team maloof with stern

Report: Maloofs pitching against Sacramento at NBA Board of Governors meeting

13 Comments

Here we go all over again.

It was around this time last year that the Maloofs stormed angrily out of the NBA’s Board of Governor’s meetings, rejected and dejected after they were told they couldn’t go to Disneyland. Today, they returned to New York to pitch the idea that they were somehow wronged during the past month’s negotiations with the city of Sacramento over a new arena.

Specifically, they’re expected to ask their fellow NBA owners to support the nebulous concept that they’re unhappy with the deal.  They’re also expected to ask owners to support their decision to move to Anaheim if they don’t get what they want out of Sacramento.

The only problem is that the NBA, and specifically David Stern, ran point on a negotiation conducted during All Star weekend that brought the Maloofs, the NBA, AEG, and the city of Sacramento into an agreement in principle on a $391 million Entertainment and Sports Complex similar to L.A. Live.

Hanging in the balance is a fan base that is roundly cited as one of the best in sports.  Also hanging in the balance is a city beset by 12 percent unemployment — that is banking on leading economists’ predictions that a downtown arena can raise property values by hundreds of millions of dollars and kick-start a broken economy.

The Maloofs themselves called the non-binding deal fair when it was struck over All Star weekend, and since that weekend nothing about the deal has changed. The only thing that has changed has been the Maloofs’ public position regarding the deal, which has been duplicitous in its approach.

On one hand, the family has said that they remain committed to Sacramento, and on the other they have unleashed a full-court legal press designed to disrupt the arena funding process.

The family’s newly hired ‘crisis consultant’ Eric Rose started feeding the family’s narrative to the press a few weeks ago, saying they don’t believe the city can deliver on a new arena in time for the 2015-16 season, and that Anaheim was still an option on the table.

Of course, if the city of Sacramento has any holes in its plans to build an arena by 2015-16, we now know that they will be cited by the Maloofs in today’s meetings as a reason the league should allow them to move to Anaheim, where they could make more money whether they keep the team or not.

The Maloofs’ attorney, Scott Zolke, followed Rose’s statements by issuing a letter to Sacramento assistant city manager John Dangberg, providing specific legal notice to the city about issues the family had with anything and everything. In fact, if you wanted to derail an arena project you would want to start a checklist using the items on that list. From the timing of environmental reviews to the ability of arena opposition groups to delay the process or stop it in its tracks – items that could have been discussed behind closed doors were now floating around in an increasingly hostile public domain.

The city responded to this first initial red flag, explaining to the lawyer that he had compiled information for his complaint from six-month old estimates from the city manager’s office that had since been publicly updated.  The 88-page letter went on to address the numerous issues raised by the Maloofs, but made one key point: “It is critical that all parties are pulling in the same direction.”

If it wasn’t clear after Rose’s newspaper run, it became abundantly clear where the Maloofs stood following their April 2 response to the 88-page letter, when they admonished the city for not responding to its concerns over an arena opposition group.

“An important new issue (casts) a giant shadow over the feasibility of the project,” wrote Zolke about a group called STOP (Sacramento Taxpayers Opposed to Pork).  The letter went on to set legal markers designed to threaten liability upon the city:

“All of your assumptions and projections are based on a premise that the Kings will be playing in a new arena for the 2015-16 NBA season. However, the issues we have identified likely will prevent the City from meeting its timeline, and thus pose imminent obstacles to the new arena being ready for the 2015-16 season. Such a failure will result in irreparable harm to the Kings, not to mention the losses the City will suffer.”

This is where things get wacky and border on bad faith.

While one would think that in a near $400 million transaction that the Maloofs’ attorney would have vetted this STOP group, it appears that no such vetting has taken place.

The group did indeed file a petition with the city to try to get the 30,000 signatures needed by May 22 in order to bring the Kings arena issue to a public vote.  If the group were to somehow get the signatures, a vote would occur in November and the project’s delay would almost certainly give the Maloofs a green light to move out of town.

The problem? The petition the group filed to authorize its signature drive might have been written on a napkin and handed to the city clerk with ketchup stains on it. It was recently removed from consideration at the request of the group, and amended to include basic, proper punctuation and simple legal terminology required of such requests.

So the organization the Maloofs’ attorneys are citing as a “giant shadow” doesn’t have an attorney, and it submitted a legal document without putting periods and commas where they legally need to be.

I followed up with the group to determine for myself what kind of organization it was and how seriously it should be taken. They had a public meeting on April 7 at a local park in Sacramento. At this meeting was a group of 10 people, with leader Julian Camacho flipping some hamburgers. Their Facebook page is up to 43 ‘likes,’ and they’re still waiting on the Sacramento City Clerk to review their most recent ballot initiative language, assuming they spelled everything correctly.

