Who's Getting the Clippers?

Corsi · Apr 30, 2014

Malcolm in the Middle

https://twitter.com/frankiemuniz/statuses/461214012236001280

RG33 · Apr 30, 2014

Between the prospect of a prolonged legal battle, and the massive tax implications for Sterling and Family if they are forced to sell, I don't see how the answer is anything other than "Mrs. Sterling & Family". Sterling bought the team for $12.5 million in 1981 per SI, so that would be a huge capital gains tax (Federal and State) if he was forced to sell. It is added incentive for him to sue through the process. If they ultimately let his family run the team, and then inherit upon his death, the family's cost basis would "step-up" to the current value on date of inheritance, and then they could sell the team and deal with a minimal tax issue (they'd still have estate tax issues of course). Because of the massive cap gains issues/legal issues, I would think the NBA would let the wife take the team, son-in-law run the team, and let it play out. That's how this story goes away somewhat, as opposed to all of the legal battles playing out on Sportscenter for the next 10 years.

Doug Beerabelli · Apr 30, 2014

I was going with the Estate of Donald Sterling on pretty much the same basis.

soxfan121 · Apr 30, 2014

RGREELEY33 said:
Between the prospect of a prolonged legal battle, and the massive tax implications for Sterling and Family if they are forced to sell, I don't see how the answer is anything other than "Mrs. Sterling & Family". Sterling bought the team for $12.5 million in 1981 per SI, so that would be a huge capital gains tax (Federal and State) if he was forced to sell. It is added incentive for him to sue through the process. If they ultimately let his family run the team, and then inherit upon his death, the family's cost basis would "step-up" to the current value on date of inheritance, and then they could sell the team and deal with a minimal tax issue (they'd still have estate tax issues of course). Because of the massive cap gains issues/legal issues, I would think the NBA would let the wife take the team, son-in-law run the team, and let it play out. That's how this story goes away somewhat, as opposed to all of the legal battles playing out on Sportscenter for the next 10 years.

I think this happens but on a much shorter time frame than you are assuming. I think the NBA has a major problem with the NBAPA if the sale doesn't happen quickly. The threat to walk out on playoff games is obviously bigger than a general player boycott in the preseason or early regular season but I don't doubt that Chris Paul & Roger Mason Jr. are going to push REALLY hard to get Sterling (all Sterlings) away from the Clippers ASAP. FTR, I'd feel differently if the current President of the NBAPA wasn't a Clipper. But Paul has a ton of leverage here and every reason in the world to use it.

Like I said in the other thread, I'll bet that Silver allows a paper transfer to save Sterling some of the tax burden as a carrot - and I have no idea if Sterling takes that (generous) offer. Because if he digs in and won't sell and an arbitrator isn't lightning fast with a ruling, the NBAPA becomes a huge complicating factor for the league generally and the Clippers specifically. Certainly no one is waiving a trade restriction to go to LAC this offseason if Sterling isn't gone. No free agent is signing there. Rivers is probably gone in a cloud of dust. Paul, Griffin, Jordan and the rest of the players probably don't report because "we refuse checks signed by a racist". This flares back up in the national conversation six months from now and Silver looks ineffective or powerless.

Silver's press conference yesterday bought the NBA time - till the end of the playoffs. Then this is back on from the NBAPA perspective and then Silver is caught in between the proverbial rock (Sterling litigating) and a hard place (NBA players refusing to play preseason games until Sterling is gone).

Koufax · Apr 30, 2014

It's time for Donald Sterling to take the hemlock. Take one for the team!

Tony C · Apr 30, 2014

Hell, in a sense he already has -- he's turned the Clippers into a hot property, per this thread and this article: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/01/sports/basketball/suddenly-everyone-it-seems-wants-to-buy-the-clippers.html?hp

If they actually manage to get this team sold to a non-Sterling -- be it Geffen or Magic or Oprah or Soon-Shiong -- this team will be in an enviable position after having been in the dumps:

-great base of in-their-prime talent
-no albatross contracts
-a coach in Rivers perfectly suited to managing egos, even if he's not a great x and o guy
-a city that is probably the most desirable to live in for NBA players (or is that Miami? in any case, right up there)
-a huge media market, albeit shared with the way more established Lakers
-a huge national story that will obviously fade, but probably made them cool in some sense.
-a Lakers team that is not only down, but that seems to be on the negative side of all the factors listed above -- no prime talent, Kobe's huge contract, a lousy coach, a lame owner.
-a marketing team that was pretty brilliant in owning the Sterling banishment and turning it into a slogan to be chanted and sold.

