The NBA is extremely close to finalizing their new Collective Bargaining Agreement, and the finalized details should be coming out in the next few weeks. During the announcement of the new television contract, we said that there are expansion escalators in the deal. In other words, if the NBA were to expand, they would get more money out of the deal.
What does all that have to do with Seattle?
Well, we know that the NBA is going to do their best to not move teams out of their current markets. They made that mistake back in 2008 with a certain team, they know they messed up big time and will not make that mistake again.
The other night I reached out to a lot of media and league people in my contact list and simply asked, "Is expansion on the table?"
I had 57 people respond, 14 of those either did not comment or said they didn’t know. That leaves 43 other responses. Some that really jumped out were:
"With no arena, you’d get 14, maybe 16, votes toward expansion."
"I’ve heard there are 14 definitely for it."
"It [expansion] is definitely on the table and being discussed."
"There are two who are fully no, everyone else can have their mind changed."
Those would be the four most pessimistic responses that I got. The rest were definitely a lot more, well I got goosebumps and it made me giddy. A couple of my favorites:
"If Seattle had a new building, they would pass expansion."
"An hour after Seattle approves their arena, they’d have an offer in hand."
How can you not be excited about those comments? I am not, however, going to get my hopes up too much. A lot can happen and things can change. The whole thing will come down to the Seattle City Council changing at least one vote and approving the street vacation of Occidental Avenue so that Chris Hansen can get a new arena built.
If there is no arena, there is no Sonics, and it is simple as that.
I’ve heard that once the CBA is finished, the expansion bidding could be announced as soon as December or as late as the All-Star Game in February. There are going to be numerous other cities competing with Seattle to get the expansion franchises as well. I do not know if there is just going to be one slot or two. Other cities I’ve heard that are going to be making a play for expansion are Louisville (they have all their affairs in order and ready to go), Pittsburgh, Omaha, Las Vegas, Vancouver, BC, and Mexico City. Kansas City and St. Louis have been brought up as well, but I can’t confirm the validity of their interest.
Seattle is definitely on the radar and the city needs to get the arena passed or it’ll be about 2050 before we can ever hope of getting a team back in Seattle.
If ever.
Comments
Good, lets get that CBA passed
By Jeff - j1012 on 10.13.16 8:10am
The problem I'm having with all this
Is if it were true why hasn’t the NBA communicated that to the city council in any way shape or form? I’m not talking about passive aggressive press conference comments. I’m talking about point blank telling them they have to get a building approved and expansion will happen. First it was the TV deal we were waiting on and it didn’t happen. Now the CBA is about to wrap up and I’m not holding my breath anymore.
By Zeppe on 10.13.16 8:17am
I guess someone can look for that kind of communication
By Jeff - j1012 on 10.13.16 8:31am
They can't
After Charlotte, all cities have to be given an equal chance at bidding on expansion. However, if the league made a public declaration of opening the expansion process – similar to how the NHL did – that would go a long way.
By Taylor Bartle on 10.13.16 8:51am
A jaded Slickhawk and depressed Ducks' fan
By Jeff - j1012 on 10.13.16 8:17am
He's got a point
Until it happens it hasn’t happened
By Kodi on 10.13.16 9:24am
that's fine
but hopefully it helps to know that the entire NBA fan base is pulling for you to get your team back
By Duby Dub Dubs on 10.13.16 3:41pm
Now we just need to come up with a way to end homelessness so the CC will pay attention to us again and we'll be set.
By wetzelcoal on 10.13.16 8:23am
I wonder if Lander St overpass funding will move a Council member to change?
By Jeff - j1012 on 10.13.16 8:30am
Some of the justification for a No vote revolved around "No team, why bother?"
At least there are some words that can be fed back to put the No-alition on the hot seat. New development opportunities at the Seattle Center may also appease some of the CMs. Maybe a few million to help construct the new high school over Memorial Stadium, or to allay the cost of re-locating the memorial there?
By cortone on 10.13.16 8:40am
You are psychic, tell me more about the future!
By twimberly23 on 10.25.16 3:28pm
My concern is
The council may want private funding but still want the kickbacks and sweeteners. I wonder if Hansen has the funds or new group members to do all these extra things on top of full private funding. I would think closing the lander gap would be the biggest carrot on offer beside private funding.
By Barely Able on 10.13.16 8:44am
Some of those sweetners are part of the street vacation process
The city has to be reasonable in its expectation for compensation for the street. They can’t put everything agreed to in the MOU, on top of everything negotiated for the original street vacation application, as the requirement if Hansen goes private without potentially incurring legal intervention.
By Matt Tucker on 10.13.16 9:39am
skeptically excited like many people...
However I think with the political climate in Seattle right now where a $200 million dollar loan for a fancy home to millionaires and the city council proposing the homeless pitch their tents in city parks…probably doesn’t look right to many people (Yes, I too have tried to convince people that the $200 million is a loan – unfortunately that is not the perception of many). It just may behoove Chris Hansen to go private financing at this point with the stars starting to line up a bit. Can one connect the dots between Hansen’s land purchase a few weeks ago and today’s news? Perhaps.
All of us here understand the MOU, understand the city council’s position, and the homeless crises which is A number 1 in the city right now. I’m not sure how Hansen can and will get the city council’s attention going forward, but going private and forgoing a city partnership just might be necessary. But, what do I know, there are probably backroom convos going on.
By realmofhelm on 10.13.16 8:44am
Shrug
Lovely sentiment but we still have no building.
Until the city decides sports fans are relevant to them we are just pissing in the wind just like the NHL expansion process. To date they have not so even good news from the league lacks gravity.
Slickhawk is right to be on Team Eeyore.
By sofa-king on 10.13.16 9:01am
Team Eeyore makes the best cookies
By Kyle Sherwood on 10.13.16 9:16am
Its the only logical way to look at it. Obviously I want to be optimistic but I mean I gotta stop being a glutton for punishment at some point
By Trolltossin on 10.13.16 5:22pm
Vote Out The Five Who Voted No First
Replace them with pro arena people and start talking
By SonicsFan197879 on 10.13.16 9:10am
I'm not waiting 3 more years
To start the process
By Taylor Bartle on 10.13.16 9:15am
You can say that again!
By JetCityWoman2 on 10.13.16 12:36pm
I'm not waiting 3 more years
To start the process
By Taylor Bartle on 10.13.16 9:16am
Not to mention the few numbers we have in the relevant districts.
Most of us live outside of Seattle.
By sofa-king on 10.13.16 9:22am
you don't have to wait 3 years
Lorena Gonzalez is up for Re-election next year in 2017. she is also a city-wide council member so if you live in Seattle you get to vote in that race.
She loves sports, my guess is with a guaranteed team she would vote for it.
She will likely win by a landslide either way though.
By python6114 on 10.13.16 2:39pm
Which doesn't really help us much
When the mou expires before the election.
By gstommylee on 10.13.16 4:15pm
at least we know
she loves the storm
By SonicsJoe on 10.13.16 6:20pm