...normally leads to a fine and a slap on the wrist. Miles wouldn’t be allowed to sue anyone if I understand the situation correctly since the federal law is already dealing with the punishment. Even if Pritchard wasn’t allowed to say stuff about Miles’s knee, the penalty doesn’t mean very much. Obviously, he shouldn’t say anything if Miles didn’t allow him. There are ethical problems with that.

The Miles situation is pretty overblown. There has been no wrongdoing. The Blazers hired the guy who helped Amare make a comeback. They let him use the practice facilities. They waited a full two years like they were supposed to before getting the approved independent doctor. Yes, they wanted Miles gone; they didn’t appear to do anything wrong in making that happen.

It seems like there’s a precedent for coaches and team officials giving updates on their players’ statuses…they do it all the time in those between-quarter interviews. “He’s feeling pretty sore but we got an ice pack on it and we’re hoping he come back…” or something like that. HIPAA is not the thing we should be worried about…Miles might have a civil case against the Blazers for what Pritchard said because it could be construed as an attempt to prevent him from getting a spot on another team. I’m not a lawyer so I don’t the proper language for that, but it’s really, really bad. He can sue for however much he thought he would make in the remaining years of his career. The good news is that his value has dropped considerably…just hope that nobody signs him before he files the suit.

Before teams go ahead and give players enormous multimillion dollar contracts, as a rule of thumb, they check to see if the player will be able to actually fulfill them. Any and all health issues are checked before hand. Right now there is a large dispute in Houston where Carl Landry is being asked to get an MRI before the Rockets sign him to a contract. In the case of Darius where it is well known that he has had catastrophic issues with his knee, one can assume that any team would get the most information possible before signing him. This would likely include checking with the doctors that did the procedure and those involved in his rehab, as well likely checking in with the Trail Blazer’s management and team doctors (I imagine that most clubs maintain a congenial relationship and would discuss such things). Things that a team would not be doing is listening to podcasts done for fans involving KP for any inside info from a person with a large vested interest in the scenario. Given this, I believe that Darius could end up griping about this, but it will not ultimately decide whether or not he gets back into the league. If he wants to sue for Paul Allen’s money, that’s great, its not like he isn’t still getting millions of it each and every year.

if we’re spending our mental energy on this, eh? Ok, so the blazers might get some picayune fine for a few thousand bucks.

Yall think Paul Allen doesn’t have better admin law attorneys than Jaynes and me (at least I’m an actual attorney, I don’t think Jaynes is) looking at this stuff? The cost/benefit for the potential (not certainty) for some minor administrative fine versus poisoning the well a bit and keeping the salary off the cap and paid by insurance was obviously something the blazer management considered and approved. That’s how corporations operate—they assess risk associated with a potential sanction from an edge case violation of a rule against the benefits incurred by violating that rule before they take any such action.

I think it helps to get a couple things straight

1. Regarding the "leak" of the drug suspension.

This is NOT something the Blazers leaked to keep Darius from getting a chance with another team. Every other team had this knowledge from the league. So forget that. Someone (not necessarily with the Blazers) leaked it because they don’t like Darius OR someone just slipped up and gave something away. But it has nothing to do with hindering his chance to make another team, because every other team already knew. You can just forget that line of argumentation.

2. Regarding leaks about his medical condition.

The guy is medically retired with a career-ending injury confirmed by an independent doctor, and an insurance company is paying his salary. If anyone has incentive to make sure, it is the insurance company, and guess what? They are paying his salary.

This is all public knowledge. Talking about the injury is supposed to be hindering his chance to make another team? Hello? If KP or anyone else with the Blazers said not a word, what would be the big issue teams would consider if they were thinking about giving Darius a guaranteed contract? Um. Yeah. One word. KNEE!!!!

Will any team be influenced one way or another by a non-doctor like KP talking about his knee when they already know it’s been ruled career-ending? No way. If they want to take a risk, they’ll have their own doctor look at it, and they’ll be a lot more interested in what he says than what some GM in Portland says.