The Clippers have a shot this year, but are probably one stud who would make Matt Barnes a bench player away from being a true championship team. With sexy new ownership, I'm guessing they'll be a prime destination for a player willing to take a discount this off-season and a real contender next year....unless Sterling manages to clog up the works, which I'm guessing he will do.

Still, that worm turned awfully quick.

RG33 · Apr 30, 2014

soxfan121 said:
I think this happens but on a much shorter time frame than you are assuming. I think the NBA has a major problem with the NBAPA if the sale doesn't happen quickly. The threat to walk out on playoff games is obviously bigger than a general player boycott in the preseason or early regular season but I don't doubt that Chris Paul & Roger Mason Jr. are going to push REALLY hard to get Sterling (all Sterlings) away from the Clippers ASAP. FTR, I'd feel differently if the current President of the NBAPA wasn't a Clipper. But Paul has a ton of leverage here and every reason in the world to use it.

Like I said in the other thread, I'll bet that Silver allows a paper transfer to save Sterling some of the tax burden as a carrot - and I have no idea if Sterling takes that (generous) offer. Because if he digs in and won't sell and an arbitrator isn't lightning fast with a ruling, the NBAPA becomes a huge complicating factor for the league generally and the Clippers specifically. Certainly no one is waiving a trade restriction to go to LAC this offseason if Sterling isn't gone. No free agent is signing there. Rivers is probably gone in a cloud of dust. Paul, Griffin, Jordan and the rest of the players probably don't report because "we refuse checks signed by a racist". This flares back up in the national conversation six months from now and Silver looks ineffective or powerless.

Silver's press conference yesterday bought the NBA time - till the end of the playoffs. Then this is back on from the NBAPA perspective and then Silver is caught in between the proverbial rock (Sterling litigating) and a hard place (NBA players refusing to play preseason games until Sterling is gone).

Yes, but with his wife and son-in-law taking the helm and the lifetime ban, Sterling is effectively gone. The players have already come out and show some support for Mrs. Sterling. Are you saying that you think the players will boycott if the NBA doesn't force all of the Sterlings out? I just don't see that happening, nor do I think the NBAPA cares about that. I would be surprised if they got support for boycotts and the like after the action that Silver took.

soxfan121 · Apr 30, 2014

Mrs. Sterling has no money to own an NBA team without Donald. And unless she filed for divorce before Silver's ruling, she ain't getting half of the sold asset in a proceeding starting after the NBA dropped the hammer.

Donald Sterling will be signing their paychecks. Oh, it may say "Joe Blow, treasurer" but I think Chris Paul is smart enough to know better.

soxhop411 · Apr 30, 2014

Randy Kerdoon ‏@KNXRandyKerdoon 43m
Fox News contributor Jim Gray says to @KNX1070 he spoke with Donald Sterling this morning. Sterling says team is NOT for sale @KNX1070

When asked earlier in the postgame news conference whether he thinks Shelly Sterling could own the team, Rivers said, "I don't know. I honestly don't know. It doesn't sound like it, to be honest, and I think she knows that. But she still wanted to be here. You know, I don't know if that's right or wrong (to allow her to come to the game) but I thought it was right."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nba/clippers/2014/04/30/los-angeles-owner-shelly-sterling-seattle-supersonics-steve-ballmer-magic-johnson/8501189/

soxhop411 · Apr 30, 2014

RGREELEY33 said:
Yes, but with his wife and son-in-law taking the helm and the lifetime ban, Sterling is effectively gone. The players have already come out and show some support for Mrs. Sterling. Are you saying that you think the players will boycott if the NBA doesn't force all of the Sterlings out? I just don't see that happening, nor do I think the NBAPA cares about that. I would be surprised if they got support for boycotts and the like after the action that Silver took.

NBAPA says yes

The players likely would protest if Shelly Sterling were allowed to own the team. To that end, National Basketball Players Association vice president Roger Mason told Yahoo Sports on Tuesday that it was not acceptable in the players' eyes to have Shelly Sterling or any member of the family own the team. But as so many Clippers said afterward, the immediate focus — now that Silver came down with the first hammer of his early tenure — is on the basketball task at hand.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nba/clippers/2014/04/30/los-angeles-owner-shelly-sterling-seattle-supersonics-steve-ballmer-magic-johnson/8501189/

jose melendez · Apr 30, 2014

This seems like it's going to get way messier before it resolves.

