Donald Sterling - LA Clippers

[Roughneck93]

Lifetime ban from the NBA.

[Roughneck93]

:2thumbsup

http://probasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/04/29/clippers-owner-donald-sterling-suspended-for-life-fined-2-5-million/

[PhiI C]

Big lawsuit coming. :(

[PhiI C]

BE POLITICALLY CORRECT!!!

:flaming:

[cougartino]

BE POLITICALLY CORRECT!!!

:flaming:

Or act like a human being should.

[BwdLion73]

Lifetime ban from the NBA.

Thats not very long for him.

[Roughneck93]

Thats not very long for him.

Lol, true.

[Cam]

...and his ex girlfriend will be hosting Saturday Night Live soon and land a role in the upcoming movie, "White Men Can't Jump Part II"......:crazy1:

[bobcat1]

Lifetime ban from the NBA. Perfect but still not enough.


BE POLITICALLY CORRECT!!!

:flaming:Yes but....


Or act like a human being should. Exactly!

[Saggy Aggie]

I definitely don't agree with what He said, but I think this is a violation of freedom of speech.... Especially in his own home.

I see a HUGE lawsuit coming.

Also, please tell me you guys saw his ad that he took out for himself in the LA Times....

[Saggy Aggie]

This brings me back to Riley cooper..... His 3 game suspension pales in comparison to the punishment handed down to sterling...

[YTBulldogs]

Maybe Magic and Sterling's piece on the side, set him up? Why else record this garbage in his own home? Magic wants to buy the team, and what better way to do it, by getting this bonehead captured on recorder making racist remarks. Best part of this story, is the LA branch of the NAACP forgiving him, before he even said he is sorry and appreciated his $upport over the years. And, knowing his past history towards blacks, was prepared to give him a life time achievement award in May. If your a rich white guy to them, it's ok to be a raci$t.:tisk:

[Saggy Aggie]

I definitely believe he was set up, but that doesn't negate the fact that he still said it.

However, as I said before, you can say whatever you want, especially in your house. That's the beauty of freedom of speech....

[caleb_mccaig]

I definitely believe he was set up, but that doesn't negate the fact that he still said it.

However, as I said before, you can say whatever you want, especially in your house. That's the beauty of freedom of speech....

Agreed, this sets up a big freedom of speech slippery slope for the future. I wonder what happens if an owner in the future says something about not bringing gay or chinese people to the games? Will they be punished likewise? I'm worried they won't be. I really hope this didn't go down because the NBA is 87% African-American.

I also find it strange the NBA finds use in a recording that would be thrown out in any other court in the U.S.

Regardless, the guy needed to to leave, he was a scumbag of the worst type. No room for racism in this world anymore. I think a better punishment would have been to let him rot away with no sponsors, no good players and a empty arena for several years though.

[waterboy]

The thought police is out there. It downright communism when you can't even speak with impunity in the privacy of your own home. Our First Amendment rights are under attack, specifically FREE SPEECH, and this ILLEGAL recording, as bad as it was, was brought into the public without mutual consent. What precedent is this setting? Yes, what he said was WRONG, but there's so much more at stake here, folks. Basically, it's the communist media that is telling everyone in America that you can't say what's on your mind, even in private. They're basically telling who we can, and who we can't like. Political correctness is metastisizing into something that is in direct conflict with our right to FREEDOM OF SPEECH.

[BB BULLS]

i just would like to know what would have happened if he had said something bad about white people? i think he got what was coming to him, but that is his company that he owns they cant make him sell it.

[Saggy Aggie]

They told him they'd disband the team if he didn't sell....

Glad I'm not the only one who thinks this is a major free speech violation.

I think mr sterling will have the last laugh when it comes to this lawsuit.... I can't see any way he won't win it.

[waterboy]

The NBA has absolutely no right to "make" him sell the team according to the bylaws of team ownership. They can, however, see to it that he is ineffective as an owner. He "should" be able to win a lawsuit against the NBA if they choose to pursue this severe action. If Sterling does "have" to sell due to NBA actions against him, and doesn't get the full market value of the team because of it, he should be able to recover the difference from the NBA. At least that's the way I see it.

