LA Clippers to announce plans for new arena in Inglewood

Dale Gribble

Registered User
Feb 9, 2019
369
331
I'm assuming Ballmer doesn't care for hockey, and there's clearly a reason as to why I'm not a Billionaire, but why wouldn't Ballmer just buy the Ducks, get the Arena lease, and move the Clippers there ?
Does LA really need another arena ?
Do they even really want the Clippers ?
 

gstommylee

Registered User
Jan 31, 2012
14,486
2,783
I'm assuming Ballmer doesn't care for hockey, and there's clearly a reason as to why I'm not a Billionaire, but why wouldn't Ballmer just buy the Ducks, get the Arena lease, and move the Clippers there ?
Does LA really need another arena ?
Do they even really want the Clippers ?

The clippers are not moving out of LA. The NBA will never allow it. Ballmer isn't interest in the NHL or the Seattle sodo arena would been built in Seattle with Balmer owner of the NHL Seattle team.
 

Boeser Fan

Registered User
Jun 23, 2018
492
531
I'm assuming Ballmer doesn't care for hockey, and there's clearly a reason as to why I'm not a Billionaire, but why wouldn't Ballmer just buy the Ducks, get the Arena lease, and move the Clippers there ?
Does LA really need another arena ?
Do they even really want the Clippers ?
The Ducks recently extended there lease in Anaheim through 2048 and the NBA clearly wants 2 franchises in Los Angeles.
 

CHRDANHUTCH

Registered User
Mar 4, 2002
35,660
4,347
Auburn, Maine
The clippers originally were San Diego Clippers before being moved to LA.
Buffalo, tommy, as Fenway has pointed out several times, is the original home of the Clippers just as Rochester is the real 'home' of the Kings/Royals that play in Sacramento, nevermind Cincinnati, Omaha/Kansas City, since the Kings actually honor Oscar Robertson, even though he never played in Rochester, Kansas City/Omaha, or Sacramento.
 

Centrum Hockey

Registered User
Aug 2, 2018
2,092
728
I'm assuming Ballmer doesn't care for hockey, and there's clearly a reason as to why I'm not a Billionaire, but why wouldn't Ballmer just buy the Ducks, get the Arena lease, and move the Clippers there ?
Does LA really need another arena ?
Do they even really want the Clippers ?
the Lakers would love it if the clippers moved they could have a monopoly on the market.
 

Centrum Hockey

Registered User
Aug 2, 2018
2,092
728
?? LOL - the Lakers already have a monopoly, no matter how good or bad the team is.

The media openly mocks the Clippers.
I meant more in a business sense they could charge a lot more than they already do for season tickets. If they where the only team in town.
 

Dale Gribble

Registered User
Feb 9, 2019
369
331
The clippers are not moving out of LA. The NBA will never allow it. Ballmer isn't interest in the NHL or the Seattle sodo arena would been built in Seattle with Balmer owner of the NHL Seattle team.

The Ducks recently extended there lease in Anaheim through 2048 and the NBA clearly wants 2 franchises in Los Angeles.
Yeesh... tough crowd. The Clippers are already an afterthought, and as I brought does the LA Metro really need yet another arena ?
Ballmer likes spending ridiculous amount of many, and this hockey fan wouldn't mind seeing him spend it on hockey. Anaheim could work, but it's just a pipe dream of mine.
 

TheLegend

Megathread Gadfly
Aug 30, 2009
36,810
28,945
Buzzing BoH
Buffalo, tommy, as Fenway has pointed out several times, is the original home of the Clippers just as Rochester is the real 'home' of the Kings/Royals that play in Sacramento, nevermind Cincinnati, Omaha/Kansas City, since the Kings actually honor Oscar Robertson, even though he never played in Rochester, Kansas City/Omaha, or Sacramento.

San Diego’s original pro basketball team was the ABA Conquistadors. They lasted for four seasons (renamed the Sails the fourth year) and then folded in 1975. Clippers franchise came in three years later from Buffalo.
 

TheMoreYouKnow

Registered User
May 3, 2007
16,409
3,451
38° N 77° W
Inglewood seems to make little sense. It's not far enough away to allow for any fan base differentiation i.e. it's in the very heart of Lakers territory. You're just going from a non-entity in the Lakers' arena to a non-entity in your own arena there.

