCO Arena. I had hooked up with a photographer who got me a press credential, and from afar I had admired the facility. At the time, ARCO was only 7 years old. The exterior had a nondescript Wal-Mart look and there was nothing in the immediate vicinity. The interior was remarkably white, whether you were looking at walls or people.

The visitors’ locker room was no larger than a typical elementary school classroom. Press accommodations were decent, and the spread was better than the one at the Coliseum Arena. My seat was in the designated auxiliary press row, a separate “balcony” above the lower level seats and suites. It was an exhibition game between the Kings and Warriors, so I didn’t expect many of the other people with assigned seats to show. I was somewhat disappointed by that, since former Warriors coach Al Attles was supposed to be sitting in the seat next to mine.

Enough reminiscing. If you have fond memories of ARCO, as I do, you might want to treasure them because the future is not bright in Natomas. Vultures are circling around the Kings and the Maloofs. And the arena, whose naming rights deal with ARCO expires soon, will be renamed Power Balance Pavilion, after an Australian company which makes energy balance bracelets that have not been proven to provide energy, power, balance, or pavilions. The deal may be worth as much as $1 million per year, a sum that seems a bit puzzling considering the company’s measly $35 million in annual revenue. Then again, the team and the Maloofs may not be around long enough to see if Power Balance actually makes more than one payment, or becomes the next Pro Player.

An Orange County Register article tries to calculate the cost of relocating the Kings to Anaheim, where coincidentally, they’d be the second team named Kings in SoCal and have the same color scheme to boot.

But is Anaheim a realistic destination? There are several obstacles that could complicate or preclude such a move.

It has been widely reported the Maloofs have $69 million left on a loan with the city of Sacramento and reportedly have taken out $125 million in loans from the NBA in recent years.

There’s also a standard $30 million relocation fee that must be paid to the NBA if a franchise moves. And there will be territorial rights fees owed to the Lakers and Clippers (estimated between $30 million and $50 million to each team) for invading the Southern California market they share.

So that’s a $69 million loan/lien plus the $30 million relocation fee and $40 million in territorial rights fees. Total: $139 million, which is close to the $150 million payoff to the Warriors for the Hornets to come to San Jose. Then there’s the $125 million in loans from the NBA, which may or may not have to be dealt with. Jinkies. Nice to see it broken down, though the existence of the Kings’ loan as a component makes it appear that $150 million is a rather inflated price tag for Lacob-Guber to go away (NBA debt notwithstanding). There’s probably some assumed debt for the Hornets that would have to be addressed at some point, which could make the final price tag similar. Or does the equation change when a new owner is involved? Looks like the rich soaking the rich.

01.10.11
by

Brown to Redevelopment: Your days are numbered

Governor Brown just finished his press conference, where he explained his budget plans. Brown is pushing for $12.5 Billion in spending cuts, and he is asking the legislature (and the voters) to extend temporary income, sales, and car taxes that are set to expire this year. As for the redevelopment golden goose, Brown said that existing (already bonded) projects are safe. New projects, on the other hand, are in trouble. Brown wants to “phase out” redevelopment agencies and start taking back $1.7 Billion in tax increment annually. What it comes down to is this: If you don’t have your project started and well underway in the next 12-18 months, you are screwed. There continues to be some debate as to how the governor could eliminate RDA’s, with the agencies enshrined in Article 16 in the Constitution and recently passed Prop 22 acting as protection. The governor seems to be saying, “If we get rid of RDA’s, there are no more protections.” Yow. Okay, who would this impact? Let’s put together a list:

  • San Jose Diridon Ballpark – While the City is speeding up land acquisition, what about Autumn Parkway and other mitigations? Will the funds be in place for the rest of the project, or will it get kicked down the road?
  • Oakland Victory Court Ballpark – Oakland already had to deal with a tight schedule based on a 2015 Opening Day. Now, Oakland will have to get its bonds raised and land in place right around the time an EIR is certified, or even before certification. Expect for Oakland to push MLB harder to decide in its favor, even without anything significant in place.
  • 49ers Stadium in Santa Clara – The quasi-public stadium authority would have to get its loans and/or bonds in place in the next 18 months as well.
  • New Raiders Stadium at the Coliseum – A new stadium is practically a nonstarter given the funding questions. Expect the Raiders to look south sooner rather than later.
  • Downtown Los Angeles NFL Stadium – The now $1.5 Billion stadium (+$500 million in the last two weeks) would require $350 million in bonds, which won’t be available if RDA’s go away.
  • City of Industry NFL Stadium – Ed Roski’s plan involves his own land, but much of the stadium cost would be funded by tax increment on the land improvements, thanks to much of the city being one large redevelopment zone. Uncertainty regarding RDAs makes the prospects for building infrastructure for the stadium and ancillary development, murky at best.
  • Sacramento Kings Arena – As Kevin Johnson’s arena task force continues to talk things out, time is running out, especially for an arena at the long dormant Railyards.
  • San Francisco Arena – Land south of AT&T Park could serve as the site for a new arena. Controlled by the Port and with development rights given to the Giants, it’s likely that any dev plan there will require at least the same kind of public outlay that made the ballpark deal work. Proponents would have to find another source for that funding.
redev_cut

