Players who become free agents Friday, with the NBA negotiating period now open. The signing period begins at noon on July 6, with a personnel moratorium until then:

Agreed to terms: Marvin Bagley III (Pistons), Mo Bamba (Magic), Nicolas Batum (Clippers), Bradley Beal (Wizards), Troy Brown Jr. (Lakers), Jalen Brunson (Knicks), Chris Boucher (Raptors), Javon Carter (Bucks), Nicolas Claxton (Nets), Amir Coffey (Clippers), Dewayne Dedmon (Heat), Lu Dort (Thunder), Isaiah Hartenstein (Knicks), Danuel House (76ers), Joe Ingles (Bucks), Damian Jones (Lakers), Tyus Jones (Grizzlies), DeAndre Jordan (Nuggets), Wesley Matthews (Bucks), Patty Mills (Nets), Malik Monk (Kings), Victor Oladipo (Heat), Bobby Portis (Bucks), Trevelin Queen (76ers), Davon Reed (Nuggets), Anfernee Simons (Trail Blazers), P.J. Tucker (76ers), Lonnie Walker IV (Raptors), Thaddeus Young (Raptors).

Best available: James Harden, Deandre Ayton (R), Zach LaVine, Miles Bridges (R), Kevon Looney, Jusuf Nurkic, Bruce Brown, John Wall, T.J. Warren, Colin Sexton (R), Gary Harris, Mitchell Robinson, Gary Payton II, Otto Porter Jr., Kyle Anderson, Montrzel Harrell, Andre Drummond, Donte DiVencenzo, Delon Wright, Derrick Jones Jr., Dennis Schroder, Caleb Martin (R), Cody Martin (R).

Atlanta Hawks: Sharife Cooper (R), Gorgui Dieng, Kevin Knox II, Timothe Luwawu-Cabarrot, Skylar Mays (R), Lou Williams, Delon Wright.

Boston Celtics: Malik Fitts (R), San Hauser, Luke Kornet, Brodric Thomas (R)

Brooklyn Nets: LaMarcus Aldridge, Bruce Brown, Nicolas Claxton (agreed to terms with Nets), Goran Dragic, Andre Drummond, David Duke Jr. (R), Kessler Edwards (R), Blake Griffin, Patty Mills (agreed to terms with Nets).

Charlotte Hornets: Miles Bridges (R), Montrezl Harrell, Arnoldas Kulboka (R), Scottie Lewis (R), Cody Martin (R).

Chicago Bulls: Troy Brown Jr. (agreed to terms with Lakers), Tyler Cook (R), Malcolm Hill (R), Derrick Jones Jr., Zach LaVine, Matt Thomas, Tristan Thompson.

Cleveland Cavaliers: Moses Brown, Ed Davis, Brandon Goodwin (R), RJ Nembhard (R), Rajon Rondo, Collin Sexton (R).

Dallas Mavericks: Jalen Brunson (agreed to terms with Knicks), Theo Pinson (R).

Denver Nuggets: Facundo Campazzo (R), Vlatko Cancar (R), Bryn Forbes, Markus Howard (R), Davon Reed (agreed to terms with Nuggets), Austin Rivers.

Detroit Pistons: Marvin Bagley III (agreed to terms with Pistons), Carsen Edwards, Luka Garza, Frank Jackson, Rodney McGruder, Jamorko Pickett (R).

Golden State Warriors: Nemanja Bjelica, Chris Chiozza, Andre Iguodala, Damion Lee, Kevon Looney, Gary Payton II, Otto Porter Jr., Juan Toscano-Anderson, Quinndary Weatherspoon (R).

Houston Rockets: Bruno Fernando (R), Daishen Nix (R), c Trevelin Queen (agreed to terms with 76ers), Dennis Schroder,, John Wall.

Indiana Pacers: Ricky Rubio, Jalen Smith, Terry Taylor (R), T.J. Warren, Duane Washington Jr. (R).

Los Angeles Clippers: Nicolas Batum (agreed to terms with Clippers), Amir Coffey (agreed to terms with Clippers), Isaiah Hartenstein (agree to terms with Knicks), Rodney Hood, Robert Covington, Semi Ojeleye, Jay Scrubb.

Los Angeles Lakers: Carmelo Anthony, Trevor Ariza, Kent Bazemore, Wayne Ellington, Dwight Howard, Mason Jones, Malik Monk (agreed to terms with Kings).

Memphis Grizzlies: Kyle Anderson, Jarrett Culver, Tyus Jones (agreed to terms with Grizzlies), Yves Pons (R), Tyrell Terry (R).

