Category Archives: Basketball

05.22.12
by

Oakland’s Prevent Defense

No statement I have seen better exemplifies Oakland’s strategy than this quote by City Administrator Fred Blackwell from the SF Business Times:

“San Francisco has given the Warriors a waterfront offer that they could not refuse,” said Fred Blackwell, assistant city administrator, in a statement. “And in the end, we will leave a space for the Warriors after they have are exhausted from the CEQA litigation and cost increases required to be on the San Francisco Waterfront.”

Replace “Warriors” with “Athletics”, “San Francisco” with “San Jose”, and CEQA litigation/cost increases with territorial rights, and you have Oakland’s attitude towards the A’s in a nutshell. Oakland has had counsel from the Giants to fight the A’s efforts to move. It wouldn’t be surprising if they went back to that well again just to make things more difficult for the W’s. The difference is that the W’s don’t have a Byzantine league statute to fight.

It’s as if the City of Oakland has no choice. Almost 50 years ago a group of civic, business, and government leaders had the foresight to build what was then a state-of-the-art sports complex for a reasonable cost. It had parking and a future transit link in the plans. The stadium was built initially for football but was designed to accommodate baseball as well, better than any other multipurpose stadium ever. With the Coliseum complex, Oakland and Alameda County built up a 30-year lead over the rest of the Bay Area. Over time that lead was diminished as other cities struggled and eventually succeeded to build new venues. If the Warriors and A’s get their new digs, that 30-year lead will have vanished with only one team, the Raiders, struggling to hold on.

All this posturing makes it appear that Oakland has no choice but this strategy. That’s entirely wrong. They do have a choice. But it starts with making the toughest choice. Instead of this “fake it ’till you make it” strategy of sounding like they’re committed to all three teams, commit to one first and make that team a positive example that the other teams will be attracted to. The resources definitely aren’t there to make Coliseum City fly as a redone, three-team complex. Why would a private developer commit to the W’s part of Coliseum City if they know that a more lucrative play is available across the bay? Even a two-team plan is sketchy due to the logistical complications (phase-in, what to do with the old venues). For now it looks as though Oakland’s putting its arrows behind the Raiders, since there is some prep work being undertaken. Until either Oakland decides or has the decision made for them, they’ll continue with the “fake it” strategy of saying they have several ballpark sites when in actuality there’s zero consensus on one. That’s a shame because it leads to false hope. That’s what organizations like Save Oakland Sports and Let’s Go Oakland are hanging their hats on. Rooting for someone else to fail works from a schadenfreude standpoint, but it doesn’t get anything built. Longtime East Bay fans are about to find that out.

05.21.12
by

SF, Warriors set to announce arena deal

Just like that, Coliseum City is in jeopardy.

The interwebs are abuzz with reports that the Golden State Warriors and the City of San Francisco are going to announce a Pier 30/32 arena deal as soon as this week. The team has issued a non-denial denial, and the rumor appears to have multiple sources, which makes this news possibly the proverbial smoke that will lead to fire.

If true this is terrible for the Coliseum City project’s prospects. By virtue of an arena’s typical utilization, the arena part of the complex is a a major anchor that the project needs. Losing the Warriors removes at least 43 home games from the schedule, totaling 800,000 annual spectators. Oakland/Alameda County could refashion the arena to better attract more concerts and other types of events. The risk with that plan is that the old arena in Oakland and the new arena in SF will be only 11 miles apart, so they’ll be competing for exactly the same acts and events. The Warriors will have the advantage of new technology to make their venue superior and more flexible for staging. They’ll also have a great incentive to keep the arena as busy as possible since they’re footing the bill for the construction cost. This affects HP Pavilion to a degree as well since it will be overshadowed by its much newer competitor to the north. However, HP Pavilion is over 40 miles away, serving the South Bay. This sort of spacing is already evident in the Bay Area with Chronicle Pavilion in Concord and Shoreline Amphitheatre in Mountain View. The two major LA arenas (Staples Center, Honda Center) are also a good distance apart, allowing both to combine to serve the bulk of the LA market.