Slide captured from the governor’s briefing

The message is abundantly clear: If you want to get something built, get a move on. (BTW, take a look at the counter on the right today. Eerie.)

01.08.11
by

CBA Talk 2011: A comparison of leagues

Three of the four major professional sports leagues have collective bargaining agreements which will expire later this year. In the NBA and NFL, discussions between management and labor have been contentious for at least the last year, with threats of work stoppages all too real and quite likely. That makes MLB an outlier, as there has been little tension in its ongoing labor discussions, even though its CBA will run out only a few months after the other two leagues’. The NHLPA authorized a one-year extension of its current agreement in the fall, allowing its CBA to expire after the 2011-12 season, but under the terms of the agreement, no further extension can be negotiated between the union and league. With Donald Fehr brought in to helm the NHLPA’s side of future talks, the players there aren’t looking to go soft at the table.

Before we get into the details, I’ve put together an overview of each league’s current CBA, sans drug testing details. Next week, each league will get its own post and in depth analysis. For now, take a look at the table and if any questions or corrections come to mind, throw them into comments. Every effort has been made to verify all of the data in the table, including each league’s CBA documents when possible. Still, there may be some issues with what’s reported, so here’s your chance to fact check. It’s also your opportunity to steer the discussion in a certain direction if you so choose.

I look forward to your questions and comments. Until then, enjoy the rest of the football weekend. My thoughts are with those who were senselessly hurt or killed at the Tucson atrocity today, and their families.

01.06.11
by

The Big Not So Easy

I’m multitasking this evening. On the plasma is basketball, first the Warriors and their furious 4th quarter comeback victory over New Orleans, and then Lakers-Suns. On one LCD monitor I’m watching the Microsoft/Steve Ballmer keynote address at CES. Some graphics are being put together on another screen for this post and a special project I’m working on. I’m watching my Twitter feed regularly, and I’ve got dinner in the oven.

Now, thanks to commenter Vince, I have to follow some new rumor about Larry Ellison’s interest in the NBA-owned Hornets. A blog entry by Forbes sports business guy Mike Ozanian indicates that Ellison could pursue the team with the intent to move it to San Jose. There’s a possible revenge/rivalry angle to the deal, as Ellison failed to buy the Warriors while the Lacob-Guber group put up the winning (and on-time) $450 million bid.

First off, let’s synopsize the Hornets’ situation. The team has struggled to get decent attendance in the post-Katrina era, despite having a decent team, a new arena, and a bona fide superstar in point guard Chris Paul. In three full seasons since returning from Oklahoma City, the team has averaged only 15,402 per game. This season, the Hornets average only 14,086 through 19 home games. Worse, the team has an out clause in its lease at New Orleans Arena in which it can leave the Crescent City if the team averages less than 14,213 during a 13-game stretch from December 1, 2010 through January 17, 2011. So far, the results aren’t inspiring if you want to keep the Hornets in town.

Someone may have to go out of pocket and buy 1,000 seats for each of the next two games to reach the target.

Hornets fans tend to respond to the schedule in a similar way to A’s fans do: show up for “event” games such as the Lakers matchup in the table above. Tonight’s crowd against a mediocre Warriors squad was a poor 13,532. Fans will have to average 15,428 over the next two games to reach the minimum 14,213 over the 13 games. Orlando should bring in a good crowd, Toronto most certainly won’t. Fans have gone as far as putting together 2-for-1 ticket deals to help get the count over the hump.

