News on 790 right now!!!

[Diesel]

The legal system has no real power over the NBA. Just like congress had none over MLB. IF Sten wants to, he can call for an end to this matter because the NBA is a private corporation. NO Law of the Land will tell Stern how to run this corporation UNLESS there's Discrimination going on.

All Stern has to do is prove that Belkin has been bad for business and swish, Belkin will be back in Boston with all the money that he has put in in the first place.

The question is will Stern do it?

I think the fact that Stern was the one who decided not to sell the Charlotte Franchise to Belk after Belk and Carr did all the work getting the city ready for a team again speaks volumes.

I'm sure that Stern will definitely call for an audit to see if Bellk can really afford the Hawks. He's said to be worth 300 million however, how much of that is not tied into other ventures. The Hawks are still in deficiet.

If Stern gets the audit done before Belkin can find new investors, expect to see the Hawks go back to the NBA and be placed on the market for the highest bidder.

[Packfill]

Quote:

---

I think you GROSSLY underestimate how complicated this is. For starters, you're crazy if you think the owners would sell to a new group after all this. Why would you give a team up, when you currently have a 50/50 chance if getting it? That makes no sense.

Also if it was that easy to sell the hawks, why is it that the first guy who tried to buy us didn't have enough cash, the second group was a disfunctional bunch. Billionaires aren't lined up to buy us.

Additionally, if it was so easy to just get one group to sell to another at "fair market price", the spirit would have gotten the team from Belkin a long, long time ago, when he agreed to sell to them.

Also, we don't know how legal it is for him to do all this threatening, and forcing a team to sell. We do know that if he waits patiently, the judge will hand it to him and put the ball in his court, which is what he's probably waiting on. At that point he can legally recommend that the owners don't approve Belkin. In round 1, he waited for the judge to call upon him, he spoke up, and got Belkin to agree to sell eventually. He knows the law and knows when he has to wait.

Just because he's extremely powerful within his league doesn't put him above the law

---

I think you are GROSSLY underestimating the underlying business issues here. The Spirit Group had the team on their doorstep but they screwed up and now Belkin has a legitimate chance of gaining control of the franchise. But for the prodigious blunders by the Spirit Group this issue is over and Belkin has already been bought out.

Anyone with half a brain that is associated with the NBA, including Stern, realize that neither ownership group is in the best interest of the league due to obvious reasons. For that reason alone, there will be plenty of closed door arm twisting sessions to force these guys out.

[Lascar78]

Quote:

---

The legal system has no real power over the NBA. Just like congress had none over MLB. IF Sten wants to, he can call for an end to this matter because the NBA is a private corporation. NO Law of the Land will tell Stern how to run this corporation UNLESS there's Discrimination going on.

All Stern has to do is prove that Belkin has been bad for business and swish, Belkin will be back in Boston with all the money that he has put in in the first place.

---

I think this is totally wrong. The reason this is wrong is that all of these lawsuits are about the interpretation of a contract of selling a franchise from one group of people to another. That is not an NBA matter, it is a legal one. It's not telling Stern how to run his league. There was a contract in place that said the Spirit gets to buy Belkin out, but if they screw up he gets to buy them out. The rules governing this multi-million dollar contract are legal ones.

The only way in which the NBA is involved is that they have to approve whoever wins. There are rules in how proceedings take place. In order for Stern to have any impact before the judge wants to ask him, he would have to be called in as a witness by the spirit to give his opinion, and even that wouldn't be until the trial / appeals. It's not like they're even in court right now are they? I don't know where it is that you want Stern to appear and say these things. Again, Stern is a lawyer, he understands that the law stands above all else, and that you have to wait your turn, you don't want to piss a judge off by acting like he should obey you.

Having said that, I would not be surprised if he's working behind the scenes, telling Belkin he won't get a team for instance. We just don't know these kind of things.

[Lascar78]

I'm not disagreeing that Stern might prefer for both groups to just sell to a new group. What I'm saying is that there's no way they will sell when it's a lifelong dream, and that it's gotten so personal at this point.

[Packfill]

Quote:

---

I'm not disagreeing that Stern might prefer for both groups to just sell to a new group. What I'm saying is that there's no way they will sell when it's a lifelong dream, and that it's gotten so personal at this point.

