ALL PURPOSE NBA expansion thread

[tank44]

Vancouver deserves another shot - those fans really did get the shaft but of course it is not a media darling story because A) they did not have history (like seattle) and B) They are a Canadian city.

If anyone looks at the history of what went down they paid the expansion fee and had zero chance to succeed.

Agree Vancouver should have another shot but NBA has priced them out.

For living in Vancouver & Seattle when their NBA teams left, it was essentially the exact same scenario. Local owner wants to sell. No local company steps up to buy team. Big pocket owner from small market in MidSouth buys the team. New owner "tries" to make it work in existing city while putting out a terrible team. New owner says it can't work and will move the team to their hometown that will have a shiny new stadium for them to play in.

 

[Hockeyholic]

NBA team in Edmonton or Calgary would be pretty cool. Both cities are passionate fans of CFL & NHL too.

NBA in Montreal would create a rivalry with the Raptors.

 

[OG6ix]

Agree Vancouver should have another shot but NBA has priced them out.

For living in Vancouver & Seattle when their NBA teams left, it was essentially the exact same scenario. Local owner wants to sell. No local company steps up to buy team. Big pocket owner from small market in MidSouth buys the team. New owner "tries" to make it work in existing city while putting out a terrible team. New owner says it can't work and will move the team to their hometown that will have a shiny new stadium for them to play in.

I mean they are priced out if your standards/benchmark is the average NHL price but the NBA has much better economics and their franchises will in all likelyhood continue to grow in the future so if you are a business person or a consortium you are going to make money.

I mean Montreal has a consortium but I think Vancouver would be better. I don't know how we jump to the conclusion that vancouver is priced out when the city is larger than many NBA cities and growing it's infrustructure for tech companies. Amazon, Asana, Salesforce, and recently Microsoft have plans to open campuses/offices in Vancouver.

NBA made a huge mistake moving to Memphis you literally ditched an international city with an ever growing precensce in Technology for a City with a declining population and rising poverty rate.

Well, unfortunately it would require someone with billions of dollars since the price tag is going to be $2 bill usd. With the way the Aquilinis run the Canucks not sure that helps in finding business partners.

They should look at becoming more like MLSE and bringing in corporate investors to build out a bigger vision.

 

[StreetHawk]

I mean they are priced out if your standards/benchmark is the average NHL price but the NBA has much better economics and their franchises will in all likelyhood continue to grow in the future so if you are a business person or a consortium you are going to make money.

I mean Montreal has a consortium but I think Vancouver would be better. I don't know how we jump to the conclusion that vancouver is priced out when the city is larger than many NBA cities and growing it's infrustructure for tech companies. Amazon, Asana, Salesforce, and recently Microsoft have plans to open campuses/offices in Vancouver.

NBA made a huge mistake moving to Memphis you literally ditched an international city with an ever growing precensce in Technology for a City with a declining population and rising poverty rate.


They should look at becoming more like MLSE and bringing in corporate investors to build out a bigger vision.

Francesco Aquilini has had a big hand in running the Canucks the pst 8 years under Benning. Would require a major change, not unlike Dolan in NY, to get him to change. Doubt someone with more money than him would want to let him run things. Be like the Griffiths in the 90’s where the new partner has more money overall and will ultimately take over.

NBA ultimately needs Aquilinis to be willing to do that in order for the nba to return. The game has changed whereby back in the 90’s. No longer a downlow paint game. More outside shooting. That helps Vancouver from a player retention POV. They would still be like teams such as Milwaukee, Indiana, Portland, etc in the eyes of most nba players.

 

[OG6ix]

Francesco Aquilini has had a big hand in running the Canucks the pst 8 years under Benning. Would require a major change, not unlike Dolan in NY, to get him to change. Doubt someone with more money than him would want to let him run things. Be like the Griffiths in the 90’s where the new partner has more money overall and will ultimately take over.

NBA ultimately needs Aquilinis to be willing to do that in order for the nba to return. The game has changed whereby back in the 90’s. No longer a downlow paint game. More outside shooting. That helps Vancouver from a player retention POV. They would still be like teams such as Milwaukee, Indiana, Portland, etc in the eyes of most nba players.

The difference in the 90s is the TV deal pays for most of your player costs right off the bat. If they share ownership with the Canucks it would be a good synergy as both teams can save on costs of Rogers Arena employees, concessions etc. Honestly, the NHL is the only gate driven league these days and that's not to say that Vancouver had terrible attendance back in the day. The last two years were bad but it's understandble considering you had steve francis debockle, a losing team, and most importantly relocation rumours from St.Louis.

