[外電] Stern's affidavit regarding Hawks' o …

看板Hawks作者 (神遊物外)時間19年前 (2005/08/12 20:30), 編輯推噓34(340114)
留言148則, 9人參與, 最新討論串1/2 (看更多)
Stern's affidavit regarding Hawks' ownership situation Published on: 08/11/05 我, DAVID J. STERN 在此正式宣示: 我以 NBA 主席的身分,呈遞此份宣誓書給法院。在 8/9/2005 由 Boston 法院,依據 NBA 協議書第 5(d) 部分所提出的備忘錄與命令,禁止 Belkin 在 Atlanta Hawks 的 NBA Governor 職位被其他合夥人移除,理由為 NBA 主席必須優先認可之。基於以下理 由,我在此批准並以此方式授權 Hawks 移除 Belkin 的職位。 雖然我相信,法院對於協議書第 5(d) 部分,可以簡單解釋為提出撤換 Governor 的請 求必須先經過我的同意,也希望依此獲得本案的最終解決之道。但是我個人的見解,可 以透過第 5.1(k) 部分( HTPA Holding Company LLC Agreement ),來加以解釋。 我的結論是,在第 5.1(k) 部分提到,如果 Governor 知道他自己正在阻礙大多數經營 者的意志時,他仍利用其職位上的權力在法律上約束球隊運作 -- 例如完成某球員的交 易或阻止交易某位球員 -- 此時罷免他的要求應該被允許。 而關於是否要執行這項五年近 70M 的交易這個議題,與這項交易很有可能對一支球隊帶 來的長期影響 -- 不論成功或失敗 -- 毫無疑問都使其可以屬於第 5.1(k) 的範疇。 在 8/1/2005 , Belkin 利用其身為 NBA Governor 的權力阻礙 Joe Johnson 的交易。 他違反了總管與其餘大多數合夥人的意志,根據 5(d) ,他約束了球隊正常運作,讓 Suns 與 Hawks 無法完成交易。 當我們在解釋何謂「在法律上約束球隊」時,我不相信完成某項交易與阻止某項交易的 完成兩者間有任何有意義的區別。如果 Belkin 違反大多數經營者的意志去交易來 Joe Johnson 時,他絕對構成在法律上約束了這支球隊且依據 5.1(k) ,他必須面臨被罷免 的命運。如果Belkin 阻礙交易的理由是由於 NBA 經由 5(d) 所直接賦予的權力,這仍 然屬於法律上約束球隊的行為,因為這等於強迫 NBA 當局阻止交易。 當我做出這項結論時,我對於 Johnson 的交易是好是壞並沒有任何的意見。我也沒有暗 示 Belkin 做錯了什麼事情, 5.1(k) 關於移除其職位的標準並不是建立在 Governor 做出錯誤的行為上,而是建立在其是否有構成在法律上地約束球隊並違反大多數經營者 意志的行為上。 故依此標準,我認為 Belkin 阻擋交易 Joe Johnson 的行為以 5.1(k) 來看是在法律上 約束了球隊。所以客觀而言,他應該被其他經營者罷免。 我已經備要求批准 Michael Gearon Jr. 為 Governor 的繼任人選。 NBA 經過調查,認 為 Gearon 符合資格,故我批准之。而 Belkin 將依據 5.1(k) 被撤換。 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 我實在翻得很爛...僅附原文以供參考,請多指教。 I, DAVID J. STERN, being duly sworn, depose and say: I am the Commissioner of the National Basketball Association, and submit this Affidavit, pursuant to the Court's view, as set forth in its August 9, 2005 Memorandum and Order, that under paragraph 5(d) of the NBA Agreement and Undertaking, Mr. Belkin cannot properly be removed as NBA Governor of the Atlanta Hawks absent the prior approval of the NBA Commissioner. For the reason stated below I deem such approval appropriate and hereby grant it. While I believe that paragraph 5(d) can fairly be read as requiring nothing more than my prior approval of the proposed replacement Governor, in light of the Court's reading of that paragraph, and in the interest of assisting the Court in reaching an ultimate determination, I submit herewith my own views on whether the requirements for removal under paragraph 5.1(k) of the HTPA Holding Company LLC Agreement have been satisfied. My conclusion is that, under paragraph 5.1(k) if the Governor knows or reasonably should know that he is acting contrary to the wishes of a majority of the Board of Managers, and he nevertheless proceeds to take an action in connection with a material matter that legally binds the team — such as consummating a player trade or preventing the consummation of a player trade — the requirements for removal have been met. The decision whether or not to trade for a player who is to be paid nearly $70 million over 5 years and who may well have a long-standing impact on the success or failure of the team, is, without doubt, a material matter as that term is used in paragraph 5.1(k). On August 1, 2005, Mr. Belkin acted to block the trade of Joe Johnson by directing the NBA (through a letter sent by his outside counsel) not to proceed with a trade call between the Hawks and the Phoenix Suns that, if held, would have consummated the trade for Mr. Johnson previously negotiated by the Hawks? General Manager and approved by the Hawks? Board of Managers. Mr. Belkin's action — which, pursuant to paragraph 5(d) of the NBA Agreement and Undertaking, was binding on the team — barred the Hawks and the Suns from completing the trade. In interpreting the phrase "action to legally bind" the team, I do not believe there is a meaningful distinction between acting to consummate a trade or acting to prevent the consummation of a trade. There appears to be no dispute that if Mr. Belkin had proceeded to consummate the trade for Joe Johnson against the wishes of the majority of the Board of Managers, he would have acted to "legally bind" the team and faced removal under paragraph 5.1(k). Directing the NBA not to proceed with the trade call was also an "action" that, by reason of the authority conferred on Mr. Belkin by paragraph 5(d) of the NBA Agreement and Undertaking, was no less "legally binding" on the team, in that it compelled the NBA to bar the trade. In reaching this conclusion, I express no view at all as to whether the proposed trade for Mr. Johnson is wise, unwise, well-considered or ill-considered. I also do not mean to suggest that, in preventing the trade, Mr. Belkin has done anything wrong or has acted improperly in any way. The test for removal under paragraph 5.1(k) is not founded upon misconduct; it is based solely on the Governor taking action in connection with a material matter that "legally binds" the team but is at odds with the wishes of the majority of the Board of Managers. Given that standard, it is my view that by blocking the trade of Joe Johnson, Mr. Belkin has acted to legally bind the Hawks within the meaning of paragraph 5.1(k) of the LLC Agreement, and therefore is subject to removal as NBA Governor by the Board of Managers. With respect to my right under paragraph 5(d) of the NBA Undertaking to approve the proposed replacement Governor, I have been asked to approve Michael Gearon, Jr. to replace Steve Belkin as Governor of the Hawks. The NBA has this week conducted an investigation that has failed to reveal any event or circumstance that has occurred or become known that would bring into question Mr. Gearon's qualification to be a controlling owner of an NBA team, and accordingly I would approve Mr. Gearon as the replacement Governor of the Hawks, in the event it is determined that Mr. Belkin has been properly removed in accordance with paragraph 5.1(k) of the LLC Agreement. 資料來源 http://www.ajc.com/sports/content/sports/hawks/0805/12hawksside.html -- ※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 59.121.50.246 ※ 編輯: sssfrost 來自: 59.121.50.246 (08/12 20:50)

59.104.194.80 08/12, , 1F
推喔~~~終於結束了
59.104.194.80 08/12, 1F

61.229.84.189 08/12, , 2F
可以拍成連續劇了 那應該是要先簽後換了吧? 唉
61.229.84.189 08/12, 2F

61.227.204.124 08/12, , 3F
忽然覺得Belkin好可憐Q_Q
61.227.204.124 08/12, 3F

61.229.84.189 08/12, , 4F
還是不懂為何其他人執意先簽後換 這就是所謂的
61.229.84.189 08/12, 4F

61.229.84.189 08/12, , 5F
"為什麼弱隊會一直弱"? 老鷹又不是今年就要搶進
61.229.84.189 08/12, 5F

61.229.84.189 08/12, , 6F
季後賽 為什麼...這個交易真的是便宜了太陽...
61.229.84.189 08/12, 6F

59.121.50.183 08/12, , 7F
是,只是交易本身與經營者之間的問題還是分開來
59.121.50.183 08/12, 7F

59.121.50.183 08/12, , 8F
看比較好。希望 BK 是真的慧眼獨具囉。
59.121.50.183 08/12, 8F

210.85.32.77 08/12, , 9F
史螣又腦殘了
210.85.32.77 08/12, 9F

218.167.6.170 08/13, , 10F
如果不先簽後換,無法保證太陽不會跟進,然後結꜠
218.167.6.170 08/13, 10F

218.167.6.170 08/13, , 11F
局是老鷹得不到JJ,太陽薪資兩年後要付豪華稅
218.167.6.170 08/13, 11F

218.167.6.170 08/13, , 12F
先簽後換,老鷹一定能得到JJ,太陽也得到一些東꘠
218.167.6.170 08/13, 12F

218.167.6.170 08/13, , 13F
西,老是在說明年明年,就是搶不到人,弱隊才一ꨠ
218.167.6.170 08/13, 13F

218.167.6.170 08/13, , 14F
直弱,我不覺得老鷹有什麼錯,反正現在一堆人要븠
218.167.6.170 08/13, 14F

218.167.6.170 08/13, , 15F
養,那兩個選秀權也沒太大作用吧!老鷹方向已經
218.167.6.170 08/13, 15F

218.167.6.170 08/13, , 16F
很明確了!
218.167.6.170 08/13, 16F

61.229.84.189 08/13, , 17F
JJ是好球員 但問問太陽球迷:JJ值5年7000萬????
61.229.84.189 08/13, 17F