MIAMI HEAT: Dewayne Dedmon (agreed to terms with Heat), Udonis Haslem, Caleb Martin (R), Markieff Morris, Victor Oladipo (agreed to terms with Heat), P.J. Tucker (agreed to terms with 76ers).

Milwaukee Bucks: Javon Carter (agreed to terms with Bucks), Serge Ibaka, Wesley Matthews (agreed to terms with Bucks), Jordan Nwora (R), Bobby Portis (agreed to terms with Bucks), Lindell Wigginton (R).

Minnesota Timberwolves: Jake Layman, Nathan Knight (R), Josh Okogie (R), McKinley Wright IV (R).

New Orleans Pelicans: Gary Clark (R), Tony Snell.

New York Knicks: Solomon Hill, Mitchell Robinson.

Oklahoma City Thunder: Lu Dort (agreed to terms with Thunder), Mike Muscala, Paul Watson (R).

Orlando Magic: Mo Bamba (agreed to terms with Magic), Bol Bol (R), Ignas Brazdeikis (R), Gary Harris, Robin Lopez,. Admiral Schofield (R).

Philadelphia 76ers: Charlie Brown Jr. (R), James Harden, DeAndre Jordan (agreed to terms with Nuggets), Paul Millsap, Shake Milton, Myles Powell (R).

Phoenix Suns: Deandre Ayton (R), Bismack Biyombo, Aaron Holiday, JaVale McGee, Abdel Nader, Elfrid Payton, Ish Wainright (R).

Portland Trail Blazers: Keljin Blevins (R), CJ Elleby (R), Joe Ingles (agreed to terms with Bucks), Anfernee Simons (agreed to terms with Trail Blazers), Ben McLemore, Jusuf Nurkic, Dennis Smith Jr., Trendon Watford (R).

Sacramento Kings: Donte DiVencenzo, Josh Jackson, Damian Jones (agreed to terms with Lakers), Louis King (R), Jeremy Lamb, Neemias Queta (R).

San Antonio Spurs: Devontae Cacok (R), Lonnie Walker IV (agreed to terms with Raptors), Joe Wieskamp (R).

Toronto Raptors: Isaac Bonga, Chris Boucher (agreed to terms with Raptors), Justin Champagnie (R), David Johnson (R), Yuta Watanabe (R), Thaddeus Young (agreed to terms with Raptors).

Utah Jazz: Trent Forrest, Juancho Herangomez, Daneul House (agreed to terms with 76ers), Elijah Hughes (R), Eric Paschall, Hassan Whiteside.

Washington Wizards: Joel Ayayi (R), Bradley Beal (agreed to terms with Wizards), Thomas Bryant, Anthony Gill (R), Raul Neto, Tomas Satoransky, Cassius Winston (R).

KEY: (R) – restricted free agent, team has right to match outside offers.

(As reported by Sun Sentinel, ESPN, The Athletic, The Associated Press and other NBA media outlets.)

()

Jazz Chisholm Jr. is one step away from starting in his first All-Star game. The Marlins young second baseman remains one of the top vote-getters at his position in the National League after phase one of voting ended Thursday.

Along with Ozzie Albies of the Atlanta Braves, Chisholm is one of two finalists for the top job and will go into phase two of voting to determine who gets it.

Phase two of voting will begin Tuesday at noon and will run through July 8, with fans only allowed to vote once per day and votes from phase one not carrying over. The starters will be revealed that Friday on ESPN at 7 p.m.

Pitchers and reserves for each team will be picked via “Player Ballots” choices and selections made by the Commissioner’s Office. The full rosters will be unveiled on July 10 at 5:30 p.m. on the MLB All-Star Selection Show on ESPN.

In his second full season in the MLB, Chisholm is hitting .254/.325/.535 with 12 home runs, 45 RBIs and12 stolen bases. It’s a significant improvement to his rookie season slash line of .248/.303/.425.

A potential roadblock for Chisholm is injury, as he was placed on the 10-day injured list Wednesday with a right lower back strain. He was removed in the second inning of Miami’s game against the Cardinals on Tuesday and underwent an MRI the following morning that revealed the extent of the injury.

Wednesday was not Chisholm’s first encounter with back issues this season, he was removed after five innings against the Mets after suffering back spasms.

Marlins manager Don Mattingly expects Chisholm to be back in the lineup between 10-14 days. At the earliest, he would return with nine games remaining before the All-Star break.

