Did the Donald Sterling event open the door for competition in professional basketball?

According to one economist a boycott of the NBA due to the racist statements of Donald Sterling would do little damage to him or the league. In fact this same economist stated that it may be do more damage to the players in terms of lost revenue from advertising. (See Donald Sterling is impossible: Why the boycotts and sponsors can’t stop him.) If we assume that this is the case then what could be motivating the other owners to act so swiftly to run him out of the league. As stated in the article the owner in question has had a history of racist antics which have been ignored by the league. If it wasn’t important then why is it important now? Could it be if they don’t clean up their act that a new league could be formed using the current pool of employees? What if they thought that the monopolistic control they have over the sport was vulnerable? What factors exist today that could support this assumption? Let’s build this scenario. Let’s Pract the facts on this issue?