Even if the NBA can somehow force the sale of the team, if they're running the sale, wouldn't they have to take the highest bidder no questions asked?

luckiestman · Apr 30, 2014

Im wondering how the NBAPA is going to look using this "sins of the father tactic" if the boycott even though Sterling is banned

soxfan121 · Apr 30, 2014

luckiestman said:
Im wondering how the NBAPA is going to look using this "sins of the father tactic" if the boycott even though Sterling is banned

Like people who aren't fooled by changing the wallpaper and calling it "all new"?

Kliq · Apr 30, 2014

It's really too soon to tell anything. At this point, every rich guy (or women) is saying that they want a part of the Clippers. IF they sell, I think a lot of the names you see up there will drop off. I don't think Magic buys the team, he just seems like such a busy guy and already operating another entity might stretch him too far. P-Diddy, Floyd Mayweather, Matt Damon, Oprah and Geffen, De Le Hoya, everyone else seems like people just jumping on to the news story. Out of all of them, Geffen sounds the most serious, and they have the money personally, which probably makes it easier to organize.

Personally, I think someone like Ballmer is going to end up with the team. Ideally, they would want to keep the Clippers in LA and not in Seattle, but Ballmer is a guy that likes sports, recently retired from his job, and is richer than god. Those are the guys that typically end up as principal owners, not entertainers and retired players. The same can be said for Soon-Shiong.

Cellar-Door · Apr 30, 2014

Kliq said:
It's really too soon to tell anything. At this point, every rich guy (or women) is saying that they want a part of the Clippers. IF they sell, I think a lot of the names you see up there will drop off. I don't think Magic buys the team, he just seems like such a busy guy and already operating another entity might stretch him too far. P-Diddy, Floyd Mayweather, Matt Damon, Oprah and Geffen, De Le Hoya, everyone else seems like people just jumping on to the news story. Out of all of them, Geffen sounds the most serious, and they have the money personally, which probably makes it easier to organize.

Personally, I think someone like Ballmer is going to end up with the team. Ideally, they would want to keep the Clippers in LA and not in Seattle, but Ballmer is a guy that likes sports, recently retired from his job, and is richer than god. Those are the guys that typically end up as principal owners, not entertainers and retired players. The same can be said for Soon-Shiong.

Magic does basically nothing with the Dodgers except go the games, he owns a tiny fraction of the team, Guggenheim writes the checks and Kasten is the president. If they bought the Clippers they would bring in a guy with experience running a team and have him take the Kasten role.
Ellison/Geffen/Oprah is a legit contender. Oprah is the Magic of that team there to smile and do nothing. Ellison has tried to buy a bunch of NBA teams, but wanted to move them to San Jose which the league would never allow so if he agrees to keep them in LA that is a contender.
The Boxers don't have the money and would never pass the vetting.
Soon SHiong is legit and already has approval since he had to get it to buy his Lakers share. He'd probably need a partner to put up capital and run the team.
Ballmer is a great choice if the NBA would let the Clips move... but they won't.

MuzzyField · Apr 30, 2014

Mrs Sterling can't be broke. She needs to consult Eddie Murphy's former gal, Umfufu. I believe Mrs Sterling's current value is HALF, and when her dearest Donald dies, it will be considerably more than half.

This is going to get interesting. Adam Silver saved his playoffs, and bought some temporary peace. The real court games will begin when the lawyers lace em up for the summer.

wade boggs chicken dinner · Apr 30, 2014

McCann has a good rundown on some of the reasons this is going to get messy (and I keep thinking that it's going to be even messier than McCourt, because at least in that case, McCourt was clearly involved in financial impropriety. Link: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nba/news/20140429/donald-sterling-nba-adam-silver-clippers-lawsuit-lifetime-ban/

In addition to having little to lose in litigation - he delays the sale plus gets the benefit of a discovery fishing expedition - under some claims, like an antitrust claim - he could be entitled to legal fees, which would be a huge carrot. Plus the fact that any sale is going to cost him or his heirs upwards of 9 figures in capital gains taxes and potential estate taxes.

Another post about potential capital gains/estate taxes here: http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2014/04/29/donald_sterling_selling_clippers_he_could_lose_100_million.html.

Nick Kaufman · May 1, 2014

From what most people write, it seems it's going to be messy, but I really wish someone would take the team to Seattle. Before 2010, the Clippers were a eyesore for the NBA, no one cared for them. They have had a couple of good years thanks to Stern's machinations, but their owner managed to cast his ugly shadow in his final act.

