Updated throughout the day with quick takes from staff.
You can be excused if, at this point, you've lost track of the Sonics vs. Sonics vs. Seattle battle. It's a convoluted mess, with multipleNearly two years after selling Seattle's NBA franchise to Oklahoma City investors, the Starbucks mogul has hired a lawyer and is preparing to file a lawsuit against Sonics chairman Clay Bennett to rescind the July 2006 sale.Schultz is widely regarded as having stabbed the city in the back, since he sold the Sonics to non-local interests who, even before all the nonsense, were suspiciously strong candidates for relocation. Hell, that's why there's a clause about it in the sales. Howard is reviled in this city, and has largely avoided the entire fray up until now. When, out of nowhere, he emerges as maybe the best shot this city has at salvation. Really, this just means more court hi-jinx, but this new wrinkle has soap operatic potential.
[...]
[Attorney Richard Yarmuth confirmed that] "It's not money damage. It's to have the team returned. The theory of the suit is that when the team was sold, the Basketball Club of Seattle, our team here, relied on promises made by Clay Bennett and his ownership that they desired to keep the team in Seattle and intended to make a good-faith effort to accomplish that."
This post originally appeared on the Sporting Blog. For more, see The Sporting Blog Archives.