So let's start off with this tweet from Softy this morning:
RT @jasonpuckettkjr: It's clear, in my opinion, that the NBA vote was a way to pressure Hansen to quit. He clearly won't...so what's next?— Dave Softy Mahler (@Softykjr) May 1, 2013
We already knew that Ballmer and Hansen weren't going to quit... so what's next?
From source in Sacramento "It appears Seattle has an appetite to make this ugly. That Ballmer is pissed enough to force a vote on the sale."— Dave Softy Mahler (@Softykjr) May 1, 2013
Well... This is getting fun.
Sac source: "Only move that could alter the ultimate direction of the Kings 4 next season would be a new deal blowing Sac out of the water."— Dave Softy Mahler (@Softykjr) May 1, 2013
And Hansen and Ballmer have more than enough money to make that happen. Let's continue.
Same source in Sac says "I'm hearing the Sac group is tapped out."— Dave Softy Mahler (@Softykjr) May 1, 2013
Which really does not shock me considering they probably never really had enough money in the first place to make this happen without a major public subsidy.
Reuters reports Sea and Maloofs talking strategy since Mon:mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSBR…— Dave Softy Mahler (@Softykjr) May 1, 2013
Maloofs, Hansen and Ballmer talking strategy? Let's dive into this article a bit more.
"There is no acceptable deal possible," a family representative wrote of the Sacramento bid, "and no serious desire by the Sacramento group to arrive at one. It has become too onerous for us to continue spending time and resources on a process that cannot succeed."
This is nothing new, but has anything changed since this produced a couple weeks back?
A source close to the proposed deal said the Maloof family and the Seattle group have been talking about strategy since the committee vote on Monday.
Oh... Hello new tidbit of information. What type of strategy?
The idea, this source said, would be for Hansen to persuade NBA owners to support his efforts to buy the team, even if they do not immediately allow him to move it.
Under the NBA's rules, a decision to relocate a team is separate from a decision to sell a team. So under this scenario, the league could support its committee's recommendation against moving the Kings to Seattle, while still supporting the Hansen group's efforts to purchase it.
The league could require Hansen to work in good faith with the city of Sacramento to try to keep the team there, setting a deadline for the construction of a new arena and working to keep attendance high at the games.
But if the arena wasn't built according to the schedule, or if attendance slipped at the games, Hansen could apply again for permission to move the team - and it could be more likely to be granted, this source said.
Thats crazy! Could it actually work out though?
David Carter, a professor of sports business and marketing at the University of Southern California, said the strategy could work.
Moreover, he said, it could provide a graceful way out of the situation for the NBA, which on one hand prefers to avoid the public relations fallout that occurs when a team is moved, but on the other might prefer the larger media market and wealthier fan base that Seattle would provide.
"It allows the NBA to have a strong exit strategy," Carter said. "They've done everything they could to protect a home market, but if it doesn't perform, they've protected themselves."
That makes a hell of a lot of sense. I wonder if KJ has a quote.
"If I were them, I would keep fighting too," the Sacramento mayor said. "I don't look down or begrudge anybody who's fighting for something they desperately want."
Thanks, KJ! We're going to continue to fight!