[waterboy]

i just would like to know what would have happened if he had said something bad about white people? i think he got what was coming to him, but that is his company that he owns they cant make him sell it.

Are you implying that there's a double-standard in racism?

[BB BULLS]

Are you implying that there's a double-standard in racism?

sometimes! he should just sell go on get out of the picture, he will have plenty of money. then everyone will be happy

[waterboy]

sometimes! he should just sell go on get out of the picture, he will have plenty of money. then everyone will be happy

I agree with both parts, by the way.

[caleb_mccaig]

I'm just still trying to figure out how the hell Ron Artest and Jermaine O'Neal got like a year suspension for going into the stands and attacking fans and this guy just had a private convo and was racist but truly caused zero criminal acts and gets a lifetime ban.

[rb585]

I definitely don't agree with what He said, but I think this is a violation of freedom of speech.... Especially in his own home.


Then you obviously don't have a clue what freedom of speech actually is.

[BB BULLS]

its because he is a rich man and someone wants what he has. if you or i would have done something like this no one would have ever heard about it.

[rb585]

The thought police is out there. It downright communism when you can't even speak with impunity in the privacy of your own home. Our First Amendment rights are under attack, specifically FREE SPEECH, and this ILLEGAL recording, as bad as it was, was brought into the public without mutual consent. What precedent is this setting? Yes, what he said was WRONG, but there's so much more at stake here, folks. Basically, it's the communist media that is telling everyone in America that you can't say what's on your mind, even in private. They're basically telling who we can, and who we can't like. Political correctness is metastisizing into something that is in direct conflict with our right to FREEDOM OF SPEECH.

What specifically does the First Amendment say?

[Saggy Aggie]

Then you obviously don't have a clue what freedom of speech actually is.

Please enlighten me

[rb585]

Please enlighten me

Freedom of speech in this county comes from the First Amendment.

[Saggy Aggie]

Freedom of speech in this county comes from the First Amendment.

That's not what I asked.....

[rb585]

OK then, what are you asking?

[waterboy]

What specifically does the First Amendment say?

Really?

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

So, what you're saying is the laws of the U.S. Constitution don't apply here?

[Macarthur]

This is not a freedom of speech issue. You are still free to say whatever you want. The government is not after him. Free to say whatever you want.

HOWEVER, you have to understand that there are consequences for things. He is free to say what he wants. The NBA as a private organization is free to deal with him as they see fit, within reason. Relate this to you - If you get on facebook or twitter and say a bunch of outlandish things, does your company have a right to fire your ass? Of course they do. Freedom of speech does not absolve you of consequences.

I think the NBA made the right decision. The issue I have with all this is that this guy has said way worse things in the past and some under oath. He's a scumbag and has been for several decades. I think there's a ton of self-righteousness here that is laughable. Where was this indignation years ago during his trial?

[caleb_mccaig]

This is not a freedome of speech issue. You are still free to say whatever you want. The government is not after him. Free to say whatever you want.

HOWEVER, you have to understand that there are consequences for things. He is free to say what he wants. The NBA as a private organization is free to deal with him as they see fit, within reason.

I think the NBA made the right decision. The issue I have with all this is that this guy has said way worse things in the past and some under oath. He's a scumbag and has been for several decades. I think there's a ton of self-righteousness here that is laughable. Where was this indignation years ago during his trial?

The NBA is a private corporation or business or whatever he is. The league is 87% black. If one of the black employees said something like that regarding white people in my company (which is a majority white) then he would be fired. He can say whatever he wants, but the company has the right to give whatever consequence as well.

[waterboy]

Even if the law was broken to obtain the recording? Yes, Sterling is a "scumbag", but there's no law against that. He bought the Clipper franchise with his own money, thereby Sterling is the owner of the private franchise, NOT the NBA. The bylaws in the NBA agreement for ownership does not give them the right to force him to sell. I think he should in light of the illegal recording being made public, but he doesn't "have" to. Get ready for the NBA to fork out some money, making up the difference, to get him out if he has to sell below the established market value. He will most definitely be out. That's a sure thing.

