For the Record: Authority of NBA Governor to Veto Trade Authorized by Board of Managers

[AHF]

I am flabbergasted. Here we are with pitiful depth...mostly due to draft picks we gave away to get JJ (when we really didn't have to) and Belkin was the ONE GUY who tried to keep those (or some) picks...and everybody hates him?? It's inflaggerablerational. Give the man the team....the others are worrying about their mortgages.

Had Belkin worked within the rules to convince the other owners that he was right or put the welfare of the franchise first, I would have no problem at all with him. It isn't the fact that he tried to keep the picks that makes people hate him. It is the fact that his actions have dragged this franchise through the mud and put it at a competitive disadvantage for years that have people resenting his actions.

Belkin had the right to disagree about the JJ trade. He didn't have the right to pull a hostile takeover (as ruled by the Court) and since that time his actions have included things like restraining the team from signing free agents, limiting the length of contracts, limiting team payroll, etc. During the buyout, Belkin tried to "game" the process by hiring his own handpicked appraiser and then objecting to the report within a minute of its release and before it could possibly be read which has resulted in years of litigation. During the litigation his actions have included rejecting a faster timetable on the appeal to lengthen the litigation and draw out the dispute over a longer period of time.

The ownership dispute is bad for this franchise and people see Belkin as the cause of it. I don't put all the blame on him because the other owners agreed to some stupid provisions in the buyout and therefore they bear some of the blame for this fiasco. However, Belkin is the primary mover behind the ownership dispute. He forced the split among the owners, he filed a lawsuit he lost against the ASG, he then started the buyout process, he gamed the process, he then filed the current suit that has plagued this team. He is entitled to do these things if he wants but a natural repercussion of those choices is to garner serious fan resentment. It isn't about whether we gave up too much for JJ because there are plenty of fans who resent Belkin's actions and agree with him that we gave up too much.

[exodus]

I said : "

TRUTH IS....Belkin came in as a "majority owner" - at least compared to the others (not a true majority owner...but he paid more than any of the others). He simply (as Governor) tried to block a bad trade.

Did you read this or just jump on the first few words...NO Belkin is not a true Majority Owner....if that were the case we would be much better off as a franchise. He just spent more money than any of the others.

I am flabbergasted. Here we are with pitiful depth...mostly due to draft picks we gave away to get JJ (when we really didn't have to) and Belkin was the ONE GUY who tried to keep those (or some) picks...and everybody hates him?? It's inflaggerablerational. Give the man the team....the others are worrying about their mortgages.

Jeez ex....I normally respect your opinion - but have you given up reading?

We have no depth because we traded away the 22nd and 15th picks? Did you suddenly forget what BK did with his lottery picks?

We have no depth because BK wasted his top 6 picks. One of them is in Greece and another one is a bench warmer on one of the worst teams in the league.

Free agent signings like Speedy and Blow Wright didn't help either.

Belkin was a minority owner, not a majority owner with quotation marks. he is not a "sort of" majority owner. There is no such thing. Either you have a majority or you don't. period.

the fact that you are trying to say that Belkin was kind of a majority owner underscores your lack of understanding about the situation. The fact that his 30% was more than any other individual owner is irrelevant.

Edited April 6, 2009 by exodus

[DJlaysitup]

You folks are sincerely insane.

No offense but you really are insane.

You don't have a decent argument to protect yourself. you are silly...and insane..

Edited April 8, 2009 by DJlaysitup

[DJlaysitup]

Had Belkin worked within the rules to convince the other owners that he was right or put the welfare of the franchise first, I would have no problem at all with him. It isn't the fact that he tried to keep the picks that makes people hate him. It is the fact that his actions have dragged this franchise through the mud and put it at a competitive disadvantage for years that have people resenting his actions.

Belkin had the right to disagree about the JJ trade. He didn't have the right to pull a hostile takeover (as ruled by the Court) and since that time his actions have included things like restraining the team from signing free agents, limiting the length of contracts, limiting team payroll, etc. During the buyout, Belkin tried to "game" the process by hiring his own handpicked appraiser and then objecting to the report within a minute of its release and before it could possibly be read which has resulted in years of litigation. During the litigation his actions have included rejecting a faster timetable on the appeal to lengthen the litigation and draw out the dispute over a longer period of time.

