C-Low wrote:
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Raptors future in Toronto
Collapse
X
-
Karl Marx. wrote: View PostLet me put it this way. Population does not necessary mean market for an NBA team. Its a population that is interested and can be interested into NBA. That is why, right now, Charlotte is better NBA market than for example London, England.
The only reason why I spoke of Charlotte is because they had by far the best NBA attendance and were one of the best markets in the NBA, only to fell apart dramatically in 4 years.
Comment
-
Karl Marx. wrote: View PostLet me put it this way. Population does not necessary mean market for an NBA team. Its a population that is interested and can be interested into NBA. That is why, right now, Charlotte is better NBA market than for example London, England.
The only reason why I spoke of Charlotte is because they had by far the best NBA attendance and were one of the best markets in the NBA, only to fell apart dramatically in 4 years.
The threat of the Raptors moving is almost nil. Its not impossible, but its not probable. They have a large, wealthy and strong market. There is population easily large enough to hold a team, an appetite for sports (basketball) and the $ to pay for it. They have well established corporation as an owner (as opposed to an individual owner who is more likely to make personal choices or be impacted by outside forces). The owners themselves also own (control) the medium by which the sport sold to the majority.
I'd say there are about 20-25 NBA teams more likely to move before Toronto.
Comment
-
Craiger wrote: View PostThe threat of the Raptors moving is almost nil. Its not impossible, but its not probable. They have a large, wealthy and strong market. There is population easily large enough to hold a team, an appetite for sports (basketball) and the $ to pay for it. They have well established corporation as an owner (as opposed to an individual owner who is more likely to make personal choices or be impacted by outside forces). The owners themselves also own (control) the medium by which the sport sold to the majority.
Comment
-
Karl Marx. wrote: View PostI do not think Raptors will ever move. But than again, people in Charlotte and Seattle were convinced they would not move ether and look what happen to them. Both of those moves were not good financially. Seattle is much bigger market than Oklahoma and Charlotte was much better market for basketball (due to fanatical fans). We can even add Vancouver to the mix. It was and always will be better market for basketball than Memphis. It just so happen that the owner wanted to move the team back (to his) home. So there is personal aspect as well. If Hansen bought the Raptors, do you think he would think twice before relocating the team to Seattle? Although I am not sure league would allow that.
When you are talking about markets such as Charlotte, OKC and Seathle, you are talking about markets that are a fraction of the size and financial strength of Toronto (and owners who are generally a fraction of the financial strength of MLSE and/or Rogers/Bell). Its like comparing Burger King to Joe's taco stand. Yeah Burger King isn't McDonalds but they are likely to withstand negative economic impacts. Just because Joe's taco stand had to be moved does not in any way shape or form mean its gonna happen to Burger King.
Comment
-
Survival of a business completely depends on financial success and as a business, the Raptors are profitable. Maybe not successful as far as wins are concerned but profitable. For two thirds of their existence they have been a losing franchise but fans have still supported them. This only proves that the team has a loyal fan base which supports the team NO MATTER WHAT. Yes winning will draw the casual fan, but the 'die hard fan' will always support this team which clearly has been enough to keep the team alive and profitably so.
Also let's not forget to give MLSE credit for its seriousness in building a good team. Despite discouraging failures it has always done everything in it's power to try and build a winner.Attitude Is A Choice.
Comment
-
Eric Akshinthala wrote: View PostSurvival of a business completely depends on financial success and as a business, the Raptors are profitable. Maybe not successful as far as wins are concerned but profitable. For two thirds of their existence they have been a losing franchise but fans have still supported them. This only proves that the team has a loyal fan base which supports the team NO MATTER WHAT. Yes winning will draw the casual fan, but the 'die hard fan' will always support this team which clearly has been enough to keep the team alive and profitably so.
Also let's not forget to give MLSE credit for its seriousness in building a good team. Despite discouraging failures it has always done everything in it's power to try and build a winner.
But since Bell/Rogers took over a year ago, it appears to be the way you describe.
*fingers crossed*
Comment
-
Matt52 wrote: View PostUnder the OTPP I do not agree with this. I think they had a budget and you operated within it. The budget was no luxury tax, I think.
But since Bell/Rogers took over a year ago, it appears to be the way you describe.
*fingers crossed*
Be it Grunwald, Babcock, BC or Ujiri, MLSE did it's best in providing them with resources to build a winner. It's investments in programs around the country to establish Raptors as Canada's team also proves it. Yes there have been times when MLSE has refused to allow it's GM's to exceed the cap but that's only understandable. The Lakers are well into luxury tax territory because of their continued success. If the Raptors enjoyed that kind of success, MLSE would definitely do the same.Attitude Is A Choice.
Comment
-
CalgaryRapsFan wrote: View PostWith such a solid ownership group in place, such a loyal and passionate fan base (without worrying about fair-weather fans who are more than offset by corporate box ownership at ACC) and a great stadium, in a sports crazy city, the Raptors will always thrive in Toronto.
Comment
-
Letter N wrote: View PostActually I believe in the context of his whole reply that Stern's big regret was putting a team in Vancouver in the first place. The NBA, for reasons that I still don't understand, did so much to dissuade Canadian cities from getting a team and did even more to make sure they didn't prosper. The original franchise cost for Vancouver and Toronto was something like 3 or 5 times what it was for Charlotte (the 2nd time around), we had restrictions against us for drafts for the first 3 years that didn't allow us to get a 1st pick overall, I think even the expansion draft was skewed to screw us over but I may be making that one up.
Outside of some sort of grudge against Canadians for how we treat his boy Bettman I never understood why Stern was so anti-Canada succeeding in the NBA.
Comment
-
psrs1 wrote: View PostI would argue that many refs are anti-Canadian. May be a reflection of leagues' attitude toward Canada. I wish media would raise more questions in this regard. I really believe league does not want to be perceived as anti Canadian but institute policies that in effect are anti Canadian. I good hammering by media would be helpful in this regard.
Comment
-
Nilanka wrote: View PostWhat reason is there to believe that such bias (from the refs) exists against Canada?
While we have been hit by some of the rules created to make Toronto and Vancouver less comparative, I do not believe refs were part of it.
Comment
Comment