Deal announced - latest rumors, etc.
- Thread starter Mojo
- Start date
- Status
You're missing the point. They can deny the current deal, for any number of reasons, and tell the Maloof family to look for other owners. It doesn't have to be for the same exact reason. In the case cited above, you're right. They cited financial issues. But they could cite any number of reasons for denying this Seattle group, most notably "best interests of the league".
The point is, the NBA can and have forced teams to look elsewhere to sell their franchise. In this case, if there is a local buyer offering the seller the exact same deal, could it not be argued that it is in the best interest of the league to keep the Kings in Sacramento? Allowing the Kings to move, despite all the factors we are well aware of -- coming up with public $$ for an Arena, consistent support of the team, etc. -- could cause damage to the league and it's future going forward. They have the right to make unilateral decisions based upon the good of the league.
The point is, the NBA can and have forced teams to look elsewhere to sell their franchise. In this case, if there is a local buyer offering the seller the exact same deal, could it not be argued that it is in the best interest of the league to keep the Kings in Sacramento? Allowing the Kings to move, despite all the factors we are well aware of -- coming up with public $$ for an Arena, consistent support of the team, etc. -- could cause damage to the league and it's future going forward. They have the right to make unilateral decisions based upon the good of the league.
You're referring to a different team and different situation. A group from New Orleans attempted to purchase and move the Minnesota Timberwolves to New Orleans in 1994. You're referring to Larry Ellison attempting to purchase the New Orleans Hornets.
Regardless, there is an underlying point in that situation too. The NBA rejected a deep pocketed owner from buying and moving one of their franchises to a larger market.They should so the exact same thing in this case, especially if there is a willing local ownership group on board.
Regardless, there is an underlying point in that situation too. The NBA rejected a deep pocketed owner from buying and moving one of their franchises to a larger market.They should so the exact same thing in this case, especially if there is a willing local ownership group on board.
As Brick mentioned above, the Kings are a franchise, and the NBA, like any other franchiser is able to dictate who can and can't buy a franchise. I believe somebody elsewhere came up with the scenario as follows: Imagine a known foreign druglord billionaire executed a purchase agreement to buy an NBA franchise. Do you honestly think the NBA has no protection and no ability to block the sale to such an undesirable owner? Of course they do.
It may well be true that they can't force the Maloofs to sell, though I'd expect that one could rather say that they have not seen fit to execute their power to force the Maloofs to sell. (Again, imagine that the Maloofs were accused and convicted of being druglords. Do you think the NBA at that point couldn't seize the franchise?) The NBA almost certainly has the power to unilaterally seize the franchise, but use of such power must be extremely judicious. Maloofery just doesn't cut it. So will the NBA use whatever power they have in them to force them to sell, assuming they reject the Hansen deal? No. But the NBA won't have to, as the Maloof financials are clearly bad enough that they have to sell, and they will quickly turn to a buyer that the NBA will approve (read: a local buyer) in no time.
It may well be true that they can't force the Maloofs to sell, though I'd expect that one could rather say that they have not seen fit to execute their power to force the Maloofs to sell. (Again, imagine that the Maloofs were accused and convicted of being druglords. Do you think the NBA at that point couldn't seize the franchise?) The NBA almost certainly has the power to unilaterally seize the franchise, but use of such power must be extremely judicious. Maloofery just doesn't cut it. So will the NBA use whatever power they have in them to force them to sell, assuming they reject the Hansen deal? No. But the NBA won't have to, as the Maloof financials are clearly bad enough that they have to sell, and they will quickly turn to a buyer that the NBA will approve (read: a local buyer) in no time.
- Status