The W’s leaving means that the naming rights deal with Oracle, which runs through the 2015-16 season, has a very slim chance of being renewed. There’s little point for Oracle to do so, as the marquee tenant will be in the process of vacating while the arena itself will be at a competitive disadvantage compared to its competition across the bay. Even though Oracle CEO Larry Ellison lost out to the Lacob-Guber group when bidding on the Warriors two years ago, the SF Warriors brand should be more valuable than the GS Warriors, making a potential naming rights deal something that Ellison should consider.

Currently there’s about $95 million of debt outstanding at the Oakland/Oracle Arena. With each lease year completed $5 million comes off, leaving a shortfall of $70 million for the W’s to pay off if they leave at the end of the 2016-17 season. This amount would be payable by the team regardless of whether they played in SF or Oakland. This is because Oakland positioned Coliseum City as having a new arena to replace the existing arena. This effectively adds $70 million to the cost of the new Oakland arena because there’s little chance that Oakland/Alameda County will operate the new and old venues side-by-side. If you were Joe Lacob and you knew that you’d have to pay $70 million either way, why would you choose Oakland over SF?

This gets to the heart of Oakland’s problem in pitching Coliseum City to its tenants. All three teams want much greater revenues, and just as important, greater control over revenue streams and more independence from each either. They’ve been able to coexist with little friction over the last decade, but that didn’t come about without a good deal of previous strife as all three teams have had legal battles with the Coliseum Authority. Mayor Jean Quan has already put out yet another letter restating Oakland’s commitment to the Warriors, just as she did with the A’s. What she and the JPA need to do – which they haven’t done yet – is explain how Coliseum City will significantly increase each tenant’s revenues (W’s rank 13th according to Forbes) compared to other options. Instead we’re having discussions about whether or not Coliseum City can pay for itself, which is a major perception problem. Most of the City’s arguments have been about how Coliseum City will benefit Oakland, with little said about how each team will benefit. Only the Raiders part of the project has any traction, thanks to ongoing planning work designed around and with input from the team. Yet the Raiders continue to entertain options outside Oakland just in case Coliseum City doesn’t take off. All three teams and ownership groups know how difficult their respective plans are on their own. To tie feasibility and risk into other parts is unnecessary, even foolish.

SF has shown its willingness to speed up the environmental review process when needed, as it did with the America’s Cup project. A similar effort could be done for the Warriors’ arena, with the caveat that the impacts for an arena will be significantly different. The America’s Cup only occurs once every three years over a short, well-defined timeframe. An arena gets 800k visitors annually for NBA games plus another 500k or more for other events. Onsite parking at the W’s arena is expected to be only 1,000 spaces, leaving the team and city looking a few thousand more within the vicinity to meet demand. It’ll be a challenge to get the W’s arena approved and built. SF’s advantage is that it has successful precedents in AT&T Park and, coming soon, the America’s Cup. That’s experience that matters.

This new SF arena plan is in its infancy, so it’s premature to call this one “in the bag”. One thing’s for certain – the two parties are heavily motivated and appear to be making measurable progress. If only we could say that about an A’s ballpark…

05.15.12
by

Drama, more drama

While the City of San Francisco continues its schmoozing of the Warriors, Kings ownership is going to war with Sacramento. Apparently the Maloofs hired a former FBI agent to look into the signatures provided by supporters of ThinkBig Sacramento, a civic group whose focus is to keep the team in the capital city. That caused ThinkBig to retaliate, as they want the US Attorney General to investigate the Maloofs to see if they harassed those supporters.

And you thought the relationship between the A’s and Oakland was bad.

In addition, newly dug up documents show that the Maloofs and the NBA had a disagreement about terms the team was asking for and items they would commit to: collateral, gameday and municipal expenses. Naturally, the Maloofs balked at putting up any of that even though it’s standard practice in stadium/arena building these days. Buzz is building that they’ll apply for relocation as the 2012-13 season ends, and there’s no telling how awkward the situation will be between the team and fans at Power Balance Pavilion this fall.

It’s all so bizarre. Excuse me while I grab some popcorn.

05.14.12
by

SF officially pursuing Warriors + LA Live observations

According to Matier & Ross, the City of San Francisco has sent a letter to the Warriors urging the team to work with the city on a new arena deal in SF. A month ago it was revealed that W’s ownership was looking at Piers 30 & 32, which were removed from the America’s Cup waterfront development plan due to cost. Nothing has changed to indicate the site isn’t the frontrunner, though the team could still work out a deal with the Giants in the China Basin/Mission Rock area as a backup plan.