61.229.84.189 08/13, , 18F
再對老鷹球迷來說 JJ=5年7000萬+Diaw+2個第一輪
61.229.84.189 08/13, 18F

61.229.84.189 08/13, , 19F
當太陽球迷連7000萬都在猶豫要不要給時 老鷹付
61.229.84.189 08/13, 19F

61.229.84.189 08/13, , 20F
出的會不會太多了一點??只希望JJ能打出頂級身價
61.229.84.189 08/13, 20F

61.229.84.189 08/13, , 21F
選秀權永不嫌多的 送禮自用兩相宜 不信問灰狼XD
61.229.84.189 08/13, 21F

203.73.225.31 08/13, , 22F
既然事已落幕 就期待Gearon Jr.能好好領導眾人囉
203.73.225.31 08/13, 22F

203.204.142.186 08/13, , 23F
如果太陽沒有Marion,我們不會猶豫5年7000萬的
203.204.142.186 08/13, 23F

203.204.142.186 08/13, , 24F
Diaw大概在三年內都不會是有效戰力,Diaw加兩
203.204.142.186 08/13, 24F

203.204.142.186 08/13, , 25F
個樂透保護選秀權 <<<< JJ,根本不能比
203.204.142.186 08/13, 25F

203.204.142.186 08/13, , 26F
要不是實在沒有空間,不然誰想做這個爛交易?
203.204.142.186 08/13, 26F

61.227.204.184 08/13, , 27F
樓上的再靠腰啥 能給太陽作交易就很好了..
61.227.204.184 08/13, 27F

61.227.204.184 08/13, , 28F
Belkin本來要讓太陽血本無歸 可惜失敗了
61.227.204.184 08/13, 28F

61.227.204.184 08/13, , 29F
算太陽運氣好~.~
61.227.204.184 08/13, 29F

203.204.142.186 08/13, , 30F
樓上的教養真不錯,充份表現了您家的文化水準
203.204.142.186 08/13, 30F

59.121.43.252 08/13, , 31F
ㄟ...不要吵架啦,青菜蘿蔔,各有所好。
59.121.43.252 08/13, 31F

59.121.43.252 08/13, , 32F
另外請教一下,為何說 Stern 腦殘?
59.121.43.252 08/13, 32F

61.229.88.226 08/13, , 33F
randyliu兄 我同意若是沒有Marion太陽是可能會
61.229.88.226 08/13, 33F

61.229.88.226 08/13, , 34F
出這麼高的價 回到主題 事實上太陽match的機率
61.229.88.226 08/13, 34F

61.229.88.226 08/13, , 35F
實在很低(當然還是有 且若match老鷹還是無礙)
61.229.88.226 08/13, 35F

61.229.88.226 08/13, , 36F
JJ不能直接等於Diaw+2第一輪 這是不對等交易
61.229.88.226 08/13, 36F

61.229.88.226 08/13, , 37F
對老鷹來說: JJ=5年7000萬+Diaw+2個第一輪
61.229.88.226 08/13, 37F

61.229.88.226 08/13, , 38F
Diaw先不管 用2個第1輪換太陽那機率極低的match
61.229.88.226 08/13, 38F

61.229.88.226 08/13, , 39F
我認為老鷹高層實在是太仁慈太保守了...(換成
61.229.88.226 08/13, 39F
還有 69 則推文
218.161.93.193 08/14, , 109F
不會放Amare一樣 你說JJ這麼好 太陽就不會放了
218.161.93.193 08/14, 109F

218.161.93.193 08/14, , 110F
太陽跟黃蜂談交易與老鷹何干? 只要JJ簽下老鷹的
218.161.93.193 08/14, 110F

218.161.93.193 08/14, , 111F
offer 就是太陽跟老鷹的事 黃蜂插不上手 事實上
218.161.93.193 08/14, 111F

218.161.93.193 08/14, , 112F
黃蜂即使要搶人 開的價碼也不到7000萬 JJ才不理
218.161.93.193 08/14, 112F

218.161.93.193 08/14, , 113F
舉例 現在還會有人覺得K-Mart值9000萬+3個第1輪
218.161.93.193 08/14, 113F

218.161.93.193 08/14, , 114F
嗎? 金塊不就是賭"K-Mart有可能成為superstar"?
218.161.93.193 08/14, 114F

218.167.21.42 08/14, , 115F
我只能說,就是因為薪資要爆了那麼簡單,JJ好,
218.167.21.42 08/14, 115F

218.167.21.42 08/14, , 116F
Amare更好,pf跟sg選一個,你要選誰?Hughes5年
218.167.21.42 08/14, 116F

