Will Steve Ballmer move the LA Clippers to Seattle?

Discuss any and all sports-related topics. From the College Sports to Baseball and everything in between. LANGUAGE RATING: PG-13

Will Steve Ballmer move the LA Clippers to Seattle?

Yes
6
8%
No
67
92%
 
Total votes : 73


  • No
    -The Glove-
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7689
    Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 1:12 am


  • No, but honestly, if he did, I would laugh and laugh and laugh.
    Smelly McUgly
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4282
    Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 3:30 pm
    Location: God's Country AKA Cascadia AKA The Pacific Northwest


  • Aaron Hernandez has a better chances of getting out of jail than we do of the Clippers coming here.
    Throwdown
    * NET Baller *
     
    Posts: 20664
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:02 am
    Location: Graham, WA


  • The deal was continent on him keeping the team in LA
    Hawkfan77
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3278
    Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 3:46 pm


  • @byandreachang · 5m
    Sterling's lawyer repeatedly said, "There's been no sale. There's been no sale. There can be no sale without Donald's signature."

    @byandreachang · 36m
    Sterling's lawyer just told me, in Sterling's driveway, "My belief is he will not sell this team."
    Hawkfan77
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3278
    Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 3:46 pm


  • Hawkfan77 wrote:@byandreachang · 5m
    Sterling's lawyer repeatedly said, "There's been no sale. There's been no sale. There can be no sale without Donald's signature."

    @byandreachang · 36m
    Sterling's lawyer just told me, in Sterling's driveway, "My belief is he will not sell this team."


    Go Sterling Go! Seattle is with you ! (thanks alot Steve)
    TheRealDTM
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1731
    Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 5:26 pm
    Location: Seattle


  • TheRealDTM wrote:
    Hawkfan77 wrote:@byandreachang · 5m
    Sterling's lawyer repeatedly said, "There's been no sale. There's been no sale. There can be no sale without Donald's signature."

    @byandreachang · 36m
    Sterling's lawyer just told me, in Sterling's driveway, "My belief is he will not sell this team."


    Go Sterling Go! Seattle is with you ! (thanks alot Steve)


    What the hell is wrong with you, we aren't with him.
    Throwdown
    * NET Baller *
     
    Posts: 20664
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:02 am
    Location: Graham, WA


  • Ballmer tried to get a team here..He can't move the Clips so I'm not wasting any more of my energy getting mad at something the NBA created in the first place..He must know full well that the stupid NBA doesn't want Seattle no matter what ..This will be my last post about present day NBA until there is a team here..Not that I really care but I want Hockey so it's tied into that somehow ..Screw the NBA and all the greedy (cussing) involved..No team is worth over a billion!
    IndyHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4547
    Joined: Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:42 pm


  • Sterling obviously isn't fighting nothing
    Attachments
    image.jpg
    image.jpg (83.68 KiB) Viewed 3765 times
    Throwdown
    * NET Baller *
     
    Posts: 20664
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:02 am
    Location: Graham, WA


  • Moving the Clippers to Seattle would be a stupid business move, just as moving the Sonics to okiedokeville was a stupid move!
    Sports Hernia
    NET Ring Of Honor
     
    Posts: 25034
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 5:36 pm
    Location: The pit


  • Sports Hernia wrote:Moving the Clippers to Seattle would be a stupid business move, just as moving the Sonics to okiedokeville was a stupid move!

    I keep reading this, but I don't really get it.

    LA still has a team, the NBA wouldn't lose the LA market. In fact they'd gain the 13th largest media market in Seattle by moving the team. IMO doesn't it make more sense to move the Clippers to Seattle than the Kings or Bucks? Right? Or am I going about this completely wrong?
    Hawkfan77
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3278
    Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 3:46 pm


  • Hawkfan77 wrote:
    Sports Hernia wrote:Moving the Clippers to Seattle would be a stupid business move, just as moving the Sonics to okiedokeville was a stupid move!

    I keep reading this, but I don't really get it.

    LA still has a team, the NBA wouldn't lose the LA market. In fact they'd gain the 13th largest media market in Seattle by moving the team. IMO doesn't it make more sense to move the Clippers to Seattle than the Kings or Bucks? Right? Or am I going about this completely wrong?



    LA is a fair weather fan base (example 1: Lakers this year). having two teams there, like new york, helps guarantee a competitive team in the 2 most valuable markets.
    TheRealDTM
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1731
    Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 5:26 pm
    Location: Seattle


  • TheRealDTM wrote:
    Hawkfan77 wrote:
    Sports Hernia wrote:Moving the Clippers to Seattle would be a stupid business move, just as moving the Sonics to okiedokeville was a stupid move!

    I keep reading this, but I don't really get it.

    LA still has a team, the NBA wouldn't lose the LA market. In fact they'd gain the 13th largest media market in Seattle by moving the team. IMO doesn't it make more sense to move the Clippers to Seattle than the Kings or Bucks? Right? Or am I going about this completely wrong?



    LA is a fair weather fan base (example 1: Lakers this year). having two teams there, like new york, helps guarantee a competitive team in the 2 most valuable markets.