There are height restrictions that will come into play, just as they did with AT&T Park. Given the City’s political will that pushed through the America’s Cup EIR, I have to think the stars would similarly align for the Warriors’ arena efforts.

It’ll be interesting to see if this motivates Oakland to ramp up its Coliseum City efforts. Given the number of events the arena holds annually (150-200), I suspect that keeping the Warriors is practically the linchpin in making Coliseum City work. With AEG in the picture, it’s possible that they may have a business plan to make the arena work without a team, probably by retooling the arena as the Bay Area’s premier large concert venue, like Sprint Center in Kansas City. Of course, making it “work without a team” is a subjective matter, as KC is paying through the nose in debt service while AEG is the one making money in the partnership.

LA Live was built out over several years, with Staples Center and the convention center as anchors

Between the Stadia EXPO and lunch at Philippe’s, I walked around downtown. I’ve never done that in LA, since for me the only reason to be there is an event at Staples Center. Oakland is trying to pattern Coliseum City as something similar to LA Live. That’s a tough one to duplicate, as I explained a few weeks ago. LA Live is a complex of numerous live venues, a multiplex, two luxury hotels, restaurants, all of it adjacent to Staples Center and the Los Angeles Convention Center. There’s always a lot of activity, even when it isn’t apparent.

Setting up for the "Battleship" red carpet premiere

As I was walking through the area, a crew was getting the rigging set up for the LA premiere of the action blockbuster “Battleship” (yes, inspired by the board game). It was 2:30 PM and people were already camping out, getting prime spots to view Rihanna and Brooklyn Decker as they walked the red carpet. Oakland got its brush with Hollywood fame when the Moneyball premiere was held at the Paramount last fall. It shouldn’t expect much more than that. Later this week Staples will hold six playoff games in five four days, including a doubleheader on Saturday. That’s not realistic for any arena in the Bay Area.

So what is realistic? If there are three major arenas in the Bay Area thanks to the Warriors crossing the bridge, the Oakland/Oracle Arena will suffer. There simply isn’t enough demand to fill all three venues regularly, and one will eventually turn into the “budget” arena to remain competitive. The best thing Oakland can do is everything possible to keep the Warriors in the Coliseum complex. I’m not sure what that will take, and I’m not certain that will be enough to overcome the cachet of San Francisco. For Oakland’s sake, I hope they put their best foot forward.

Update 6:43 PM – Oakland has responded with a statement reiterating their commitment to the Warriors. Curiously, it’s the first real indicator that Oakland is pushing for a new arena to replace Oracle Arena, something that has not shown up in public documents to date. Oakland’s advantage versus SF is that they shouldn’t require a brand new arena. What incentive is there for the W’s to build in Oakland if they have to pay for it?

04.29.12
by

News for 4/29/12

Good stuff:

  • The Kings arena deal was officially declared dead on Friday. Perhaps they were waiting for rigor mortis to fully set in. The team will stay for another year, after that? Who knows? I’m not generally a fan of boycott efforts, but if Kings fans really wanted to stick it to the Maloofs with both a fiscal and PR nightmare, they should boycott ALL games. The family may be struggling enough that a loss of $30-50 million in revenue could really hurt them, and force them to sell the team. That’s what the fans want, right?
  • Many readers are getting a buzz off the news that Angels’ owner Arte Moreno met with AEG recently. As Bill Shaikin writes, they’d have a long way to go before they started doing anything. Moreno’s a good businessman, and as a good businessman should he has to at least hear AEG out and get some kind of dialogue going. It won’t force the City of Anaheim to do anything, so the leverage play isn’t there – at least not right now. I wrote last week about AEG’s business model and goals for the LACC expansion-cum-NFL stadium, and how baseball isn’t really on AEG’s map. AEG has its own somewhat weak leverage play in that they want to push the NFL to make a move on their behalf, but as recent discussions between the two parties have revealed, the league is not easy to budge. The NFL can at any time revive the Roski/City of Industry plan and favor it over AEG’s concept, and it would have every right to do so. The NFL doesn’t care about AEG’s desire to hold the Final Four or BCS championship game there, or about AEG’s interest in expanding LACC. All they want is a new, Super Bowl-ready venue. AEG, on the other hand, would have to strain to make a downtown ballpark work within its convention center plans. Since AEG wants an indoor convention hall, the ballpark would require a retractable dome instead of open air. The field would have to be moved out like University of Phoenix’s field, yet there’s no space for such a field-on-a-tray. Because of the rather bespoke nature of a ballpark, it would be difficult to put in the flexible seating system AEG would need to hold the Final Four. Plus there’s the issue of not having enough seats for large football events. Baseball may provide 81+ annual events, but you can bet that the revenue share for AEG will not be beneficial enough to cover the debt service on the venue. There are few compatibilities between what Moreno wants and AEG’s goals. That makes a downtown ballpark a non-starter.
  • Minnesota lawmakers continue to work throughout the weekend on the tenets of a Vikings stadium plan. The big obstacle may be rank and file Democrats, many of whom who appear to have pledged to vote down any stadium proposal. Financing would come from a appropriations (state) bond, which means that debt would be serviced by an annual appropriation, to be paid back by gambling tax revenues and other sources. It’s certainly a “creative” public financing solution, though one that would never leave the budget committee in California.
  • Barclays Center in Brooklyn putting on an exhibition in October between the Islanders and Devils to test out the hockey configuration, which is suboptimal.
04.24.12
by