This year’s All-Star Game will take place at Dodger Stadium in Los Angeles on July 19.

()

The Pac-12 Conference has existed, in some form or another, for 107 years.

After the thunderous news Thursday that USC and UCLA are seeking membership in the Big Ten starting in 2024, the future of the conference is very much in doubt.

What’s next for the shattered Pac-12, which was caught completely off guard by the planned departures of the schools in its largest media market and its most fertile recruiting ground?

Without an anchor in Southern California, the league is a shell of its former self.

Can it exist as a 10-school entity?

Should it expand?

Is a merger possible?

First, let’s be clear: When it comes to conference realignment, nothing is done until it’s done — and sometimes not even then.

USC and UCLA have yet to utter a public peep; nor has the Big Ten.

But if we presume the move becomes official in the next 24 hours, there are a slew of scenarios to consider:

— Will Oregon and Washington attempt to join the Big Ten, as well?

The success of their football teams makes the Ducks and Huskies potential targets.

UW also brings a significant media market and academic bonafides, while Oregon has the Nike affiliation and a national following.

For scheduling purposes, the Big Ten might determine it’s better off with four West Coast schools.

Of course, its media partners would have to agree.

— What happens to Cal and Stanford?

The California Four, which has served as the heart of the Pac-12 for eons, is no more.

The Bears and Cardinal excel at Olympic sports, but neither possesses the football credentials — either the on-field success or the fan affinity that generates TV ratings — to be considered must-haves if the Big Ten intends to take in more schools.

Abandoned by their partner (USC for Stanford) and their sister (UCLA for Cal), the Bay Area schools most likely will remain in the reconfigured Pac-12.

— Could the ‘Four Corners’ schools be next?

Arizona and Arizona State joined the Pac-12 in 1978, while Utah and Colorado came aboard in 2011.

Without the connection to Southern California provided by USC and UCLA, the quartet could look for options together.

The best of those might be the Big 12, to create a league that owns the Central and Mountain Time Zones.

But this development is extremely damaging for all four of those schools given their reliance on Southern California for recruiting and on the L.A. schools as prime sources of TV revenue.

— Are there expansion options available?

Yes, there are several. But none of them are ideal.

The Pac-12 could add the top-tier football teams from the Mountain West, such as San Diego State, Boise State or Fresno State. But those schools bring little in the way of media value.

It could attempt to poach the Big 12 schools such as BYU, TCU or Houston.

But what motivation would those universities have to leave the Big 12, which is suddenly better positioned strategically and competitively than the Pac-12?

The options are few, in part because of the paucity of football schools in major media hubs in the Western third of the country.

— Is an outright merger in the works?

One year ago, the Big 12 was in an equally dire situation, having lost its biggest football brands, Texas and Oklahoma, to the SEC.

It reached out to the Pac-12 and asked about a merger, only to have the offer rebuffed.

At that point, the Big 12 scanned the landscape and decided to expand, adding Cincinnati, Brigham Young, Houston and UCF to create stability for its post-Texas/Oklahoma existence.

Now, the Pac-12 is desperate.

On numerous levels, it makes sense to seek a merger with the Big 12 that would give rise to a conference with 22 teams and span three time zones.

But would anyone pay for it?

The prime driver of conference realignment is the revenue generated by media rights contracts, particularly with Fox and ESPN.

By NICHOLAS RICCARDI

The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to hear a case that could dramatically change the way elections for Congress and the presidency are conducted by handing more power to state legislatures and blocking state courts from reviewing challenges to the procedures and results.

The justices will consider whether state courts, when finding violations of their state constitutions, can order changes to federal elections and the once-a-decade redrawing of congressional districts. The case probably will be argued in the fall.

“This case could profoundly alter the balance of power in states and prevent state courts and agencies from providing protections for people’s right to vote,” said Rick Hasen, a law professor at the University of California, Irvine. “There’s a wide range of ways the court could rule on this. Taken to its extreme, it would be a radical reworking of our system of running elections.”

In the most extreme example, lawyers said, if the Supreme Court were to rule that no entity besides state legislatures can set rules regarding federal elections, that could stop a governor from vetoing election bills or a state court from blocking rules that set up different voting hours in urban and rural precincts.

Jason Torchinsky, a Republican lawyer who wrote a legal brief urging the high court to take the case, said it is absurd to think the Supreme Court would ultimately allow that. He noted that as recently as 2015, the court agreed that legislatures do not have absolute power in elections, ruling that Arizona’s voter-approved redistricting commission could legally take the authority away from lawmakers to draw district lines.