    Gotcha, thanks
    Hawkfan77
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3278
    Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 3:46 pm


  • Throwdown wrote:Sterling obviously isn't fighting nothing


    He apparently can't do anything about it, since he was found mentally incapacitated - thus enabling his wife to sell the team without his blessing.

    http://deadspin.com/report-steve-ballme ... socialflow
    Hasselbeck
    * NET Sage *
     
    Posts: 11397
    Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 5:55 pm


  • As for the original question - no. You don't pay $2 billion dollars to move the team to Seattle. I'm sorry.. but the TV deal the Clips will get now, with better ownership and marketable players, dwarfs anything Ballmer could get up here. Then there is the whole Los Angeles element in itself.. teams in LA and NY don't come up for sale very often. Doesn't matter if you're talking the Clippers or Mets.. they just dont come up often.
    Hasselbeck
    * NET Sage *
     
    Posts: 11397
    Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 5:55 pm


  • I can't get over two billion dollars for an NBA franchise. Jerry Jones just wet himself, his wife, and his son.
    duckypoo
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 441
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 10:31 am


  • The Browns went for a billy, same did the Dodgers, that the value of these pro sports teams with these tv contracts.
    Throwdown
    * NET Baller *
     
    Posts: 20664
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:02 am
    Location: Graham, WA


  • You don't buy for $2B and move to Seattle, which some speculate cuts the value of the team in half. But the Clippers do not have the TV contract that the Lakers have ($150M/yr) nor do they have much on the current stadium deal if you believe ESPN's Darren Revelle (sp?).

    I don't understand these shared stadium/arena configurations the NY and LA markets have. I guess it guarantees roughly double the dates the facilities would normally have, making it good for the local economies, but not sure how the Clippers ended up sucking hind tit on their stadium deal. Probably because Sterling wanted out of San Diego and into the LA market and was willing to sing bargain deals just to get established?
    drdiags
    * The Doc *
     
    Posts: 10682
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 8:33 am
    Location: Kent, Washington


  • There is a better chance that the Lakers will be purchased and moved to Seattle (which won't happen either) because the Clips have a better future outlook than the Lakers.
    tom sawyer
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1737
    Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2013 9:31 am


  • There's a few teams that will never move, ever

    Clippers, Lakers, Heat, Knicks, Nets, & Bulls, and because of the market in Atlanta, I'm pretty tempted to say the Hawks will never move as well.
    Throwdown
    * NET Baller *
     
    Posts: 20664
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:02 am
    Location: Graham, WA


  • I can confidently say that for the forseeable future that every team in the NBA is comfortable where they are for a long time.
    SonicHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 5558
    Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 1:56 pm


  • SonicHawk wrote:I can confidently say that for the forseeable future that every team in the NBA is comfortable where they are for a long time.


    Pretty much, we just gotta sit and hope for the Bucks to not get their arena built.
    Throwdown
    * NET Baller *
     
    Posts: 20664
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:02 am
    Location: Graham, WA


  • Throwdown wrote:
    SonicHawk wrote:I can confidently say that for the forseeable future that every team in the NBA is comfortable where they are for a long time.


    Pretty much, we just gotta sit and hope for the Bucks to not get their arena built.


    Per sale stipulations the new owners have until 2017 to have an arena deal accepted, if not control of the team goes to the league.
    TheRealDTM
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1731
    Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 5:26 pm
    Location: Seattle


  • TheRealDTM wrote:
    Throwdown wrote:
    SonicHawk wrote:I can confidently say that for the forseeable future that every team in the NBA is comfortable where they are for a long time.


    Pretty much, we just gotta sit and hope for the Bucks to not get their arena built.


    Per sale stipulations the new owners have until 2017 to have an arena deal accepted, if not control of the team goes to the league.


    The league won't hold onto the team for long, they'll flip it to someone pretty quickly, and Hansen's name has to be at the top of the list, specially if nothing worked out in Milwaukee.

    I think Hansen should team with the NHL guys, get the NHL first since the NHL wants to be here, get the dual purpose arena built, and that way we're just sitting with an arena IN USE, that has dual purpose for Milwaukee to fall through, or whenever another team is available. At this point I just want the god damn arena built, that way the NBA has no reason to do what they did to us in the Kings saga.
    Throwdown
    * NET Baller *
     
    Posts: 20664
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:02 am
    Location: Graham, WA


  • Hawkfan77 wrote:The deal was continent on him keeping the team in LA


    I remember Clay Bennett saying he wasn't taking the team to OKC.
    ZorntoLargent
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1345
    Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2013 9:45 pm


  • SonicHawk wrote:I can confidently say that for the forseeable future that every team in the NBA is comfortable where they are for a long time.

    That could actually be a good thing. Finally some franchise stability could lead to expansion. I'm not counting on it though.
    86Hawk
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 386
    Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 3:23 pm
    Location: Surfing somewhere


  • Throwdown wrote:
    TheRealDTM wrote:
    Throwdown wrote:
    SonicHawk wrote:I can confidently say that for the forseeable future that every team in the NBA is comfortable where they are for a long time.


    Pretty much, we just gotta sit and hope for the Bucks to not get their arena built.