AEG looks to add NorCal to its empire

A very clever strategy is emanating from facility operator Anschutz Entertainment Group. It’s a two-pronged affair based in Sacramento and Oakland. The movement draws upon what can be considered serious deficiencies in both markets in their inability to attract certain types of events and visitors. Most importantly, it offers hope to both cities, which are both in danger of losing their respective pro sports franchises.

For San Jose Earthquakes fans, AEG may as well be a four-letter word. The company owned the Quakes franchise as part of its initial MLS holdings. When AEG was unable to forge a new stadium deal in San Jose, the team was abruptly moved to Houston in 2006, making the parent company persona non grata in the South Bay. AEG came back in 2008 with a small move, taking over for Live Nation as the operator of The Warfield in SF.

In Sacramento, AEG is seen as the facilitator for the Railyards Entertainment and Sports Complex. The backing out by the Maloof family has for now killed the plan, though it’s possible that AEG could resurface as a key driver with or without the basketball Kings. Should Sacramento lose the Kings, they’d have the option of building an on-spec arena, similar to former Kings home Kansas City when it built the Sprint Center. That’s a far different scope from Oakland, which is looking to keep three franchises at home via at least two new venues plus a convention center and hotel. Oakland’s model is the AEG-run LA Live complex and LA Convention Center.

AEG is the premier arena operator in the country, with Staples Center as its crown jewel. It has the experience to make cities listen when they come calling, and the weight to make cities cower when threatening to attract a team, as evidenced by AEG’s NFL pursuits. While dangling its own success in front of potential suitors, it forges ahead with its plans to expand its SoCal empire by working on a football stadium-cum-convention hall. While not a short-term likelihood, the threat and possibility remains into the future, and would hugely benefit AEG in two key ways: it would make LACC more competitive with San Diego and Las Vegas for conventions, and it would create the ultimate flexibility for all of its LA venues, which happen to be within blocks of each other.

AEG's Downtown LA operations provide great flexibility and huge traffic

To understand what make LA Live unique, it’s important to look beyond Staples Center. LA Live has two venues of its own: the 7,100-seat Nokia Theatre and 2,500-person Club Nokia, both of which are essentially auditoriums. They slot in below Staples Center for booking concerts, which is necessary because Staples is home to three pro teams and at least 126 home dates per year. In most other cities an arena operator would use a curtain system to reduce capacity at a large arena. AEG doesn’t need to do this sort of “half house” setup with Staples much, instead it can push a show to the Nokia Theatre. Staples famously hosts the Grammys every year, while Nokia hosts the Primtetime Emmys, MTV VMAs, and the finale of American Idol. Club Nokia mostly serves as a venue for up-and-coming and smaller acts. The Convention Center churns plenty of day business and drives demand to local hotels. Both convention and entertainment visitors benefit local restaurants and bars, some of which are in LA Live. It boils down to the equivalent of the population of the Bay Area visiting downtown LA every year, spread out among 2.5 events per day.