If the Clippers move to Seattle, they will correct one of the biggest injustices a city have suffered, while transforming themselves from a blot of the league to a beloved historic team.

It's true that the LA market can sustain two teams, but still. Seattle Sonics man. Seattle Sonics.

Fred not Lynn · May 1, 2014

You don't spend what it's going to take to buy the Clippers and then move them to Seattle. One of the great values of the team is that they're in LA. Further, they are now the most talked about NBA team in LA. This ownership change will be part of them becoming not - second fiddle to the Lakers. Sure, the Lakers' poor performance is helping, too...but excitement over a new owner, especially if there's a celebrity element, is just going to build the brand.

Nick Kaufman · May 1, 2014

Nah, there are a couple of people who will spend what they have to and they will take them to Seattle. People were ready to spend a gazillion on Sacramento and Millwaukee to do that. The problem is that the NBA won't let them.

Tony C · May 2, 2014

Why would they move to Seattle? Makes zero business sense. If the Sonics move to OKC and if Milw refuses to move to Seattle, why on earth wld someone pay a billion + to move to a tiny market out of LA?

Nick Kaufman · May 2, 2014

For people like Hansen or Balmer who want to bring a team to Seattle, it's not about business sense. It's about having a team in Seattle.
Milwaukee, i.e. Herb Kohl didn't sell to those people, even if they made the better bid, precisely because they were going to move to Seattle. That was one of the terms he had set for the sale of the Bucks. Not move the team That would probably made business sense though.

However, moving the Clippers to Seattle doesn't make sense for the NBA and that's why they probably won't allow such a move.

Curtis Pride · May 2, 2014

There's a good chance that if the Clippers are sold, the new ownership can make them a bigger draw than the Lakers just by being better than Donald Sterling.

Tony C · May 2, 2014

Yep, that'd be remarkable.

And, Nick, I hear you on Ballmer, but as you say it doesn't make sense for the NBA. The Times has a piece up today that is pretty cut and dry. If it's correct then the sale will happen, it will happen quick, and the NBA will be in full control: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/02/sports/basketball/little-recourse-for-sterling.html?hpw&rref=sports

I didn't vote for the Magic group in the poll, but it would make a ton of sense for the NBA to favor a group of which he is the public spokesperson: L.A. ties, great businessman, minority, and as Curtis Pride says it'd go a fair ways to making the Clippers a threat to the Lakers dominating the L.A. market, which would be a boon for the NBA (and clearly something they want -- see Chris Paul).

HomeRunBaker · May 2, 2014

My thoughts and comments......

* A group that includes Ellison will end up with this team. The league and NBAPA will not allow this franchise to remain in the Sterling family.

* I am assuming the NBA by-laws were well thought out and written to prevent a situation like a Sterling holding the league hostage. Deal is closed within 1 year I say.

* Any who DIDN'T vote >$1b is severely misinformed as to the opportunities in LA and the NBA along with the demand for rebranding this franchise. The Milwaukee Bucks, the poster child for worst house on the best street, will be selling for $550m once the sale is approved. I've got $1.3b as the number and it wouldn't shock me if this ended up being a conservative number when all is said and done.

wade boggs chicken dinner · May 2, 2014

HomeRunBaker said:
My thoughts and comments......

* A group that includes Ellison will end up with this team. The league and NBAPA will not allow this franchise to remain in the Sterling family.

* I am assuming the NBA by-laws were well thought out and written to prevent a situation like a Sterling holding the league hostage. Deal is closed within 1 year I say.

* Any who DIDN'T vote >$1b is severely misinformed as to the opportunities in LA and the NBA along with the demand for rebranding this franchise. The Milwaukee Bucks, the poster child for worst house on the best street, will be selling for $550m once the sale is approved. I've got $1.3b as the number and it wouldn't shock me if this ended up being a conservative number when all is said and done.

On the Bylaws issue, it's not so clear the NBA has authority. Rather than go into it, I'll just point you here: http://msn.foxsports.com/college-football/outkick-the-coverage/nba-lacks-the-authority-to-force-donald-sterling-to-sell-the-clippers-050114.

On the timing issue, as it took MLB over a year to get McCourt to sell - and that was a pretty cut and dried case with financial malfeasance and a bankruptcy. It's going to take more than a year here. Sterling has literally nothing to lose and has shown a willingness to used scorched earth litigation tactics in the past. Also, if his wife files for divorce, that is going to complicate matters even more as she would argue that the NBA doesn't have the power to take away her ownership interests based on actions of another.

