Click for full sized image

Title: Like Shooting It Into An Ocean

Photographer: Brandon Bombay

Description: Hong Kong, Main Island, Pok Fu Lam (off Victoria Road). Mainly a neighborhood filled with locals, so not many ex-pats means not many good runs. A gorgeous court deserving of better competition.

Date: October, 2010

Check out this post to learn how to contribute to the My Stomping Grounds image collection.

So many of the current NBA discussions are framed around market size – yet the numbers used to define these markets are somewhat misleading. Not to get all sabermetric (or would it be sabermetro) on everyone, but I thought it may be a good exercise to look at the criteria used most commonly to define ‘big’ vs ‘small’ markets. And why, for the most part, the numbers we use are bullshit.

Most current discussions are framed around Designated Market Areas (DMAs) as outlined by Nielsen. Nielsen uses DMAs to assign total audience numbers to various regions for use in buying and selling ad space. The flaw in using DMAs to evaluate ‘large market vs small market’ in NBA terms is that every county in the United States is assigned to a DMA. For example – the Salt Lake City DMA includes the entire state of Utah. DMAs are designed to evaluate the size of a city in the same way your waist size is used to evaluate the size of your penis.

Below is a chart ranking each NBA market in terms of DMA.

One of the most common citations in the ‘big market vs small market’ debate is that LeBron James left Cleveland, the 18th largest DMA, for Miami, the 16th largest. If looking purely at DMAs, the move is insignificant.

But DMAs don’t really illustrate the true size of a city. The Cleveland DMA includes Akron and Canton, which somewhat artificially inflate the idea of Cleveland as a city. While a case can be made that TV markets are still an important number when evaluating NBA markets, looking at the metro size of these cities provides some stark differences.

Metros, or Metropolitan Statistical Areas, outline the core urban area and the immediate outlying regions that are directly related to that region. To extend the Salt Lake City example, a metro determines the people who live in Salt Lake City – not in the ENTIRE STATE OF UTAH. This provides a more accurate sense of the size of the city, and not just the assigned television market. When looking at the Metro sizes of Cleveland and Miami, Cleveland is ranked 28th with 2 million people, while Miami is ranked 8th with 5.6 million. So Miami is almost three Clevelands.

Below is the same chart as above, ranking each NBA market by DMA next to a chart ranking each market by metro – with fancy light sabers highlighting markets that have a large discrepancy.

The DMA and metro rankings mirror each other fairly close except for a few large outliers, which I’ve highlighted.  Also note the discrepancy in many of the smaller markets, where their DMA is ranked much higher than their metro, even if that didn’t impact their rank relative to other NBA markets.  Indiana is the 26th ranked DMA, but the 35th ranked metro.  Charlotte and Orlando are also much smaller metros than DMAs.  In the top 10, markets like Dallas, Philadelphia, and Boston only drop a few spots, but with the huge populations of those cities, the total audience difference is significant.

DMAs definitely have a relevant place in the discussion. When evaluating teams that may be willing to go into the luxury tax, looking at their DMA provides a fairly accurate idea of the size of their television contract. But when discussing free agents, the DMA probably has less impact than the metro ranking.

Mostly because metros more accurately define the amount of girls with slutty Twitter avatars available for follows in each market.

(Please note: Toronto was excluded since Canadian markets are not included in either the Nielsen or Metro rankings. Sorry, Canada. Golden State was listed under the San Francisco / Oakland DMA and Metro.  Seattle is the 15th ranked metro and 12th ranked DMA.)

Episode 35 – Keepin Our Shoe Game Tight

On this episode Mike, JP and Matt chat about marketable players and the shoe game.  Pretty great stuff, as always.

Episode 35 [ 1:10:35 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

Click for full sized image

Photographer: Mike S

Description:  So the first time I came up here on business, my boss was like “Oh, I have to let everyone know I can’t play basketball at lunch today…”  I was all like “Whaaaaa????”

So turns out the Rockwell Automation building in Milwaukee has a basketball court in it.  Way back in the 40s/50s/60s, there was a Industrial Basketball league where like all the manufacturing companies in Milwaukee played each other.  Each team had it’s own home court and Rockwell’s was up on 7th floor of the building.

As you can see in the pic, it’s pretty big and baller.  People play on their lunch during the week and there is an intercompany league.  From the info I gathered, there is still some sort of Manufacturing League, but couldn’t figure out if Rockwell has a team and if they use it as their home court.

