Clippers to Inglewood?
Goto page Previous  1, 2

 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> General Basketball Discussion Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
lakersken80
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Aug 2009
Posts: 27739

PostPosted: Sun Feb 26, 2017 6:58 pm    Post subject:

I read that Ballmer wants full control of the land where he's building the new arena so obviously Kroenke would have to sell part of the land he owns there. For Kroenke, a big reason why adding another addition like a basketball arena would help him is that it would get foot traffic to the area during the NFL offseason and it would benefit the other component of the Inglewood project, which is the retail shops, hotels, etc...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
VegasLakerFan
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 25 Dec 2011
Posts: 1694

PostPosted: Sun Feb 26, 2017 7:00 pm    Post subject:

lakersken80 wrote:
I read that Ballmer wants full control of the land where he's building the new arena so obviously Kroenke would have to sell part of the land he owns there. For Kroenke, a big reason why adding another addition like a basketball arena would help him is that it would get foot traffic to the area during the NFL offseason and it would benefit the other component of the Inglewood project, which is the retail shops, hotels, etc...


Kroenke doesn't own that land by himself though, it's a deal with Stockbridge Capital, so they'd have to agree to fork over some of the land they wanted to develop.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
unleasHell
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 16 Apr 2001
Posts: 8234
Location: Stay Thirsty my Friends

PostPosted: Sun Feb 26, 2017 11:04 pm    Post subject:

Goldenwest wrote:
Good, never liked the idea of the Lakers sharing the staples center with the Clippers.

But this won't happen till 2024...too long to wait.


You do recall that the Clippers signed to play at Staples BEFORE the Lakers did right? (meaning they had first rights to it)...
_________________
BRING ON THE DANCING HORSES...!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
VegasLakerFan
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 25 Dec 2011
Posts: 1694

PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2017 12:11 am    Post subject:

unleasHell wrote:
Goldenwest wrote:
Good, never liked the idea of the Lakers sharing the staples center with the Clippers.

But this won't happen till 2024...too long to wait.


You do recall that the Clippers signed to play at Staples BEFORE the Lakers did right? (meaning they had first rights to it)...


He probably doesn't recall that because it isn't true: http://articles.latimes.com/1998/apr/17/news/mn-40154
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
lakersken80
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Aug 2009
Posts: 27739

PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2017 3:37 am    Post subject:

unleasHell wrote:
Goldenwest wrote:
Good, never liked the idea of the Lakers sharing the staples center with the Clippers.

But this won't happen till 2024...too long to wait.


You do recall that the Clippers signed to play at Staples BEFORE the Lakers did right? (meaning they had first rights to it)...


No they didn't....somebody beat me to it with the link to the article....thats why the Clippers pay such a low lease....about 1 million a year and have the worst dates out of the 3 tenants. Compared to the Lakers who sold 25% of the team to AEG to help pay for the construction of the Staples Center when they were in the planning stages.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 118802
Location: The Gold Coast

PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2017 1:16 pm    Post subject:

VegasLakerFan wrote:
lakersken80 wrote:
I read that Ballmer wants full control of the land where he's building the new arena so obviously Kroenke would have to sell part of the land he owns there. For Kroenke, a big reason why adding another addition like a basketball arena would help him is that it would get foot traffic to the area during the NFL offseason and it would benefit the other component of the Inglewood project, which is the retail shops, hotels, etc...


Kroenke doesn't own that land by himself though, it's a deal with Stockbridge Capital, so they'd have to agree to fork over some of the land they wanted to develop.


Having another tenant during the time that the NFL isn't playing would make the property more valuable and it is doubtful that the partners would have an issue with that. Smart move by Ballmer, a new state of the art arena, along with the team being successful in wins and losses, will raise the Clipper profile in LA. As nice as Staples is, it is already outdated. His only dumb move was Doc as GM.
_________________
#lakerclownshow
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
vanexelent
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 May 2005
Posts: 27710

PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2017 3:38 pm    Post subject:

venturalakersfan wrote:
VegasLakerFan wrote:
lakersken80 wrote:
I read that Ballmer wants full control of the land where he's building the new arena so obviously Kroenke would have to sell part of the land he owns there. For Kroenke, a big reason why adding another addition like a basketball arena would help him is that it would get foot traffic to the area during the NFL offseason and it would benefit the other component of the Inglewood project, which is the retail shops, hotels, etc...


Kroenke doesn't own that land by himself though, it's a deal with Stockbridge Capital, so they'd have to agree to fork over some of the land they wanted to develop.


Having another tenant during the time that the NFL isn't playing would make the property more valuable and it is doubtful that the partners would have an issue with that. Smart move by Ballmer, a new state of the art arena, along with the team being successful in wins and losses, will raise the Clipper profile in LA. As nice as Staples is, it is already outdated. His only dumb move was Doc as GM.


Is that being successful? The Lakers have sucked at that the last 4 years and are worth more than the Clippers.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
MJST
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 06 Jul 2014
Posts: 11364

PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2017 4:26 pm    Post subject:

I don't want them in Inglewood.. because what if Ballmer tries to take the Forum?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
lakersken80
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Aug 2009
Posts: 27739

PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2017 5:04 pm    Post subject:

MJST wrote:
I don't want them in Inglewood.. because what if Ballmer tries to take the Forum?


Forum is owned by MSG now....as far as I know its not up for sale and has been converted to a concert venue....
I don't think Ballmer would be interested in that venue since its not up to date and he would be limited by the age and design of the building.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 39194
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2017 5:43 pm    Post subject:

City_Dawg wrote:
In old Showtime territory? Please.

Go to the OC or some other city that has beef with LA. Go to San Diego so they can feel better about the Chargers skipping town.


"Irvine Clippers" has a nice ring to it (not really I'd just like them gone).
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
Heís something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built thatís all for show goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
governator
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 28 Jan 2006
Posts: 6223

PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2017 5:45 pm    Post subject:

Riverside Clippers is more fitting
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
MJST
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 06 Jul 2014
Posts: 11364

PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2017 5:46 pm    Post subject:

Anaheim Clippers or better yet, the Seattle Clippers is more appealing.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
governator
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 28 Jan 2006
Posts: 6223

PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2017 5:50 pm    Post subject:

MJST wrote:
Anaheim Clippers or better yet, the Seattle Clippers is more appealing.


They would actually gained a ton of fan base in Seattle
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 118802
Location: The Gold Coast

PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2017 6:51 pm    Post subject:

vanexelent wrote:
venturalakersfan wrote:
VegasLakerFan wrote:
lakersken80 wrote:
I read that Ballmer wants full control of the land where he's building the new arena so obviously Kroenke would have to sell part of the land he owns there. For Kroenke, a big reason why adding another addition like a basketball arena would help him is that it would get foot traffic to the area during the NFL offseason and it would benefit the other component of the Inglewood project, which is the retail shops, hotels, etc...


Kroenke doesn't own that land by himself though, it's a deal with Stockbridge Capital, so they'd have to agree to fork over some of the land they wanted to develop.


Having another tenant during the time that the NFL isn't playing would make the property more valuable and it is doubtful that the partners would have an issue with that. Smart move by Ballmer, a new state of the art arena, along with the team being successful in wins and losses, will raise the Clipper profile in LA. As nice as Staples is, it is already outdated. His only dumb move was Doc as GM.


Is that being successful? The Lakers have sucked at that the last 4 years and are worth more than the Clippers.


Yes, typically winning more games than you lose is being successful in wins and losses.
_________________
#lakerclownshow
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
jodeke
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 40932
Location: In a world where admitting not knowing something is considered intelligent.

PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2017 7:24 pm    Post subject:

Dodgers, Angels, Lakers, Clippers.

If the Clippers win a ship they will still be number 2 as were the Angels after winning the World Series.

What bothered me about that was The Singing Cowboy, Gene Autry didn't live to see it.
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.

Your prayers are always answered. Sometimes the answer is NO.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
vanexelent
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 May 2005
Posts: 27710

PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2017 9:13 pm    Post subject:

venturalakersfan wrote:
vanexelent wrote:
venturalakersfan wrote:
VegasLakerFan wrote:
lakersken80 wrote:
I read that Ballmer wants full control of the land where he's building the new arena so obviously Kroenke would have to sell part of the land he owns there. For Kroenke, a big reason why adding another addition like a basketball arena would help him is that it would get foot traffic to the area during the NFL offseason and it would benefit the other component of the Inglewood project, which is the retail shops, hotels, etc...


Kroenke doesn't own that land by himself though, it's a deal with Stockbridge Capital, so they'd have to agree to fork over some of the land they wanted to develop.


Having another tenant during the time that the NFL isn't playing would make the property more valuable and it is doubtful that the partners would have an issue with that. Smart move by Ballmer, a new state of the art arena, along with the team being successful in wins and losses, will raise the Clipper profile in LA. As nice as Staples is, it is already outdated. His only dumb move was Doc as GM.


Is that being successful? The Lakers have sucked at that the last 4 years and are worth more than the Clippers.


Yes, typically winning more games than you lose is being successful in wins and losses.


Right, but as you know, the Clippers have lost more playoff games than they've won. Just depends on how you limit the scope of the meaning of "success". They aren't worth more than what the owner paid for them and they have never been to the Finals.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Goldenwest
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2090

PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2017 11:50 pm    Post subject:

VegasLakerFan wrote:
unleasHell wrote:
Goldenwest wrote:
Good, never liked the idea of the Lakers sharing the staples center with the Clippers.

But this won't happen till 2024...too long to wait.


You do recall that the Clippers signed to play at Staples BEFORE the Lakers did right? (meaning they had first rights to it)...


He probably doesn't recall that because it isn't true: http://articles.latimes.com/1998/apr/17/news/mn-40154


yeah, from what i read Jerry Buss convinced Sterling to join him at Staples. though I Don't understand why...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
VegasLakerFan
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 25 Dec 2011
Posts: 1694

PostPosted: Tue Feb 28, 2017 3:14 am    Post subject:

Goldenwest wrote:
VegasLakerFan wrote:
unleasHell wrote:
Goldenwest wrote:
Good, never liked the idea of the Lakers sharing the staples center with the Clippers.

But this won't happen till 2024...too long to wait.


You do recall that the Clippers signed to play at Staples BEFORE the Lakers did right? (meaning they had first rights to it)...


He probably doesn't recall that because it isn't true: http://articles.latimes.com/1998/apr/17/news/mn-40154


yeah, from what i read Jerry Buss convinced Sterling to join him at Staples. though I Don't understand why...


I don't doubt you but I don't personally remember that part. I do know the Doc was cool with Sterling (presumably because he was cool with pretty much everyone), but from what I remember the Clippers were thinking of moving to the Pond if they couldn't get a new arena at Exposition Park. They only latched onto Staples at the last minute when they couldn't get the Coliseum Commission to work with them (no surprise given their history with Jack Kent Cooke and Carol Roosenbloom) and only after Sterling ultimately chose not to move to the OC. Maybe it was JB that swayed him?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 118802
Location: The Gold Coast

PostPosted: Tue Feb 28, 2017 11:20 am    Post subject:

vanexelent wrote:
venturalakersfan wrote:
vanexelent wrote:
venturalakersfan wrote:
VegasLakerFan wrote:
lakersken80 wrote:
I read that Ballmer wants full control of the land where he's building the new arena so obviously Kroenke would have to sell part of the land he owns there. For Kroenke, a big reason why adding another addition like a basketball arena would help him is that it would get foot traffic to the area during the NFL offseason and it would benefit the other component of the Inglewood project, which is the retail shops, hotels, etc...


Kroenke doesn't own that land by himself though, it's a deal with Stockbridge Capital, so they'd have to agree to fork over some of the land they wanted to develop.


Having another tenant during the time that the NFL isn't playing would make the property more valuable and it is doubtful that the partners would have an issue with that. Smart move by Ballmer, a new state of the art arena, along with the team being successful in wins and losses, will raise the Clipper profile in LA. As nice as Staples is, it is already outdated. His only dumb move was Doc as GM.


Is that being successful? The Lakers have sucked at that the last 4 years and are worth more than the Clippers.


Yes, typically winning more games than you lose is being successful in wins and losses.


Right, but as you know, the Clippers have lost more playoff games than they've won. Just depends on how you limit the scope of the meaning of "success". They aren't worth more than what the owner paid for them and they have never been to the Finals.


Considering you are responding to something I never posted, I will not further waste my time. Winning and losing is a simple concept, if it is beyond your comprehension then I can't help you.
_________________
#lakerclownshow
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
vanexelent
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 May 2005
Posts: 27710

PostPosted: Tue Feb 28, 2017 12:56 pm    Post subject:

venturalakersfan wrote:
vanexelent wrote:
venturalakersfan wrote:
vanexelent wrote:
venturalakersfan wrote:
VegasLakerFan wrote:
lakersken80 wrote:
I read that Ballmer wants full control of the land where he's building the new arena so obviously Kroenke would have to sell part of the land he owns there. For Kroenke, a big reason why adding another addition like a basketball arena would help him is that it would get foot traffic to the area during the NFL offseason and it would benefit the other component of the Inglewood project, which is the retail shops, hotels, etc...


Kroenke doesn't own that land by himself though, it's a deal with Stockbridge Capital, so they'd have to agree to fork over some of the land they wanted to develop.


Having another tenant during the time that the NFL isn't playing would make the property more valuable and it is doubtful that the partners would have an issue with that. Smart move by Ballmer, a new state of the art arena, along with the team being successful in wins and losses, will raise the Clipper profile in LA. As nice as Staples is, it is already outdated. His only dumb move was Doc as GM.


Is that being successful? The Lakers have sucked at that the last 4 years and are worth more than the Clippers.


Yes, typically winning more games than you lose is being successful in wins and losses.


Right, but as you know, the Clippers have lost more playoff games than they've won. Just depends on how you limit the scope of the meaning of "success". They aren't worth more than what the owner paid for them and they have never been to the Finals.


Considering you are responding to something I never posted, I will not further waste my time. Winning and losing is a simple concept, if it is beyond your comprehension then I can't help you.


I challenged your definition of "successful". Winning and losing is quite simple, but Regular season winning and losing is different than Playoff winning and losing. The latter is the what all teams are ultimately judged by.

I think most people who follow basketball think the Clippers have been a failure because they haven't won in the playoffs. But, you think otherwise. Not sweat.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> General Basketball Discussion All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2010 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB