Firstly, you need to take this with a severe grain of salt. By no stretch of the imagination is this imminent and I’d have to think the NBA would do everything it could to relocate a team first before folding up operations on them, not to mention, while the Kings might be high on the list of contraction they wouldn’t top it.
With that said though, it’s a scary thought for we King fans. With the arena issues continuing to get worse by the day and the hard hit central valley struggling economically, the Kings staying in Sacramento is becoming less and less probable.
Ken Berger of CBS has a fantastic piece on the upcoming CBA and the NBA owners floating out ideas of contraction as a possible source of recovering revenue.
I’m all for that. Saying goodbye to the Grizzlies, Timberwolves, Bucks and Bobcats would save the league a few hundred million in needless salaries and improve the product dramatically. When the NBA had 23 teams in 1980-81, having multiple Hall of Famers on the same team was the norm. Back then, the Heat would’ve been nothing special. Today, they’re a national spectacle covered 24 hours a day.
Billy Hunter, executive director of the National Basketball Players Association, was traveling Thursday and unavailable for comment. But typically, sports unions have resisted efforts to jettison teams because of the resulting job losses. For example, eliminating the two most revenue-challenged NBA teams would mean the loss of 30 player jobs, not to mention coaching and front-office positions. Based on gate-receipts data, the teams that have struggled the most in the past two years of the current CBA are Memphis, Minnesota, Milwaukee, Indiana, Atlanta and Charlotte. The Sacramento Kings are a clear candidate for relocation, given that their stalled efforts to build a new arena resulted in what Stern termed a “disappointing” update on that franchise’s future at Arco Arena.
You can read the full piece here.