Last month I described the NBA’s purchase of the team from George Shinn an Expos-style deal. With the team bought for $310 million, the league and the other 29 owners stand to make a serious profit if the team does sell for $400 million or more. The league’s intent is to keep the team in the Crescent City, or at least that’s how it appears. Previous minority owner Gary Chouest was supposed to put together a group to buy the team, but his livelihood may have taken a hit after the BP Deepwater Horizon disaster. If a local buyer can’t be found – a process that probably won’t last more than a year – the Hornets will be up for grabs.

Ozanian’s piece puts the figure to move the Hornets to San Jose at $450 million, though that includes an unspecified amount of compensation to the Warriors for invading their 75-mile radius. The last NBA team to encroach upon another’s territory was the Clippers in 1984, who moved from San Diego after six ho-hum seasons at the Sports Arena. While the Lakers were not adversely affected by the constant cellar dwelling Clippers, there’s no guarantee that the Warriors won’t be affected by a second NBA team in the Bay Area. It would be a shock if Lacob-Guber didn’t level a sizable lawsuit at the league, trying to protect their near half-billion dollar investment. The NBA may have the most hard-nosed commissioner in pro sports in the form of David Stern, but he doesn’t have an leaguewide antitrust protection in his back pocket as Bud Selig does.

And Ellison won’t be the only interested party. The aforementioned Ballmer (whose keynote at CES was not exactly riveting) is Seattle’s Ellison, a man expected to bring the Sonics back to life. Unfortunately for Seattle, the lack of what Stern considers an NBA-quality arena in place is a considerable hurdle for the Emerald City. At this point, Seattle is just as hostile to new public sports venue financing as California is. Kansas City remains a town with an arena but without a white knight to bring a team in.

The upcoming labor situation in the NBA could be a determining factor in terms of when and to whom the team gets sold. Both sides are gearing up for a lockout, and if it proceeds like the one that shortened the 1999 season to 50 games, the timeline could be stretched out a few more months. The league could wait until a new CBA is ratified, as the Hornets could be more valuable with greater cost certainty ingrained in the new agreement. Then again, they could try to sell the team as quickly as possible, though this isn’t a league that is hurting for cash.

All of this leaves San Jose is a strange situation. With the specter of another redevelopment fund raid looming, San Jose has to pick and choose where it spends. The quest for baseball has spanned over five years in this attempt alone and there is still no light at the end of the tunnel. While the land investment for a ballpark would have greater potential (2+ million visitors per year vs. 750k for hoops), an investment in the arena and land for a Hornets practice facility may be a more prudent way to spend RDA funds. Even in better fiscal times, I can’t see San Jose having the resources available to attract both the Hornets and A’s simultaneously unless Ellison or SVSE footed the bill for all necessary HP Pavilion renovations and the practice facility (around 3 acres) as well.

The corners are vacant due to an older, less flexible seating configuration

As for the state of HP Pavilion, I’ve said before that it’s a good arena, but as it stands currently it wouldn’t be in the upper half of venues in the league. The seating bowl ends would need dual-rise seating tiers to maximize capacity and sightlines for basketball. The technology would also help change from hockey/arena football configuration to basketball more quickly. Yes, I said arena football, as the Sabercats are due to return to the AFL this March.

The biggest change may be in the area most fans don’t get to see. NBA standards don’t just include seats and suites, they include locker rooms and related amenities. The arena’s facilities are good, but they’ll have to be expanded just to accommodate an NBA team properly. While the Hornets won’t need everything listed in the plan below due to a degree of overlap, you get an idea how much space is required to house a team.

Note the size difference between the home and visitor locker rooms

It’s hard to say where and how an arena expansion could occur. It’s been 15 years since I was last in the bowels, covering the Warriors as a stringer while the team played its lone season at then San Jose Arena. I fondly remember one preseason game in which press row was placed in the hockey benches for some reason. Anyway, while there is some flex space at event level, it’s unclear whether that would be enough to make all of the necessary renovations.

In the long run, the biggest winner could be San Francisco and the Giants. If the Giants are intent upon building a new arena in SF, they’d be able to play Lacob-Guber and Ellison & Co. against each other in order to get a good deal for themselves, whatever that may be. Of course, by the time they’d get to make the deal they probably won’t have RDA to help with cheap or free land. You can’t win ’em all, I guess.

P.S. I would be remiss if I didn’t note how ironically bizarre it would be for the Ellison to send the Hornets to Oakland to play twice a season at the arena named after his company, while playing home games at the arena named after the company he just blew up publicly.

