tOffical all things Sterling thread

[True Lakers Fan]

Likewise Trojan -I take nothing you say as of value either. Very clearly to me some of those threads were used to bait them into arguing with you just you're trying to bait me by calling you stupid and my opnion is that as a moderator - you should be a professional.

 

[trojanfan12]

Likewise Trojan -I take nothing you say as of value either. Very clearly to me some of those threads were used to bait them into arguing with you just you're trying to bait me by calling you stupid and my opnion is that as a moderator - you should be a professional.

Bait them into arguing with me?!? Are the black SportsHoopla helicopters circling your house there, conspiracy theory? I barely addressed mont when he got banned and I didn't address L+USC at all. Bottom line, you've made a fool out of yourself and now you want to try and claim some kind of conspiracy to get posters banned.

Might be time for some new tinfoil, the SportsHoopla admins are starting to be able to read your thoughts again.

 

[starbigd]

Apparently the league has given Sterling until the 27th to pay the fine, and they will vote him out on the 3 of June.

This is going to be very entertaining.

 

[True Lakers Fan]

Apparently the league has given Sterling until the 27th to pay the fine, and they will vote him out on the 3 of June.

This is going to be very entertaining.

It's been that already

 

[wildturkey]

Apparently the league has given Sterling until the 27th to pay the fine, and they will vote him out on the 3 of June.

This is going to be very entertaining.

That's not news though. Everything has to follow a timeline set by the NBA constitution. Everyone knew it was coming. The dates are just arbitrary.

 

[True Lakers Fan]

That's not news though. Everything has to follow a timeline set by the NBA constitution. Everyone knew it was coming. The dates are just arbitrary.

Sterling has requested a delay of the hearing for three months - which is expected to be rejected and they are also including the recent interviews where he said Magic Johnson is not a good role model as further damage to the NBA. Because the sponsers have pulled out, the NBA stands to lose tens of millions of dollars in revenue sharing and the NBPLA has stated that if Sterling is still an owner in November,they will consider boycotting the games which would further damage the NBA. As I said before I think its the matter of when Stering is put out - not if. I would be surprised if the courts even agreed to hear Sterling's case at all and don't throw it out entirely

 

[trojanfan12]

Basically, what has happened is exactly what I think most expected to happen. The NBA fired their 1st shot with the lifetime ban and deciding to take the team. Sterling and his lawyers shot back with the "I'm not paying the fine and Sterling hasn't done anything to deserve this action" letter.


Now, as expected, the NBA has started moving forward with their attempt to take the team. We will likely hear in the coming weeks about Sterling moving ahead with suing the NBA to keep his team.

 

[starbigd]

I wonder what the nuclear option is for the league.

Let's say they get blocked from terminating his ownership. Can they then force the issue by contracting the league and eliminating his franchise from the NBA?

I'd imagine they have considered every angle here. Sterling in effect, is challenging contract law that he signed.

I'm sure that when this is over, the other owners will move to further clarify and amend the league by laws. There's no question the other owners should have the ability to end a business partnership with a rogue owner......but they need to be more specific about the terms of that removal.

I am on record here as being in agreement with the NBA in removing Sterling, but I think they will need to make a few changes when this is over.

 

[fordman84]

I wonder what the nuclear option is for the league.

Let's say they get blocked from terminating his ownership. Can they then force the issue by contracting the league and eliminating his franchise from the NBA?

I'd imagine they have considered every angle here. Sterling in effect, is challenging contract law that he signed.

I'm sure that when this is over, the other owners will move to further clarify and amend the league by laws. There's no question the other owners should have the ability to end a business partnership with a rogue owner......but they need to be more specific about the terms of that removal.

I am on record here as being in agreement with the NBA in removing Sterling, but I think they will need to make a few changes when this is over.

I think if the court comes back and says the NBA can't do this, they will throw up their hands and say "hey, we did everything we could". I don't think they contract an up and coming LA team. Sterling could have trouble getting and keeping talent to play for him though, and the sponsors are where it is really going to hurt him. Sharing an arena might be all that saves him from losing the biggest sponsor.

