Brooklyn Nets: A Reality Check
by Mark Ginocchio
Dec 24, 2009 Brooklyn, Bruce Ratner, Opinion
Six years ago, I first bought into Bruce Ratner’s idea of the Nets in Brooklyn. As a lifelong New Yorker who seemingly punished himself by choosing to root for the team playing in New Jersey, rather than the more easily accessible franchise in Manhattan, I was overjoyed that the Nets would some day only be a simple New York City subway ride away from my front door. And fresh off back-to-back trips to the NBA Finals, I thought the timing of such a move was spectacular. Doing the math in my head, I figured by 2009, Jason Kidd would be playing in his final season with the team, having already brought us NBA championship glory with Richard Jefferson and Kenyon Martin (substitute Vince Carter for Martin a year later). The Nets would be coming to Brooklyn after clearly owning the title of New York City’s supreme team. Take that, New York Knicks fans, who tortured me with their bravado in the mid-90s and mocked me for rooting for a team that played in a different state and was toying with the idea of renaming itself the “Swamp Dragons.”
Obviously, this master plan of mine (and Bruce Ratner’s) hit some snags. Residents of the Prospect Heights neighborhood in Brooklyn where the arena was to be built were not about to hand their land over to a developer without a fight. And then there was the whole issue of financing this big thing, which became even more questionable when the famous, and now former arena-architect Frank Gehry was waxing poetic about “Miss Brooklyn” skyscrapers. Meanwhile, the Nets got steadily worse where it mattered most to me – on the basketball court. The “Big Three” were traded away to create roster flexibility (aka, salary relief) and this year, the Nets got off to the worst start in NBA history. Then, there was all this talk that if the Nets weren’t in position to break ground in Brooklyn by the end of this year, the project was probably never going to happen. Yet, after so many letdowns with this team and this organization, it was hard for me to say if any of this Brooklyn stuff even mattered anymore.
Now, yesterday’s “master closing” announcement from Ratner and Co. is probably not the definitive victory dance in this fight – but is a clear sign that after all of these years, delays, lawsuits and controversies, this project is as close to reality as it’s ever been. And I must admit, I’m suddenly getting reacquainted with the 2003 version of myself (it’s like the Sport Fan’s version of The Lake House). Finally, the era of the Brooklyn Nets is upon us. For the first time in my life, I will have liked something before it became hip and cool to Brooklyn folk. Now all I need is my Strokes t-shirt and an apartment in Williamsburg and I’ll fit right in.
Seriously though, while the bluster of Brooklyn arena opponents will try and have you believe otherwise, at this point, there appears to be a very thin veil of red tape and interference that will prevent this project from happening. The courts have ruled in favor of the use of eminent domain, the tax-exempt bonds have been sold (and briskly at that), and the project has been “closed.” Ground needs to be broken, and Russian billionaire Mikhail Prokhorov needs to be approved by the NBA (the latter will, undoubtedly happen), and this long strange trip should come to an end, and the next era of Nets basketball will be set to begin. Opponents keep talking of lawsuits and more lawsuits. It’s certainly their right to fight this project to the death, but with very few political allies who matter remaining on their side, their record in the courtroom is starting to reflect the Nets’ record on the hardwood – except even the Nets have pulled out a couple of victories this season.
So, for the first time in many years, I’m back to talk about the Brooklyn Nets like this is something I will see in my lifetime. Sure, my current vision of things may differ from what I was expecting back in 2003, but beggars can’t be choosers.
December 24th, 2009 at 8:26 PM
It does seem a bit strange that this Brooklyn Nets might actually happen in our lifetimes. Anyone who has lived in New York in a long time knows how difficult it is to place any new team in the city.
First, you need facilities to play in, which assumes that a tenant in an existing facility would not object to allowing a new team to play inside the same building. As we all know, big egos and financial interests do not allow for such co-habitation. So it’s a search for a new facility, which may require building new. That has to take into consideration the cost of real estate, labor, legal and administrative fees, potential legal challenges from nearby residents, etc.. Then there’s location. Where do you want to place it where it’s most convenient for people to come watch you? What are you willing to charge? How would you pay for the players?
Once you factor all that in, you would see why it is cost-prohibitive for everyone but the biggest hitters in business, finance and real estate to put a new professional team of any stripe in this city. Ratner believed in this project because he convinced himself that he would make a killing on a real estate deal. I have my doubts about that. Then again, it’s not my money (except for the part of the subsidies that will go into this project) to lose.
However, don’t get your hopes up that we would see a plethora of superstars coming to the borough. Even the Knicks can’t attract every big name to play at Madison Square Garden. What makes you think that it would be different in Brooklyn? The most likely scenario is that by 2016 the Nets would have just ordinary players on the roster. They should be much better than this year by then but nothing like the dollar signs envisioned by boosters.
Well, that’s my opinion.
December 25th, 2009 at 3:59 AM
what difference does it make where they play, they are still gonna be the worst team in the league, and still not gonna have a fan base. they are better off moving to an area where there is no team like kansas city or san diego.
December 25th, 2009 at 11:10 AM
When you talk about “political allies who matter,” keep in mind that is a group of two people: NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Governor David Paterson. The two of them move this project forward, taking political refuge behind the opaque Empire State Development Corporation. Neither Bloomberg nor Paterson want to step out in front and defend what was supposed to be a project to remove blight by building affordable housing and open space, but has now become a project that will itself blight Brooklyn with the largest surface parking lot in the borough. The affordable housing promises are empty. But the Mayor and the Governor are solidly behind big real estate interests, and are willing to gift public and private property to a private developer at a time when the State is nearly bankrupt.
Although the writer may not think they “matter,” all of the local legislators from the districts surrounding the project asked the ESDC to defer approving the renegotiated project plan until its environmental impact could be studied. The ESDC (effectively Paterson) told them to get lost.
The reality is that in New York City today, a politically-connected developer can appropriate entire city blocks in your neighborhood, remove public streets, condemn private property, and create a construction wasteland lasting decades. And neither you nor the elected officials that represent you have any say whatsoever. Even if you love the idea of having the Nets play in Brooklyn, the politics should be unacceptable.
December 26th, 2009 at 11:05 AM
basketball has no importance when the most powerful people in state government are governing corruptly. does it?
December 30th, 2009 at 9:44 PM
They’re beating the knicks tonight.