218.167.21.42 08/14, , 117F
6000萬,Redd 9000萬,對照JJ的7000萬,我認為不
218.167.21.42 08/14, 117F

218.167.21.42 08/14, , 118F
會太不合理(雖然價碼的確是高),舉黃蜂的例子就갠
218.167.21.42 08/14, 118F

218.167.21.42 08/14, , 119F
是說增加太陽match的機率,老鷹還是得不到JJ啊
218.167.21.42 08/14, 119F

218.167.21.42 08/14, , 120F
還有,7000萬+2個第1輪+Diaw就是老鷹能確定得到
218.167.21.42 08/14, 120F

218.167.21.42 08/14, , 121F
JJ的方法,不管他(現在或未來)值不值
218.167.21.42 08/14, 121F

218.167.21.42 08/14, , 122F
另外,我認為這個問題不該討論到JJ值不值身上
218.167.21.42 08/14, 122F

218.167.21.42 08/14, , 123F
[因為還沒開打,JJ值不值沒人知道,不是你認為
218.167.21.42 08/14, 123F

218.167.21.42 08/14, , 124F
他沒法當主將,他就沒法當主將,真正的重點還是
218.167.21.42 08/14, 124F

218.161.93.193 08/14, , 125F
太陽match了不是馬上可以交易給黃蜂 要等三個月
218.161.93.193 08/14, 125F

218.167.21.42 08/14, , 126F
在老鷹如果真心要得到JJ,必須付出多少才是重點
218.167.21.42 08/14, 126F

218.167.21.42 08/14, , 127F
我知道~~
218.167.21.42 08/14, 127F

218.161.93.193 08/14, , 128F
另外您覺得JJ價值這麼高老鷹這麼想得到他就是了
218.161.93.193 08/14, 128F

218.161.93.193 08/14, , 129F
你似乎已搞不清楚我質疑的重點 我知道老鷹要付
218.161.93.193 08/14, 129F

218.161.93.193 08/14, , 130F
出這些才得的到 我質疑的是:老鷹為何要付出這麼
218.161.93.193 08/14, 130F

218.161.93.193 08/14, , 131F
多只為得到JJ? 他真有這麼好? 您自己不都說高了
218.161.93.193 08/14, 131F

218.161.93.193 08/14, , 132F
點嗎? 重點不是如何得 而是為什麼要得?
218.161.93.193 08/14, 132F

218.161.93.193 08/14, , 133F
我的結論是1.老鷹有必要付出這麼多只為得到JJ?
218.161.93.193 08/14, 133F

218.161.93.193 08/14, , 134F
2.即使被match 以老鷹現況沒挖到大卡其實也無礙
218.161.93.193 08/14, 134F

218.161.93.193 08/14, , 135F
您的結論是:1.老鷹非得到JJ不可 2.JJ值這些錢
218.161.93.193 08/14, 135F

218.161.93.193 08/14, , 136F
那我想我們之間的討論也該結束了 多謝您了 :D
218.161.93.193 08/14, 136F

218.167.21.42 08/15, , 137F
我的結論並不是那樣...算了!到此結束也好..有冒
218.167.21.42 08/15, 137F

218.167.21.42 08/15, , 138F
犯之處請見諒
218.167.21.42 08/15, 138F

218.167.202.190 08/15, , 139F
他既然認為他想的是對的 那你還跟他討論幹嘛阿chou
218.167.202.190 08/15, 139F

210.85.32.77 08/15, , 140F
打贏官司了 還要推老鷹於不義之中
210.85.32.77 08/15, 140F

210.85.32.77 08/15, , 141F
5年70M真的太多了...
210.85.32.77 08/15, 141F

210.85.32.77 08/15, , 142F
這種價碼不是說不能給JJ
210.85.32.77 08/15, 142F

210.85.32.77 08/15, , 143F
那也等他打出超級巨星的身手在給阿...
210.85.32.77 08/15, 143F

210.85.32.77 08/15, , 144F
何況是一隻要重建的球隊
210.85.32.77 08/15, 144F

210.85.32.77 08/15, , 145F
如果沒有 Marion 太陽真的會毫不猶豫跟進嗎?
210.85.32.77 08/15, 145F

210.85.32.77 08/15, , 146F
關於這一點我也很懷疑...
210.85.32.77 08/15, 146F

203.73.233.97 08/15, , 147F
文字討論問題容易形成切入點不同 對方解讀的方向
203.73.233.97 08/15, 147F

203.73.233.97 08/15, , 148F
和原先所想不同 愈解釋卻愈偏離 沒誰對誰錯啦:P
203.73.233.97 08/15, 148F
文章代碼(AID): #12_9PvYb (Hawks)
文章代碼(AID): #12_9PvYb (Hawks)