[NBA Gossip] Donald Sterling Hates the Blacks, Including Magic

Sterling will not sell so easily. This is his life.

There will be no shortage of bidders but Sterling being a lawyer himself will fight this to the end.

Don't forget that his wife has a big share in owning the Clippers too. None of the sanctions are against her.

This is a much more complex scenario than forcing a sale via other owners votes'

 

He can certainly try and get an injunction from the court to prevent a quick sale of the Clippers by the NBA.

 

The NBA won't do that, they do not want to chip away at a league that already has more credibility issues than the NFL or MLB.

 

He doesn't need it.

The CBA is a contractual agreement between the NBAPA and the NBA. If the NBAPA agrees with the NBA, they can amend the agreement or add an addendum.

No contract is immune to change if both sides agree.

Create a 1-time exception, the NBA and NBAPA sign off, done deal.

 

The NBA is not going to destroy the competitive balance of their league in order to punish Donald Sterling. Even if they *could* do it (which is questionable, at best), they won't.

 

Sterling is an example of the pathetic state of our society is as well as LA. I don't know you can take people's possessions away by being set up.

 

True.

 

They would if they want to apply pressure to Sterling to sell. Letting the franchise implode would give them more ammunition and evidence that the team was not sustainable as long as Sterling is an owner.

IE, they can go to a judge and say,

"Look, this franchise is NOT viable as long as Sterling is an owner. Every single player wants out. Nobody wants to play for him. No coach wants to work with him. No sponsor wants to advertise there. And we have to give the players the option to leave as they are entitled to work in an organization that is not a hostile work environment. And not being able to go to work where you know that your labor is enriching a racist and subject to protests and daily picket lines is clearly a hostile work environment (per California law). Not letting them walk would open the NBA to charges of violations of California employment law."

California employment law requires that employers provide a non hostile work environment. Normally you would file a complaint and the company is required to remedy the situation by terminating or addressing the issue through reprimanding the behavior. However, if the hostile work environment is being created by the Owner (who you can't terminate), then it's easy to argue that you have to give the player the freedom to seek employment somewhere else. IE, grant them free agency.

So don't think for a moment this is off the table. The NBA has multiple tools to damage or destroy the franchise or simply shut it down. That's why the NBA Owner by-laws exist, to give the NBA the tools to remove other owners.

 

It is probably best for Sterling to sale Clippers!

Once the sponsors start to exit, and the fans not coming to the games, he will get the message loud and clear! Any protract legal fight will be counter-productive.

I just feel badly for Doc Rivers, he has to act for his team and players.

 

Neither the owners or the players are going to agree to this. For the owners, it hurts the majority of their teams - all the ones that aren't under the cap and see their rivals have a free chance at Griffin and Paul.

For the players, this creates a mess for them. It works great for the stars - Paul and Griffin will get gigantic contracts. What about the lesser players? They are either stuck playing in LA or possibly lose money signing elsewhere. And at the end of the day, someone has to play in LA, so you're just punishing the players that get stuck there - and they will be attacked for voluntarily playing for a racist. If somehow you could convince everyone not to play there, you're taking away 15 NBA jobs.

The whole thing is a ridiculous idea and will never, ever happen. The owners are not going to blow up their product to pressure Sterling.

 

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Bottom line: There isn't a franchise that could withstand public backlash of failing to vote w/ Adam Silver on Donald Sterling's ouster.</p>&mdash; Adrian Wojnarowski (@WojYahooNBA) <a href="https://twitter.com/WojYahooNBA/statuses/461222621942525952">April 29, 2014</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Can't disagree. Threat of public disclosure of not voting out Sterling would pretty much destroy any team that didn't support Silver.

 

I think removing him legally is more complicated. I'm pretty sure Adam Silver consulted with the NBA's legal counsel of the full extent of punishment they can pursue on legal grounds. I think if they could have forced Sterling to sell, they would have. It's going to be tough.

 

Agree with this. And does it REALLY work for the stars? They wouldn't be able to build their super team again with any of the major markets that they were hoping to go to. There are also really big points of contention between the owners and the players over the last CBA.

 

The NBA would be foolish to take this route. Further, Sterling will fight it tooth and nail, including trying to get an injunction to keep anything from happening until the courts rule.

The best outcome for the NBA is for Donald Sterling to pass away.

 

They will for one simple reason, imagine the public backlash if the NBA forces minority players to play for a racist owner. Competitive imbalance is a short term issue. Destroying the brand of the NBA is a long term issue.

If you're an owner, would you rather have a couple better teams or have all the teams being clobbered in the press, by the NBAPA and by civil rights groups?

The Owners are painted in a corner now that it's become so big. Their options are very, very limited and as such if they're seen as an obstacle to the process of removing Sterling the backlash would be massive.

 

Why do you feel bad for Rivers?

He played for Sterling and made the decision to coach the Clippers while being fully aware of Sterlings reputation and past transgressions.

 

Don't quite understand the private club thing. If Sterling was not a racist, but just does not get along with the other owners, can the owners vote him out because they feel he is "detriment" to the whole franchise? Can they slap some BS claim such as not having the Clippers in the playoff for X number of years or not drawing enough fans?

 

Except Sterling already signed away all his rights to contest in court. He signed a contract that accepts all rulings under the NBA bylaws and the Commissioner as representative of final arbitration.

The Commissioner and BoG are the court of final arbitration. If he wanted to keep the right to sue, he shouldn't have signed those rights away.

He could try to contest the legality of final arbitration power, but it would be VERY difficult to contest unless he could argue misconduct on the part of the NBA.

 

I think it creates a precedent that owners are not comfortable with.

That said, Sterling should just man up and say he's sorry, and that he'll sell his team. Meanwhile, he'll stay out of the operations of LAC. For the sake of LAC fans, he should also promise to keep the team in LA.

Then he should just disappear, forever.

 

His right to sue is void regarding the commissioner's power of discipline, not on the owners voting him out. Of course he can sue on that.