Philc1 wrote:Only difference between sarver and sterling is sterling had an audio tape of him saying stupid stuff that was getting played everywhere. If you want to go on a long nonsensical rant about how it’s ok for sarver to get a wrist slap while sterling had a lifetime automatic ban and was forced to sell the clippers fine but stop pretending like there’s a substantive reason for it other than a tape isn’t out there getting played on local news

Reading is fundamental. Another stretch moronic response.
Look it up.

1. Sterling was banned.
2. His wife ran the team.
3. Sterling was declared cognitively incompetent (Like some of your posts)
4. She sold the team.

NBA never forced the team to be sold. The way it was structured mrs. Sterling was able to obtain ownership thru the trust or other non taxable mechanism. When the trust sold it, the tax implications were realized then.

If your hell bent on proving me wrong look it up.
The tape demonstrated a clear egregious situation. That is true. Sarvers was not so clear.
I know my "Long nonsensical rant" is above your attention span and intellect. If so let the adults converse.
If all you got out of my post was "it was ok to get a wrist slap" you did not want to see this

I don’t condone any of the language sarver used or his mysogonistic actions./quote]

Perhaps I should have written in crayon a simple ending for you like "in the end this will likely play out to most satisfaction but I don't believe there is a legal path to force him to sell unless there was criminal activity". I stated I believe he will eventually will sell via pressure in some manner by his partners.

I know you want to grab a "gotcha" on me. Thats cool but present a fact. Grown ups do this and it adds to the quality of the discussion.

Nalod wrote:Did NBA get Clippers right? Remember how Silver “got it right”? Lets get it straight, Silver banned Sterling for life. Mrs. Sterling got Don declared incompetent and sold the team foe 2 billion. He did not force them to sell.
The idea to ban was nobody had to deal with Sterling or would see him at games.

Adam Silver works for the 30 team owners. In the end they got it right. But, owners don’t force others to sell.

Sarver owns about a 3rd of the team. As I said previously civil actions, push back from players, and other partners will chime in. What I did not say was Sponsers will also. If they start to pull out and not spend money supporting them by buying space/tickets/TV ads because the public won’t tolerate it then “The league will get it right”.
This is what happend with clippers. Money started pulling out.
The Clipper players banded together and played for themselves. Same with Doc Rivers. GUys like Sarver and Sterling were pieces of Shit but nobody had a problem with this until a story came out and the league took some action to ban him for one year and 10mil fine. So in a way the league did “get it right” by starting the ball rolling with Clippers and Sterling, and this should play out that the suns will some how convince Sarver to sell at a premium because he will financially damage the team and waiting will lower the price and cause further decline and perhaps they could sue him later for breach of fiduciary.
Players don’t deserve this nonsense but if they are truly repulsed they either have to sit out and defy their contract or demand to be traded. Not that Suns have to, but players will set the narrative of how sponsers will react.
I feel bad for Monty Williams in respects that he is in a bit of a hard place with a fresh contract.

I don’t condone any of the language sarver used or his mysogonistic actions. I don’t know the man. Sarver is banned for a year. I suspect in that time it will be made right. How? The court of public opinion. This where the money comes from. The fans and sponsers in effect “Own” the team. If they Vote with their money sponsers will pull out. Players will get push back from a small racist minority as they see it as “you get paid to play, not think”.

Why don’t owners make them sell? I think they never could come to an agreement to what conditions it would be. Is it Criminal charges? Then conviction? That could take years. The owner of ATL, Bruce Levinson had no reputation of anything close to Sarvers. He made one mistake and voluntarily sold his stake. That make him a good guy? Not sure. Its possible there was an agreement with the partners that if one damages the team perhaps that need to occur? I don’t know. Do the suns ownership smell blood and look to oust him not just for obvious reasons but for personal gain as well? They can buy more of the team and maybe under better terms if they can force it? Does Sarver counter with a lawsuit disputing that valuation? Logic says there should be a agreement in place among partners as to the formula.
PHX is a valuable franchise.