“I don’t think you can take the theory as far as ‘the legislatures alone can do whatever they want,’” Torchinsky said. “The problem is we have these rogue state courts.”

The case, an appeal from North Carolina Republicans, challenges a state court ruling throwing out the congressional districts drawn by the General Assembly that seemingly would have made GOP candidates likely victors in 10 of the state’s 14 congressional districts.

The Supreme Court has never invoked what is known as the independent state legislature doctrine, but four of the court’s conservative justices have expressed interest in taking on the subject. One of them, Justice Clarence Thomas, was among three justices who advanced it in the Bush v. Gore case that settled the 2000 presidential election.

It only takes four of the nine justices to agree to hear a case. A majority of five is needed for an eventual decision.

The issue has arisen repeatedly in cases from North Carolina and Pennsylvania, where Democratic majorities on the states’ highest courts have invoked voting protections in their state constitutions to frustrate the plans of Republican-dominated legislatures.

The case comes as state courts have become increasingly involved in redistricting, the consequence of a 2019 decision in which the Supreme Court said federal courts could no longer handle claims of illegal partisan gerrymandering.

Initially, in cases in states such as North Carolina and Pennsylvania, that hurt Republicans and helped Democrats. But courts in Democratic-dominated states including Maryland and New York then threw out maps as Democratic gerrymanders, leaving Republicans with a slight edge at the end of the once-a-decade congressional redistricting process.

The high court already has another significant redistricting case on its to-do list for the fall, a reconsideration of how the Voting Rights Act requires majority-minority districts to be drawn to ensure marginalized groups have a chance at electing their preferred representatives.

But the North Carolina case has implications far beyond redistricting, The independent state legislative doctrine could also hold that state courts cannot stop legislatures from imposing any restrictions they want on congressional voting or even the selection of electors who choose the president of the United States.

North Carolina House Speaker Tim Moore, who filed the appeal to the high court, cheered the news that the case will be heard. “This case is not only critical to election integrity in North Carolina, but has implications for the security of elections nationwide,” Moore, a Republican, said in a statement.

Voting rights groups were furious.

“In a radical power grab, self-serving politicians want to defy our state’s highest court and impose illegal voting districts upon the people of North Carolina,” said Bob Phillips of Common Cause, North Carolina, which brought the lawsuit that overturned the GOP-drawn maps. “We will continue to stand up for the people of our state and nation as this case goes to the U.S. Supreme Court. We must stop this dangerous attack on our freedom to vote.”

___

Associated Press writer Gary Robertson in Raleigh, North Carolina, contributed to this report.

Authorities arrested a man Wednesday whom federal prosecutors accuse of running a $45 million scam that netted him 39 Teslas and allegedly included false claims that a billionaire electric car company founder — likely Tesla CEO Elon Musk — was involved in the investment scheme.

In a federal grand jury indictment unsealed Wednesday, Neil Suresh Chandran, 50, is alleged to have defrauded more than 10,000 victims since June 2018 by claiming that at least one of his five cryptocurrency and virtual-reality companies “was about to be purchased by a consortium of wealthy buyers and thereby yield his investors extremely high returns.”

The indictment cites an alleged email from Chandran claiming an $88,000 investment would deliver a $2 trillion return.

The alleged fraud seemingly involved claims about Musk, whom the indictment describes as “Billionaire 2” and “founder and CEO of an electric car company,” and also apparently about Amazon executive chairman and founder Jeff Bezos, described as “Billionaire 1” and the “founder and executive chairman of a large online retailing company.” The indictment makes clear that both billionaires 1 and 2 “had no involvement.”

The U.S. government is seeking to have Chandran, arrested in Los Angeles, forfeit the Teslas along with five properties in California and Nevada, a Ferrari, a Rolls-Royce, and other high-value items including a diamond-crusted gold Swiss watch, as proceeds of crime.

Chandran did not immediately respond to email messages sent to three of the companies listed in the indictment. It was unclear whether he was represented by a lawyer.

The government is also seeking to obtain through forfeiture about $36 million held in 25 accounts at 12 different banks, two insurance firms and a stock brokerage.

The 39 Teslas included 16 Model Y compact SUVs, 15 Model 3 sedans, four Model S sedans and three Model X SUVs. Also allegedly accumulated by Chandran, of Las Vegas, were 19 other cars, two pick-up trucks, three RVs and a wakeboarding boat.

“U.S. Marshals and the FBI are seizing most of the assets pending resolution of the criminal case,” the U.S. Department of Justice said in a press release.