[caleb_mccaig]

Even if the law was broken to obtain the recording? Yes, Sterling is a "scumbag", but there's no law against that. He bought the Clipper franchise with his own money, thereby Sterling is the owner of the private franchise, NOT the NBA. The bylaws in the NBA agreement for ownership does not give them the right to force him to sell. I think he should in light of the illegal recording being made public, but he doesn't "have" to. Get ready for the NBA to fork out some money, making up the difference, to get him out if he has to sell below the established market value. He will most definitely be out. That's a sure thing.

No one in the public knows what the NBA by-laws say. Their by-laws are EXTREMELY private and are not public. They're a private corporation so they don't have to disclose that information. It obviously is in the by-laws if the NBA can do a force sale with 75% of the owner vote.

Can you buy stock in the Clippers, or any other NBA team? No, therefore part of a private corporation.

If he sells it won't be below the market value. I think the last time I saw the Clippers were estimated to be worth about $512 million and people are saying if they are sold then it won't be for any less than $1 billion.

[Saggy Aggie]

OK then, what are you asking?
You said I don't have any clue what freedom of speech is.... I'd like you to explain....

[Saggy Aggie]

I'd be interested for someone to compare this to the Riley cooper situation....

[waterboy]

No one in the public knows what the NBA by-laws say. Their by-laws are EXTREMELY private and are not public. They're a private corporation so they don't have to disclose that information. It obviously is in the by-laws if the NBA can do a force sale with 75% of the owner vote.

Can you buy stock in the Clippers, or any other NBA team? No, therefore part of a private corporation.

If he sells it won't be below the market value. I think the last time I saw the Clippers were estimated to be worth about $512 million and people are saying if they are sold then it won't be for any less than $1 billion.

Okay. Yes, the by-laws of ownership of an NBA franchise does have an ethics clause in it. That we do know. The NBA can do what it wants pretty much, but they will pay the difference in actual selling price and market value, if there is any. This taped conversation was ILLEGAL by California law. That's the scary part. In a court of law, the recording could not be used as evidence, therefore, if he chooses to sue he can, and most likely win. Here's a write up on the key issues, with insights to the by-laws, and is worth reading:

http://hangtime.blogs.nba.com/2014/04/29/heavy-fine-may-be-most-nba-can-do/

Here's something I found interesting. The commissioner fined Sterling $2.5 million, but read this key statement:

"This is the key phrase: the Commissioner can fine anyone up to $1 million, and suspend — either for a definite or indefinite period — anyone who makes statements deemed to be “prejudicial or detrimental to the Association,” and/or detrimental to the best interests of basketball."

I don't think the NBA can legally fine him that amount. If Sterling were to go to court with the NBA, the evidence (the recording) wouldn't hold up in court because it was obtained illegally.

[rb585]

Really?

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

So, what you're saying is the laws of the U.S. Constitution don't apply here?

You bolded the wrong things.

[caleb_mccaig]

Okay. Yes, the by-laws of ownership of an NBA franchise does have an ethics clause in it. That we do know. The NBA can do what it wants pretty much, but they will pay the difference in actual selling price and market value, if there is any. This taped conversation was ILLEGAL by California law. That's the scary part. In a court of law, the recording could not be used as evidence, therefore, if he chooses to sue he can, and most likely win. Here's a write up on the key issues, with insights to the by-laws, and is worth reading:

http://hangtime.blogs.nba.com/2014/04/29/heavy-fine-may-be-most-nba-can-do/

Here's something I found interesting. The commissioner fined Sterling $2.5 million, but read this key statement:

"This is the key phrase: the Commissioner can fine anyone up to $1 million, and suspend — either for a definite or indefinite period — anyone who makes statements deemed to be “prejudicial or detrimental to the Association,” and/or detrimental to the best interests of basketball."