The ownership dispute is bad for this franchise and people see Belkin as the cause of it. I don't put all the blame on him because the other owners agreed to some stupid provisions in the buyout and therefore they bear some of the blame for this fiasco. However, Belkin is the primary mover behind the ownership dispute. He forced the split among the owners, he filed a lawsuit he lost against the ASG, he then started the buyout process, he gamed the process, he then filed the current suit that has plagued this team. He is entitled to do these things if he wants but a natural repercussion of those choices is to garner serious fan resentment. It isn't about whether we gave up too much for JJ because there are plenty of fans who resent Belkin's actions and agree with him that we gave up too much.

OK now we get down to WW3. Wer gave WAY to much....

Edited April 8, 2009 by DJlaysitup

[DJlaysitup]

the fact that you are trying to say that Belkin was kind of a majority owner underscores your lack of understanding about the situation. The fact that his 30% was more than any other individual owner is irrelevant.

No - it's not.

[DJlaysitup]

the fact that you are trying to say that Belkin was kind of a majority owner underscores your lack of understanding about the situation. The fact that his 30% was more than any other individual owner is irrelevant.

No - it's not.

[exodus]

No - it's not.

That shows your lack of understanding about the situation. Belkin is a minority owner. I have never seen you refer to him as a minority owner even though that is exactly what he is.

Speaking of insane that describes yourself if you think those mid first rounders the Hawks gave up in the JJ trade were worth going to court over. Did you forget how little BK did with his top 6 picks? What makes you think he would have done anything worthwhile with those picks?

Belkin did not have the votes to veto the trade. Perhaps more importantly he didn't contest the ruling removing him as Governor for attempting to block the trade. If he really believed that he had veto power and truly wanted to continue to be a Hawks owner, why didn't he contest the ruling removing him as Governor?

Even after the ruling he had the chance to stay as Governor but chose not to.

But there remains one way Belkin can stay on as governor. Since blocking the sign-and-trade deal of Joe Johnson from Phoenix constituted the ''removable action," Belkin has five business days to approve the deal and preserve his current status.

The fact that he chose not to contest the ruling and chose not to take action to preserve his status as Governor is just more evidence that he didn't want to be part of the ownership group in the first place. He has never shown any intention that he wanted to be a long term owner of the Hawks.

Edited April 8, 2009 by exodus

[AHF]

OK now we get down to WW3. Wer gave WAY to much....

I am not arguing whether we gave too much or not. For purposes of the issue of why Belkin takes flack, I'll concede that we gave too much. Giving too much in a trade, though, doesn't justify all the **** we've been through as a result of Belkin's actions since the trade.

Assuming the JJ trade was giving WAY too much, it (for example) wasn't giving as much as Babcock gave for Lorenzen Wright (2 unprotected first round picks) and certainly we got back a ton more. If there had been an ownership group in place when Babcock wanted to deal for Wright, I hope they would have voted the trade down. However, if the trade passed anyway 2-1, then I would be pissed if the losing minority owner decided to pull a coup and dragged the team through 5+ years of competitive disadvantage and embarassment in the process.

[DJlaysitup]

That shows your lack of understanding about the situation. Belkin is a minority owner. I have never seen you refer to him as a minority owner even though that is exactly what he is.

Oh horse patooty! I have often made it clear that Belkin is not a true Majority owner - only that he put in more money than the rest of the ASG individually. Really ex - you should get out of this fight. I have mastered you. AHF is my only true opponent

Edited April 9, 2009 by DJlaysitup

[DJlaysitup]

I am not arguing whether we gave too much or not. For purposes of the issue of why Belkin takes flack, I'll concede that we gave too much.

I agree....game over.

