Sterling suing NBA for $1 Billion

[JEDIYoda]

Jut wow -- NO he cannot move his team!! The move needs to be approved by a huge %% of NBA team owners. Just because it is his team -- does not mean he do as he wants with it!!

 

[TerryMathews]

The franchise as is, is close to worthless without the existing players that are under contract.

Chicken/Egg syndrome.

Thank you for seeing logic.

 

[MixMasterTang]

The franchise as is, is close to worthless without the existing players that are under contract.

Chicken/Egg syndrome.

If the New York Yankess got rid of all of their players, do you think they would be close to worthless at that point? That name alone is worth many many millions (if not a billion). If the 10 best players for the Clippers jumped ship and started playing in a European Basketball League that was not associated with the NBA, do you think the price of the team they joined would increase to 2 billion dollars?

 

[MixMasterTang]

Thank you for seeing logic.

So when the NFL accepted the Houston Texas as a team in 2002, before they had ANY players at all, you would have valued the Texans as completely worthless?

 

[TerryMathews]

So when the NFL accepted the Houston Texas as a team in 2002, before they had ANY players at all, you would have valued the Texans as completely worthless?

I never said they were worthless. They are however a portion of the total team value.

The other side is arguing that the contracts are worthless.

 

[TerryMathews]

If the 10 best players for the Clippers jumped ship and started playing in a European Basketball League that was not associated with the NBA, do you think the price of the team they joined would increase to 2 billion dollars?

The question is, would the Clippers still be worth the same in that situation. I think the obvious answer is no.

A star player puts butts in seats. That is literally cash flow. Ergo the contracts have value and some contracts are worth more than others.

 

[smackababy]

So when the NFL accepted the Houston Texas as a team in 2002, before they had ANY players at all, you would have valued the Texans as completely worthless?

Bad example. Houston was an expansion team, so it was never not an organization outside of the NFL. If it was, the value would be far less than once it was an NFL team. A "professional" sports team that is not part of an organization, with no players, stadium, broadcast rights, etc is worth about $0.

 

[Perknose]

The franchise as is, is close to worthless without the existing players that are under contract.

Chicken/Egg syndrome.

No, it is most assuredly not close to worthless. Why do you think Ballmer is willing to pay 2 Billion when most had the FRANCHISE valued at between 600 million and 1 Billion? It certainly was NOT because he valued the player higher.

In fact, the current players are at most a side issue! Ballmer is paying TWO BILLION for the long-term value of the FRANCHISE itself.

To add insult to your injury, even though you and others seem to think so, there is no way in the world Sterling could separate his players from any sale of the franchise. Wake up and smell reality here, please!

 

[TerryMathews]

To add insult to your injury, even though you and others seem to think so, there is no way in the world Sterling could separate his players from any sale of the franchise. Wake up and smell reality here, please!

Sure he could. He could trade them to any other eligible team.

 

[Capt Caveman]

Reports: Donald Sterling Drops Lawsuit Against NBA

Donald Sterling won't pursue lawsuit

Wait? I thought he was going to take this to the Supreme Court? :biggrin: So, many tards in this forum.

 

[IAteYourMother]

Sure he could. He could trade them to any other eligible team.

And then the NBA could veto it

 

[Perknose]

Sure he could. He could trade them to any other eligible team.

Not without league consent he couldn't. And they would ONLY agree to a trade that gave him equal value players in return. You do understand this, no?

 

[Perknose]

Reports: Donald Sterling Drops Lawsuit Against NBA

Donald Sterling won't pursue lawsuit

Wait? I thought he was going to take this to the Supreme Court? :biggrin: So, many tards in this forum.

Persistent tards at that. It's like arguing in P&N.

 

[tynopik]

An HOA is a far more limited contract, but demonstrates the same principle. Are you catching on yet?

yes, just because someone has authority over someone (HOA over homeowner, NBA over Sterling, city over residents), doesn't mean they own them

If you make invalid employment contracts, the government will disallow them. That doesn't mean your workers are employed by the government.

 

[TerryMathews]

Not without league consent he couldn't. And they would ONLY agree to a trade that gave him equal value players in return. You do understand this, no?

What about cash consideration?

Glad to see you're doubling down on stupid.

 

[Perknose]

What about cash consideration?

Glad to see you're doubling down on stupid.

You are truly revealing your fundamental ignorance. The NBA has squashed EVERY SINGLE TRADE where cash considerations made the talent swap unequal.

You didn't KNOW that? FFS, do some research before you open your yap so confidently again, you're embarrassing yourself.

Educate yourself.

But minutes after a deal was agreed to in principle, a source confirmed a Yahoo! Sports report that the NBA called off the trade. Owners, who spent the last five months fighting for competitive balance during the lockout, pushed back against the league-owned Hornets for trading a star point guard on the verge of free agency to a big-market team.

Yahoo! Sports obtained a letter that Dan Gilbert sent to commissioner David Stern and deputy commissioner Adam Silver, in which the Cavaliers' owners called the proposed deal a "travesty" and felt "this should go to a vote of the 29 owners of the Hornets."

"I just don't see how we can allow this trade to happen," he wrote. "I know the vast majority of owners feel the same way that I do. When will we just change the name of 25 of the 30 teams to the Washington Generals?"

Despite Gilbert's letter, the NBA denied that the owners nixed the deal.

"The league office declined to make the trade for basketball reasons," NBA spokesman Tim Frank said.

The decision came immediately after a deal to ratify a new collective bargaining agreement for the next decade was finally reached. Ostensibly, one of the aims of the agreement was to bring parity to the 30 teams in the NBA, while still facilitating player movement.

 

[TerryMathews]

You are truly revealing your fundamental ignorance. The NBA has squashed EVERY SINGLE TRADE where cash considerations made the talent swap unequal.

You didn't KNOW that? FFS, do some research before you open your yap so confidently again, you're embarrassing yourself.

Educate yourself.

I just can't wrap my head around this fantasy you have, that the Clippers with no players under contract is worth the exact same amount as the team as currently staffed.

 

[Perknose]

I just can't wrap my head around this fantasy you have, that the Clippers with no players under contract is worth the exact same amount as the team as currently staffed.

It's good to admit your intellectual shortcomings.