I don't think the NBA can legally fine him that amount. If Sterling were to go to court with the NBA, the evidence (the recording) wouldn't hold up in court because it was obtained illegally.

According to constitution the NBA made public after dropping the hammer; it says in article 24 the "best interests of the Association" clause that Silver is given the power to levy any punishment he sees fit when a violation is not specifically covered elsewhere. It also sets the maximum amount which was Sterling's fine.

The punishment you're reading is only for players. The one above is relatively new.

There's a lot of confusion, I think there's no way in hell he loses in court, but I think he should just sell the team and get it over with. He isn't wanted.

[rb585]

You said I don't have any clue what freedom of speech is.... I'd like you to explain....

The First Amendment defines what freedom of speech means in this country. You should read it.

[rb585]

I don't think the NBA can legally fine him that amount. If Sterling were to go to court with the NBA, the evidence (the recording) wouldn't hold up in court because it was obtained illegally.

The NBA doesn't grant Donald Sterling due process; it's a private club with its own bylaws. If they have the evidence, they can use it against him, especially because they didn't illegally obtain it, they just downloaded it from Deadspin.

If the State of California were charging Donald Sterling with a crime, then the recording wouldn't hold up in court.

[waterboy]

You bolded the wrong things.

So private corporations don't have to follow the Constitution? I get it. That's setting a dangerous precedent, in my opinion. That recording was ILLEGAL by California state law, so it would be inadmissable in a court of law. What's next? It's a well-known fact that the government is already eavesdropping on its citizens. Conversations are no longer private. What if a person was recorded saying they want to harm the president, and that conversation was made public illegally? Do you think the government would have the right to come into your house and take your guns, and seize any other evidence they want? Just a hypothetical question. Sterling was tried and convicted by the media, and the NBA without due process.

[rb585]

So private corporations don't have to follow the Constitution? I get it.

No you don't. The Constitution says CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW... That means that the police can't come throw you in jail for what you say.

It means you can say what you want (short of yelling "FIRE!" in a crowded movie theater, etc.) without being arrested or charged with a crime.

It doesn't mean that everyone has to be OK with what you say. It doesn't mean that your business can't fire you if they don't like what you say. It doesn't mean the organization that you belong to can't kick you out if they don't like what you say. If what you say costs your employer or your organization money, you should expect that there will be repercussions coming from your employer or your organization.

And that's exactly what has happened here.



What's next? It's a well-known fact that the government is already eavesdropping on its citizens. Conversations are no longer private. What if a person was recorded saying they want to harm the president, and that conversation was made public illegally? Do you think the government would have the right to come into your house and take your guns, and seize any other evidence they want? Just a hypothetical question. Sterling was tried and convicted by the media, and the NBA without due process.

These are two totally different things. Sterling in not entitled to due process from the courts -- he is governed by the bylaws of the NBA. They don't have to follow the Constitution. Free speech is not a right if you're an NBA owner. Seriously, have you not heard of Mark Cuban? He has been fined *TWENTY* times by the NBA (http://www.eskimo.com/~pbender/mavs/mavs-news/cuban_fines.txt) for saying things that David Stern didn't like.

[Enigma]

No you don't. The Constitution says CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW... That means that the police can't come throw you in jail for what you say.

It means you can say what you want (short of yelling "FIRE!" in a crowded movie theater, etc.) without being arrested or charged with a crime.

It doesn't mean that everyone has to be OK with what you say. It doesn't mean that your business can't fire you if they don't like what you say. It doesn't mean the organization that you belong to can't kick you out if they don't like what you say. If what you say costs your employer or your organization money, you should expect that there will be repercussions coming from your employer or your organization.

And that's exactly what has happened here.




These are two totally different things. Sterling in not entitled to due process from the courts -- he is governed by the bylaws of the NBA. They don't have to follow the Constitution. Free speech is not a right if you're an NBA owner. Seriously, have you not heard of Mark Cuban? He has been fined *TWENTY* times by the NBA (http://www.eskimo.com/~pbender/mavs/mavs-news/cuban_fines.txt) for saying things that David Stern didn't like.