Hey Nalod, just wondering, are you a lawyer or something? This post definitely seems like a different style than your usual posts- I hope if I say it's more coherent you don't take any offense, lol. It definitely sounds like you have some expertise in this area. I think it's a real good point you pulled up about the League actually not forcing Sterling out- a well publicized nuance that seemingly has been forgotten in the current media.

I for one read the initial report as mostly Earl Watson just grinding an axe. I have seemingly antiquated feelings on the work place- that if you don't like your boss you should just quit. I think people often get compensated in other ways with a bad boss, either through better compensation or less oversight. I think rules for public and private sector are different. As an entrepreneur, I have always thought that I worked harder than my employees. Years ago I got sued by one because I paid him extra under the table to support his family. After I didn't renew his contract he sued me for back social Security. It really changed my perspective on the employee/ employer relationship, ie I gave up on trying to be good boss.

It seems like with what's been reported so far, the ten million fine sounds harsh, regardless of how much money the guy has. I question the motives of a lot of the people involved, though not CP and LeBron.

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/Baxter/status/1570574088808329216

Won't be surprised if every player/coach will also follow suit.

Nalod wrote:Paypal all in to be out.
My take is while the NBA has no clear path for owners to be forced to sell, natural forces will make it so as depicted.
Perhaps Adam Silver was willing to take the body punch for the owners and look bad. He works for them and can't throw them under the bus.
At the same time fan and player outcry will put push the conclusion as it should be. Fans, sponsors, and their money all should and will have a voice.
Its the way of nature. Once Sarver is made gone we'll go back and remember it as the NBA got it right.
If not players will publicly requests trades. Sponsors will pull out and perhaps it gets political. The city of phoenix paid $150 million of the $230 renovation to the arena. Public money going to benefit a "racist" or "misogynistic" individual or institution will not go well.

Again, my take was and remains the **** storm that is coming for the Suns will take care of Robert Server. I do believe that if they tried to force him out the litigation that would follow could be very ugly. Say for example Sterling was forced out, could he not demonstrate bias? What if he verified in court that Sarver is a piece a **** and league is not doing anything. Or another owner, say one close to Jeffry Epstein was not being forced out? You go tot court and can prove accuracy its to liable. Thats why owners are not so quick to force out another.
Sterling and Sarver seemingly have not done anything criminal. Sexual harassment and cruel/lude behavior are subject to civil penalties as Anuca Brown has shown us. Nobody went to jail. In fact, Isiah was not even fired for it! Yes, it was morally very wrong. But criminal? Nobody got arrested or sent to jail.
The owners need not do this. It will all take care of itself. In fact, one might even see more of Sarvers behavior become more public. Would benefit the owners themselves to lee

Grady, Im not an attorney. I don't play on on TV either. Im just an avid reader.

Perhaps my lack of focus on some topics is my speed typing and using a Bluetooth keyboard that does funny things and I don't proof read as I should.

This one cracked me up.

On the second post I realized the difference, no rhetorical questions.

https://www.theringer.com/nba/2022/9/16/23357070/robert-sarver-phoenix-suns-suspension-nba-adam-silver

Seriously, f both these guys. It's really hard for me to swallow the moral hypocrisy.

Sarver did acknowledge using the word once many years ago. "On one occasion a player used the N-word to describe the importance of having each others' back," Sarver said through his attorneys. "I responded by saying, 'I wouldn't say n---a, I would say that we're in the foxhole together.'

3/5

At least a half-dozen Suns staffers recounted to ESPN instances of Sarver hearing a story from a Black player and then using the same language when retelling it, down to the usage of the N-word.

4/5

The investigation also found Sarver to have made misogynistic and sexually inappropriate comments in the workplace. One example was when he wanted to unassign a pregnant employee from an event because it would take place shortly after she had given birth. His reasoning was that she would be “breastfeeding” and “babies need their mom, not their father.” Sarver eventually put her back on the event.

https://deadspin.com/nba-report-proves-that-robert-sarver-is-a-bad-guy-1849532227

So wanting to give a new mom extra time off is misogynistic?