Are the Vancouver Hornets in the making?

Wrong.

Vancouver arena opened in 1995. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogers_Arena

Renovated Seattle Coliseum opened in 1995. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KeyArena#Rebirth_as_KeyArena

Seattle did have fewer seats and possibly has fewer suites, though.

 

Are there many places fitting that description that a) are big enough to support a team and b) have an arena established, in progress or in the imminent future? Vegas, of course, but that won't happen till the books move away. Norfolk doesn't have an arena. Louisville does, and they want the NBA, but are they too close to Indy and can the area support two popular basketball teams (three if counting UK)? Austin touches all the major Texas markets.

 

The problem with Louisville isn't that it's too close to Indy or that there wouldn't be enough fan support. It's that the city and state just ponied up millions to build that arena, and now Tom Jurich and Rick Pitino want to get into a dick measuring contest with any potential NBA suitors to keep control of the scheduling. And that shows how backward they are.

In DC, the Wizards, Capitals and Georgetown split the Verizon Center during the winter, and the place has tons of events anyway. The Lakers and Clippers share an arena. And yet Jurich and Pitino want everyone to think it'd be impossible for Louisville and an NBA team to share that arena.

 

Oklahoma City, Sacramento and San Antonio are not "glamour" towns but they are also cities that are the "only game in town". Plus both have enough affluent people to support it. Sacramento is also TV Market 21 (same size at St. Louis) so they have enough eyeballs.

Memphis is at the opposite end. Only game in town but the financial demographics of the city still make me scratch my head (like New Orleans) as to why an NBA franchise is even there.

 

Toronto is obviously a hockey town, but it also has the Blue Jays and Toronto FC, which has been enormously successful at the gate. I have never met anyone who admits to being a Raptors fan and anyone I know who goes to games has always gone on someone else's dime. I suspect if MLSE didn't own the Raptors they would be on the move too, not that I think anyone here would give a shit.

 

The only reason the Hornets are still in New Orleans is because it would have looked really bad to move the team permanently after Katrina. If memory serves, the commissioners of the NBA and NFL both assured everyone that the Hornets and Saints weren't going anywhere.

 

Like Utah, which I doubt is losing money.

 

On the glamour/almost-only-game-in-town angle, I think Nashville would do much better with an NBA team than an NHL team. (Yeah, way to step out on a limb there, Bob.) I think it would work well for the NBA, too. Having a lot of country stars in the front row would be a great marketing tool for the league.

Especially if it's George Jones, drunk and pissed and running across the floor like Shooter from Hoosiers.

 

Stupid question time: would they consider Tulsa, which has a new arena and a metro population of 1 million, for an NBA/NHL team?

 

Let's contract the Heat. And give the Cavs the first pick in the dispersal draft.

That could be fun.

 

If the NBA makes it worth his while MJ will cheerfully allow the Bobcats to be contracted. Apparently, Jordan put up his own money in buying the team. Not the whole price but a lot. If he could make a profit by contracting, he'll do it.