Private corporations do have to follow the laws of the US inclusive of the Constitution. The first amendment in this instance allows Sterling to say what he wants.... which he did. The actions taken by the league have nothing to do with taking away his right to say what he wants. The question to be answered is whether what the league is doing is within their power as stated in the bylaws or other agreements between the owners. We shall see.

[cougartino]

I love free speech. But with freedom comes responsibility. The government can't take away our right to free speech. But try calling your boss an ***hole and expect to keep your job based on free speech. Let me know how that works out. And since we are on free speech, be truthful, how many of you were appauled when it was testified to that Trayvon Martin said a "crazy *** C-word" is following me?

[rb585]

Private corporations do have to follow the laws of the US inclusive of the Constitution. The first amendment in this instance allows Sterling to say what he wants.... which he did. The actions taken by the league have nothing to do with taking away his right to say what he wants.

And that's my whole point -- This isn't a First Amendment case at all, because the First Amendment doesn't apply to anything/anyone but the government:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

[Saggy Aggie]

The First Amendment defines what freedom of speech means in this country. You should read it.

I am fully aware of what it says. Please explain how this isn't a violation of freedom of speech

[Saggy Aggie]

He has the right to say what he wants.

Read what mark Cuban said. You can't force someone to sell their assets because of what they say in their own home.

The fine, the force of sale, defamation, etc.... I think he's going to MAKE money on this deal to be honest, especially considering I believe he was set up

[Tejastrue]

I agree Mac... should have thwarted this a long time ago...

http://www.boston.com/sports/blogs/obnoxiousbostonfan/2014/04/doc_rivers_controls_donald_sterling_ultimate_fate. html

[rb585]

I am fully aware of what it says. Please explain how this isn't a violation of freedom of speech

No, you're obviously not aware what it says.

[rb585]

I agree Mac... should have thwarted this a long time ago...

http://www.boston.com/sports/blogs/obnoxiousbostonfan/2014/04/doc_rivers_controls_donald_sterling_ultimate_fate. html

Agree completely with this. Sterling should have been gone long ago because his ACTIONS showed him to be a racist. It's idiotic that a recording of a private conversation seems to matter more than his actions.

[rb585]

He has the right to say what he wants.

Read what mark Cuban said. You can't force someone to sell their assets because of what they say in their own home.

The fine, the force of sale, defamation, etc.... I think he's going to MAKE money on this deal to be honest, especially considering I believe he was set up

Do you not read any of the rest of the thread? Mark Cuban is not claiming freedom of speech, nor is he claiming that Sterling can say what he wants. Cuban has paid a total of 20 fines to the NBA for things he has said as an owner.

[Saggy Aggie]

No, you're obviously not aware what it says.

Again, please explain.

I'm not saying this has anything to do with the govt.

Fines are great. I'm not saying he shouldn't be fined. I understand he has to follow league rules....

But I don't think they can force him to sell his assets over comments he said.... Especially when it's a set up.... That is the big deal here.... Not the chump change fine....

[Saggy Aggie]

Or force him to have no involvement with his own team. You're telling me he can't go in a stadium he owns?

[rb585]

Again, please explain.

I'm not saying this has anything to do with the govt.

Fines are great. I'm not saying he shouldn't be fined. I understand he has to follow league rules....

But I don't think they can force him to sell his assets over comments he said.... Especially when it's a set up.... That is the big deal here.... Not the chump change fine....

If you're claiming it's a freedom of speech violation, you are saying that it's a gov't issue, because freedom of speech in this country is Congress shall make no law...

If you're saying you're OK with them fining him for what he said, then you're not arguing that he can say what he wants, like you did earlier.

You don't seem to know what you're arguing.

[Cam]

What's going on over here on this thread?....What happened?......what's a Sterling?..A bird?..what did the bird do?....Someone please fill me in.....doesn't CNN and FOX ever talk about the important stuff anymore?...All they talk about now is lost planes, Russians, and Ukranians!......Oh wait a minute!!....does this have anything to do with that basketball team, an old wart-faced man, and some young exotic chick that looks like a duck???......never mind then...carry on men of men!

