Skip to content

Will Lakers, Clippers oppose Kings relocation to Anaheim?

Mar 7, 2011, 9:46 AM EDT

Sacramento Kings v Los Angeles Lakers Getty Images

Does the greater Los Angeles area really need more NBA teams than New Yorks has, and will have even after the Nets move to Brooklyn? More than Chicago?

The Sacramento Kings are serious about a move to Anaheim and negotiations are ongoing. But according to Mitch Lawrence at the New York Post (via Eye On Basketball), the Lakers and Clippers are not on board.

The move to Anaheim will be opposed by the Lakers and Clippers, who see it as an encroachment on their territory. But sources close to the Maloofs say they’re willing to pay the two L.A. teams whatever it takes to relocate. That would be in addition to the league’s relocation fee of $30 million.

League sources already said that the Honda Center in Anaheim is far enough away from the Staples Center that is home to the Lakers and Clippers that the Kings would not have to pay territorial rights fees to the Lakers and Clippers. However, the NBA Board of Governors (the other owners) could vote to make the Kings pay fees to the two Los Angeles teams.

Certainly the Lakers and Clippers would like some compensation. The question is would it really be enough to deter a move?

Lawrence also points out that billionaire in Henry Samueli — the owner of the NHL’s Anaheim Ducks and who runs the Honda Center — could loan money to the Maloof brothers to help pay for a move. However, the Maloofs have said publically they are not taking a loan or selling a portion of the team too Samueli.

This move is gaining a lot of momentum, even if we think that a third team in the market will face challenges. Especially if they try to complete a move and woo a new fan base after a lockout rips away part of the inaugural season in their mew home. (“Hey Orange County, come see us play! Right after our millionaire players and billionaire owners get done fighting over how to divide up your money.)

Meanwhile, some very loyal fans in Sacramento have tried to fill the building and make their emotional appeals. Their points are valid. But likely to fall on ears that only hear the noise made by the rustling cash of Anaheim.

  1. loungefly74 - Mar 7, 2011 at 9:54 AM

    bad move! they will be a vagabond team in LA…no one…no one..will care about them! they need to stay in Sac-town. If they have to move, go to a city that needs or can support an NBA team such as Columbus, Las Vegas, San Jose to name a few…but to add a 3rd team in LA? just bad.

    • wfon1 - Mar 7, 2011 at 10:04 AM

      how about seattle?

  2. ibejeph - Mar 7, 2011 at 10:30 AM

    The Clippers coming to Anaheim made some small amount of sense but the Kings? It is a TERRIBLE idea. Have they done any research into the matter?

    I’m an OCite, I grew up with Magic and Worthy on the TV. So did all my friends and most everyone I know. How can they compete with a fanbase which grew up with the purple and gold?

    The Maloofs must be angling to be bought out. The NBA bought the Hornets, now they can buy the Kings and liquidate both teams.

  3. heyooooh - Mar 7, 2011 at 2:12 PM

    You can easily make a case to contract at least 4 franchises & no one outside those cities would even notice: Kings, Nets, Grizzles, & Bobcats. I’d throw in the Clippers, Hornets, Hawks (ATL has awful pro sports fans) as the next 3 to go. The NBA has too many teams.

  4. craigw24 - Mar 7, 2011 at 4:12 PM

    I realize we can all argue about the 4 teams we think should contract, but the Griz are actually pretty relevant this year (OKC is a smaller market) and it will be very hard to contract Donald Sterling.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

Why can't Lakers have a player-coach?
Top 10 NBA Player Searches
  1. L. James (4172)
  2. K. Love (4131)
  3. D. Rose (3927)
  4. K. Bryant (2726)
  5. R. Allen (2380)
  1. C. Anthony (2225)
  2. K. Durant (2218)
  3. B. Griffin (2059)
  4. E. Bledsoe (2047)
  5. D. Wade (1944)