Also, Ellison has clarified (via the Merc’s Brandon Bailey) what his intent was with the Hornets:

“I did offer $350 million” for the New Orleans Hornets, Ellison told reporters, adding that he was “slightly outbid” by the National Basketball Association when the league bought the bankrupt team last month from owners George Shinn and Gary Chouest.

Ellison’s comments put a damper on the hope floated in a Forbes blog post that he planned to buy the team and move it to San Jose.

The prospect was warmly greeted by San Jose officials, intrigued with the notion of another pro franchise moving to the city, but Ellison flatly said the report was “not true.”

More grist for the mill.

P.P.S. An expansive article by the Merc’s John Woolfork about San Jose’s RDA just became available. The agency, which is the second largest in the state, pulls in $185 million in property tax receipts yearly.

11.18.10
by

It’s good hittin’ weather


It’s the halfway point of the NFL season, which means that football is completely dominating the sports world. The NFL Network had its first Thursday night broadcast of the season, and two college football games will be played in MLB ballparks this weekend: Illinois-Northwestern at Wrigley Field, and Army-Notre Dame at Yankee Stadium. The Yankee Stadium football layout is from home plate to centerfield, making seats at the 50-yard line no great shakes. Wrigley Field is much more interesting, as it orients the gridiron much like AT&T Park but with less space to accomplish the task.

Source: Yahoo

Those drag routes across the back of the end zone are sure to be exciting. Update 11/20 – Big Ten officials and the teams’ head coaches had a pow-wow and decided to disuse the east end zone shown above. Instead, both teams will drive toward the safer west end zone when on offense. Bizarre.

Over in Philly, the Eagles are doing something really cool – they’re taking their home stadium, Lincoln Financial Field, off the power grid. To achieve this, 80 wind turbines and 2,500 solar panels will be installed. As large as that is, those renewable energy sources will only provide 15% of the expected output, while a plant that burns either natural gas or biofuels will handle the rest. Still, it’s an admirable effort and something the A’s should look to duplicate – at least the wind/solar part. The Giants, of course, were the first to cover their roof with solar panels. Less than a mile east of the Diridon site, Adobe placed several wind turbines within its building complex.

Enough of the feel-good. Let’s get back to greed business.

  • AEG’s Tim Leiweke wants the citizens of the Southland to believe that a downtown LA football stadium can be built without parking. And that it’ll cost only $725 million. With a retractable roof.
  • As for possible tenants in such a stadium, the Chargers can pay a set amount each year to get out of the team’s lease at Qualcomm Stadium. The amount decreases every year for the next decade.
  • Apparently the NFL is willing to go to any length to get the Falcons out of the 18-year old Georgia Dome. The argument this time: the Dome prevents the Super Bowl from being played in “the elements” as it should. WHA?!?!?!
  • Oriole Park at Camden Yards, which is rapidly approaching its 20th year in service, is ready to undergo a series of improvements, including the removal of more than 2,000 seats, replacement of the existing seats with wider ones, and a drop in the number of luxury suites, from 72 to 50. The O’s are also changing their concessionaire from oft-criticized giant Aramark to Delaware North.
  • Perhaps emboldened by winning a public battle to get Mesa, AZ to pay for a new facility to replace HoHoKam Park, Cubs owner Tom Ricketts has his hands out for $200-300 million in TIF-financed renovations to Wrigley Field. Unlike most TIF financing structures that we’re familiar with in California, the money wouldn’t come from property taxes. Instead, funds to pay back the loans would come from a portion of the ticket taxes currently paid on tickets to Cubs games. The “amusement tax” would be frozen would be frozen at 12%, and planned raises to the tax would pay back the loans. Aside from the even more expensive tickets to come, it’s not an entirely bad idea since the Cubs are as consistent in terms of attendance as any team in baseball.
  • TD Ameritrade Park in Omaha is nearly 80% finished and on schedule for hosting the 2011 College World Series. The 24,000-seat, $128 million stadium looks like a smaller version of the redone Kauffman Stadium, which is a good thing.
  • Drayton McLane is trying to sell the Astros for $800 million, including a stake in CSN Houston.
  • According to AOL Fanhouse’s Jeff Fletcher, nothing happened this week at the November winter meetings regarding the A’s. Wait a few weeks, perhaps.
  • Speaking of being emboldened, Bryan Grunwald has an editorial at SFGate touting his 980 Deck ballpark plan. Will anyone listen?
  • The Trib comes out in favor of Victory Court, saying, “This is a great jumping off point for newly elected Mayor Jean Quan. She has to be all-in for this project and she must convince city leaders to do the same.”
  • Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson is still trying (in vain?) to get some kinda of arena deal done that would keep the Kings in town. A meeting today marks the one year anniversary of an arena task force assembled to work a complex land swap that fizzled two months ago.
  • A report commissioned by the SF Board of Supervisors estimates the cost of hosting the 2013 America’s Cup at $42 million, plus $86 million in forgone revenue caused by giving development rights to whomever fixes up Piers 30/32 for the event. Race organizers and other business interests have pledged up to $32 million to help defray the cost. In the sports world, that sounds like an incredible deal.