Since the April 2 letter to the city the Maloofs have also made a massive public records request – 53 separate requests total. They have requested all communications between the city and the NBA, AEG, and politicians of all levels, and nothing says trust and partnership like a public records request.

So in summary, the project is on a tight deadline, needs all the public support it can muster, and the Maloofs are refusing to pay $3.26 million in pre-development costs, or one year of Travis Outlaw’s salary. They’re saying that the handshake agreement David Stern helped to cultivate didn’t go down how every other stakeholder said it did. They’re delaying the project by not paying those minimal costs, but saying that they’re also not sure the project can be done on time. They’ve rang the bell for an opposition group of 10 people that apparently can’t punctuate nor afford an attorney — that can’t start collecting the 30,000 signatures they need because they botched the original paperwork request. Meanwhile, the Maloofs’ attorneys are deposing the city like defendants and a crisis consultant has been brought on board to manage the media.

Elsewhere, 25 prominent Sacramento business leaders sent a letter to David Stern today asking that the Maloofs be removed as owners of the Kings. The Maloofs’ crisis consultant responded by criticizing the business leaders, pointing out that they didn’t want to get behind a deal like the failed arena project from a few cities over in Stockton.  Never mind the fact that the two deals are like pineapples and oranges — simply mentioning the two deals in the same breath is akin to doing an ad about how rich you are before asking the public for money.  You just don’t do it, and you certainly don’t go on the offensive against the same businesses that you’ll be partnering with for the next 30 years.

So at 2 p.m. ET representatives for the Maloof family, presumably led by brother George, started to make the case that Sacramento has screwed them yet again.  They’ll be pandering to owners that want to maintain their leverage in their future dealings with municipalities. But if the NBA wants to get another publicly subsidized arena without every city citing Sacramento as a cautionary tale, they’ll send the Maloofs out the side door once again, angry and dejected.

Rajon Rondo on signing with Knicks: ‘The triangle’s not really a good look for me’

Sacramento Kings guard Rajon Rondo, left, saves the ball from going out of bound as New York Knicks center Robin Lopez, right, defends during the second half of an NBA basketball game in Sacramento, Calif., Thursday, Dec. 10, 2015. (AP Photo/Rich Pedroncelli)
1 Comment

Mike Conley threw the point-guard-needy Knicks a bone, saying he’d consider New York (and everyone else) in free agency.

They better hope that’s more than lip service.

This free-agent class doesn’t run deep, especially at point guard. And the second-best unrestricted point guard – a one-time target – doesn’t sound interested in the Knicks.

Kings guard Rajon Rondo, via Mike Mazzeo of ESPN:

“The triangle’s not really a good look for me, I don’t think,” Rondo said.

“[The] coach. And style of play. The biggest thing for me is the style of play,” he replied before the Kings were destroyed by the Nets, surrendering 18 3-pointers and 55.8 percent shooting in a 128-119 loss. “I wouldn’t want to go to a system where I don’t really have the ball in my hands and they have you stand in the corner and shoot 3s. That’s not my style of play. … The style of play is the biggest thing, and then obviously personnel on the court and coaches.”

This is the drawback of Phil Jackson’s triangle attachment. The Knicks know what they want to do, but that also means they lack the flexibility to acquire players who don’t fit their scheme. To their credit, the Knicks have bent more this season – but not enough to change perception of their methods.

If they want to change Rondo’s mind, they weren’t going about it by flattery.

Just ask former Knicks coach Derek Fisher, who played for Jackson’s Lakers that beat Rondo’s Celtics in the 2010 NBA Finals (and conveniently ignore Boston winning the same Finals matchup two years prior).

Chris Herring of The Wall Street Journal:

Rondo has earned a big raise with a bounce-back season. The Kings will likely pay him, but if not, he’ll have other suitors – likely including the Knicks’ crosstown rivals, the Nets. I doubt this tiff with the Knicks will affect him.

New York, on the other hand, faces grimmer prospects. Conley seems to legitimately enjoy playing for the Grizzlies. After Rondo, the Knicks could make a longshot offer to restricted free agent Jordan Clarkson, but the Lakers would likely match. Then what? Brandon Jennings? He’s alright, but he also might leave New York wishing its system accommodated choosing from a wider pool of players.

Hey, maybe firing Fisher will change Rondo’s perception of the Knicks. Then again, its essentially impossible to see Jackson hiring a coach who won’t run the triangle.

Tony Parker to play with France despite wife’s pregnancy

AP Photo/Michel Spingler
Leave a comment

PARIS (AP) San Antonio Spurs point guard Tony Parker says he has found a deal with his wife that will allow him to take part in France’s Olympic qualifying tournament this summer.

