Oklahoma City Thunder

pinback · Post by **pinback** » Wed Sep 03, 2008 6:31 pm

I thought we all agreed that singular names for professional teams were acceptable only for second- and third- rate sports like Arena Football, Slamball, and the WNBA. Didn't we agree on that?

Miami Heat · Post by **Miami Heat** » Wed Sep 03, 2008 6:44 pm

pinback · Post by **pinback** » Wed Sep 03, 2008 7:04 pm

Miami Heat wrote::(

That's right, HEAT. Your name is unacceptable. As is your team.

I'm looking at you too, JAZZ.

You're not exempt from this either, TIGER-- oh whoops

Ice Cream Jonsey · Post by **Ice Cream Jonsey** » Wed Sep 03, 2008 7:18 pm

Yeah, the entire franchise is a goddamn mockery. As if white people like myself needed another reason to completely ignore the NBA. "Don't get too attached! Your team can be moved if the commissioner is friends with a greedy huckster that buys it!" What a fucking joke Stern is.

At least they are finally changing the nicknames, even if they are changing them to laughable ones like "Thunder." Which was also the nickname used by the Orlando "World Football League" team back in the 90s. Someone actually went hmm yes at "Utah Jazz" and here we are. They just keep expanding into the same fucking cities anyway, so now we have the New Orleans Hornets. Stern really is pathetic.

Knuckles the CLown · Post by **Knuckles the CLown** » Thu Sep 04, 2008 6:20 pm

you realize the Utah Jazz were once the New Orleans Jazz right?

pinback · Post by **pinback** » Thu Sep 04, 2008 6:59 pm

If they were the UTAH JIZZ then I would find that acceptable.

BAG OF DIARRHEA

Flack · Post by **Flack** » Tue Nov 25, 2008 11:15 am

As an Okie (and Thunder season ticket holder) let me assure you that everyone here thinks the name is ridiculous, too.

At least with the Hornets we had a mascot. No one's figured out what the Thunder's will be yet. A giant lightning bolt? How retarded.

Last week some guys in the nosebleed section started showing up in togas with giant cardboard lightning bolts, calling themselves the Gods of Thunder. They're no Hugo the Hornet, but at least it's somethin'.

ICJ · Post by **ICJ** » Tue Nov 25, 2008 11:36 am

I would just like to state that I co-opted my brother's rage at the OKC Thunder. (He loves all the Seattle teams.)

Then, the other night, I was at his place, and he was watching the Hornets-Thunder game. His take was that, all in all, he didn't care that much that the team moved, not actually being from Seattle. My brother sort of, er, dislikes liberal cities anyway, so to him this was not a huge loss.

I really have to think that with 31 NBA teams, there is going to be an expansion into Seattle within the next three years. I mean, seriously, where else would they expand to? (Though I know that David Stern and Roger Goodall would love five teams in Europe.)

So please excuse me using terms such as "mockery."

ICJ · Post by **ICJ** » Tue Nov 25, 2008 11:37 am

pinback wrote:If they were the UTAH JIZZ then I would find that acceptable.

BAG OF DIARRHEA

Flack, there are some other posts I would like to also apologize for that don't reference the OKC Thunder.

Flack · Post by **Flack** » Tue Nov 25, 2008 11:49 am

Dude, I have tough skin. I live in Oklahoma and work in IT.

The New York Times had a great article regarding the Hornets and the Thunder. Essentially it states that we probably would have kept the Hornets had it not been for Chris Paul. Throw a Rookie of the Year on a team that turns it around and all of a sudden all eyes were on them. So instead, OKC got a team the old fashioned way -- we bought one.

Knuckles the CLown · Post by **Knuckles the CLown** » Tue Nov 25, 2008 12:34 pm

Flack wrote:Dude, I have tough skin. I live in Oklahoma and work in IT.

The New York Times had a great article regarding the Hornets and the Thunder. Essentially it states that we probably would have kept the Hornets had it not been for Chris Paul. Throw a Rookie of the Year on a team that turns it around and all of a sudden all eyes were on them. So instead, OKC got a team the old fashioned way -- we bought one.

is that what they did? they bought it?

Flack · Post by **Flack** » Tue Nov 25, 2008 2:46 pm

Bought ... stole ... depends on who you ask and where you live, I suppose.

The very very abridged version is that Howard Schultz (founder, Starbucks) sold the Seattle SuperSonics to a group of investors who claimed that they wanted to keep the team in Seattle. Now if that was the plan, he sold it to the wrong group of investors. The team was led by Clay Bennett, who was instrumental in getting the Hornets relocated to OKC after Hurricane Katrina and desperately wants a team here. Bennett was also one of the owners of the San Antonio Spurs and saw what an NBA team can do for a city (it is no coincidence that OKC got a riverwalk a few years back, too). Bennett is also married to one of the Gaylords (who essentially run Oklahoma, own the newspaper, and have more money than God).

So anyway, Schultz sold the team to a bunch of OKC investors who just had a team and lost it. The new owners (Bennett and Co.) said that Seattle needed a new arena (which they do) and so he proposed a $500 million arena to be paid for with tax dollars. The city declined, people voted against it, and the next thing you know the team was being relocated to OKC.

Anyone who was surprised that they moved didn't investigate the new buyers very closely. So anyway like I said, the people here tend to see it as we "bought" a team whereas people in the northwest tend to see it as we "stole" the team. Past of the agreement was that Seattle would retain everything connected to the team, including their name and even their trophies.