Edited April 9, 2009 by DJlaysitup

[DJlaysitup]

Belkin had the right to disagree about the JJ trade. He didn't have the right to pull a hostile takeover

What a bunch of hooey...there was no "hostile takeover"....you people are making things up. Belkin simply figured that the GM was getting caried away to get a Shooting Guard...paying way too much. Simple as that. :kickcan: :snowballfight:

[exodus]

Oh horse patooty! I have often made it clear that Belkin is not a true Majority owner - only that he put in more money than the rest of the ASG individually. Really ex - you should get out of this fight. I have mastered you. AHF is my only true opponent

He isn't any kind of majority owner, true or otherwise. He is a minority owner.

Denial is not a river in Egypt.

Edited April 9, 2009 by exodus

[exodus]

What a bunch of hooey...there was no "hostile takeover"....you people are making things up. Belkin simply figured that the GM was getting caried away to get a Shooting Guard...paying way too much. Simple as that. :kickcan: :snowballfight:

So all he had to do was vote against it and try to persuade the others to vote against it too.

Instead he violated the contract by attempting to block the trade. Then strangely enough he didn't contest the ruling that removed him as Governor. Why didn't he contest the ruling?

After it was ruled that he could be removed as Governor based on his actions it was clear that the JJ deal was going to go through in spite of him. However he still had the oppotunity to stay on as Governor if he signed off on the deal. He still chose not to. Why didn't he sign off on the deal so he could stay on as Governor when it was clear that the deal would go through anyway ?

Funny how you avoid the pertinent questions but instead resort to saying we are insane and our points are horse patooty. I guess that is what you have to do when have no argument.

Edited April 9, 2009 by exodus

[DJlaysitup]

After it was ruled that he could be removed as Governor based on his actions it was clear that the JJ deal was going to go through in spite of him. However he still had the oppotunity to stay on as Governor if he signed off on the deal. He still chose not to. Why didn't he sign off on the deal so he could stay on as Governor when it was clear that the deal would go through anyway ?

Funny how you avoid the pertinent questions but instead resort to saying we are insane and our points are horse patooty. I guess that is what you have to do when have no argument.

He chose not to sign off on the third JJ deal becuasue he thought it was getting out of hand.....a matter of principle.

..and I apoligize about any comment about anybody being insane....obviuosly tho...you are a tad mentally disshevled :laugh:

Edited April 11, 2009 by DJlaysitup

[exodus]

He chose not to sign off on the third JJ deal becuasue he thought it was getting out of hand.....a matter of principle.

Anyone who is willing to give up his ownership interests over a disagreement about a couple of draft picks obviously isn't serious about being a long term owner.

[DJlaysitup]

Anyone who is willing to give up his ownership interests over a disagreement about a couple of draft picks obviously isn't serious about being a long term owner.

OK here we go back to the "will Belkin move the team" stuff.......I call BS........Belkin can't make the Atlana Hawks the Boston Hawks. I doubt he want's to relocate.

[exodus]

OK here we go back to the "will Belkin move the team" stuff.......I call BS........Belkin can't make the Atlana Hawks the Boston Hawks. I doubt he want's to relocate.

WTF are you talking about? My post had nothing to do with relocating the Hawks. It has to do with the fact that he decided to give up his ownership interest in the Hawks over a disagreement over 2 draft picks.

[DJlaysitup]

It has to do with the fact that he decided to give up his ownership interest in the Hawks over a disagreement over 2 draft picks.

Well there you go

TWO FIRST ROUND DRAFT PICKS

...it was getting silly

[exodus]

Well there you go

TWO FIRST ROUND DRAFT PICKS

...it was getting silly

So are you trying to say it actually made sense to give up his ownership interest in the Hawks over two draft picks (which turned out to be non-lottery picks)?

:lol6:

[MemphisX]

So are you trying to say it actually made sense to give up his ownership interest in the Hawks over two draft picks (which turned out to be non-lottery picks)?

:lol6:

IMO it makes perfect sense. You are not looking at it from his perspective. If the ASG are going to blindly follow BK and he has no authority to stop them then either he has to get out or try to get the team. He also doesn't want to have to pay out his money for their mistakes especially for a noncompetitive team.