Will be interesting to see what happens. New Orleans is likely to reloate and Minnesota has some hurdles too.

 

[StreetHawk]

The difference in the 90s is the TV deal pays for most of your player costs right off the bat. If they share ownership with the Canucks it would be a good synergy as both teams can save on costs of Rogers Arena employees, concessions etc. Honestly, the NHL is the only gate driven league these days and that's not to say that Vancouver had terrible attendance back in the day. The last two years were bad but it's understandble considering you had steve francis debockle, a losing team, and most importantly relocation rumours from St.Louis.

Will be interesting to see what happens. New Orleans is likely to reloate and Minnesota has some hurdles too.

Partner would basically have to buy into Rogers arena most likely. Not sure it could work any other way for Vancouver. Need the Canucks and nba to work together otherwise why would the aquilinis do it? City isn’t going to Greenlight another 18k sports arena. Rogers is perfectly fine. And land is massively expensive in Vancouver.

 

[Big Z Man 1990]

I mean if a team like Boston wanted more than 2 games against say, Miami, all you have to do is meet in the playoffs. They'd get at least 2 or 4 postseason games against each other (depending in what round they meet in) to complement the home-and-home they played in the regular season.

 

[Big Z Man 1990]

It's really not feasible to do that. Roofs make projects about 40% more expensive. Like, $2 billion instead of $1.2 billion. And the vast majority of markets have zero need for it.

Texas, Florida, Phoenix and Vegas do. That's six teams (five that currently exist).

Out of 2430 games in 2021, 56 games were PPD for something a roof would prevent. That's 2.3%

And rainouts don't really LOSE teams money, because they're not selling out 81 games and then having to cram in TWO crowds into one date or issue refunds. Single-admission doubleheaders probably increase revenues.

Seattle and Milwaukee too

Also, nothing is more annoying than having tickets purchased far in advance for a baseball game played in an outdoor venue, only to have it rained out - and then you can't attend the game on the makeup date because of a scheduling conflict.

 

[IU Hawks fan]

Seattle and Milwaukee too

Also, nothing is more annoying than having tickets purchased far in advance for a baseball game played in an outdoor venue, only to have it rained out - and then you can't attend the game on the makeup date because of a scheduling conflict.

Milwaukee doesn't need it. It's a nice luxury, but a costly one.

And that ballpark feels like you're indoor even when it's open.

 

[KevFu]

Seattle and Milwaukee too

Also, nothing is more annoying than having tickets purchased far in advance for a baseball game played in an outdoor venue, only to have it rained out - and then you can't attend the game on the makeup date because of a scheduling conflict.

They HAVE roofs, but they're not necessary.

The only game I've ever been to at Miller Park, it was gorgeous out when we tailgated, a torrential downpour was going by game's end. The roof was clutch.

But it's a luxury. Finding rainout data is hard, and of course if you already HAVE a roof, you don't have rainouts. But I found this: inches of rain by city April thru September (2002-2012).

Milwaukee is 14th and Seattle is actually 24th (among teams, 28 cities listed because of NY/NY and CHI/CHI).

BTW, the Yankees/Mets almost both had retractable roof stadiums. Every plan included the roof for both stadiums, and everything was headed down the path. Until NYC asked them to cut the roofs or pay for them themselves after 9/11. So if your MLB trip to New York gets rained out, blame al Qaeda.

 

[KevFu]

Milwaukee doesn't need it. It's a nice luxury, but a costly one.

And that ballpark feels like you're indoor even when it's open.

All of them do. It's really hard to fake not having a fourth wall when it's there. The only one who comes remotely close to faking it is Seattle.

 

[OG6ix]

Partner would basically have to buy into Rogers arena most likely. Not sure it could work any other way for Vancouver. Need the Canucks and nba to work together otherwise why would the aquilinis do it? City isn’t going to Greenlight another 18k sports arena. Rogers is perfectly fine. And land is massively expensive in Vancouver.

That's what I mean they bring in investors/partners to build out "Canucks sports and entertainment" - kind of like what Larry T did with Rogers/Bell for MLSE.

 

[KevFu]

NBA team in Edmonton or Calgary would be pretty cool. Both cities are passionate fans of CFL & NHL too.

NBA in Montreal would create a rivalry with the Raptors.

I personally thought that Hansen and Geoff Moulson should have become friends and worked on Seattle/Montreal NBA expansion teams and Seattle NHL team together.

The difference in the 90s is the TV deal pays for most of your player costs right off the bat.