If there’s anything else about venues worth including, send it in.

09.30.10
by

(Insert Name Here) Kings

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).

09.25.10
by

Cal Expo rejects Kings arena plan

What next?

After several months of review, Cal Expo’s board came back and formally rejected a land swap proposal that would’ve placed the future home of the Kings on top of the old railyards near downtown and private development at the old fairgrounds, while Expo itself would’ve moved to the site of ARCO Arena.

Cal Expo board members voted 7-2 against the idea, saying the Natomas site is too small and not visible enough from the freeway.

“It’s the wrong site. We’ve said that time and time again,” said Cal Expo General Manager Norb Bartosik.

The complicated land swap proposal is the latest in a series of unsuccessful efforts – dating back a dozen years – to finance a new arena.

While the Maloofs were demure when asked to comment on the news – as they have been since David Stern took the wheel – you can’t help but think that whatever frustration they’ve held has to be spilling over at this point. They’ve said all the right things about not wanting to move the team, but Der Kommissar has to be getting ready to break out the big guns now. After all, he had few qualms about ripping the Sonics from Seattle, and the Emerald City had a much longer hoops lineage (and a ring) than Sactown.

So here’s the poll question for the week:

Where will the Kings end up?

A. Sacramento (where they flounder or a miracle deal is made)
B. Las Vegas (where the Maloofs get their unspeakable wish fulfilled)
C. Seattle (bought by Steve Ballmer and/or Howard Schultz)
D. San Jose (bought by Larry Ellison)
E. Kansas City (where they came from and an empty arena awaits, owner unknown)

07.15.10
by

W’s New Owner Is… Not Who You Think

Just coming across the wire is a report by CNBC sports business stud Darren Rovell, who says that the Golden State Warriors are being sold for a a record $450 million. While it was almost assumed that the winning bid would be put forth by Oracle head honcho and billionaire Larry Ellison, it now appears that the winner is a group headed by Kleiner Perkins managing partner Joe Lacob and Peter Guber of Mandalay Entertainment.

Mandalay is the interesting piece here, since they’ve been acquiring minor league franchises by the truckload over the last several years. They even have a history in the Bay Area, as they almost bought the A’s from Schott/Hofmann in 2001. Now that they’re in charge, it’ll be interesting to see what they do with it. Note: Mandalay is not affiliated with the Mandalay Bay casino, which is owned by MGM/Mirage.

Update 1:13 PM – Now the other shoe drops. Tim Kawakami has just posted a Twitter update with a quote from Larry Ellison:

Whoa. Ellison statement: “Although I was the highest bidder, Chris Cohan decided to sell to someone else.”

Kawakami also has a blog post explaining further, with a full statement:

“Although I was the highest bidder, Chris Cohan decided to sell to someone else.  In my experience this is a bit unusual.  Nonetheless, I wish the Warriors and their fans nothing but success under their new ownership,” said Larry Ellison.

Cohan decides not to sell to Ellison out of spite? What a jerk.

Update 1:27 PM – Damon Bruce is lining up Sal Galatioto, head of Galatioto Sports Partners, the firm hired to broker the sale. Also, Darren Rovell has a followup on Twitter:

Ellison’s bid was a few million more, but it was too late. Bid was put in hours before agreement was signed w/Lacob+Guber

Hours before? Something smells fishy…

Update 1:49 PM – Galatioto was just interviewed on KNBR-1050 by Damon Bruce. He refuted Ellison’s assertion, saying that Ellison’s bad was late by weeks, not by hours. He said that Ellison tried to disrupt the negotiation process after the bids were submitted and narrowed down. If true, it seems to fit Ellison’s M.O. Not saying that this doesn’t happen from time to time, it’s just that Galatioto Sports had to follow its own rules. Better luck next time, Larry.

Just wondering: What happens to naming rights on the arena?