So yeah, two things.  It’s pretty boss to have a basketball court at your work to have a nice lunch run… and the idea of like a little city league where old school manufacturing dudes played each other? That rules.

Check out this post to learn how to contribute to the My Stomping Grounds image collection.

It’s really cold in Cleveland right now, you guys. Still, I’ve managed to lovingly write you up this statsy blog post even though I can’t quite feel my digits…..Time some stats upside ya head…

 Tim Duncan Block Party

Tim Duncan is averaging a very spry 2.7 blocks per game. That’s just .2 under his career high of 2.9 ten years ago in the 02-03 season. In the last three years, he has averaged 1.5, 1.9, and 1.5 blocks per game. He is also shooting .826 from the line as a .691 career free thrower. Dude’s gonna be 37 this year. Maybe some things do get better with age…or at least stay pretty consistent. Long live Timmy.

Let me Vasquez you a question…

Who might this year’s most improved player be? I’ve waffled on this quite a bit so far this year, but Greivis Vasquez of the Hornets is making a nice case for himself. He’s third in the league in assists with 9.2 (also fifth in turnovers, but whatevs…Both Jrue Holiday and Rajon Rondo are top five in assists and turnovers as well — solid company). He’s up to 14.3 PPG (up from 8.9 last year) on .441 shooting for the year as well, and is shooting a very solid .383 from three (career .336).  He is also managing to pull down 4.6 rebounds per game. Quite a nice stat line for a guy at his position.

Durant Status

There’s been a bit of talk about Kevin Durant becoming a part of the prestigious 50-40-90 club (ending the season shooting 50%+ overall FG%, 40%+ 3P%, and 90%+ FT% would allow him a membership). This would put him with the likes of Bird, Price, Miller, Nash, and Nowitzki. If Durant keeps up his numbers, it’s quite possible that he does this while also leading the league in scoring. Talk about efficiency.

2012 Draft Class Watch

2012 Draft Class Stats before games on 1/22/2013. Leaders in each category are highlighted.

I’ve really enjoyed doing this on a bi-weekly basis for this past year’s top ten draft picks. It has been interesting to see how these stats fluctuate as the season goes on. If you’re lucky and I’m feeling like putting in effort, I might just have a super graphical summary come all star break to see how these guys have improved as the season has progressed using these bi-weekly “snapshots”. But I digress. Here’s the meat and potatoes for this week.

Anthony Davis

Davis’ continues to put up nice numbers even though he’s down to 24.6 minutes per game in January (29.1 for the season). This after he averaged almost 34 MPG in
December. He’s managed to score in double digits the last five games, going for a double double in two of those. In the most recent of those five games, he unfortunately
injured his ankle (again) and looks like he might miss some more games. Before injury, he managed an impressive 11 and 6 line in 15 minutes, with three blocks to boot.

Michael Kidd-GilChrist

Welp, it looks like MKG is losing a little bit of playing time. Kidd-Gilchrist is down to 25.4 minutes in the month of January, where he averaged 27+ in previous months (he currently stands at 27 MPG for the season). In the past three games, he has played 24 minutes (5 PF, so that helps explain that one a little bit), 18
minutes, and 23 minutes.

Bradley Beal

Beal was on one hell of a nice streak til he played Portland and went 1-7 from the field for 2 points. Before that he has games where he went for 13 points on 11 shots, 23
points on 13 shots, 26 points on 14 shots, and 17 points on 10 shots. Quite nice for a guy who just finally got his FG% above 38 recently.

Dion Waiters

Waiters exploded for 33 points against Sacramento earlier this month on 18 shots, then proceeded to go 1-9 for 5 points the very next game against Portland. That’s Waiters’
season in a nutshell. Oh, and he scored 23 points on 14 shots in a loss to Utah after the Portland game (shooting 12 FTs!). Dion finally has his shooting percentage above 38%
as well, so that’s nice.

Thomas Robinson

Robinson had a pretty nice game against the Cavaliers on the 14th, going for 12 and 7. He also had a double double (10/10) in a blowout loss to Miami and an impressive rebound display in thirteen minutes of action against Dallas on 1/10, grabbing 10 rebounds (9 of those defensive, so it’s not like he was volleying missed tip attempts to himself in that timespan). Those tidbits aside, nothing fantastic coming from Robinson these last two weeks.

