How about some more Seattle basketball?
KeyArena: Could it again be more than the home of Seattle University basketball?
Compujeramey (Jeramey Jannene)/Wikimedia Commons
As Super Sunday dawned in Greater Seattle, sports fans rabid about pro football’s annual tribute to Roman numerals may have realized they first would need to dispatch a few matters pertaining to basketball.
There was the Washington Huskies men’s team prevailing over a Los Angeles rival for the second time in 48 hours and thus keeping their league-leading advantage going into a lot of challenging out-of-town encounters.
But college basketball seemed somehow secondary for those who read The Seattle Times. The main story above the fold on page one Sunday (Feb. 5, or Feb. V, if you’re Roman) was about the Sacramento Kings (nee Kansas City Kings and Cincinnati and Rochester Royals). If we know nothing else about the franchise, then, we at least could agree that it’s been well-traveled during its six decades.
Would its next incarnation be as the ... Seattle SuperSonics? The lengthy Times story and sidebar make the case that, yes, the struggling Sacramento franchise may soon move to Seattle and resume National Basketball Association play here by next season.
It would mean needing to endure for several years the bitter hardships of occupying KeyArena, which league commish David Stern has frequently disparaged as a facility seemingly not fit for middle-school dribblers. Meanwhile, property south of the city’s pro-football/soccer and baseball facilities would be developed by a Seattle-bred California zillionaire. The new building, for basketball and, perhaps, a National Hockey League franchise, would be palatial enough so that it might even come close to meeting Stern’s approval.
Seattle thus would join the few burgs that boast the Big Four of professional sports. But so much would need to happen for the above to become a reality that it’s enough to make one stumble back to the more pedestrian but reliable subject of college basketball.
Let’s note, then, that the Huskies, after Saturday night’s often unconvincing 69-41 home win against a diminished USC contingent, stand at 9-2 in league play, 16-7 overall in a quest to make it to yet another NCAA tournament. The remaining conference schedule seems at best unfriendly, with five roads games and just a pair at home prior to the league tourney that commences March 7.
If the Dawgs behave the way they did for the first 30 minutes against a pathetic (1-10, 6-18) Trojan program, they’ll be hard-pressed to keep their lead amid a Pac-12 top tier of good-but-not-great teams.
If, on the other hand, the Huskies play the way they did during the final six minutes against UCLA Thursday, they may yet prove to be the team of destiny during a season of inordinately weak league competitors. The Huskies stunned the Bruins with a late 16-4 run, winning 71-69 in a game that could’ve gone either way at the end.
The more recent effort, if that’s what it was during the initial three-fourths, featured repeated missed shots and opportunities, the Dawgs often looking as though they were trying to replicate the Trojans’ inability to score, rebound, and pass. The Huskies’ hustling final few minutes resulted in a respectable 48-percent field-goal-completion mark, seeming all the more impressive as SC players made just 29 percent of shots from the floor.
The men next play Thursday at Oregon, a veritable eternity from now for sports fans suddenly having to contemplate not just the Super Bowl but perhaps the resurrection of the SuperSonics later in the year MMXII.
Like what you just read? Support high quality local journalism. Become a member of Crosscut today!











Twitter
Facebook
RSS Feeds
Comments:
Posted Sun, Feb 5, 12:58 p.m. Inappropriate
Make that Big 6 of sports, Mike, including Sounders and Storm! Can NASCAR be far behind? Can this city ever be major league enough to relax?
Posted Sun, Feb 5, 10:17 p.m. Inappropriate
I would love to see the NHL come to Seattle. A Seattle team won the Stanley Cup in 1917 — how about a repeat in 2017?
Posted Mon, Feb 6, 8:46 a.m. Inappropriate
Astonishing that this writer didn't even mention the possibility of public financing for yet another sports palace to which the Times article coyly alluded. Didn't we just say NO to more stadiums? When does "no" finally mean "no"?
If this rich fellow wants to stroke his own vanity by buying himself a team, let him really show us what he's got and build the palace for it HIMSELF.
Posted Mon, Feb 6, 10:36 a.m. Inappropriate
Former Sonics owner Barry Ackerly 20 years ago offered to privately build and finance a $100,000,000 (give or take a few bucks) arena where Safeco Field sits now. Seattle elected officials shot it down. They protected the coliseum from competition and did not want to engage in street and utilities upgrades in SODO.
Posted Tue, Feb 7, 2:31 p.m. Inappropriate
Yes, animalal, and remember when that California developer (fancy houses) wanted $70 million to upgrade the Kingdome? King County briskly shot that down and then went on to tear down the entire Kingdome and build the present palace- ostensibly with Allen's money but with enough long term side benefits to Allen to actually pay for it. We are blessed with brave, far-seeing government here. Tough negotiators.
Login or register to add your voice to the conversation.