It took MLB three years to get Marge Schott to sell from the time she was banned from baseball for the second time. This is where the NBA is methinks.

HomeRunBaker · May 2, 2014

wade boggs chicken dinner said:
On the Bylaws issue, it's not so clear the NBA has authority. Rather than go into it, I'll just point you here: http://msn.foxsports.com/college-football/outkick-the-coverage/nba-lacks-the-authority-to-force-donald-sterling-to-sell-the-clippers-050114.

On the timing issue, as it took MLB over a year to get McCourt to sell - and that was a pretty cut and dried case with financial malfeasance and a bankruptcy. It's going to take more than a year here. Sterling has literally nothing to lose and has shown a willingness to used scorched earth litigation tactics in the past. Also, if his wife files for divorce, that is going to complicate matters even more as she would argue that the NBA doesn't have the power to take away her ownership interests based on actions of another.

It took MLB three years to get Marge Schott to sell from the time she was banned from baseball for the second time. This is where the NBA is methinks.

Sterling's divorce and impending potential death could certainly stretch this out. This I agree "could" occur. As for that piece, the author isolates the exact grounds Silver has to call for a vote, one that will surely be unanimous, based on a clear violation of the agreement......then closes by saying Silver doesn't have the power to do so.

Then I saw this was a Fox-anything piece which now all makes sense.

Cellar-Door · May 2, 2014

HomeRunBaker said:
Sterling's divorce and impending potential death could certainly stretch this out. This I agree "could" occur. As for that piece, the author isolates the exact grounds Silver has to call for a vote, one that will surely be unanimous, based on a clear violation of the agreement......then closes by saying Silver doesn't have the power to do so.

Then I saw this was a Fox-anything piece which now all makes sense.

He is arguing that the intent element in A will mean that once Silver calls the vote Sterling can challenge and win based on his lack of intent. It isn't a terrible argument, but I would guess that a judge would find that he intended to make the statements to other people knowing he was being recorded, and that is enough.

axx · May 2, 2014

If the owners are really afraid the NBAPA might strike over the Sterlings continuing to own the team, then they have bigger problems. That doesn't mean that the NBA wouldn't be better off if someone else owned the Clippers though.

HomeRunBaker · May 2, 2014

axx said:
If the owners are really afraid the NBAPA might strike over the Sterlings continuing to own the team, then they have bigger problems. That doesn't mean that the NBA wouldn't be better off if someone else owned the Clippers though.

I don't feel they have ever felt that threat having been confident Silver would satisfy their demands which correlated with what everyone wanted to see. Their concerns were Sterling damaging the NBA brand having had lost 15 corporate sponsors in the 4-5 days following the release of the recording. They also know if they come across as the good guys in fully supporting Silver it will be a huge positive PR move on their behalf that will more than offset the Sterling hiccup.

Year of Yaz · May 14, 2014

axx said:
If the owners are really afraid the NBAPA might strike over the Sterlings continuing to own the team, then they have bigger problems. That doesn't mean that the NBA wouldn't be better off if someone else owned the Clippers though.

No players are going to strike over this. For one thing, they will lose salary. What will possibly motivate Sterling to sell are lost endorsements and a decrease in attendance.

soxfan121 · May 14, 2014

Year of Yaz said:
No players are going to strike over this. For one thing, they will lose salary. What will possibly motivate Sterling to sell are lost endorsements and a decrease in attendance.

Not for preseason games they won't. And since they (generally) dislike preseason games anyway, a coordinated "we aren't playing tonight" boycott costs them nothing but costs the owners plenty.

And don't underestimate how LeBron thinks this is going to help define his legacy. If the players boycott, it will be because LeBron wants to boycott.

Your other points are good though.

Brickowski · May 14, 2014

IMHO the players might strike. Alternatively I could see LeBron, CP3 and a few other prominent players simply retiring, stating that they refuse to play in a league with a racist owner. Certainly in the case of LeBron, the salary he collects from the Heat is small potatoes compared to the sneaker money and his other endorsements. And if he did need a salary, LeBron might make a pretty good NFL receiver.

Year of Yaz · May 14, 2014

Another issue is the comment by Magic that the players would strike if any Sterling, meaning his future ex-wife, is still the owner. The proposed fine and banishment from the commissioner applied only to Donald. Taking the same stance with her, who probably isn't a racist, seems extreme.

soxfan121 · May 14, 2014

Year of Yaz said:
Another issue is the comment by Magic that the players would strike if any Sterling, meaning his future ex-wife, is still the owner. The proposed fine and banishment from the commissioner applied only to Donald. Taking the same stance with her, who probably isn't a racist, seems extreme.