 

[trojanfan12]

I wonder what the nuclear option is for the league.

Let's say they get blocked from terminating his ownership. Can they then force the issue by contracting the league and eliminating his franchise from the NBA?

I'd imagine they have considered every angle here. Sterling in effect, is challenging contract law that he signed.

I'm sure that when this is over, the other owners will move to further clarify and amend the league by laws. There's no question the other owners should have the ability to end a business partnership with a rogue owner......but they need to be more specific about the terms of that removal.

I am on record here as being in agreement with the NBA in removing Sterling, but I think they will need to make a few changes when this is over.

That might be the leagues nuclear option. I'm not positive that it is, but I've heard a few folks say that it's a possibility.

The Sterlings also have a "nuclear option". If Shelly files for divorce, it goes to California Family Law court and all assets (including the Clippers) are essentially "frozen" until it gets sorted out.

I agree, Sterling needs to go and the one certainty out of all of this is that the league will make what can cost an owner his franchise, MUCH more clear.

 

[trojanfan12]

I think if the court comes back and says the NBA can't do this, they will throw up their hands and say "hey, we did everything we could". I don't think they contract an up and coming LA team. Sterling could have trouble getting and keeping talent to play for him though, and the sponsors are where it is really going to hurt him. Sharing an arena might be all that saves him from losing the biggest sponsor.

I agree that it's very unlikely that they contract the Clippers. The one thing that the league did (and I don't think the courts can do anything to stop it) is they have banned him for life. So even if he gets to keep the team, he is still effectively removed from the NBA.


In it's own way, that could be a worse punishment. Sterling reportedly takes great pride in the prestige of being an NBA owner. He would own the team and not be able to attend games, NBA functions or have anything to do with the Clippers at all.

 

[starbigd]

That might be the leagues nuclear option. I'm not positive that it is, but I've heard a few folks say that it's a possibility.

The Sterlings also have a "nuclear option". If Shelly files for divorce, it goes to California Family Law court and all assets (including the Clippers) are essentially "frozen" until it gets sorted out.

I agree, Sterling needs to go and the one certainty out of all of this is that the league will make what can cost an owner his franchise, MUCH more clear.

Does anyone else see the pointlessness of 80 year olds getting divorced? By the time the courts settle this both sides could be dead.

I think Shelly's angle is bigger than Donalds. I don't think he has much of a case here, but she may even though shes pretty racist herself. I don't think the players or players union is going to support ANYONE named Sterling in ownership......and I don't think the league can allow it either, it more or less circumvents their ban on Donald.

 

[True Lakers Fan]

What most of you are missing is that each owner and the NBA have agreed ahead of time to binding arbitration. In order to prevail in court, Sterling would have to do two impossible things:

1. Show that the NBA has violated it's own league rules which includes their due process and rules

2. Show that Sterling's comments did not hurt the NBA in any form or fashion.

Without those two componets - there is no way in hell the court will step in other than to review the case, evidence submitted and than throw it out.

 

[xpuctaqpGT]

The ultimate nuclear option for the league would be to disband the NBA completely, then reform a new basketball league that doesn't include the Clippers. But that would be a little extreme.

 

[trojanfan12]

Does anyone else see the pointlessness of 80 year olds getting divorced? By the time the courts settle this both sides could be dead.

I think Shelly's angle is bigger than Donalds. I don't think he has much of a case here, but she may even though shes pretty racist herself. I don't think the players or players union is going to support ANYONE named Sterling in ownership......and I don't think the league can allow it either, it more or less circumvents their ban on Donald.

I don't know how old Shelly is, but I don't think she's in her 80's. According to reports, she already has the papers signed and just hasn't filed them "on the advice of her financial advisor". Doesn't seem too much of a reach to think that that advice is based on the situation with the Clippers. I can see where if it looks like it's not going to go their way, she files for divorce and then fights to keep her 50%.

 

[starbigd]

I don't know how old Shelly is, but I don't think she's in her 80's. According to reports, she already has the papers signed and just hasn't filed them "on the advice of her financial advisor". Doesn't seem too much of a reach to think that that advice is based on the situation with the Clippers. I can see where if it looks like it's not going to go their way, she files for divorce and then fights to keep her 50%.

I don't think she can win that battle either ultimately. Unless a judge rules that the NBA by laws are not legally binding I don't think they have an out here. I'm not even sure what they can sue the league on - anti trust exemptions or something?

It's going to be interesting to see this unfold. I'm sure with enough lawyers you can sue about anything - but contracturally speaking the league has the leverage here.

 

[trojanfan12]

I don't think she can win that battle either ultimately. Unless a judge rules that the NBA by laws are not legally binding I don't think they have an out here. I'm not even sure what they can sue the league on - anti trust exemptions or something?

It's going to be interesting to see this unfold. I'm sure with enough lawyers you can sue about anything - but contracturally speaking the league has the leverage here.

Ultimately, that's the thing. With the caliber of lawyer that Donald Sterling has hired, I'd say it's pretty likely that it ends up in court. The lawyer he hired is one of the top anti-trust lawyers in the nation and is one of very few who have sued the NFL and actually won (representing Al Davis).

If it comes down to it, I expect that Shelly will file for divorce, in which case it will definitely end up in court because the Clippers will become one of the assets that gets "frozen".

As you said, this is going to be very interesting. I think it may very well end up being precedent setting.

 

[True Lakers Fan]

I don't think she can win that battle either ultimately. Unless a judge rules that the NBA by laws are not legally binding I don't think they have an out here. I'm not even sure what they can sue the league on - anti trust exemptions or something?

It's going to be interesting to see this unfold. I'm sure with enough lawyers you can sue about anything - but contracturally speaking the league has the leverage here.

The NBA will argue that Shelly has Donald Sterling's spouse for something like 55 years has been and still is his business partner with full knowledge of everything even though the two have not lived together for a few years. Considering that Shelly was a co-defendent accused and convicted of racial discrimination in their apartment buildings - I think she would have a hard time trying to argue that she didn't allow Sterling to practice discrimination when both have been charged and convicted of those charges in lawsuits.

 

[True Lakers Fan]

The courts by the way don't have the power to freeze the Clippers from being sold - if the NBA determines that ownership of the Clippers by the Sterling family is detrimental to the NBA - then they will seize the Clippers and sell the team themselves. Sterling can sue them but once their membership in the NBA is terminated, then the NBA will take possession. The reason the courts won't be likely to get involved and turn it into a frozen asset is because both of the Sterlings signed binding agreements to settle in abritration. In ever case where Sterling sued former employees/players of the Clippers he lost. Granted it's a delay tactic which might delay it at the most

 

[True Lakers Fan]

the charge is one of several steps required for the NBA to oust Sterling. The league's Board of Governors—which consists of the controlling owner for each of the 30 teams—will meet on June 3 to decide Sterling's fate. SI.com has learned details of the hearing. Minnesota Timberwolves owner Glen Taylor, the board's chairman, will be the presiding officer of the hearing, with the 29 controlling owners other than Sterling acting as jurors. Attorneys for the NBA will make their case against Sterling, and Sterling and counsel can respond. The NBA constitution expressly provides that the federal rules of evidence do not apply to the hearing, meaning the rules for evidence and witness examination will be less formal than in court. If 22 owners sustain the charge, Sterling will be removed from the NBA and the Sterling family trust's ownership of the Clippers would cease. At that point, Sterling and his wife, Shelly, would no longer own the Clippers. The Clippers would then be managed by the office of NBA commissioner Adam Silver, who would put the team up for sale

Read More: Donald Sterling vs. the NBA: A legal primer - NBA - Michael McCann - SI.com