....this is all Greendawgs fault!...

[rb585]

Or force him to have no involvement with his own team. You're telling me he can't go in a stadium he owns?

He doesn't own the Staples Center.

Again, you have no clue what you're arguing.

[Saggy Aggie]

If you're claiming it's a freedom of speech violation, you are saying that it's a gov't issue, because freedom of speech in this country is Congress shall make no law...

If you're saying you're OK with them fining him for what he said, then you're not arguing that he can say what he wants, like you did earlier.

You don't seem to know what you're arguing.

No all I'm saying is I think the guy has the right to say what he wants without anyone forcing him to sell his assets.

And sorry, he owns a team that plays in the staples center....

[rb585]

No all I'm saying is I think the guy has the right to say what he wants without anyone forcing him to sell his assets.

And sorry, he owns a team that plays in the staples center....

Why do you think that?

[Macarthur]

No all I'm saying is I think the guy has the right to say what he wants without anyone forcing him to sell his assets.

And sorry, he owns a team that plays in the staples center....

It's not an asset in the sense you're using the term. It's not the same as a piece of property or a car. He's a part of a syndicate and he can not do anything he wants with zero repercussions.

[Macarthur]

I agree Mac... should have thwarted this a long time ago...

http://www.boston.com/sports/blogs/obnoxiousbostonfan/2014/04/doc_rivers_controls_donald_sterling_ultimate_fate. html

Kareem is spot on.

[Saggy Aggie]

Why do you think that?

Because I don't think it's legal? Never heard of anything like that happening?

I don't know the ins and the outs of the legality of it, but isn't this exactly what Cuban was saying? Very slippery slope as he said

[caleb_mccaig]

Just heard on the Fan that he is going to sue the NBA to keep the team.

[Macarthur]

Should be interesting.

[waterboy]

^ Yes, it should be interesting, and I think Sterling has a case. Correct me if I'm wrong, but can't a civil court strike illegally obtained evidence?

[PhiI C]

The NBA is a private corporation or business or whatever he is. The league is 87% black. If one of the black employees said something like that regarding white people in my company (which is a majority white) then he would be fired. He can say whatever he wants, but the company has the right to give whatever consequence as well.

That's what the NFL thought until they dealt with Al Davis.

[caleb_mccaig]

If I had to guess what's going to happen, I'd say he still has the lifetime ban and keeps the team. But at that point no black player will play for the Clippers and the NBA will end up voiding all of the current Clippers contracts.

Voiding the contracts has already been spoken about, I personally think it would be terrible for the league because players would start making bull crap reasons after that to get out of contracts.

Even if he loses in court He'll probably die before a verdict ever comes through.

[rb585]

Because I don't think it's legal? Never heard of anything like that happening?

I don't know the ins and the outs of the legality of it, but isn't this exactly what Cuban was saying? Very slippery slope as he said

So let's say that there was this restaurant franchise called TexasHSFootball Burgers.

And you bought a franchise and I bought a franchise, and other people did too.

And the franchise agreement specified that all franchises could keep 60% of their revenues, and the other 40% would be returned to the main office of TexasHSFootball Burgers, which would then redistribute most of that equally to all of the franchises.

And then let's say that someone released a tape of me saying that I hate blacks, browns, yellows, Jews, etc. And everyone boycotted my restaurant, so that I had hardly any revenue to contribute to this revenue sharing fund amongst all the franchises. And the only thing that was keeping me in business was the revenue sharing I received from the other franchises.

And then the word of my bigotry got out past the local level, so that not only was my franchise being boycotted, but all of the other TexasHSFootball Burgers franchises were being boycotted as well, including yours.




You're telling me that you, as a business owner, would be defending this guy's "freedom of speech?"

[rb585]

^ Yes, it should be interesting, and I think Sterling has a case. Correct me if I'm wrong, but can't a civil court strike illegally obtained evidence?

Hell, I think he has a case, too.