Honestly, the NHL is the only gate driven league these days

I'm a little confused on that first sentence. And the NHL is not a gate-driven league in any way shape or form.

Sure, it's the MOST gate-driven of the big four because it has the lowest amount of TV revenue (but also the lowest amount of payroll costs). But that's like saying because he's the smallest of four boxers, Mike Tyson is a lightweight and not a heavyweight.

 

[OG6ix]

I personally thought that Hansen and Geoff Moulson should have become friends and worked on Seattle/Montreal NBA expansion teams and Seattle NHL team together.




I'm a little confused on that first sentence. And the NHL is not a gate-driven league in any way shape or form.

Sure, it's the MOST gate-driven of the big four because it has the lowest amount of TV revenue (but also the lowest amount of payroll costs). But that's like saying because he's the smallest of four boxers, Mike Tyson is a lightweight and not a heavyweight.

I meant in the 80s and 90s tv deals didn't pay player costs. Totally agree with you Kev!

 

[Big Z Man 1990]

Speaking of TV deals, I'd like ABC, ESPN, and TNT to be joined by CBS and Peacock in the next contract.

CBS would air the Saturday night games currently on ABC. All NBA broadcasts on CBS and TNT would be co-produced by CBS Sports and Turner Sports, like March Madness, and CBS broadcasts would use TNT's current theme.

Peacock would mark the NBA's entrance into streaming-exclusive games. As an NBCUniversal property, Peacock broadcasts should use Roundball Rock, but it would need to be licensed from Fox because NBC sold the song to that network a few years ago. Fox uses Roundball Rock for college basketball coverage.

ABC and CBS would alternate airing the NBA Finals every year.

 

[tank44]

They HAVE roofs, but they're not necessary.

The only game I've ever been to at Miller Park, it was gorgeous out when we tailgated, a torrential downpour was going by game's end. The roof was clutch.

But it's a luxury. Finding rainout data is hard, and of course if you already HAVE a roof, you don't have rainouts. But I found this: inches of rain by city April thru September (2002-2012).

Milwaukee is 14th and Seattle is actually 24th (among teams, 28 cities listed because of NY/NY and CHI/CHI).

For Seattle, the rain listed would almost be exclusively in April-May and the last week of Sept. It basically doesn't rain in the summer at all.

My one game I've attended in Milwaukee would have been a rain out with torrential downpour in May. Inversely there's way too many times Im in Chicago for work and bought Cubs tickets and that game is a rain out. It sucks to plan on rain and have to reschedule, hence a roof gives you some stability for that sake.

 

[KevFu]

For Seattle, the rain listed would almost be exclusively in April-May and the last week of Sept. It basically doesn't rain in the summer at all.

My one game I've attended in Milwaukee would have been a rain out with torrential downpour in May. Inversely there's way too many times Im in Chicago for work and bought Cubs tickets and that game is a rain out. It sucks to plan on rain and have to reschedule, hence a roof gives you some stability for that sake.

I mean, yeah, rainouts suck as a fan. No one is disputing that. The question is "How much money all your rainouts (or excessive heat) costs a team to the point where adding a $800 million roof to the venue is worth it?" For Miami, and Phoenix and Las Vegas, it's a no brainer.

The Texas Rangers, for example, could see that Houston opened a stadium with a roof in 2000, and from then until 2016, the Rangers had more total wins but a lower "fans per win" ratio. Giving them an amount of unsold tickets due to the heat that added up over 30 years was greater than the cost of the roof. Therefore, build a roof.

A rule on "new stadiums need a roof" is silly. And MLB doesn't even utilize "who has a roof/warm weather" when they schedule anyway. Which drives me crazy. They have 14 teams in warm-weather cities or with a roof; and yet, do they schedule the first week of the season so that those 14 teams are at home and only ONE team is risking a rain out? Nope.

MLB needs like, three more roofs or warm-weather cities and they could easily schedule the first three weeks to limit home games for the bad weather places. But MLB doesn't need a rule until they actually schedule MIN, CLE, DET, KC, BOS, NYY, NYM, PIT, COL on the road the first nine games of the year and OAK, SF, LAA, LAD, SD, MIL, HOU, TEX, MIA, TB, SEA, TOR, ARZ, ATL all at home the first nine games of the year.

 

[IU Hawks fan]

A rule on "new stadiums need a roof" is silly. And MLB doesn't even utilize "who has a roof/warm weather" when they schedule anyway. Which drives me crazy. They have 14 teams in warm-weather cities or with a roof; and yet, do they schedule the first week of the season so that those 14 teams are at home and only ONE team is risking a rain out? Nope.