---

That is where I think we disagree. As business men, they have reputations to maintain. Getting their buts kicked publicly is not good for business. They could save face by selling for a slight profit over what they bought the franchise for.

[Diesel]

Quote:

---

The reason this is wrong is that all of these lawsuits are about the interpretation of a contract of selling a franchise from one group of people to another. That is not an NBA matter, it is a legal one.

---

The interpretation of the contract is a legal matter.. sure. But the NBA holds all rights period. The NBA is not public. IF it were, then i'm sure we all would have investments in it. The NBA is a private entity.

Listen to how Stern Talks:

Quote:

---

NBA Commissioner David Stern said Monday that he is committed to keeping the Trail Blazers in Portland but asserted the team's financial position is "untenable."

Stern told The Oregonian that Blazers owner Paul Allen may or may not be part of the team's future. "All options are on the table," he said.

"I can say my goal on behalf of the league would be to keep the team in Portland, playing in the Rose Garden, with economic prospects that make some financial sense," Stern said.

---

He basically is saying with our without Paul Allen, the team is staying in PTL. How can he say that if he didn't have the power to say that?

In short, because the NBA is a private entity, their rules and regulations govern themselves unless there's some type of discrimination, you can't force Stern to take an owner and you can't force him to keep one.

If that was the case, MJ and David McDavid would have great cases against the NBA in a court of law. But they don't!

[Lascar78]

Totally different situation. Also, all Stern said there is that he wants the team in portland and that they need better finances. That's totally different from intervening in the middle of a lawsuit.

The NBA does not hold all rights. Their rights are within legal rights. Stern can't tell Belkin that he has to accept to sell his share for $1 mill because what matters here is that there are contracts between the owners, and contracts between owners and the NBA. What is legal depends on what both sets of contracts say. Stern is far from having full power here.

[Lascar78]

You know what I was thinking? Being a hawks fan might not be the easiest fandom in the world, or the most rewarding, but we sure do learn a lot! Over the years we've become experts on the draft lottery process, various drafting strategies, financial obligations in purchasing a team, the legal system and the balance of power between the law and the NBA, the validity of the traditional 5 man model on the court...

Most fans only learn about the newest star on their team...

[Duff_Man]

Quote:

---

You know what I was thinking? Being a hawks fan might not be the easiest fandom in the world, or the most rewarding, but we sure do learn a lot! Over the years we've become experts on the draft lottery process, various drafting strategies, financial obligations in purchasing a team, the legal system and the balance of power between the law and the NBA, the validity of the traditional 5 man model on the court...

Most fans only learn about the newest star on their team...

---

Kinda like what I used to say about my old Ford Explorer: "That thing was always in the shop, but I sure did learn a LOT about car mechanics from that thing."

My god, never buy a used Ford. Ever.

[Diesel]

Moreover,

When it comes to approval of Belkin...

This is where I feel that Stern will let the whole world know who's really in charge.

Stern is the ultimate Mob boss.

[Diesel]

NBA commissioner David Stern submitted an affidavit yesterday that approved the removal of Boston-based businessman Steven Belkin as NBA governor of the Atlanta Hawks. The affidavit was filed in response to a request by the ownership group Atlanta Spirit after Massachusetts Superior Court Judge Allan van Gestel granted Belkin a preliminary injunction and the right to remain as governor Tuesday. At that time, van Gestel concluded that approval by the commissioner was a precondition of any removal.

Since the Hawks' owners in opposition to Belkin now have prior approval from Stern, they will attempt to install Atlanta-based owner Michael Gearon Jr. as NBA governor. In the affidavit, Stern also approved Gearon as the replacement governor. The defendants in the case filed a motion yesterday to dissolve the preliminary injunction. Briefs will be submitted this morning. The owners in opposition to Belkin want the matter to proceed as expeditiously as possible, hoping van Gestel will reverse his decision this afternoon. The Hawks' Board of Managers has scheduled a teleconference for later this afternoon, which could represent the first opportunity to replace Belkin with Gearon.