But if he pursues that case and wins, not only is he going to throw away tens of millions of dollars on attorney fees, he's also going to be rewarded with a franchise that's worth a fraction of what it was worth before this incident, because players, fans, and sponsors aren't going to support him. (Several sponsors have already bailed on him.) He's going to have a bad team playing in a half-empty arena with few sponsors.

His best financial decision right now is to have the NBA get an independent appraiser to value the team, and to let them sell it at that price. That price will surely be higher than what it's worth if he's the owner.

[rb585]

Sterling lavished gifts on Stiviano over their four-year relationship, including a 2013 Range Rover, a 2012 Ferrari and two Bentleys. He paid her rent. He bought her jewelry. And, on March 7 of this year, Sterling's wife, Shelly Sterling, sued her to get it all back.

Stiviano lawyered up. Her attorneys filed a response to the civil suit, asking that the case be dismissed on April 21. Instead, Shelly Sterling's attorneys requested that Stiviano turn over all tapes and recordings made of herself and Sterling. The law compelled her to do so.

Four days later, the tapes surfaced publicly on TMZ.On Monday of this week, Stiviano met with NBA investigator Anders and verified that she and Sterling were indeed the ones on the tape, which was recorded in September. She told them that Sterling knew he was being recorded and that they often taped conversations because Sterling, who sources say has been battling cancer in recent years, forgets things, and explained that part of her job was to help coach him on his image. On one of the tapes, a third person is heard in the background. The NBA also interviewed that third person before Silver made his ruling Tuesday, a fact that could be important later if the legality of the tapes is questioned.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/10869537/los-angeles-clippers-owner-donald-sterling-troubled-reign-approaches-inglorious-end

[Roughneck93]

Sterling's negotiating the sale of the Clippers?

http://m.espn.go.com/nba/story?storyId=10973679

[PhiI C]

He shouldn't have said what he did but it is strange that none of the players mentioned that he paid them millions making them millionaires.

[carter08]

He shouldn't have said what he did but it is strange that none of the players mentioned that he paid them millions making them millionaires.

He paid them because they helped him make money, not because he likes black people.

[caleb_mccaig]

Love how Ray Rice is on video knocking his wife the hell out and then dragging her into an elevator and he isn't going to jail, isn't going to be suspended or anything, but Sterling says something in the privacy of his own home and gets kicked out of a league for forever.

Crazy times we live in boys. Crazy times.

[msu97]

Hell, I think he has a case, too.

But if he pursues that case and wins, not only is he going to throw away tens of millions of dollars on attorney fees, he's also going to be rewarded with a franchise that's worth a fraction of what it was worth before this incident, because players, fans, and sponsors aren't going to support him. (Several sponsors have already bailed on him.) He's going to have a bad team playing in a half-empty arena with few sponsors.

His best financial decision right now is to have the NBA get an independent appraiser to value the team, and to let them sell it at that price. That price will surely be higher than what it's worth if he's the owner.

ummm... this guy owns the Clippers... until about 3 years ago this was their existence... he is the longest tenured owner in the NBA... i think Sterling should sue and expose the NBA for the money grabbing league that it is...
when he had far worse things to say and do, nobody cared... why? because they are the Clippers... he was the only guy who would own them... now that they are valuable... the league wants him out...
like Kareem said...

[PhiI C]

He paid them because they helped him make money, not because he likes black people.


Would that we all could have bosses that didn't like us and made us millionaires.

[Roughneck93]

$2 billion to buy the Clippers?

http://probasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/05/29/report-microsofts-steve-ballmer-reaches-deal-to-buy-clippers-for-2-billion/

[Saggy Aggie]

$2 billion to buy the Clippers?

http://probasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/05/29/report-microsofts-steve-ballmer-reaches-deal-to-buy-clippers-for-2-billion/

He paid 12.5 million for them. Pretty good investment.....

[Roughneck93]

He paid 12.5 million for them. Pretty good investment.....

Yeah, not too shabby.

[Tejastrue]

Right back at you NBA...

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/lawyer--donald-sterling-to-sue-nba-for--1-billion-212907563.html