Parker had raised the possibility of missing the tournament from July 4-10 and the Olympics – if France qualified – because of the expected birth of his second son in July.

But Parker told L’Equipe newspaper Monday that he will be available for both events, saying: “I will be at the Olympics if we qualify.”

Parker says his wife is making a “big sacrifice” by letting him go and has warned him he “should better bring a medal back home.”

The Olympic basketball tournament in Rio de Janeiro will be held from Aug. 6-21.

Rumor: Lakers would fire Byron Scott for Luke Walton

Golden State Warriors interim coach Luke Walton, left, walks off the court with Los Angeles Lakers guard Kobe Bryant after an NBA basketball game in Oakland, Calif., Tuesday, Nov. 24, 2015. The Warriors won 111-77. (AP Photo/Jeff Chiu)
AP Photo/Jeff Chiu
2 Comments

The Lakers reportedly view the rest of the season as a tryout for Byron Scott.

Unless Warriors assistant Luke Walton wants the job. Then, Scott is out.

So says a notable Lakers rumormonger.

Stephen A. Smith on ESPN LA on Scott:

I’m hearing he’s gone if Luke Walton wants to come in and take the job next season, that if he wants to do that, that obviously they would move beyond the Byron Scott era and bring in Luke Walton, that Luke Walton, however, as much as he loves the Lakers and California, may not find that to be an attractive job unless they position themselves to acquire somebody like a Ben Simmons. That is what I have heard.

I have also heard that it’s very, very possible that Jeanie Buss is going to keep her word and fire her brother Jim Buss – thank the good lord – and that Mitch Kupchak may very well not be safe as well.

How definitive that is remains to be seen. But that is the chatter in NBA circles.

Walton played for the Lakers, and Kobe Bryant still respects him. Though Kobe will retire after the season, his endorsement could still carry weight – especially as it speaks to players’ perception of Walton.

The Golden State assistant impressed while filling in for Steve Kerr as acting head coach. He has already been linked to the Knicks and Suns, and he could get other offers.

If the Lakers keep their top-three-protected first-round pick, they’d have an intriguing job with D'Angelo Russell, Julius Randle, a promising rookie, matching rights for Arenas-provision-limited Jordan Clarkson and tons of cap space. If the Lakers lose their pick, the job would look a lot worse. Either way, staying in California and leading one of the NBA’s premier franchises could appeal to Walton.

It’s this interest that makes me believe Scott’s “tryout” is little more than a courtesy for a former player who helped the Lakers win championships. If they’d fire Scott for Walton, how many other replacements would warrant dumping Scott? My list would be long enough to ensure he gets canned.

As far as Jim Buss, his deadline for turning around the team or losing his job has been a source of contention. But even Jeannie, who gives him less time than he gives himself, said he had until the summer of 2017.

Lakers fans might have to settle for exercising one one of their demons.

Report: Luke Walton and Brian Shaw top Knicks’ candidates to replace Derek Fisher

LOS ANGELES, CA - JUNE 06:  (L-R) Assistant coach Brian Shaw, head coach Phil Jackson and assistant coach Frank Hamblen of the Los Angeles Lakers sit on the bench in the second half against the Boston Celtics Game Two of the 2010 NBA Finals at Staples Center on June 6, 2010 in Los Angeles, California. NOTE TO USER: User expressly acknowledges and agrees that, by downloading and/or using this Photograph, user is consenting to the terms and conditions of the Getty Images License Agreement  (Photo by Christian Petersen/Getty Images)
Getty Images
11 Comments

Out: Derek Fisher.

In: Kurt Rambis.

That’s only the first step of the Knicks’ coaching change.

Brian Windhorst of ESPN:

Of course, Luke Walton and Brian Shaw – like Fisher and the other top candidate in 2014, Steve Kerr – played for Phil Jackson. The Knicks president has a type, one that includes both good and bad candidates.

The good: Walton. He impressed with his handling of the Warriors in Steve Kerr’s absence. He’s one of the hottest coaches on the market. I have some doubts, given Kerr’s and Golden State’s players’ influence. But Walton has done plenty right to be in this position.

The bad: Shaw. Jackson reportedly preferred Shaw to Fisher two years ago, but Shaw was under contract with the Nuggets. Denver since fired him, because he did a stunningly awful job connecting with his players. Perhaps, he has grown in that area since, though.

It seems inevitable Tom Thibodeau’s name will come up. The former Bulls coach isn’t a Phil Jackson disciple, but he previously worked as a Knicks assistant. Maybe his New York connection will allow Thibodeau to overcome his lack of a Jackson tie.

A direct connection to Jackson clearly puts someone on the fast track for this job.