I'd say they should really be in Vegas yesterday.
 

gstommylee

Registered User
Jan 31, 2012
14,486
2,783
Inglewood seems to make little sense. It's not far enough away to allow for any fan base differentiation i.e. it's in the very heart of Lakers territory. You're just going from a non-entity in the Lakers' arena to a non-entity in your own arena there.

I'd say they should really be in Vegas yesterday.

Clippers are not leaving LA. NBA would never allow it.
 

Boeser Fan

Registered User
Jun 23, 2018
492
531
Yeesh... tough crowd. The Clippers are already an afterthought, and as I brought does the LA Metro really need yet another arena ?
Ballmer likes spending ridiculous amount of many, and this hockey fan wouldn't mind seeing him spend it on hockey. Anaheim could work, but it's just a pipe dream of mine.
Well sorry to be the bearer of bad news but that's not happening the Clippers and Ducks have never been connected and never will.
 

la patineuse

Registered User
Aug 21, 2010
7,128
3,485
I'm assuming Ballmer doesn't care for hockey, and there's clearly a reason as to why I'm not a Billionaire, but why wouldn't Ballmer just buy the Ducks, get the Arena lease, and move the Clippers there ?
Does LA really need another arena ?
Do they even really want the Clippers ?

Ballmer can't just buy the Ducks because they're not for sale. The Samuelis' own the management agreement for the Honda Center as well the Ducks, so why would they sell the only professional sports team tenant of the arena they operate? Plus, the Samuelis are local OC owners who have invested heavily in growing hockey in OC by buying and operating many ice and inline rinks, starting a high school hockey league and most recently building the Five Points ice facility.
 
  • Like
Reactions: oknazevad

sexydonut

Registered User
May 12, 2009
950
490
Inglewood is a borderline dump and not particularly convenient.

But these oligarchs (Balmer, the Walmart heirs, etc.) see prime redevelopment potential.
 

Brodie

HACK THE BONE! HACK THE BONE!
Mar 19, 2009
15,525
563
Chicago
Hot take: the Ducks should move to the Inglewood arena and rebrand as the Los Angeles Ducks
 

Terry Yake

Registered User
Aug 5, 2013
26,850
15,333
yeah i can't see the NBA allowing the clips to leave LA at this point despite the fact that they will always play second fiddle to the lakers

and i get it. the clips want their own arena because from the second they moved into staples center in 1999 they have played under the lakers shadow of success. i mean just a year or two ago after ballmer took over they began covering up the lakers title banners during their home games. and up until recently, the clippers were a complete afterthought for the arena itself. always getting schedules for weekend matinee games while the lakers got the prime slots. not to mention that staples center's lower level seats were mostly purple during the arena's first decade or so. you would have never been able to guess a team aside from the lakers and kings played there up until recently

but i'm really not sure how much having their own arena will change things for the team. staples is a prime venue and the team has started to receive far more recognition from the arena and the city in recent years
 

CHIP72

Registered User
Mar 16, 2013
738
123
Silver Spring, MD
Inglewood is a borderline dump and not particularly convenient.

But these oligarchs (Balmer, the Walmart heirs, etc.) see prime redevelopment potential.

I believe the new Rams/Chargers stadium is intended to be an entertainment complex rather than merely a stadium, similar to the arena being built in San Francisco, and the Clippers want to get in on that action by building their own arena next to the new stadium.
 

CHIP72

Registered User
Mar 16, 2013
738
123
Silver Spring, MD
the Clippers leaving San Diego seems like a dumb move in retrospect.

The primary reason (and I'd argue the only reason) it looks like a dumb move is because Donald Sterling was a terrible owner. Had the Clippers organization consistently tried to create a competitive team since the franchise moved to Los Angeles in 1984, the Clippers would be much more prominent in Los Angeles. They'd still be a clear second fiddle to the Lakers, but would be more analogous to say the Mets in New York than what they actually have been for most of their history in Los Angeles. There would have been/would even be times when the Clippers would overshadow the Lakers for a few years, like the Mets did with the Yankees for much of the period between 1984 and 1990.
 

Brodie

HACK THE BONE! HACK THE BONE!
Mar 19, 2009
15,525
563
Chicago
I mean you think Ballmer would have paid all that money for San Diego Clippers?

I mean the amount Ballmer paid doesn't mean anything except to the owners of other franchises.

I think owning one of two pro sports teams in the 8th largest city in the country would probably still be desirable
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad