Talk:Sacramento Kings

Cowbell?
I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess that a link to More Cowbell doesn't belong in the Kings dropdown box under "rivalries." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mileslivingston (talk • contribs) 10:24, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Royals and Kings pointers
Many NBA teams that fans know today have remarkable histories. The team known today as the Sacremento Kings is one of those teams. This team came a long way before names like Peja, Miller, Vlade, Webber, Turkoglu, Bibby or Jason Williams became known. The Rochester Royals, started by the Harrison Brothers, date back to the Great Depression of the 1930s. After the War Years in the 40s, their independent success as barnstormers led them to the National Basketball League, a loose group of Midwestern teams with industrial or barnstormer roots. Akron, Fort Wayne, Oshkosh and Sheboygan were the kinds of towns the NBL had then. After the Second World War, in the late 40s, the NBL grew and got better. The Royals defeated George Mikan's Chicago and Minneapolis squads, and won the 1947 title. Two years laters, the Royals were one of four NBL clubs talked into jumping to the rival Basketball Association of America, the direct decendant to the NBA. Mikan's Lakers and the Royals were the top two teams of the early NBA. The Royals had NFL star Otto Graham, future Knicks coach Red Holzman among the bench. The owner Les Harrison coached the squad. But that team got old as teams do, and the Royals fell on hard times after their only NBA championship. The Royals were cash-strapped and nearly folded. They were unable to pay or retain top players. One who stayed was Maurice Stokes, the first black NBA superstar. A fall to the floor tragically ended his career. Another was sure-shot Jack Twyman, the Royals' first 30-point scorer. Without Stokes, a devastated team went thru two tough 19-win seasons and considered folding. In the 1960s, the team slowly came back. Oscar Robertson joined. A team slowly was assembled around him. The Big O, as he came to be known, was a rare 6'5 all-around player who could shoot, pass, rebound and lead. He also could control a game's flow and tally a big list of free throws. Robertson got some All-Pro help with the signing of big man Jerry Lucas. Lucas had a great shooting range and could pass as well. But Lucas is remembered today as probably the greatest rebounding forward ever. Robertson and Lucas both set NBA records which stand to this day. But numerous players the Royals drafted or signed would later be lost, or they would delay signing. Despite that, and numerous coaching changes, the Royals were a whisper from the NBA title and were arch-rivals of the vaunted Boston Celtics. The team was kept in the tough NBA East, even though the Baltimore Bullets were in the West for three years. Had the Royals been a West team, they likely would have made two NBA Finals. Instead, even with the second best NBA record, they simply lost to Boston in the playoffs. Meanwhile, the Royals owners focused on their true industry --- using the Royals to sell hotdogs. Leadership during these years was poor for building a basketball champion. Then the team hired loyal Celtic Bob Cousy to coach the club. Soon Robertson and other stars were traded. Not long later, the team moved to Kansas City before finally firing Cousy. Nate Archibald was the Kansas City Kings superstar, but the team was far from being a winner. Coach Cotton Fitzsimmons was the only real constant as the team went from the 70s to the 80s. Not much improved as the team somehow ended up in California's capital. It wasn't until the late 90s that the team again approached an NBA title as it had in the mid-60s. The team's sense of tradition is a little weak. As fans watch the latest version of the Kings struggle thru the 2006-07 season, it might do them well to recall where the franchise came from and the best players and teams from those bygone days.

Jerry Lucas and The Classic NBA@yahoogroups.com

Player names on uniforms
I believe that the Kings used the unusual player's name under the number format while they were still the Cincinnati Royals. That imiatated what the Cincinnati reds were doign at around that smae time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Staszu13 (talk • contribs) 14:46, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Rochesterroyals.gif
Image:Rochesterroyals.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:34, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Kc-omaha-kings.gif
Image:Kc-omaha-kings.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 08:18, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Cincinnatiroyalslogo.gif
Image:Cincinnatiroyalslogo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 20:44, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Coverage needed on new arena situation
Please add info on the push to build a new arena at Cal Expo. That information is extremely relevant to this article as a new arena or lack thereof will affect the future of the Kings franchise, at least in the Sacramento market. I will do so by this weekend if no one else does.--Msr69er (talk) 17:06, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * A nice addition and generally well cited. I added two FACT tags though.  With regards to the relative condition of the current ARCO Arena, this is a generally accepted truth but it still needs a citation.  As regards flagging attendance being a compelling reason, without a citation I can't help but feel that is a speculative statement.  At the time the bond measure was under way, the Kings had been consecutively sold-out since 1999.  I'm a bit pressed for time and can only find this, but the Maloofs were felt to have backed away from measures Q & R, so it might help to distance mention of any "campaign" on their part with the ballot measures. Ogre lawless (talk) 21:40, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

I keep hearing that the Kings was the other team, including the L.A. Clippers and the now Oklahoma City NBA team, that was interested in moving basically back to Kansas City. ~BigBoi29 —Preceding unsigned comment added by BigBoi29 (talk • contribs) 20:13, 11 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I want to update about the Kings' and Hornets' relocation matter 3 years later.

The Kings aren't moving to Anaheim or San Jose, so has the Hornets: each team is staying put. The economic downturn prevented relocations and new arena offers for the two lackluster teams, including the LA Clippers whom thought of a new site. The 2011 NBA All-Star Game logo had combined the LA Clippers colors and the Lakers stardom glare. Another regional city: Las Vegas, Nevada whom hosted the 2007 NBA All-Star Game; hadn't succeeded in a NBA team, nor had Seattle after the Supersonics relocated to Oklahoma (City). The NBA's Kings would be the first US professional sports team to relocate 5 times in its' 60-year history. + Mike D 26 (talk) 04:39, 4 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Update: The Kings team ownership is meeting with the league commission board and the city of Anaheim in a decision to move there next season. The local NBA franchises: Lakers and Clippers need to approve a competitor in their fan market base. Also the possibility is the Clippers in L.A. will find another arena, instead of sharing Staples Center, in the metro area. 71.102.30.215 (talk) 09:36, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Separate Page for the Royals
Can we have a separate page for the Royals? I failed at creating a separate page for the Buffalo Braves. AmericanLeMans (talk) 05:27, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

==I don't see why the separate page for the Royals exists. It should be merged with this page (and I say that as a former Rochesterian). It's the same franchise. It wouldn't make sense to have separate pages for the Brooklyn Dodgers and Los Angeles Dodgers.

Ron Burkle
Is there any source for the part in the 2011-12 section about Ron Burkle wanting to keep the Kings in Sacramento? I had heard on local radio (105.9 The X Pittsburgh, as Burkle is part owner of the NHL's Pittsburgh Penguins) a few months ago that Burkle was interested in buying the team and moving them to Pittsburgh — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rouse52794 (talk • contribs) 14:40, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Royals
I have created a separate page for the Royals, as I believe that the team is different enough to allow for a different page. Please help if you wish. AmericanLeMans (talk) 18:32, 1 June 2012 (UTC)


 * With all due respect, they are the same team. No other single professional sports team has two different pages that I know of.  I believe, the proper thing to do, if it is an issue of brevity, would be to create separate pages for the periods of time spent by the team in other cities, not separate pages for the same team in a different city.  But note, even this would be rather unusual when compared to the pages of other, similar teams.Reigndog (talk) 17:43, 31 May 2013 (UTC)


 * I agree, and support the merging and redirect of the Cincinnati Royals article to here. First Light (talk) 17:56, 31 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you.


 * For what it is worth, out of sincere respect for any work ALM might have put into the Cincinnati Royals article beyond copying information from the preexisting Sacramento Kings article, I was rather careful in my merging. When it came to deleting information, I only made redundancy deletions, not brevity deletions.  I may have made the merge and redirect decisions but I'll most likely leave future brevity edits to someone else.  If they need to be made that is, I am relatively new here and I don't want to seem like I think I own this page. Reigndog (talk) 05:16, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

How is it that the Buffalo Braves have their own page, then? AmericanLeMans (talk) 03:54, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Move to Seattle
When the Kings move to Seattle, will the Kings' franchise records still be recognized, or will they be recognized as the Seattle Supersonics? I seem to remember the NBA promising Seattle a new team that would keep all of the old Sonics' franchise history. However, that's odd, since the Oklahoma City Thunder have kept the Sonics' franchise history.69.181.41.173 (talk) 05:15, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 21 January 2013
The "Seattle Kings" logo is fake; some guy made it for a t-shirt: http://thesportsgeeks.com/2013/01/09/seattle-kings-logo/. Also, despite the announced move, there is no intention to keep the Kings name, so references to the "Seattle Kings" are also incorrect ("Wojnarowski reports Hansen and the new owners will bring back the Seattle SuperSonics longtime green-and-gold colors and name." http://www.nba.com/2013/news/01/21/kings-sale-to-seattle-aldridge/index.html). Also not sure of the logic of having Seattle listed everywhere while the team is still playing in Sacramento.

The last edit should probably just be reverted.

Koala on a building (talk) 16:20, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Pictogram voting wait.svg Already done Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:24, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Unverified rumors and speculation
I have removed sections from under the 'Sale to Seattle Ownership Group'. The information regarding Sacramento selling out 19 of 27 seasons is trivial and is not a concrete fact pertaining to the situation. -Tboy206 (talk) 14:30, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

I have deleted portions of this article that are mere speculation and biased. Tboy206 (talk) 22:22, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Seattle section
The section about the proposed move to Seattle really needs to be cleaned up. There's propaganda on both sides that really shouldn't be in the article. Also, does there need to be so much of a blow by blow summary of it? The other proposed relocation sections aren't nearly as detailed.108.211.37.125 (talk) 07:48, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I cleaned it up but I think the whole relocation saga warrants its own article. 134.134.137.75

This section is a disaster. A day by day account of the events is a bit over the top, and reads like a 3rd grade report. I tried cleaning it up about a month ago and consolidating, making it more readable, but some joker reverted everything. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.185.2.13 (talk) 06:31, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Move relocation section to separate article or not?
The article is already long and there is too much content in this recent relocation attempts section, relative to its importance to the franchise. This content could be made a stand alone article to preserve the detail and sourcing, or simply edited down as was done by IPs. UW Dawgs (talk) 04:35, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
 * See Failed Relocation of the Sacramento Kings Was done without comment. UW Dawgs (talk) 20:57, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Sacramento Kings Hall of famers
There should be a seperate section on the Sacramento Kings article for the Kings Hall of Famers. This section should include for example:

Megacheez 06:27, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 one external links on Sacramento Kings. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.sacbee.com/2013/05/16/5427622/kings.html
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.sacbee.com/2013/05/28/5453258/nba-board-of-governors-unanimously.html
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.nba.com/kings/slamsons-home
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.nba.com/kings/kids/slamson_bio000204.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 06:09, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Split proposed
I would propose splitting a good share of the information in the history section to a new article titled History of the Sacramento Kings and then summarizing the information in the history section on the main Sacramento Kings page. As it is, the history section (mostly the 1985-present part) is quite long and a bit unwieldy, taking up around half of the page. Ideally, the history would be condensed to one to three (maybe four) reasonable-sized (about as long as this post) paragraphs for each location/era (Rochester, Cincinnati, Kansas City-Omaha, and Sacramento, with Sacramento perhaps getting a couple to three paragraphs for 1985-~2010 and then another couple to three paragraphs for ~2010-present, since most visitors to the main Sacramento Kings page will be more interested in recent history), while all of the detail could survive in the new History of the Sacramento Kings article. What does everyone else think? Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 15:49, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
 * This is non-controversial. It appears about half of NBA teams are already have such a page listed in Category:National Basketball Association history by team. Go for it per WP:BOLD, but take note of WP:RECENTISM. UW Dawgs (talk) 16:22, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Yes, do this like the other NBA pages. WestCoastSaint (talk) 08:15, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Suggestion
My suggestion is to add a recently drafted section. See Articles listed in the sort able for references

--Jewels Royal (talk) 16:46, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Why? Do other NBA pages do this?

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:09, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Mitch Richmond.jpg

They haven’t won one…
So technically the Sacramento Kings have never won one because 1951 they were they royals. So yeah. You say the rest I guess. 173.216.92.144 (talk) 21:41, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Color links
I added links to the colors in the info box, but it got deleted purple and black are not linked anywhere in the article. This is a minor change, but why was it deleted? Meekrton (talk) 20:13, 29 March 2023 (UTC)