RealGM

With the way players, especially stars, can seem to manipulate teams and owners in deciding for themselves where they will and will not play, will OKC be able to support a perennial loser team?

They have Robert Swift. Enough said.

I give it 3 years.

20 years max

4-5 years.

They are too close to other markets and I see no reason that anyone making NBA cheese would want to live there for half the year. The spark of fanhood they gave in the wake of Katrina will die fast when they realize they don't have a team solidly build around a rising MVP candidate.

~10 years sounds about right.

Serpo wrote:~10 years sounds about right.

I added a 10 years option in the poll.

The fact of the matter is that it's not very hard to support a team for one season in a city with no major sports franchise when the only reason they're there is because their city was ravaged by a hurricane. How could you not go out and support that team considering those factors? This Sonic team is rebuilding and won't win very many games this season in the very deep western conference. Their attendance will probably be very good this season since it's the first year, but what happens in year two if they win 25 games? Will the fans still pack the arena every night? Maybe if they get the #1 pick and take Blake Griffin, hell I see a lotto fix happening already...

5 years with probably the last 3 of them being abysmal. I can't imagine anyone wanting to play there or staying there. This is going to make Vancouver and Memphis seem like Miami or Los Angeles by comparison.

This begs a second poll. Will Kevin Durant bolt from OKC at the first moment?

Yes. He will.

That is the issue here. No one will want to play in OKC. The team will be a perennial loser.

Great work, Mr. Stern.

I've done a lot of business up in OKC, and from what I've seen they're ready for something like this. They are a flourishing, growing city with several economic hubs, so they won't be hurt by one industry having a rough time like some cities would. The fans know a thing or two about supporting sports teams, as Norman is right outside of OKC.

I think that they will be there for the long haul. I also think that Durant will be as well.

I've been there a couple of times. It's not that bad of a place. It's boring enough to where it will be #1 thing for fans to do almost all the time, but not quite boring enough to where it will be hell for the players--not quite at least. Bricktown (their downtown district) is pretty cool and probably not a bad place to be, but everything closes on Sunday, and there is like one grocery store in town outside of Wal-Mart. The weather is God awful too (hot, humid summers and ice storms in the winter).

But still, it's not as bad as some of you are making it out to be.

I don't get why people think the team won't last. They have a sweet arena deal; they have a large regional population base to draw on (only Dallas and Denver have NBA team that would be competitive within the four states closest to OKC as Memphis just isn't a factor) in not only OK but also Missouri, Kansas and Arkansas for a population base of nearly 15m people, far larger than the regional base that the Sonics had in Puget Sound for the last 41 years; their metro area, if you want to stretch it to include Tulsa is larger than Portland's or Utah's (no one would argue that both cities support their teams very well); and the Sonics are a team that should improve over the next few years which will cement the relationship between the local folks and the team for years to come. There is definitely a school of thought on these boards that Bennett is making a very poor business decision here, but the Sonics never had either the regional or local support that OKC will have, so I see no reason why they won't be there for a long time. The only reason they would fail is if they were seen as a vagabond team that was poorly run like the Kansas City Kings were in KC, but with Presti at the helm it would seem that the commitment is towards building a long-term winning tradition with the team.

As for "no one will want to play in OKC," that remains to be seen. People said the same thing about Utah and they lured Boozer out there, and it's not like Seattle was a major free agent destination, either. And there are a good number of players that love the adolation that comes from being a big fish in a small pond, so keeping players won't be as hard as some think. It might be hard to keep Durant or Mayo (had he landed there) as both of those guys seem to see LA or New York as their destinations, but not everyone has that sort of inclination. So I don't see the huge downside some see here with this move.

There seems to be a fan base to support the team, so I see no reason to anticipate failure. The team should do well for the forseeable future, and barring some sort of bungling by management, I expect the franchise to remain in OKC.

mojo you just used intelligence and fact to support a claim. You sir do not know the general board way.

Utah isn't the least desirable place to play at any more... YES!

Do they even have an NBA worthy arena?

Longer than new orleans has the hornets.

3 years.

DITCH OKLAHOMA CITY ! LETS SCREW OVER CLAY BENNETT !

Milkdud wrote:mojo you just used intelligence and fact to support a claim. You sir do not know the general board way.

With all due respect to Mojo, as I do respect him, I completely disagree with your post. He did not lay out any more facts than my original claim that this team will be a perenial loser.

My opinion is that KD will leave. He agrees. My opinion is that All Star caliber players will not want to play in OKC. He disagrees and uses Boozer in Utah as an example. The fact is, money is what motivates Boozer, and it is money that will only motivate most players to play in OKC. However, money is not enough to retain All Star players, especially when money can be had in most, if not all, NBA cities. Boozer will bolt next summer for a more glamorous locale.

Essentially, Mojo and I disagree, but both of our positions are based mostly on speculation and opinion, and not fact. I can point to Memphis as a example of a struggling small market team that could lose its franchise due to dwindling fan support and cheap ownership.

Mojo could then point to Portland's and Sactowns' success as being examples of small market successes that are mostly attributed to only having 1 professional team.

Again, for every reason someone can tell me why OKC will be a success, I have historic precedences and examples of why they will fail. It comes down to a matter of opinion.

I have nothing against OKC. And, this is really an argument relevant to all small markets, because lately a lot of the better players are demanding trades and are influencings moves to LA, NY, Boston, etc. - so all small market fans should have this fear, if not in the backs of our minds.

Could not the Sonics be an example?

hoops4life wrote:Utah isn't the least desirable place to play at any more... YES!

Do they even have an NBA worthy arena?

Yes, they do have a pretty new and rather nice arena. It is where the Hornets played while they were up there. It's right by Bricktown, the renovated and bustling part of their downtown.