Charles Barkley called the SuperSonics' move from Seattle to Oklahoma City "a travesty." Then again, when Barkley interviewed Chris Paul shortly after the Hornets relocated to Oklahoma City, he asked the rookie if he had "cows and chickens in his front yard" and informed him that Oklahoma was "a vast wasteland" and "no place for black people."

Flack · Post by **Flack** » Mon Dec 08, 2008 2:18 pm

I have tickets to tonight's game against Golden State and am actively trying to give them away. Put it this way, my wife and daughter might go. My daughter is 3 and she and my wife have the same basketball knowledge level.

Ice Cream Jonsey · Post by **Ice Cream Jonsey** » Mon Dec 08, 2008 2:44 pm

Golden State - they lost Baron Davis and didn't replace him with anyone, right? I haven't been closely following the NBA this season, but I think your daughter might be the 14th or 15th best player in the building tonight.

Flack · Post by **Flack** » Tue Dec 09, 2008 9:28 pm

Unfortunately they did not call her to the court, and we lost.

Ice Cream Jonsey · Post by **Ice Cream Jonsey** » Tue Dec 09, 2008 10:09 pm

Well, I'm out of ideas. :(

Worm · Post by **Worm** » Tue Dec 09, 2008 10:34 pm

Hold on, is this a liquor themed team?

CO · Post by CO » Wed Dec 10, 2008 12:33 pm

Flack wrote:Essentially it states that we probably would have kept the Hornets had it not been for Chris Paul. Throw a Rookie of the Year on a team that turns it around and all of a sudden all eyes were on them. So instead, OKC got a team the old fashioned way -- we bought one.

Weird, I've experienced both sides of this story that I didn't even know was connected. I was living in Charlotte when they got the Hornets and remember how excited everyone was and how I thought all the purple themed stuff was gay. Now I live in Seattle and see the disappointment some people have and the anger, some people even won't go to Starbucks anymore.

One addition to your story about how we lost the Sonics though. Late in the last legislative session, Paul Allen did get together a big pot of private money that would have matched the public outlay for the required stadium but the liberal governor (Christine Gregoire) and democratic state leg. wouldn't move on it instantly to "save" the team. The money probably would have been together this year as if it really mattered anyway.

hygraed · Post by **hygraed** » Wed Dec 10, 2008 2:45 pm

Worm wrote:Hold on, is this a liquor themed team?

No, that would probably be the Claremore Winos.

Ice Cream Jonsey · Post by **Ice Cream Jonsey** » Wed Dec 10, 2008 6:59 pm

CO wrote:One addition to your story about how we lost the Sonics though. Late in the last legislative session, Paul Allen did get together a big pot of private money that would have matched the public outlay for the required stadium but the liberal governor (Christine Gregoire) and democratic state leg. wouldn't move on it instantly to "save" the team. The money probably would have been together this year as if it really mattered anyway.

She made the right move. The renovations to the Key Arena were 13 years old at that point.

Wiki wrote:The first regular season game that the Seattle SuperSonics played in the rebuilt arena was on November 4, 1995, against the Los Angeles Lakers.

I'd like to ask why the renovations were only good for 13 years, before I go into some laughable $500 million, partly-publically financed stadium right before the worst financial debacle since the Great Depression.

I mean, following the money, I see it like this:

- There was no reason a NEW team couldn't have been placed in Oklahoma City. There are 31 teams in the league right now, which is goofy. There's certainly the talent for it, if all these international teams with 1 or 2 NBA players are able to paste the teams we usually send.

- That being said, David Stern wanted to teach the fans of the NBA a lesson. He doesn't teach Seattle or anyone else a lesson if they simply continue to go with the Key Arena and open up a new team in OKC. He will want new stadia in various markets in the next few years, and he feels like he should simply ask and get what he wants. So he was very motivated in removing a team from Seattle. $500 million? For a stadium that will hold, what, 18,000 people? Ha ha ha.

- Football taught their "lesson" with the Browns. You can argue that baseball did the same moving the Expos. I mean, really, the Hornets were in N.O., what, two years before Katrina hit? Moving them wasn't going to scare anybody. I know the Rams, Colts and Cardinals moved, but who gave a shit? The Baltimore Ravens are INFINITELY better run than the Colts were, under Irsay. Ditto the St. Louis Rams, compared to the St. Louis Cardinals. (I would also take this opportunity to say that Katrina saved the Saints in New Orleans. No way, with an ancient - yet servicable - stadium, and L.A. empty, do the Saints stay in N.O. Not when Goodall is gritting his teeth over the place the Vikes and Bills play in. Better to move the Saints, who have never won anything.)

I mean, if you have a guy with Clay Bennet's money, and a fanbase as good as OKC's, and an odd number of teams, someone someday can frigging explain to me why they can't open a new franchise there. They're practically an expansion team now, with Durant being the only guy (maybe Green) that anyone can identify there. I really don't buy that it was going to take half a billion dollars to save basketball in Seattle, just because nobody is talking about putting up half a billion in OKC for an arena, as far as I know.

There are also grumblings, from time to time, about the Skydome in Toronto. I love it: the NFL can't wait to move in there for football, because it is newer than Rich Stadium, but it being 19 years old (compared to so many new stadia in baseball) is this huge travesty. So I can't wait to see how that all turns out.