''I'm very heartened by the commissioner's action strongly supporting our position to remove Steve Belkin as governor and approve Michael Gearon as our new governor," said Washington-based Hawks owner Bruce Levenson. ''It's in the judge's hands now. Despite Steve Belkin's opposition, every owner and our entire basketball staff supports GM Billy Knight in his efforts to put together an exciting young team that will capture the hearts of our fans. Joe Johnson is the next important piece of that plan."

n part, the Stern affidavit read: ''My conclusion is that . . . if the Governor knows or reasonably should know that he is acting contrary to the wishes of a majority of the Board of Managers, and he nevertheless proceeds to take an action in connection with a material matter that legally binds the team, such as consummating a player trade or preventing the consummation of a player trade, the requirements for removal have been met.

''On August 1, 2005, Mr. Belkin acted to block the trade of Joe Johnson by directing the NBA [through a letter sent by outside counsel] not to proceed with a trade call between the Hawks and the Phoenix Suns that, if held, would have consummated the trade for Mr. Johnson previously negotiated by the Hawks' General Manager and approved by the Hawks' Board of Managers. Mr. Belkin's action, which . . . was binding on the team, barred the Hawks and the Suns from completing the trade."

From the text of the Stern affidavit, it was clear the commissioner wanted to preserve the authority of general managers or those invested with the power to pursue and arrange trades (Danny Ainge is called the Celtics' executive director of basketball operations). While the Hawks' situation is unique, Stern apparently believed the league could not afford to allow the legal system to set a precedent where an NBA governor had the right to block a deal desired by the majority of co-owners and team's basketball staff. The commissioner thought both agreeing to or blocking a trade constituted a legally binding action.

In the wake of the Stern affidavit, Levenson reiterated his belief that the only tenable resolution to the whole situation would be a divorce where Belkin is bought out or vice versa. Belkin and his representation declined to comment last night.

[Diesel]

Now, how much do you think Stern will allow the "legal system" to assert control over his league?

[AHF]

Quote:

---

Now, how much do you think Stern will allow the "legal system" to assert control over his league?

---

In that case, the issue was whether blocking a trade was a legally binding action. Stern offered non-binding guidance from the position of the NBA that executing a deal or blocking a deal were both "actions" that legally bound a franchise. It was appropriate for him to step in because the issue under the contract was one of basketball management.

I just don't think the issue being litigated on appeal is comparable or that the NBA would step in to say who has the right to select the assessors under the contract or when the time period ran for buying out Belkin (and whether there was legal justification for faililng to meet that deadline), etc.

[Lascar78]

I agree.

Aren't you a lawyer, or in some related field? I forget

[DrReality]

From the little I've read and also what I heard on the radio this week; Kincaid talked about the judge wanted both parties to work things out instead of making a ruling. I wonder if the judge KNOWS where this thing is headed, ie a decision by Stern and the owners and thus does not want to get in too deep with the legal wranglings. Meaning that at the first appropriate opportunity he is going to punt this thing to Stern and be done with it.

[DJlaysitup]

Yeah Las...I think you and AHF are looking at this from the most realistic points of view. Stern can fine an owner for conduct (or statements) within the framework of league rules (and I'm sure the NBA has other ways to get involved too - like ownership approval) - but it comes down to contract/property rights law.

The likely outcome I would see is that Belkin wins a drawn out legal battle - then Stern and the other owners disapprove him as a full 100% owner - then Belkin takes the league to court - and finally (in about 2010) Belkin is forced to sell the Hawks at a huge profit.

[AHF]

Quote:

---

I agree.

Aren't you a lawyer, or in some related field? I forget

---

Yes. I represent companies, primarily in the Southeast, in employment matters. If you know an employer who needs representation (advise on policies, threatened lawsuit, etc.) let me know!

[AHF]

Quote:

---

From the little I've read and also what I heard on the radio this week; Kincaid talked about the judge wanted both parties to work things out instead of making a ruling. I wonder if the judge KNOWS where this thing is headed, ie a decision by Stern and the owners and thus does not want to get in too deep with the legal wranglings.

---

That is a common approach by judges to have the parties try to negotiate the language for something instead of the Court. It helps prevent later challenges to the order.