FWIW... What MD judge should have done

[sturt]

Rather than setting up concrete, obtrusive restrictions that can just as easily decrease the value of the franchise as would be the case otherwise (some of us would say, it even makes it MORE likely that the franchise value is going to be harmed)...

...if the concern is that the current ownership not be able to sabotage the franchise to harm the potential ownership, isn't that just as simple as the court appointing a referee who would be compensated 50/50 by both parties, and who would be given the charge to ensure that every player transaction is a reasonable one?

It makes sense for divorce court, as often a judge will appoint an advocate for the child's best interests... and this would be similar to that -- someone strictly looking out for the franchise's best interests.

Who to appoint?

Well, when the judge doesn't have a clue who "Mr. Claxton" is, or evidently even realized the Hawks had obtained Mr. Claxton's services, certainly one doesn't expect the judge himself to make that determination.

Not a problem though... the judge just does what judges do when there's a case that falls outside of their own personal sphere of knowledge... he simply should ask David Stern to make a recommendation, likely someone who has never been associated with the franchise, but someone who has distinguished himself as a general manager in the league in the past.

Why is that so hard to come up with??? Why didn't Eric Johnson call me before he hashed out this lame restrictive idea and essentially commanded the franchise's demise? Surely he has my number... ???

[BornandDieHawks]

Quote:

---

Well, when the judge doesn't have a clue who "Mr. Claxton" is, or evidently even realized the Hawks had obtained Mr. Claxton's services, certainly one doesn't expect the judge himself to make that determination.

---

You know the judge did not have a clue about what it takes to run a sports fanchise. He gave all parties the opportunity to basically hash out an agreement thay would benefit the Hawks and Thrashers, but Belkin blocked all suggestions. The more I think about this whole circus, I believe this is more personal than business. Belkin has been trying to own an NBA team for more than 20 years and I can not see why he wouldn't want to put a competive team on the floor. He has basically won the case. I mean the ruling was he could buy out the other owners at cost. I think right now his only desire is to stick it to the current ownership and management for going against him in the first place. That's why the NBA and NHL needs to step in and take complete control of our team before it's ruined.

[Duff_Man]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Well, when the judge doesn't have a clue who "Mr. Claxton" is, or evidently even realized the Hawks had obtained Mr. Claxton's services, certainly one doesn't expect the judge himself to make that determination.

---

You know the judge did not have a clue about what it takes to run a sports fanchise. He gave all parties the opportunity to basically hash out an agreement thay would benefit the Hawks and Thrashers, but Belkin blocked all suggestions. The more I think about this whole circus, I believe this is more personal than business. Belkin has been trying to own an NBA team for more than 20 years and I can not see why he wouldn't want to put a competive team on the floor. He has basically won the case. I mean the ruling was he could buy out the other owners at cost. I think right now his only desire is to stick it to the current ownership and management for going against him in the first place. That's why the NBA and NHL needs to step in and take complete control of our team before it's ruined.

---

Total agreement. I can almost hear the spite from here. And the real losers in this whole "divorce court" style fiasco is us...the fans. I am a little upset that David Stern hasn't steped in or said anything. I feel like we are being ignored by the league.

[DJ_Money]

Honestly, I don't know this judge's background or history, but he seems way out of his league in this case.

[Spiral]

Since the idea of putting up a bond was being thrown around, why not state that the Atlanta Spirit has to put up a bond in the amount of any new guaranteed contracts they take on that are longer than one year. That would assure Belkin that he will not take on any salary losses. In my opinion, that would be the most logical way to handle it. That way Belkin is protected and the team could still operate as they see fit.

[sturt]

Spiral, that would certainly satisfy Belkin, but now you enter into an area where ASpirit would say "nowwwwaaaaaitaminute."

You're essentially suggesting that they put up millions of dollars (more) on a gamble that the judge will rule in their favor.

They shouldn't be expected to do that.

What's simple is for there to be a third party established by the court to look out for the franchise's long-term well-being, to be recommended by the NBA office. It's done all of the time by courts in other contexts.

Let BK make his deals, and then let the third party pass judgment.

It's not necessarily ideal, but it's a whole lot better than any of the alternatives, especially the one currently established.

[Spiral]

Yeah, but Belkin was wanting them to put up some absurd number like 150 million. I think we'd be looking at putting up like 20. Like you said, nothing is ideal, but at least business could go as usual...and if the owners are as confidant as they claim to be about eventually winning the team back, I don't see why they would have a problem with it.

[sturt]

Quote:

---

Yeah, but Belkin was wanting them to put up some absurd number like 150 million. I think we'd be looking at putting up like 20. Like you said, nothing is ideal, but at least business could go as usual...and if the owners are as confidant as they claim to be about eventually winning the team back, I don't see why they would have a problem with it.

---

I appreciate the response, and not to pile on, but...

1. You can't expect ASpirit to be be anything but confident publicly, can you? But the fact is, Belkin's lawyers are ahead in what could be the 3rd quarter of the game.

2. Conservatively speaking, 20 million is about 19 million more than the other option would cost.

3. It's easy to gamble with other people's money. If it were your 20 million and the judge had ruled against you once, I doubt you'd be real enthusiastic to chance losing both the franchises PLUS that amount of money.

[Plainview1981]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Well, when the judge doesn't have a clue who "Mr. Claxton" is, or evidently even realized the Hawks had obtained Mr. Claxton's services, certainly one doesn't expect the judge himself to make that determination.

---

You know the judge did not have a clue about what it takes to run a sports fanchise. He gave all parties the opportunity to basically hash out an agreement thay would benefit the Hawks and Thrashers, but Belkin blocked all suggestions. The more I think about this whole circus, I believe this is more personal than business. Belkin has been trying to own an NBA team for more than 20 years and I can not see why he wouldn't want to put a competive team on the floor. He has basically won the case. I mean the ruling was he could buy out the other owners at cost. I think right now his only desire is to stick it to the current ownership and management for going against him in the first place. That's why the NBA and NHL needs to step in and take complete control of our team before it's ruined.

---

Both teams should be stripped of ownership. Neither team has shown that they should own the team. I don't think there's a middle ground each way... Belkin is too much business and the other owners appear to know very little about that side.

[TheDude]

otis redding was a pretty good. but from that era(a bit later), i'm a curtis mayfield guy.

[sturt]

Judge Johnson, may I offer an unsolicited thought?

The restrictions placed on the Atlanta Hawks franchise are prohibitive at a time of the year when a franchise may either gain or lose value based on the transactions they are or are not able to make. So, in fact, Mr. Belkin's concern may be unwittingly exacerbated and the franchise may be caused to decline in value by the very dictate intended to keep its value from harm.

Cognizant of that, may I propose that you consider more strongly the idea of appointing a "franchise advocate," much like judges appoint advocates for children in family court cases.

This person would be someone with no prior relationship to the franchise, someone who has distinguished himself as an NBA executive of unquestioned integrity (likely with prior experience as a General Manager), and would have court-mandated authority as the gatekeeper for any transactions that the current General Manager would attempt to complete.

Ostensibly, that person would be recommended to you by the league office, and ostensibly he would be compensated 50/50 by the two sides, until the case is resolved one way or the other.

Yes, indeed I'm an Atlanta Hawks fan, but one who has not sided with one or the other. Much like a concerned grandparent who has invested some of themselves in a grandchild over a period of time (I personally go back to 1970), I just want to see the franchise emerge from all of this as healthy as possible. And, I think what I'm suggesting is entirely pragmatic and positive. Hope you will see it that way, as well.

Sincerely....