Oakland wants this kind of traffic, so they’re looking to drop SMG like a bad habit then partner up with AEG now and into the future. It’s going to be difficult to pull off. A third of AEG’s visitors come from the convention center. To build a competitive center in Oakland, the facility would have to surpass Moscone, San Jose, and Santa Clara in terms of space. It would require at least one, probably two anchor hotels attached to the convention center. A thriving commercial and retail district wouldn’t hurt attracting people and conventions. Oracle Arena is a good, modern arena thanks to the 1996 renovation, and AEG is promising to maximize utilization of the arena to its full potential and provide consulting for the Coliseum City concept.

The inherent risks are timing and cost. AEG built Staples Center prior to the 1999-2000 NBA and NHL seasons. The Nokia Theatre didn’t open until 2007, after Staples as AEG responded to market conditions. Club Nokia opened the following year. For AEG to be that involved and willing to invest in Oakland, it would have to recognize similar market potential and a chance to dominate the market the same way it does in LA. The arena part will be difficult to pull off as Sharks Entertainment will always be competitive with HP Pavilion. The Warriors could build an arena in SF, relegating Oracle Arena in the process. Another Planet Entertainment controls several smaller theaters throughout SF and the East Bay, providing natural competition in the process. There is no proper 7,000-seat auditorium in the Bay Area, pushing shows of that size to the arenas unless AEG sees fit to build one (the Bill Graham Civic, as historic as it is, is really a gym). Plus there is no shortage of 2,500-seat venues in the Bay Area: Fox Oakland, Paramount, Warfield, SF Masonic Auditorium, and the San Jose Center for the Performing Arts. AEG isn’t going to bring a fully-formed Coliseum City on Day 1. It would have to be phased in over many years, with no guarantee that much of what’s being promised will be built.

For AEG, the best part is that in making these deals, it’s getting exclusivity for usually a year or more for a very small price while making a little money to boot. AEG has been willing to invest in venues to some degree as it did with Sprint Center. However, Phil Anschutz is not about giving away the farm, as witnessed by his hardball dealings with the NFL and the contribution cap AEG paid for Sprint Center. Maybe something will happen, maybe not. Either way AEG is the first one in and keeps competition out, while getting a better understanding of how to exploit a particular market. As great as LA Live is, it shouldn’t be considered easily repeatable. Sprint Center is a more realistic and perhaps cautionary example. The arena is the second busiest in America according to Pollstar and is highly profitable by AEG’s standards, though it’s a $13 million annual drain on the city’s coffers. Sprint Center is well integrated with KC’s $850 million Power and Light District development. There remains no major pro team. AEG appears to be happy with whatever business model works best for it whether it’s three teams or none, civic pride not being a great priority.

One other curiosity about AEG: as interested it is in the NFL and as extensive as its holdings are in hockey (LA Kings), basketball (Anchutz’s minority share of the Lakers), and soccer (LA Galaxy, Houston Dynamo), there’s one glaring omission on its resume: baseball. Does AEG care about baseball at all? It doesn’t operate any ballparks, nor does it own a minor league team. It doesn’t seem to have any relevant experience with baseball. Its new AEG Sports division has no baseball interests at all. Judging from AEG’s track record, I have to think its priority list would look like this:

  • Concerts
  • Soccer
  • Conventions
  • Hockey
  • Football
  • Basketball
  • Baseball?

Judging from that, maybe AEG would be more interested in bringing a MLS team to Oakland than in keeping the A’s there. In regards to the A’s, AEG’s presence is similar to Larry Ellison in that certain factions would love for either of them to be interested in the A’s, but neither has shown any sign of interest to date. A clause in the Coliseum management contract dictates that AEG can’t talk to teams about moving, which I suppose might have teeth if a team were bound to a long-term lease (only the Warriors are). It gives a new twist on the Coliseum City exercise being a feasibility study.

04.13.12
by

Saints owner Benson to buy Hornets

The New Orleans Times-Picayune and TNT/NBA.com scribe David Aldridge are reporting that New Orleans Saints owner Tom Benson is buying the New Orleans Hornets for close to $340 million. The Hornets had been languishing ever since the league purchased them from George Shinn in late 2010. This was especially the case over the winter, when the team was forced to trade franchise point guard Chris Paul yet couldn’t get the most value in a trade because the league didn’t want large or lengthy contracts on the books. Benson won out over at least one other group including Los Angeles businessman Raj Bhatal and former NBA coach/player Mike Dunleavy.