    Per sale stipulations the new owners have until 2017 to have an arena deal accepted, if not control of the team goes to the league.


    The league won't hold onto the team for long, they'll flip it to someone pretty quickly, and Hansen's name has to be at the top of the list, specially if nothing worked out in Milwaukee.

    I think Hansen should team with the NHL guys, get the NHL first since the NHL wants to be here, get the dual purpose arena built, and that way we're just sitting with an arena IN USE, that has dual purpose for Milwaukee to fall through, or whenever another team is available. At this point I just want the god damn arena built, that way the NBA has no reason to do what they did to us in the Kings saga.

    Finally you came around to "Duel Purpose Arena" ..Only way most of us will be happy..
    IndyHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4547
    Joined: Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:42 pm


  • It always was one, I just want it built so they can't say "you don't have an arena"
    Throwdown
    * NET Baller *
     
    Posts: 20664
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:02 am
    Location: Graham, WA


  • Throwdown wrote:
    TheRealDTM wrote:
    Throwdown wrote:
    SonicHawk wrote:I can confidently say that for the forseeable future that every team in the NBA is comfortable where they are for a long time.


    Pretty much, we just gotta sit and hope for the Bucks to not get their arena built.


    Per sale stipulations the new owners have until 2017 to have an arena deal accepted, if not control of the team goes to the league.


    The league won't hold onto the team for long, they'll flip it to someone pretty quickly, and Hansen's name has to be at the top of the list, specially if nothing worked out in Milwaukee.

    I think Hansen should team with the NHL guys, get the NHL first since the NHL wants to be here, get the dual purpose arena built, and that way we're just sitting with an arena IN USE, that has dual purpose for Milwaukee to fall through, or whenever another team is available. At this point I just want the god damn arena built, that way the NBA has no reason to do what they did to us in the Kings saga.

    I'm gonna laugh when sacramento never gets their arena built...

    The NBA is so stupid, Hansen has everything ready to go but the league is bending over backwards for these small market teams with crap arena situations.
    Hawkfan77
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3278
    Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2011 3:46 pm


  • Sac's arena just got the funding approved, it's gonna happen in Sacramento, good for them.

    I think the one flaw in Hansen's plan to get a team, is that he doesn't have the arena built. So it really gives an even playing field to these other markets who are in danger of losing their teams. We don't want that, this is business, granted it'll be easier after the EIS, then its just a team purchase and approval away from shovels in the ground.
    Throwdown
    * NET Baller *
     
    Posts: 20664
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:02 am
    Location: Graham, WA


  • It's not necessarily a bad thing. Sure the Seattle bid loses it's biggest money guy, which does suck, but like the NFL it's the owners of the NBA teams make the call on things like expansion. With Ballmer now owning the Clips, it's another PNW guy at the table (along with Uncle Paul Allen) who might sway favor to move a team back up this way.

    :3-1:
    CANHawk
    * Gangnameister *
     
    Posts: 12041
    Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 4:29 pm
    Location: PoCompton, BC Canada


  • 86Hawk wrote:
    SonicHawk wrote:I can confidently say that for the forseeable future that every team in the NBA is comfortable where they are for a long time.

    That could actually be a good thing. Finally some franchise stability could lead to expansion. I'm not counting on it though.

    Stern's big arena-gouge weapon against the fans was threatening to move the team, so once the ugly evil gangster midget was out of the picture, there could only be more stability.
    Lords of Scythia
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2365
    Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 11:32 am


  • The whole deal with the Bucks sale was that Herb Kohl was intent on ensuring that the Bucks remained in Milwaukee no matter what, and that the main condition of the sale was that the new owners either have a new arena built in Milwaukee or renovate the Bradley Center. Herb Kohl was always a popular owner among Bucks fans, but doing that ensured that he'd be remembered and respected for a long time.
    Gatehawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1875
    Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2011 8:29 pm
    Location: SW Florida


  • Billionaires don't stay billionaires for long if they make stupid decisions.

    LA is a bigger if not the biggest market for basketball and, the Lakers are going to most likely suck for the next few years.

    Though I do think he over paid.

    Are still leases and contractual obligations that keep the Clippers in LA. i.e. penalties for leaving..
    Uffda
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 741
    Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2011 8:13 am
    Location: Boise


  • He would have to do it for no other reason than to bring a team back to Seattle. As others have mentioned, they would go from a huge market to a small-medium one. He would lose his arse.
    halfrack
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 145
    Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 7:43 pm
    Location: Lakin, KS


  • Could of had an NBA, NFL and NHL team for that price..... :snack:
    Atradees
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3639
    Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 8:22 pm
    Location: Ich tu dir weh


  • And according to the racist goon -nobody is buying anything-He's suing big time to prevent any sale..2 billion doesn't mean much to him I guess..
    IndyHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4547
    Joined: Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:42 pm


  • He's a dying old guy. What's $ gonna do for him that the team he loves won't?
    Lords of Scythia
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2365
    Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 11:32 am





It is currently Wed Aug 21, 2019 5:57 pm

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE SPORTS BAR ]




Information
  • Who is online
  • Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests