Donald Sterling *shakes head*

[Jack.Kerr]

Originally Posted by Underdog

Cuban not in favor of booting Sterling

The short & sweet of it: "freedom of speech" - it's a slippery slope to remove someone's property for having an unpopular opinion, even if he is a disgusting bigot.

Not a surprising viewpoint, considering that Cuban's opinions aren't always the most popular either. I mean, he distributed Loose Change - a "documentary" about how the US government CAUSED 9/11. And although he says that movie didn't reflect his own personal beliefs, simply being associated with something like that could be construed as a reason to take his team away... Where do you draw the line once a precedence has been set?

So that's Cuban's pitch to the top-flight free agents who might consider signing with Dallas? Good luck.

I'd be leery of and absolutely opposed to any governmental entity coming in to try to force Sterling out.

I'd be leery of and absolutely contemptuous of any private business association that didn't.

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by Jack.Kerr

So that's Cuban's pitch to the top-flight free agents who might consider signing with Dallas? Good luck.

I don't see how that has anything to do with free agency... He repeatedly said that Donald Sterling is a disgusting bigot who he doesn't want to be associated with in the NBA.

But he does have a point about precedence. Where does it stop once you set a legal framework? Could an owner get booted for criticizing the league?

[Jack.Kerr]

Originally Posted by Underdog

I don't see how that has anything to do with free agency... And he said repeatedly that Donald Sterling is a disgusting bigot who he doesn't want to be associated with in the NBA.

But he does have a point about precedence. Where does it stop once you set a legal framework? Could an owner get booted for criticizing the league?

I think Cuban's statements here will be used against him (or at least taken into account)--by players' agents and advisors, and possibly the GMs of other teams in some cases when it comes time to decide where to sign.

This is going to be such an extremely, primally emotional issue for so many players, at least for the forseeable future, that I don't think even a salesman like Cuban would be able to intellectualize or nuance away anything less then categorical opposition to Sterling's remaining an owner.

Given the Mavericks' recent record of success in attracting free agents such as Deron Williams, Dwight Howard, and LeBron James (who has already said he wouldn't play for Sterling and that there was no room for Sterling in the NBA), I'm not sure Cuban's comments here are tipping the balance in favor of the Mavericks in future decisions. Silence would have been a better option, IMO.

[TripleDipping]

Originally Posted by Underdog

I don't see how that has anything to do with free agency... He repeatedly said that Donald Sterling is a disgusting bigot who he doesn't want to be associated with in the NBA.

But he does have a point about precedence. Where does it stop once you set a legal framework? Could an owner get booted for criticizing the league?

That's absolutely right. That slope gets mighty slippery.

What do you do then with everyday people who make racist remarks? What do you do if your employer makes such racist remarks?

The NBA can penalize Sterling by fining him, banning him from attending games, or withdrawing draft picks from the Clippers. I read somewhere that the Clippers' players might be able to opt for free agency and go play somewhere else. I think they can, and should, be afforded the opportunity to do so. It's just like if you find out your employer's a racist prick, you can always quit or even sue for discrimination, but forcing him/her to sell the business so that you can continue to be employed there and get a paycheck is nonsense.

One more thing, the person who obtained and leaked the audio of a private conversation between a man and his girlfriend is, imo, as big a scum as Sterling.

[Jack.Kerr]

Originally Posted by TripleDipping

One more thing, the person who obtained and leaked the audio of a private conversation between a man and his girlfriend is, imo, as big a scum as Sterling.

Really? That's what troubles you?

Maybe Sterling and his wife and their attorneys grossly "misunderestimated" this woman when they decided to try to reclaim the cash, jewlery, cars, property and other gifts that he made to during their four-year extra-marital relationship. All's fair in love and war.

Or maybe Sterling should select his mistresses more carefully, in any case.

[dirt_dobber]

interesting take by Kareem:

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar: Welcome to the Finger-Wagging Olympics
http://time.com/79590/donald-sterlin...jabbar-racism/

[EricaLubarsky]

Is anyone important really proposing the NBA confiscate his team? Is that even legally plausible? I mean, Sterling is a grade-A A-hole, but you can't just take someone's property away from them, even if it's mostly an intellectual property managed by a third party.

What IS plausible is penalizing the team with loss of TV revenue, no Allstar game, draft picks, etc.

[Jack.Kerr]

Originally Posted by EricaLubarsky

Is anyone important really proposing the NBA confiscate his team? Is that even legally plausible? I mean, Sterling is a grade-A A-hole, but you can't just take someone's property away from them, even if it's mostly an intellectual property managed by a third party.

What IS plausible is penalizing the team with loss of TV revenue, no Allstar game, draft picks, etc.

Suppose you're in a business partnership (that's what the NBA is, right?) ....operating say...a restaurant, and one of your business partners is revealed to be a racist on the order of Sterling. Customers stop coming. Catering gigs dry up. Vendors stop selling to you. Longtime employees file discrimination suits. You have trouble getting skilled kitchen help, waitstaff, etc. Your landlord becomes difficult to deal with. You have trouble getting insurance for your business. The Health Department starts sending Mr. González out for what become every-two-week inspections, and you can't ever manage to come out of an inspection with less than 50 penalty points, and you keep having to close your business for Health Department-ordered repairs, and this starts getting disseminated via social media, and sites like Yelp. The local paper puts you on the front page publicizing your recent business difficulties. The local news station comes and stands in your empty parking lot and does a 4-minute segment about the racist business partner, about your recent problems with employees, vendors and the Health Department.

Would the non-culpable business partners be required to stay in business with the racist business partner? Or could they say, "Hey, this thing's going down the toilet. All of us are going to lose our investment if we can't attract business and resolve these employee lawsuits. We can give you this much money right now for your interest in the business, you leave, go far, far away, and say nothing publically ever again about our business, or our business relationship or the fact that we were ever even acquaintances; or we can all go down in flames together." If he refuses your offer, are you obligated to stay in business with him? Or can you dissolve the business relationship and re-open somewhere else on your own?

The NBA's situation is complicated, and complicated by the fact that they don't seem to have a clearcut provision for getting out themselves out of this situation. (In fact, now you've got an owner like Cuban saying that he doesn't even want such a provision.)

And even if the NBA declares that everyone on the team can be a free agent, what's to stop Sterling from suing and saying that the league has diminished the value of his investment? Or that the loss of draft picks is excessive punishment, and similarly negatively affects the value of his investment? Or that they have coerced him into divesting? Damned if they do, gosh-damned if they don't. Gonna be costly either way.

What stopped Cuban from suing Stern and saying that $500,000 was excessive or his remarks critical of NBA offciating? Where is the line? By comparison, Sterling's remarks were private, and released without his knowledge or consent. What gives the league any authority at all to punish him?

Their authority is what they say it is, and what they want it to be, whatever they have the collective will (and perhaps resources) to enforce. The other owners will have to make a business decision about how much they're willing to let Sterling cost them either in terms of a buyout, a forced buyout, protracted legal battles or lost business revenues, and labor difficulties, and general brand degradation.

29 other owners scruffling up $20 million apiece to buy Sterling out. Is there an NBA owner out there who can't get their hands on $20 million?

[chumdawg]

Originally Posted by Jack.Kerr

Suppose you're in a business partnership (that's what the NBA is, right?) ....operating say...a restaurant, and one of your business partners is revealed to be a racist on the order of Sterling. Customers stop coming. Catering gigs dry up. Vendors stop selling to you. Longtime employees file discrimination suits. You have trouble getting skilled kitchen help, waitstaff, etc. Your landlord becomes difficult to deal with. You have trouble getting insurance for your business. The Health Department starts sending Mr. González out for what become every-two-week inspections, and you can't ever manage to come out of an inspection with less than 50 penalty points, and you keep having to close your business for Health Department-ordered repairs, and this starts getting disseminated via social media, and sites like Yelp. The local paper puts you on the front page publicizing your recent business difficulties. The local news station comes and stands in your empty parking lot and does a 4-minute segment about the racist business partner, about your recent problems with employees, vendors and the Health Department.