Damian Lillard
Lillard continues to be one hell of a pick up for the Blazers — and a pretty consistent one at that. In November, December, and thus far in January, he’s averaged 18.1, 18.2, and 18.1 points respectively. His shooting is also up to .429 in the month of January, up from .408 in December. Still nothing to write home about with those percentages, but the Blazers aren’t complaining. Oh, and this happened….

Harrison Barnes

Harrison has turned out to be a nice role player for a surprisingly winny GSW team. He’ll have his great games, like his 21 point effort where he went five of six from downtown. He’ll also have his not-so-hot nights, such as his 3/12 shooting display in a loss to Miami (still, he had three assists on six rebounds to his credit). Rarely does Harrison have such a terrible game that you might actually think he played a large role in losing the contest (see: 15 point loss to Charlotte where he connected on zero field goals on seven attempts). He has brought his 3P% up to .381, up from .338 two weeks ago.

Terrence Ross
There was a tiny buzz about Ross after his nice little stream of games at the end of December and into January, where he scored 26 points against Portland on the 2nd. Since
then, he’s scored 3, 0, 7, 0, 4, 0, 18 (Yay!) and 4 points. To be fair, he’s only played over 20 minutes in three games this month, and played just three minutes in one of
those games where he scored 0 points.

Andre Drummond

Drummond continues to put together an awesome rookie campaign. In limited minutes (21.4), he is averaging 8.4 rebounds, 2.3 blocks, and 9.6 points per game on .690 shooting. It is possible he takes Lillard’s rookie of the year at the end of the season, but he’s likely gonna need more minutes (and for Lillard to hit a legit rookie wall). Still, he is giving the Pistons more than they could have hoped for this early in his career.

Austin Rivers

Austin beat his daddy’s Celtics! Quite handily, too. Still, same old bleh, nothing exciting or new to really report.

Episode 34 – The Time We Found Out Emile Loves Tayshaun Prince

Yep, you read that right.  Emile likes Tayshaun Prince… A LOT.  And Michael Beasley too.  Don’t let that deter you though because there is a lot of great basketball talk in this episode.

Episode 34 [ 1:41:59 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

Click for full sized image.

Photographer: Amin Vafa

Description: Here’s a picture of a basketball court I saw walking around Dakar, Senegal. I was there for a work trip at the end of September/beginning of October, and my colleagues and I went walking around the city and coastline on the weekend. We saw a few monuments, but this was definitely one of my favorite things I saw. Basketball is pretty popular in Senegal (I saw plenty of NBA gear as I was walking around), but wrestling (MMA-style) and soccer still rank slightly ahead in participation. I think this court was nestled between one of the poorer neighborhoods and one of the richer neighborhoods. I think the date was Sept 29, 2012. Also please note that the baskets are weighed down by buckets full of rocks.

Click for full sized image.

Photographer: Amin Vafa

Description: It’s a court at a boarding school (in Senegal), I think. You can see a playground in the background, too.

Check out this post to learn how to contribute to the My Stomping Grounds image collection.

Have you ever done something then immediately regret it?  Yeah, well that’s how I felt after starting this conversation with Angelo about the Kings’ proposed move to Seattle.  I think I’m just exhausted with talking about this.  But yeah, here are thousands of words about the whole thing.  If you’ve ever fantasized about how IGHN members bicker back and forth, here is a peek inside our world.

From: Mike
Date: January 10, 2013
To: Angelo
Subject: Reasonable Opinions on the Kings
So the internet’s goin nuts over this Kings thing, huh?

I guess the whole reason this email chain is starting is because I don’t get how anyone can think there isn’t blood on the hands of Sonics fans.

On Thu, Jan 10, 2013, Angelo wrote:
Can I just point out that I love how an email with the subject “Reasonable Opinions on the Kings” has a sentence about there being blood on people’s hands?

This is exactly why I think that this whole thing is being so overwrought. Is it a crappy situation? Absolutely. Is an incredibly loyal, passionate fan base being robbed of their team? Yes. But to go above and beyond that and start moralizing this is absurd. How does this become a moral issue involving anyone outside of the Maloofs?

On Thu, Jan 10, 2013, Mike wrote:

Well “blood on their hands” is a reasonable metaphor because it implies some guilt. Maybe they didn’t jab the knife in, but there were there watching cheering it on and getting blood on themselves. I don’t think Seattle fans are the primary guilty party, but they play a part in this puzzle that can’t be ignored.  They are implicit.