Benson, who has owned the Saints for more than a quarter-century, is exactly the kind of local interest that David Stern and the other owners wanted to keep the team in New Orleans. The car dealership magnate was lauded in the 80’s and 90’s, then turned into a pariah as he demanded publicly financed improvements to the Superdome. When Hurricane Katrina hit in 2005, it wasn’t clear what the team’s future would be. Benson split his time between The Big Easy and San Antonio, where the Alamo Dome awaited with open arms. A large percentage of NOLA’s population left the area, making economic prospects bleak. The Superdome itself was hit hard, its roof skin torn off, its lower level flooded, and its interior and reputation damaged by some evacuees. FEMA and the Louisiana government came in and rehabbed the stadium for $180 million, which gave locals a rallying point and Benson an reason to stay. A few years later the team won the Super Bowl, the dome got a naming rights deal with Mercedes-Benz, and throughout it all Benson performed one of the greatest public relations turnarounds in the history of sports – thanks in no small part to a hurricane.

In buying the Hornets, Benson will get a long-term lease at the New Orleans Arena through 2024. Knowing that a local like Benson is now the owner should help bump up ticket sales, making the biggest weakness the team’s lack of a franchise player. Staked with the third-worst record in the league, perhaps they’ll sneak in and get the #1 pick in the NBA draft lottery. It was only a 11 days ago that Kentucky’s Anthony Davis dominated the national championship game in the Superdome. The team could eventually switch nicknames to something more befitting the city. Too bad the Jazz name moved with the team to decidedly not-jazzy Salt Lake City.

This news solidifies the team’s stay in NOLA, which was Stern’s biggest goal. Stern rebuffed overtures by Larry Ellison to buy the team, as Ellison was more interested in moving the franchise to San Jose. Now we’ll find out if New Orleans can be a basketball town in the long run.

04.13.12
by

Sabotage in Sacramento

Update 11:04 AM – Now we have the Maloofs’ proposal: Refurbish Power Balance Pavilion/ARCO Arena. Good idea or not? (I’ve been sitting on my post about ARCO, looks like it’ll go up tomorrow.) David Stern and the NBA Board of Governors have a press conference going on now.

As the Maloofs flew to New York to discuss the terms of the Sacramento ESC/Arena deal, civic interests rallied together to write a letter urging NBA commissioner David Stern to find new ownership. Clearly, whatever goodwill was captured a month ago has evaporated.

Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson with Kings owners Joe and Gavin Maloof in happier times

The Sacramento Bee followed up with an editorial also calling for the Maloofs to sell. The level of distrust between the two parties is extraordinary. For their part, the Maloofs contend that they remain committed to a new arena in Cowtown, whereas the City and its backers continually accuse the Maloofs of trying to derail every arena plan, going back several years.

My problem with the whole affair is this: Have the Maloofs ever come up with their own plan for an arena? Based on the Bee’s timeline of the Kings’ tenure in Sacramento, the answer is no. They piggybacked onto a railyards plan in 2002, and when it collapsed they blamed the City. In 2006, they famously backed away from arena measures shortly before elections. Now they’re balking at the ESC plan over money for pre-development work. They’ve also attacked the plan’s feasibility and had their lawyers make a huge, aggressive information request of the City over the plan.

KJ took the red-eye to New York to meet with the Maloofs and Stern on Friday. He’ll have the letter and support from the business community and the Bee, which is great. But this request of Stern is not going to change things. Sure, the NBA has leverage over the Maloofs because they’re tapping into the league’s credit line. It isn’t enough to break them. As cash poor as they are, neither they nor the team are in danger of bankruptcy. Kings payroll is the lowest in the league, and the only thing keeping it from dropping lower is the league’s salary floor ($44 million).