Shelly Sterling's role in the housing discrimination claims settled is arguably more repugnant and disgusting than Donald's role.

YMMV, but I don't know that I'd attempt to make the bolded argument in a consequence-free debate class, let alone on this board where numerous people have posted extensive histories of Mrs. Sterling's past behavior (in the other thread, mostly).

Year of Yaz · May 14, 2014

soxfan121 said:
Shelly Sterling's role in the housing discrimination claims settled is arguably more repugnant and disgusting than Donald's role.

YMMV, but I don't know that I'd attempt to make the bolded argument in a consequence-free debate class, let alone on this board where numerous people have posted extensive histories of Mrs. Sterling's past behavior (in the other thread, mostly).

Yikes, you are right about her. I assumed that she didn't have much involvement in her husband's business.

soxhop411 · May 23, 2014

Yao Ming?

Marc Stein ‏@ESPNSteinLine 45s
Story posting now to ESPN: Former All-Stars Grant Hill and Yao Ming both assembling separate ownership groups to try to buy Clippers

Brickowski · May 23, 2014

LOL. if there's Russian money in the NBA, why not Chinese money?

ElUno20 · May 27, 2014

It may be childish but as a clipp fan, id would enjoy it if magics group got the team. It would pour some salt on the lakers fans wounds right now.

Fred not Lynn · May 27, 2014

Not so much would Magic being part of a Clippers ownership group pour salt on Lakers fan's wounds, as it would give them viable rationale to switch allegiances...Magic provides them that magic link that ties their fandom for the 80s era Lakers to the Clippers of today, and therefore makes a switch something other than outright bandwagon jumping.

Tony C · May 27, 2014

I think both are true....and agree with both -- some would hate it and some would switch, and love both.

And, in re pouring salt on wounds, it'd also pour salt on our boy Donald's wounds.....it's a win-win-win. Not to mention that I respect Magic and wouid hope he'd be more than just a face for an ownership group as he is with the Dodgers. I'd hope with the Clippers he has either a substantial stake or a prominent management role. Or both.

soxhop411 · May 27, 2014

Uh….. WOW

Robert Kovacik ‏@RobertNBCLA 1m
#BREAKING: #DonaldSterling lawyer tells @NBCNews #Clippers owner "...has received offers in excess of $2.5B" for the team.

Average Reds · May 27, 2014

In other news Stephen Drew still has a three-year $45 million contract offer on the table.

soxhop411 · May 28, 2014

Ramona Shelburne ‏@ramonashelburne 2m
Shelly Sterling's lawyer said today that she has a written agreement w/ Donald to sell the team. She's definitely pressing to sell by June 3

Ramona Shelburne ‏@ramonashelburne 1m
The first round of bids for the Clippers are due by Wednesday morning, sources said. Needless to say, this could happen quickly.

soxhop411 · May 28, 2014

BigSoxFan said:
Breaking news: Donald Sterling is going to fight this after all! Get yo popcorn ready.

Shelly Sterling says he told her to sell

ElUno20 · May 28, 2014

That's why this is so confusing. Shes working on selling the team but now this idiot is help bent on keeping it

HomeRunBaker · May 29, 2014

Steve Ballmer checking in with a $1.8m bid. Sounds about right.

Who's Getting the Clippers?

Who will end up with the Clippers?

Mrs. Sterling and family

Geffen/Oprah/Ellison

Pretty Boy Floyd/Oscar De La Hoya

Magic Johnson and Guggenheim Partners

Steve Ballmer

Patrick Soon-Shiong, AKA the richest guy in LA

Other (please state in post)

Yao Ming and Partners

Grant Hill and Partners

teaching korea american

isn't shy about blowing his wad early

Certain Class of Poster

Killer Threads

JAG

Well-Known Member

Moderator

Certain Class of Poster

JAG

news aggravator

news aggravator

Earl of Acie

Son of the Harpy

JAG

Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Member

protector of human kind from spoilers

Dick Button Jr.

protector of human kind from spoilers

teaching korea american

Moderator

protector of human kind from spoilers

Member

Moderator

bet squelcher

Member

bet squelcher

Member

Member

bet squelcher

Banned

JAG

Banned

Banned

JAG

Banned

news aggravator

Banned

teaching korea american

Member

Dick Button Jr.

Moderator

news aggravator

Member

news aggravator

news aggravator

Member

bet squelcher