MLB needs like, three more roofs or warm-weather cities and they could easily schedule the first three weeks to limit home games for the bad weather places. But MLB doesn't need a rule until they actually schedule MIN, CLE, DET, KC, BOS, NYY, NYM, PIT, COL on the road the first nine games of the year and OAK, SF, LAA, LAD, SD, MIL, HOU, TEX, MIA, TB, SEA, TOR, ARZ, ATL all at home the first nine games of the year.

9 days really doesn't mean much. I mean, look at this garbage we deal with in the Midwest. Here in Chicago, we had more consistent warmth in March than April.

3/31, Should-Have-Been-Opening Day had a high of 63, then 8 days later it was 42. 17th & 18th matched that 42 for the lowest high of the month.

 

[KevFu]

9 days really doesn't mean much. I mean, look at this garbage we deal with in the Midwest. Here in Chicago, we had more consistent warmth in March than April.

I hear you, I'm merely saying that setting the matchups without any attempt to factor in weather means the situation of weather in MLB costing them revenue is not a big enough factor to force a $800 million expense on every team in the league.

Of course no matter how you schedule it, you're still going to get rainouts. But if weather was so much of a factor, they wouldn't have the Dodgers opening the season at Colorado instead of the other way around. Not when they play six series a year.

If it isn't worth it to MLB to use the schedule to their advantage to combat rainouts, then it's not worth it to mandate a roof.

 

[GindyDraws]

Is Louisville even considered in this discussion?

 

[Cynicaps]

Is Louisville even considered in this discussion?

Ideally, yes but there is one huge hurdle: If a pro tenant was to move into KFC Yum! Center, UofL would retain the rights to sell premium seating over the team there. While there is precedent (the Capitals first decade or so under Leonsis when Abe Pollin/WS&E kept club ticket rights), this might not be tenable long term.

There's also the issue that the NBA may have priced itself out of smaller markets and that NO, OKC, and Memphis stick around out of inertia at this point. If you were starting from a blank slate with a league would they be on the radar?

 

[StreetHawk]

Ideally, yes but there is one huge hurdle: If a pro tenant was to move into KFC Yum! Center, UofL would retain the rights to sell premium seating over the team there. While there is precedent (the Capitals first decade or so under Leonsis when Abe Pollin/WS&E kept club ticket rights), this might not be tenable long term.

There's also the issue that the NBA may have priced itself out of smaller markets and that NO, OKC, and Memphis stick around out of inertia at this point. If you were starting from a blank slate with a league would they be on the radar?

That’s kind of why for the nhl they cannot look at the 29 us nba markets and say hey we can still have 5/6 more us markets to go into.

Portland, Sacramento, Utah, San Antonio, Milwaukee, Indiana, OKC, New Orleans, Atalanta, Houston. Not to mention Orlando and Cleveland and Memphis when the nhl has Tampa and Columbus and Nashville in the same state.

I doubt the nhl is eying half of those us markets that the nba is in.

 

[LadyStanley]

Getting back to the NBA.......

LeBron James wants to own NBA franchise in Las Vegas

Speaking on his talk show, “The Shop: Uninterrupted,” Los Angeles Lakers superstar LeBron James said he wants to own an NBA franchise in Las Vegas.

www.reviewjournal.com

Full show coming out Friday on HBO Max and YouTube (I'm assuming a paid subscription).

 

[StreetHawk]

Getting back to the NBA.......

LeBron James wants to own NBA franchise in Las Vegas

Speaking on his talk show, “The Shop: Uninterrupted,” Los Angeles Lakers superstar LeBron James said he wants to own an NBA franchise in Las Vegas.

www.reviewjournal.com

Full show coming out Friday on HBO Max and YouTube (I'm assuming a paid subscription).

He won’t be the majority owner. The team would cost $2 billion and his net worth just hit $1 billion.

 

[BKIslandersFan]

That’s kind of why for the nhl they cannot look at the 29 us nba markets and say hey we can still have 5/6 more us markets to go into.

Portland, Sacramento, Utah, San Antonio, Milwaukee, Indiana, OKC, New Orleans, Atalanta, Houston. Not to mention Orlando and Cleveland and Memphis when the nhl has Tampa and Columbus and Nashville in the same state.

I doubt the nhl is eying half of those us markets that the nba is in.

They aren’t. But there are two large cities still open for NHL. NBA has no large cities left aside from Seattle.

He won’t be the majority owner. The team would cost $2 billion and his net worth just hit $1 billion.

He could start off as minority owner and slowly buy more and more shares.