Here is my case:

Seattle fans are (understandably) upset about how the Sonics were taken from them.  It was a bad situation and most Sonics fans (and a lot of general NBA fans) were very outspoken when the Thunder were in the finals last year.  While I think there is a statute of limitation about complaining about losing your team, it’s reasonable that they are upset.

However, when did it become right to steal a team just because your team was stolen?  How could Sonics fans look at this situation and even remotely say “well sucks for Sacramento, but WE HAVE A TEAM NOW!!!!!”?  I guess this is an argument of principle, but you become a hypocrite when you accept something today that you just cried about yesterday.

Seattle fans didn’t actively steal this team, but they have had years to make it clear that they would only accept and support an expansion team and NOT a relocated team.  I would even be ok with a team moving there that lacks fan support.  But I seriously believe Seattle fans should have some self respect and say “not the Kings”.

On Thu, Jan 10, 2013, Angelo wrote:
Of course they’re hypocrites. Who isn’t at some point in their life though?

I would agree with you if I thought that an expansion team was a viable solution to this problem. But that’s the thing, it’s not. The NBA is a zero-sum game. The talent in the league is already diffused enough with 30 teams in the league. If the league were to go ahead and grant Seattle a team (and another city in the East to even things out), do you think that problem is going to get any better?

I look at this as a far more systemic problem with a lot more blame to go around. The league just came out of a lockout where competitive balance was a major issue (though it was skewed as a small vs. large market issue, which I think is a false analogy). The solution they came up with, the significantly more severe tax system, simply put a bandage on the issue. Sure we’ve seen OKC move Harden due to the tax, but the Lakers are something like $195M into the tax come next season. Given their insane television contracts, they’ll be able to afford paying that tax and will be able to keep Dwight on the books if he so chooses and sign a guy like LeBron James if the Heat blow things up. All that CBA has done is insure that teams with large television contracts can continue to be stacked as long as they have the outside revenue to afford the tax (and they do). There’s still going to be a consolidation of talent at the top. All an expansion team would do is continue to diffuse what remaining talent the rest of the teams in the league have to fight over. Is that really a viable solution to this problem?

Who’s more to blame then? The fans who finally get their beloved team back or the owners and league officials that can’t write a CBA that will allow the league to grow into new markets? I look at this as a problem arising from bad business practices. The NBA hasn’t put themselves in a position where they can grow beyond their current boundaries. Until that problem is fixed, you’re going to have this problem of owners looking to offload teams to better markets because their product isn’t financially viable.

Bottom line, if the NBA had structured a better system, Sacramento could be a more financially viable option for the Maloofs, minimizing their incentive to sell the franchise. An expansion team would’ve been a viable option for the Seattle consortium (minimizing their incentive to purchase the franchise). The problem is that structure doesn’t exist and won’t exist until another lengthy lockout.

And even if Seattle did get an expansion, there’s still teams teetering on the edge of relocation. The Hornets almost left New Orleans. The Bobcats seem like they’re always about ready to collapse. An expansion team is just a stop-gap solution to a much larger problem.

To summarize: even if Seattle wasn’t buying, the Maloofs were still selling.

On Thu, Jan 10, 2013, Mike wrote:

Well maybe this is a dreaming too big, but is expansion really off the table?  Sure, with the economy it makes it a tough sell, but let’s look at the facts.  Stern has said over and over again how the Sonics moving was a regret of his.  And well-respected writers have speculated that Stern wants to get a team back in Seattle as his final act as commissioner.  This all makes a ton of sense.  If Seattle fans framed their case as “we want a team, but only the right way”, maybe the NBA could be strong armed into this happening.  Instead they have taken the “by any means necessary” stand that is not a good look for people who were crying back in June.

I agree with every single word you said about the financial structure of the league and maybe that’s why expansion isn’t viable… but what I can’t get down with is that this financial structure is what is causing the Kings to move.

Let’s be real: The Kings are moving because the Maloofs can’t handle their money.  This has nothing to do with how the league is set up… the Maloofs are kind of bad at business (or placed bad bets due to the economy) and the city of Sacramento is paying the price.  This has nothing to do with the fans.  It has nothing to do with the city of Sacramento (they have stepped up at every instance to basically do what it takes… it just hasn’t been ENOUGH money for the Maloofs).