Knowing that the Maloofs are wary of Sacramento’s feasibility, Stern should force the Maloofs to do the one thing they haven’t done yet: come up with their own plan. Maybe that incorporates all or part of the ESC plan, maybe it’s something completely new. At least it would force the Maloofs to be engaged to a degree that they’ve never demonstrated. Then Stern can compare what the Maloofs have with ESC, take the best parts from both, and we’ll see who’s truly committed and what’s feasible. It would put ownership on the defensive and compel them to act instead of sitting on the sidelines as they’ve historically done. Stern can extend the artificial deadline another year, which won’t hurt things. If Sacramento can’t work out, they should know by next year, with Anaheim waiting in the wings. if the Maloofs are running into money problems, it’s possible that will be exposed in the next year, which could force Stern’s hand. That’s the only way I can see a sale happening not by the Maloofs’ choice. They’d have to run into a legal/financial crisis that de-prioritizes owning a team. In conjunction, Sacramento doesn’t need to do more than they’re doing now – figuring out the ESC plan feasibility. They’ve bent over backwards and spent a lot of money on this and the failed 2006 plan. And that is much more than I can say for Oakland.

Added: Pro Basketball Talk’s Aaron Bruski covers the Maloofs’ recent actions in great detail.

04.09.12
by

Warriors look at SF arena sans Giants

It looks like the Warriors won’t be partnering up with the Giants for an arena after all, which, if Matier and Ross are correct, is the best decision the franchise has made under the Lacob-Gruber ownership group. Instead of building on the parking lots south of China Basin, the Warriors’ arena could end up at Piers 30 & 32, which were recently abandoned as part of the America’s Cup project due to the cost of development.

The new foundation, which would consist of hundreds of deeply driven piles, would cost $80 million. The piers are currently an 11-acre parking lot, so there’s ample room for an arena, parking, and as would be expected, green space.

It’s a supremely attractive location, at the foot of the Bay Bridge and equidistant from both BART and Caltrain (3/4 mile). The only issues are a lack of parking in the vicinity and potential EIR difficulties stemming from the visual impact of the structure. You can imagine the bumper videos of ferries approaching a bayside arena during Warriors broadcasts, with the Bay Bridge and Financial District in the background.

Matier and Ross argue that the W’s are getting rid of a middleman in the Giants, which is probably correct, but it’s easy to see them exchanging one partner for another. It makes sense for the W’s to partner with AEG or another arena operator to defray some of the cost. If we’re projecting to a 2017 or 2018 opening, the cost of the arena could run $700 million easily, maybe more. Key to the deal is the fact that the W’s don’t currently operate Oracle Arena, since they have no control over it. SMG operates the arena instead, and while SMG could pitch the W’s on operating an arena in SF, I imagine that their history leaves something to be desired.

The arena could be anywhere from 120 to 150 feet tall, depending on how complex the structure is. With the lack of nearby parking, the arena could be built with 1,000+ spaces underneath. It’s more expensive, but knowing the NBA’s requirements for premium seating, also necessary. There is an example of a waterfront arena with 1,000 parking spaces built in a garage underneath. That venue happens to be in Miami, and it was designed in part by 360 Architecture, the same firm working with the A’s.

American Airlines Arena (Image from Wikimedia Commons)

On second thought, maybe it’ll cost $1 billion.

04.05.12
by

Warriors plan to move D-League team to Santa Cruz

If the Warriors and the City of Santa Cruz can hammer out a deal, we may see pro sports in Surf City for the first time in… ever?

Rendering of the inside of the 3,200 seat D-League arena

After having talks with officials in San Jose, the W’s are looking at Santa Cruz, which has no existing pro sports franchises that could compete with a D-League franchise. Last summer the W’s bought the Dakota Wizards, who play their home games in Bismarck, ND. Rumors surfaced quickly that the team could be on the move as the big team could look to cut travel costs and make the affiliate more accessible, the same way MLB teams have been reining in minor league franchises to be local satellites. The key to the relationship is that the W’s are one of a handful teams that wholly control their D-League affiliate, as opposed to other affiliates which may have players from two or three NBA teams on their rosters.

Update: The Warriors have posted a FAQ which includes details of a future permanent 5,000-seat arena, which would be built in conjunction with UCSC. They also have additional renderings, which I’ve downloaded (Exterior in Warrior colors, Exterior in pink/purple)

Santa Cruz is a small city that has generally resisted big-ticket civic projects. While the area is not known for sports, Santa Cruz High has had a legacy of prep hoops success, especially under Pete Newell Jr. There certainly are sports fans in town, and the lack of fervor for intercollegiate sports at UCSC could play into the franchise’s favor since there’s little competition nearby. There is the usual California issue of having other entertainment alternatives, but Santa Cruz’s relative isolation and the D-League’s winter schedule may help attract interest.