Would the non-culpable business partners be required to stay in business with the racist business partner? Or could they say, "Hey, this thing's going down the toilet. All of us are going to lose our investment if we can't attract business and resolve these employee lawsuits. We can give you this much money right now for your interest in the business, you leave, go far, far away, and say nothing publically ever again about our business, or our business relationship or the fact that we were ever even acquaintances; or we can all go down in flames together." If he refuses your offer, are you obligated to stay in business with him? Or can you dissolve the business relationship and re-open somewhere else on your own?

The NBA's situation is complicated, and complicated by the fact that they don't seem to have a clearcut provision for getting out themselves out of this situation. (In fact, now you've got an owner like Cuban saying that he doesn't even want such a provision.)

And even if the NBA declares that everyone on the team can be a free agent, what's to stop Sterling from suing and saying that the league has diminished the value of his investment? Or that the loss of draft picks is excessive punishment, and similarly negatively affects the value of his investment? Or that they have coerced him into divesting? Damned if they do, gosh-damned if they don't. Gonna be costly either way.

What stopped Cuban from suing Stern and saying that $500,000 was excessive or his remarks critical of NBA offciating? Where is the line? By comparison, Sterling's remarks were private, and released without his knowledge or consent. What gives the league any authority at all to punish him?

Their authority is what they say it is, and what they want it to be, whatever they have the collective will (and perhaps resources) to enforce. The other owners will have to make a business decision about how much they're willing to let Sterling cost them either in terms of a buyout, a forced buyout, protracted legal battles or lost business revenues, and labor difficulties, and general brand degradation.

29 other owners scruffling up $20 million apiece to buy Sterling out. Is there an NBA owner out there who can't get their hands on $20 million?

I haven't read the full goings-on, but I can say with certainty that any initiative impacting ownership woul need to be carefully measured.

[DevinHarriswillstart]

Originally Posted by EricaLubarsky

Is anyone important really proposing the NBA confiscate his team? Is that even legally plausible? I mean, Sterling is a grade-A A-hole, but you can't just take someone's property away from them, even if it's mostly an intellectual property managed by a third party.

What IS plausible is penalizing the team with loss of TV revenue, no Allstar game, draft picks, etc.

Well if your coach quits and the star players demand trades, then your back will be up against the wall. I don't think it will be the NBA as much as the Clippers organization that will force him out. This is personal for people. It is the stupidity that bothers me more than the racist parts. I mean, you just have to be plain ole dumb to tell someone not to bring black people to a basketball game. That is stupid on a ridiculous level.

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by DevinHarriswillstart

It is the stupidity that bothers me more than the racist parts. I mean, you just have to be plain ole dumb to tell someone not to bring black people to a basketball game. That is stupid on a ridiculous level.

Speaking of stupid - Sterling loves to brag about how he's paying for the lifestyle of these black athletes, while fully ignoring the fact that the very black people that he doesn't want coming to his arena are the ones who give him the money that he pays said athletes with (at least partially)... Even if nobody had ever heard him say it, that's just bad business.

[DevinHarriswillstart]

Woj writes about how the league could get rid of him...

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/how-nba...093958859.html

[Underdog]

Banned for life.

[TripleDipping]

Can someone watching the press conference give the details? What does lifetime ban mean? He has to relinquish ownership of the franchise?

[DevinHarriswillstart]

Originally Posted by TripleDipping

Can someone watching the press conference give the details? What does lifetime ban mean? He has to relinquish ownership of the franchise?

Based on Woj's article and a few other reports, the owners will vote him our of ownership with the league taking over until a sale can be negotiated.

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by DevinHarriswillstart

Based on Woj's article and a few other reports, the owners will vote him our of ownership with the league taking over until a sale can be negotiated.

CP3 to NO!

[EricaLubarsky]

Originally Posted by Underdog

CP3 to NO!

When can we finalize our Calderon/Dally for Paul/Jordan trade?

But seriously, the league will do nothing for the Clips but allow them to draft. If they force Sterling out and trade away assets leading to a decreased team value when sold, they are asking for a huge lawsuit.

[TripleDipping]

Got this from clutchfans:

Expecting a fight from Sterling? I have no idea.

Polling owners, what support to do you have to force a sale? Didn't poll the owners. Spoke to a few and I have their full support.

Authority to force a sale? Owners have authority to 3/4 vote to remove him has owner.

NBA hasn't done anything until today. Why? Can't speak to past actions. When evidence was brought to the NBA, we acted.

Lose a team over remarks shared in private? Private or not, they are now public and represent his views.

When did you decide? I decided this morning this was the appropriate action.

Process will begin immediately.

Sterling own up to this immediately? What has he expressed? Mr. Sterling acknowledged it was his voice and has not expressed to me directly any other views.

Message for the Clippers and their fans? My message is that the league is far bigger than any one owner, coach or player. I have complete confidence in Doc Rivers and basketball management.

Punishment designed to get the message across to Sterling that there is nothing to be gained from continued ownership? Did you take into account his past behavior? We did not take into account his past behavior.

What specific violation and forced sale, what covers that? The lawyers will lay that out for you.

NBA considering more African-American ownership at this point? Always open to ownership from all races, ethnicity, nationalities.

Magic Johnson? He knows he's welcome as an owner in this league.

Talk to any players before you came to this decision? Players have any recourse if they don't want to play for Sterling? I had a chance to talk to Chris Paul, Doc Rivers, players of the team. I believe the players will be satisfied. If a player doesn't want to play for the Clippers, we'll deal with that when that happens but not my sense of where we're at right now.

New rules in place for owners? Not sure. We're always willing to take a fresh look. We have appropriate rules in place to cover a situation like this.

In past cases, has Sterling been fined or suspended for racial remarks? Never fined or suspended by the league. While there have been rumors and cases filed, he was sued and did settle with the DOJ.

Elgin Baylor concerns not concern you? It concerned us greatly. Ultimately, Baylor did not prevail in that litigation.

I would say those marketing partners of the Clippers and NBA should judge us by this response to this incident.

Mr. Sterling's family will be allowed to remain in the league? No decisions about other members of the Sterling family. This ruling applies to Donald Sterling and Sterling's conduct only.

Financial impact from this scandal? I don't know. This has happened in 3 days. Hopeful there is no long term damage to the Clippers/NBA. I'm outraged so I can understand their outrage. I'll do my best to bring them back in the NBA family.

Lifetime ban is instituted. That is independent of the sale.

When I first heard it, I was shocked. I was hoping it was fraudulent or doctored. I've know Donald for over 20 years. We immediately investigated and let's get to the bottom of it.

I've had multiple conversations with Kevin Johnson and hope the actions today satisfy our players and they should.

Interactions been like with Sterling over those 20 years? Seen or felt anything like this? I have not been that close to him but nothing in his behavior to see these kind of views. There have been public findings but nothing firsthand that he held the views that were expressed on these audio recordings.

My response was as a human being. It wasn't anger but somberness. I felt strongly for that team. For those players and coaches to do what they need to do and play at the highest level and this hanging over, I had a certain sadness. Regardless of religion, this is hurtful.

Anytime during your conversation did he express remorse or denial? Not directly to me.

Clippers granted FA? Not something we're considering.

If you don't get 3/4 vote, possible Donald is absentee owner profiting? I fully expect the support from the other owners to remove him.

[DirkFTW]

Interesting revenge tool they've created for jilted lovers and disillusioned fans. Someone help the Cowboys out please...

Cuban makes some good points:

Cuban added that it was "damn scary" to ponder the thought of attempting to remove somebody from the NBA because of his personal beliefs.

"In no uncertain terms am I supporting what Donald Sterling said, or his position," Cuban said. "He's obviously racist, he's obviously bigoted. And in this day and age when you're in the public eye, you've got to be damn careful -- if that's your position, and that's unfortunately where you're at, you better be damn careful what you say, even in the privacy of your own home.

"But regardless of your background, regardless of the history they have, if we're taking something somebody said in their home and we're trying to turn it into something that leads to you being forced to divest property in any way, shape or form, that's not the United States of America. I don't want to be part of that."
http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/10...-kicking-owner

[DirkFTW]

Wow, Sterling bought the team in 1981 for $12 million. Valued recently at close to $600 million, and may be higher now based on Bucks and Kings sales.

Maybe he should keep the team, and the league should go with hefty annual fines and personal community service as long as he owns it:
1) 1-hour sessions of photo-ops with minority fans at the end of every game, posted to the team's website and Instagram
2) 300 hours per year of community service with specific minority causes determined by a vote of Clippers players and personnel
3) Annual PSAs on fighting racism... and the dangers of adultery while he's at it

[Thespiralgoeson]

Originally Posted by DirkFTW

Interesting revenge tool they've created for jilted lovers and disillusioned fans. Someone help the Cowboys out please...

Cuban makes some good points:

I dunno. I see where he's coming from, I guess, but I have trouble seeing this as any kind of violation of Sterling's rights because this is an entirely private matter that's being handled internally by the NBA. If this were the government forcing him to part from his property, that would be different. But like Jack.Kerr said, the NBA is a collection of business partners, and they just don't want to do business with him anymore. Should they be legally required to keep doing business with them, even if it's detrimental to their product and people are walking away from it droves? It's sort of like a home owner's association- sure, you own the house, but when you buy the house you enter into a contract with the other home owners. If you don't maintain your house and it becomes a dilapidated sh*thole and starts bringing down the property values in the whole neighborhood, they can force you to sell your home, and they're well within their legal right to do so.

[Five-ofan]

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

I dunno. I see where he's coming from, I guess, but I have trouble seeing this as any kind of violation of Sterling's rights because this is an entirely private matter that's being handled internally by the NBA. If this were the government forcing him to part from his property, that would be different. But like Jack.Kerr said, the NBA is a collection of business partners, and they just don't want to do business with him anymore. Should they be legally required to keep doing business with them, even if it's detrimental to their product and people are walking away from it droves? It's sort of like a home owner's association- sure, you own the house, but when you buy the house you enter into a contract with the other home owners. If you don't maintain your house and it becomes a dilapidated sh*thole and starts bringing down the property values in the whole neighborhood, they can force you to sell your home, and they're well within their legal right to do so.

Considering homeowners associations are one of the worst legal things in this country, I'm not sure I'd use them as an example of someone being right.

[jthig32]

Originally Posted by Five-ofan

Considering homeowners associations are one of the worst legal things in this country, I'm not sure I'd use them as an example of someone being right.

They're the worst thing around until you have neighbors that won't get in line and start affecting your life or your property value.

Pretty appropriate comparison I'd say.

[Five-ofan]

Originally Posted by jthig32

They're the worst thing around until you have neighbors that won't get in line and start affecting your life or your property value.

Pretty appropriate comparison I'd say.

Hoas are great in theory, and I don't have an issue with them when used correctly. The problem is that they vastly overstep their authority(or at least what their authority should be) the vast majority of the time

[Thespiralgoeson]

Originally Posted by Five-ofan

Considering homeowners associations are one of the worst legal things in this country, I'm not sure I'd use them as an example of someone being right.

Didn't say they were right- OR that it's necessarily right or proper for the NBA to force Sterling to part with his property. I'm just saying neither case is illegal. It's a private matter, and it doesn't strike me as a case of Sterling being persecuted somehow.

Believe me, I have no love HOA's. The one in my neighborhood is particularly draconian and about the biggest pain in the ass on the planet.

[TripleDipping]

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

Believe me, I have no love HOA's. The one in my neighborhood is particularly draconian and about the biggest pain in the ass on the planet.

Mine doesn't even have the balls to issue a statement to the neighborhood that pet owners need to clean up after their pets done sh*tting other people's lawns.

[Murphy3]

Yep, I agree with Cuban. It's a slippery slope. We just saw a CEO basically forced to resign because of his Christian beliefs that led him to be against homosexual marriage. What exactly is next?

Sterling obviously has a screw loose, but it is a very, very slippery slope. Following the PC crowd can be a very poor choice.

[Jack.Kerr]

Originally Posted by Murphy3

We just saw a CEO basically forced to resign because of his Christian beliefs that led him to be against homosexual marriage. What exactly is next?

Technically, this is incorrect. Eich made a contribution to NOM's (National Organization for Marriage) campaign for Prop 8, which supported 'traditional marriage'.

NOM is an organization which goes to great pains, nay contortions, to point out that they are not against homosexual marriage, but that they support TRADTIONAL marriage. You know...the kind like Donald and Rochelle Sterling's--one woman, one man, and a series of long-term highly-paid 'mistresses'.

[Jack.Kerr]

Originally Posted by Murphy3

We just saw a CEO basically forced to resign because of his Christian beliefs that led him to be against homosexual marriage. What exactly is next?

Marriage Equality, probably.

[dirt_dobber]

Can he still get NBA League Pass?

(too soon?)

[Jack.Kerr]

Originally Posted by dirt_dobber

Can he still get NBA League Pass?

(too soon?)

That should be part of his punishment.

[EricaLubarsky]

Originally Posted by Jack.Kerr

That should be part of his punishment.

I assume you mean force him to buy League Pass Broadband, but suffering through that is way too cruel.

[Jack.Kerr]

Originally Posted by EricaLubarsky

I assume you mean force him to buy League Pass Broadband, but suffering through that is way too cruel.

And costly.

[Thespiralgoeson]

Wow! I did not see this coming at all. I thought he'd get a lengthy suspension but I didn't even think the league could legally force him to sell the team on such grounds.

[Thespiralgoeson]

From Cubes' twitter: "I agree 100% with Commissioner Silvers findings and the actions taken against Donald Sterling"

[Thespiralgoeson]

Apparently before his comments got leaked all over the internet, the NAACP was about to give Sterling its lifetime achievement award. Uh... what?

[EricaLubarsky]

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

Apparently before his comments got leaked all over the internet, the NAACP was about to give Sterling its lifetime achievement award. Uh... what?

Money talks.

He already received one award after donating another large sum, presumably to cover up for rumors of rampant racism (and lawsuits) twenty years ago. Non-profits often award unsavory-but-wealthy individuals with awards with the hope of receiving even more money. It's not about merit. It's about being someone who can afford to keep a non-profit in business.

[Murphy3]

Splitting an awfully fine hair on that one Jack.Kerr.

[Jack.Kerr]

Originally Posted by Murphy3

Splitting an awfully fine hair on that one Jack.Kerr.

Me? Or NOM?

Do you think NOM is lying when they claim not to be anti-homosexual, but pro-TRADITIONAL marriage?

I mean.....they say it with such a straight, god-fearing face. Usually.

Or were you referring to my characterization of Donald Sterling's traditional-marriage 'mistress' as 'highly-paid'? Because you may have me there.

Sterling was reportedly suing V.Stiviano for the return of $240,000 in cash which he had 'gifted' her over the course of their four-year extra-traditional-marital relationship. That comes out to about...(divide the 4 into the 24......) $60,000 per year to "sleep" with Donald Sterling, and probably see him nekkid, and cut his golden, curled-up old-man toenails, and...who knows what-all-else she probably had to do, which I agree is not really that highly-paid after all. Particularly in California. Damned libbruls, ruinin' the world for putas and semi-happily married men.

[j0Shi]

This is a tough challenge for the owners. So far Silver pushed all the right buttons so let's hope they'll finish this/him off in the best possible way.

The complexity of the problem besides those already mentioned is also demonstrated by a tidbit I just stumbled upon on twitter. If they force a sell, they sure can't control the buyer, can they?
So what if, let's say, an investment group based in Seattle posts the highest bid? Sterling might be gone, but then so is the team.