Barely a decade ago, the Kings were an elite NBA contender, with a packed arena and a richer payroll than their rival the Lakers. What went wrong? How did they become a bargain basement franchise, possibly headed to Anaheim?
It's not just the inability of Sacramento to build a new arena. It has to do with an almost seismic shift in the NBA landscape.
As the recession widened the gap between the NBA haves and the have-nots, a new breed of mega-wealthy owners have been outspending their less-wealthy competitors like the Kings. Luxurious new arenas increased the revenues of the wealthy teams, leaving others behind.
And while other leagues used revenue sharing to help the poorer franchises, the NBA did little to share the wealth, leaving teams like the Kings further behind.
The decline of the Kings has coincided with troubles for the team's owners. The Maloofs were labeled billlionaires by Forbes in 2003, but they've been hit hard in recent years. A minority shareholder in the Maloofs' Palms Casino in Las Vegas said the casino is now virtually worthless.
Moreover, for teams in smaller markets, it's become increasingly difficult to compete for top talent. Star players are gravitating toward the rich, glamorous teams. Take Carmelo Anthony as an example. Sacramento never showed up in his deliberations.
Commisssioner David Stern says he wants to share more revenues to stabilize weaker teams with the next collective bargaining agreement. But a new economic model probably won't come in time to keep the Kings in Sacramento.