More realness for you: As discussed by Ziller this morning, while Sacramento has made every possible concession to keep the Kings there, let’s not forget that the city of Seattle was screwing around and played a major factor in the Sonics leaving.  I know it kind of came off as a nasty move, but Seattle wasn’t falling over themselves like Sacramento is to keep the Sonics there.

This is really hard, because I do believe sports franchises are businesses and the owner has the right to decide what to do with their business. However, this all comes back to the Maloofs.  The NBA shouldn’t protect them from themselves.  I see this as there are viable options for them to stay in Sacramento, but the Maloofs just want more and more.  Don’t really know why Seattle fans would want any part of this.

On Thu, Jan 10, 2013, Angelo wrote:
You think Stern can be strong-armed by a feel good story in a Seattle paper? Come on Mike, this is Mr. “Basketball Reasons” we’re talking about here.

How is the NBA protecting the Maloofs from themselves in this situation? If anything, buying the franchise from the Maloofs to keep them in Sacramento (much like Stern did with the Hornets), is protecting them from themselves. That starts the slippery slope of the league buying troubled franchises off from owners, which minimizes the risks of them making bad business decisions. Moral hazard. Econ 101.

I’m not trying to downplay how awful this situation is, but I don’t see any way around it, outside of Stern stepping in and forcing the Maloofs to consider a match from another ownership consortium in Sacramento (an idea that I really like and I wish would be institutionalized by the league). The crux of the problem is, there’s a $500M deal on the table. Stern can’t step in and veto that sale and force them to take a smaller deal in Sacramento. Owners would balk and the league would have serious problems stemming from that.

And even if the league stepped in and gave Seattle an expansion team, the Maloofs will continue to look for buyers in Anaheim or Virginia Beach. The root cause of this problem is the Maloofs. Even if the Seattle move is somehow stopped, the writing is pretty much on the wall here.

On Thu, Jan 10, 2013, Mike wrote:

I mean we are arguing the business minutia of this.  This all goes back to the fans of Seattle.  They can just as easily say “we don’t like this and it’s kind of disgusting”.  But they don’t.  I used this analogy on twitter last night: If my wife leaves me, does that make it ok or less morally reprehensible to steal someone else’s wife?  Sure, this is all “business as usual for professional sports”, but let’s not act like the people of Seattle aren’t scumbags for being excited about it.

Also, I am just curious about this:  How much do you think the national “this sucks for Sacramento, but THE SONICS ARE BACK! YAY!!!!!!!!!!!” crowd are influenced by it being Seattle that is getting the team. Like we all kind of get happy/excited thinking about Kemp and Payton.  We all fantasize about Seattle being this great northwestern city (which it might be, I’ve never been there).  I don’t know, just kind of feels romanticized.

On Thu, Jan 10, 2013, Angelo wrote:
First of all, I don’t agree with that analogy. I think the better way to frame it is dating your friends ex-girlfriend. Sure it’s not the coolest thing to do, but everyone involved is a consenting adult that can make their own decisions.

And I think you’re totally right that the Sonics are romanticized due to the Kemp/Payton era. To be totally honest, once Kemp was on the Cavs, I couldn’t care less about that team. They were just a team. Sure, it sucks that they aren’t around anymore, but I had no personal connection to them outside of watching Kemp dunk on fools when I was a kid.

Let’s frame it like this, if this was the Raptors moving to someplace like Kansas City, you think this would be as huge of a deal? I mean, pretty much no one cared about the Nets moving to Brooklyn last year.

On Thu, Jan 10, 2013, Mike wrote:

I think the analogy works because there is more skin in the game.  The Kings shouldn’t be Sacramento’s ex.  As far as I understand, there are business people ready to buy the team and keep them in Sacramento and the city wants to do everything they can to build a stadium.  I guess the fundamental discussion is: can the Maloofs do whatever they want with the team?

I agree with how you framed it, except I think Toronto has a really good fan base. The Nets are a great example, nobody cares.  If the Bobcats moved, not many people would care.

The problem becomes you are moving a team from one awesome fan base to another.  So once there is a team in Seattle, don’t we play this game again with Sacramento down the road?  What the hell are you even solving?

I just have a hard time with Sonic fans being hypocrites and a ton of people being like “yeah that’s true, but it’s how things work now”.  Stop with this by any means necessary garbage.

On Thu, Jan 10, 2013, Angelo wrote:
But the Maloofs have every right to sell them. There’s no “from death till we part” here. While that sucks, that’s the reality of it. You can try to change everything about yourself to appease your partner, but they still have every right to walk away from the relationship, which is clearly what’s happening here. To take it out of the ham-fisted analogy though, I agree, Sacramento should have the opportunity to match the deal. That’s the fair way to handle this situation. Will that happen? Who knows, that’s a discussion for a later date.

As for Sonics fans, what do you expect them to do? Turn them down? That’s not realistic. Yeah, it’s hypocritical, but people are hypocrites. Why should we hold a fan base to an unreasonable expectation that we’d never hold ourselves to in real life? That excuse can be lobbed at Cleveland if LeBron comes back. Is that a fair criticism? Are Thunder fans evil because they welcomed a team into open arms that once belonged to Seattle? Or are they in a higher moral standing because they’re not hypocrites because they never lost a team?

And with Brooklyn, that attitude of “it’s different because nobody cares” is hypocritical. Just because there’s less passionate fans in New Jersey doesn’t mean that to those passionate fans that did exist that this relocation is any different. Just because the outrage is smaller doesn’t mean it’s any less justified.

I guess the bottom line of what I’m saying here is that David Stern is a terrible commissioner and needs to have retired like a decade ago. The NBA will never be the top league in the US until there’s some stability in team locations.

On Thu, Jan 10, 2013, Mike wrote:
I guess the more I look at it, the more I just need to be consistent with my “teams are businesses and the people who own businesses can do whatever they want with said businesses” point of view.

I guess I don’t fault the Maloofs for doing whatever they want, but this is an issue of fans and their behavior.  I guess Sonics fans have the right to be hypocrites, but why should any fan outside of Seattle be reacting to this with any sort of excitement?

Although I do think there are degrees for moving teams.  Here is how I would categorize it (and I am sure this will open up a whole new can of worms):

Unforgivable: Moving a team with a supportive fan base and supportive civic leadership

Not cool: Moving a team with a good fan base, but civic leaders don’t show the proper support

You could make an argument: Teams in markets that aren’t sustainable.  Fans support is only ok, but the business model is not sustainable.

Teams that should most likely move: Poor fan support, poor community support.

I guess this all comes back to if you have a team in one of the top tiers, you should be able to make your team work in the city that it is currently located in. If you can’t, you’re probably a poor business person.

On Thu, Jan 10, 2013, Angelo wrote:
I like that matrix, and I think that highlights the root of the problem I was discussing. The NBA, more than any other league in the US, has more teams in the bottom two rungs. I mean, outside of the NBA, the only other team I can really think of in one of those teams is the Miami Marlins. They’ve also made some questionable decisions as to where to locate franchises (Vancouver, two in LA, putting a team back into New Orleans and Charlotte despite a team folding there previously), so they’ve made this problem much worse.

The more I think about this, the more I think teams need to be treated like a restricted free agent. Give the current city a year to match the offer sheet before relocation. I think that would have prevented Seattle from moving and would probably also prevent the Kings from moving. Would have also helped the Hornets and probably would have avoided the league ownership. Does that seem like a fair consideration?

On Thu, Jan 10, 2013, Mike wrote:

Totally.  I think it gets to the root of what is fair here: let Sacramento match.

Although I’d like to ask about something in your last email: Two teams in LA are a mistake?  I think both do fantastic.  And honestly?  After Seattle, I would consider putting a second team in Chicago.  If you have a big market, why not?

Also lost in all of this was Stern saying last week that we would have European NBA teams at some point in the future.  So domestic expansion to a city that desperately wants an NBA team is off the table, but expanding to Europe is on it?

On Thu, Jan 10, 2013, Angelo wrote:
You think both LA teams do fantastic? Does your memory of the Clippers not extend back before 2010?

You don’t put another team in Chicago because you then have six playoff teams coming from three cities. It’d be a ratings disaster for the league, not to mention isolates a ton of fans, especially in places like Seattle.

And yeah, the Europe thing is ridiculous. But Stern gets to puff his chest and say that the NBA has something that neither MLB nor the NFL has. Nevermind the fact that neither league has European teams because that’s absurdly stupid, but Stern’s gon’ Stern.

DAYS PASS

On Thu, Jan 15, 2013, Mike wrote:
Hey we let this go for a few days, but reading this just refreshed my memory that we need to finish this conversation

Is it just me, or is that letter not helping anything?  Sure, it has the message that you are telling me of “don’t blame the fans, but blame the system”… but I don’t see much in here about keeping up the fight to keep the team in Sacramento.  It almost has the tone of “well just move on and here is how you should get a new team”… no?

Also I think it’s a little insulting for the Sonicsgate people to give advice to the Sacramento fans… the Sacramento fans have been a pain for the Maloofs for a while now and have been building a template on how to keep a team, rather than how to be crying babies after you lose a team.

On Thu, Jan 15, 2013, Angelo wrote:
God, you’re going to make me read a Grantland article? You’re the worst.

I don’t think it’s fair to label them crying babies, as there’s a fundamental difference between the two situations that keeps being ignored. The Maloofs want to sell the Kings to a Seattle buyer. The Thunder owner wanted to relocate the team from Seattle to OKC after purchasing the team in Seattle. Kings fans have the opportunity to make a counter offer to the keep the team that was never extended to Sonics fans because the move was about more than just cash. I think that’s an important distinction to note, is it not?

Which is also why I think the continued comparisons between the two cities isn’t fair. There’s no way for Seattle to look good in this. Either they’re hypocritically stealing a team from another market, or they’re turning the team down and justifying the move to OKC because they aren’t rabid enough about the NBA.

On Thu, Jan 15, 2013, Mike wrote:
I don’t think there is any fundamental difference.  Seattle lost it’s team because civic leaders refused to build an arena.  Schultz got annoyed and sold the team to someone who was set on moving the team.  They could have kept the Sonics if they just did what they needed to in order to keep Shultz happy.  No?  Sacramento is doing everything they can to not only find an ownership group to match the Seattle offer, but to fund an arena.

Seattle fans would have looked a lot better in they just kept their team.  Sometimes you lose a team and you don’t get bailed out and get one back.  Look at how it worked out in Charlotte.  Why do we automatically think this is such an awesome idea?

On Thu, Jan 15, 2013, Angelo wrote:
Seattle would look better if they just kept their team? Yeah, and Cleveland would look better if LeBron James never left and won a bajillion titles here, but you can’t change the past. Unless you have a Delorean. Do you have a Delorean, Mike?

I’m beginning to think we’re just going around in circles here. Can we at least agree to never read Grantland again?

On Thu, Jan 15, 2013, Mike wrote:
I just agreed with Matt Moore on Twitter.  I must be losing my mind so, yeah, it’s time for this discussion to end.  We’ll just agree that I win (and don’t think I won’t edit out any subsequent email messages from you).

Click for full sized image

Title: Along the River; Behind the Grocery Store

Artist: Spacefunmars

Description: If this drawing looks familiar, that is because it is the same court I used in the original My Stomping Grounds post. I love this basketball court. It is in the neighborhood just beside my own in Buffalo — a neighborhood called Black Rock. From one angle, you can see many trees lining a beautiful river that bike paths follow in parallel. From another, there are wonderfully graffiti-ed buildings and the dual steeples of a Catholic church.

Just behind the court (and not shown in the drawing) is a hill that leads to Buffalo’s largest grocery store (Wegmans). The hill barely keeps the store at bay from becoming a complete eyesore, and it lends the court an air of secrecy and privacy. Buffalo has many other basketball courts displayed more prominently in its larger parks that people use far more. This one remains my favorite if only because it is a hidden gem that seems to only be used by the residents of the Black Rock neighborhood.

On a note only somewhat related to this actual court, if you look closely at the backboard, the word “bcuz” is spray painted there. Someone (or a group of someones) go around Buffalo and graffiti stuff with this word and sometimes with a few words like “bcuz I don’t care about your guardrail.” The idea being they are spray painting stuff just for the sake of spray painting stuff. I happen to love it, and one can find that graffiti almost everywhere.

Check out this post to learn how to contribute to the My Stomping Grounds image collection.

 Buy a canvas print of this drawing.

Episode 33 – Bad Basketball, Bad Audio Quality

Welp!  A killer line up of guests was almost ruined by some bad audio quality.  It sounds really bad at some points, but that shouldn’t deter you.  Join us to hear Amin, Matt, Greg (from Sactown Royalty) and Kirk (from The Two Man Game and Mavs Moneyball) talk about cheering for really bad basketball teams.  And yes, this was recorded before the Kings move to Seattle blew up… so deal with it.

Episode 33 [ 1:24:42 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download