The City has a limited number of sports facilities, none that could properly house the relocated Wizards. High school gyms and the gym at Cabrillo College are out of the question. The Santa Cruz Civic Auditorium is a nice, WWII-era arena with a basketball floor, but its hoops capacity is only 1,000 or so, making it far too small for what the W’s are looking for. UC Santa Cruz’s West Fieldhouse has room for about 500 spectators and would be a parking nightmare. The City has very little available land upon which an arena of any size could be built. That means the W’s and the City need to be creative, and that’s where it gets interesting.

According to the Santa Cruz Sentinel, both parties are looking at a parking lot at the fringe of downtown, at the corner of Front Street and Laurel Street Extension. Location-wise, it’s at the foot of Beach Hill in a sort of commercial no-man’s land, two blocks from the City’s transit center. The lot is owned by the Seaside Company, operator of the Beach Boardwalk and owner of just about everything in and around the tourist attraction. Currently the roughly one acre lot is used for Boardwalk employee parking, and while the Boardwalk is open all year round, it’s much more a summer destination than anything else. That creates an opening for a land lease, where the Seaside Company makes money off its little-used property while the City gets new downtown visitors. Seaside could also use the space as a small convention facility, as the only one it controls is the 20,000-square foot Cocoanut Grove.

$2.5 million is being discussed as a budget for the facility, which would be paid upfront by the City and half-reimbursed by the W’s. Revenues from holding the games would presumably pay off the City’s half over time. That budget is pretty small for what would ostensibly be a 3,200-seat arena. Cost savings would be achieved by building a large, one-acre tent. Comparisons are being made to the tents Cirque du Soleil uses for its touring shows, but I think a better example is the $6 million South Hall of the San Jose Convention Center. At 80,000 square feet, the South Hall is more than twice the size the W’s are looking for. The lot’s irregularly shape could hold a 185′ x 185′ footprint, which is enough to build an arena with three full courts, plus space on the floor for 20-row telescoping seating platforms on the sidelines and some retractable bleachers along the baselines. Concessions and restrooms would have to be placed in the corners or along the ends. Locker rooms may have to be in an outbuilding of some sort if they couldn’t be fit within the arena footprint. Update: Outbuildings it is.

San Jose Convention Center South Hall

W’s VP Jim Weyermann, formerly of the San Jose Giants, said that the facility would have hard walls, so it may look similar to the picture above. If you look closely, you’ll see that the tent itself is anchored to a raised concrete foundation on the sides, a technique that could also be applied to a Santa Cruz tent arena. The problem with this kind of structure is that it’s meant to be temporary, with a roof lifespan of 10 years. If the team proves popular, the City and W’s are guaranteed to have another major expenditure down the road for either a new structure or a replacement facility. On the other hand, D-League franchises are not the most stable form of pro sports ownership. The W’s could decide at any time to suspend operation of the team or fold it altogether. Last season the Utah Jazz folded its D-League affiliate, making 15 teams that have folded in the decade-plus the league has been in operation. The Los Angeles Lakers suspended their affiliate for the 2010-11 season, then this season had the affiliate play its home games at the Lakers’ training facility in El Segundo to cut costs. There is risk for both parties regardless of the expenditure. At least with an initial outlay of $2.5 million, it isn’t something that will cripple the City. It’s not much different than the economic realities for other minor league sports. Potential exists for the arena’s use as a concert venue, though the tent structure can’t be as good at containing noise as thick concrete walls.

The D-League’s season is normally 50 games long, running from mid-November to early April. Playoffs consist of eight teams playing in up to three rounds of a best-of-three series format. Not coincidentally, this announcement was made after the Wizards’ last home game on Tuesday. Plans for the tent arena may have the team in Santa Cruz as early as this November. I’m not clear on how permitting works for something like this, but this is Santa Cruz, so you can expect the plans to get a healthy amount of scrutiny. I wouldn’t bet on Weyermann and the W’s to be able to pull off a deal like this and construct the facility by November, but if they can, more power to them. I’ll definitely hit a few games here and there.