Did KP break the law? I don’t know. But neither of these alleged misdeeds by Portland "leaking" will have the least impact on whether Darius makes another team. Other teams will get their own information and make their own evaluation, no matter what Portland says. That information will include the email from the league notifying them of Darius’ suspension. It will also include the fact that he has this knee issue that they’ll want to evaluate.

This is silly. If there was a legal violation, it was inadvertent. There is no "agenda" to keep Darius from getting a chance with another team. The last thing other teams want to do is take our word for it about Darius, whether good or bad. They aren’t on our side. If they want to try him out, they’ll make their own evaluation.

People around here give KP too much credence. He’s brilliant. But he doesn’t use mind-control to make people drop in the draft. He doesn’t make people make trades that they don’t want to make, or think are bad for them. And he can’t and won’t keep people from giving Darius a try-out if they think he might be able to help them, and it would be silly to think he is saying things with that in view. He’s smart enough to know that he can’t do that even if he wanted to.

Added to this post (not on the main page): I love knickfan’s writing, and his analysis is almost always 100% spot on. Tominhawaii would say 110%. But friend, you’ve been barking up the wrong tree on this one. If KP said more than he should have, it was an inadvertent technical violation. The alleged motive of killing Darius’ career simply doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.

Let me put it to you this way. If you are Donnie Walsh and Darius’ agent calls up and asks for a tryout, how should you decide? Factors:
1. Can Darius still perform at a high level.
2. How Darius’ personality fits with the team.
3. How Darius’ skills (if he still has them) fit with the team.
4. How does his drug suspension (which you learned about from the league, not from a Blazers leak) fit with your plans.
5. Will Darius be medically able to play through the season.

You will analyze #1 based on a tryout (no matter what KP says), #2 based on a whole body of evidence from multiple media reports and your own personal evaluation and discussions with him, #3 based on his tryout and your own analysis, #4 based on your view of your team, and #5 based on his medical retirement and whether your own doctor evaluates him and says the independent doctor was wrong, or at least overly pessimistic.

KP’s comments will have no bearing at all on any of those factors. Not the least little bit.

A couple of my comments on this matter seem to have disappeared entirely from this thread. Didn’t think they were really all that offensive. Overly critical of Blazer management, perhaps, but hardly anything that I think would merit deletion.

Wonder where they might have run off to?

I know people enjoy a thread filled with uninformed conjecture. However, the actual CBA actually deals quite well with what has occured here:

“ARTICLE XXII: MEDICAL TREATMENT OF PLAYERS
AND RELEASE OF MEDICAL INFORMATION

Section 3. Disclosure of Medical or Health Information.

(d) Subject to Section 3(e) above, each Team may make public medical information relating to the players in its employ, provided that such information relates solely to the reasons why any such player has not been or is not rendering services as a player. “

so the blazers do have the right and authority to disclose medical information relating to the Miles injury.

the section 3 (e) referenced in that section of the CBA states:

“(e) A player or his immediate family (where appropriate) shall have the right to approve the terms and timing of any public release of medical information relating to any injuries or illnesses suffered by that player that are potentially life- or career-threatening, or that do not arise from the player’s participation in NBA games or practices. “

that would mean that the only possible violation would be the blazers gave out information that Miles hadn’t “authorized”. However, that section deals with “before the fact” circumstance: “potentially…career threatening”. That isn’t the case for Miles. There is no “potenttial” and there is no “career threatening”. It is well past that point.. The Independent medical evaluation is “career-ending”. Substantial difference.

And all the comments referenced in Jaynes’s article took place after the ruling from the league.

So, there may be a remote chance that the blazers violated one section of the CBA, but the operative word there is ‘remote’.

As to a HIPPA violation…it’s less then remote.

And as to the “leak” of the fact that Miles has been suspended. Good luck making a case of that, since the testing organization knew, as well as the league office, and all 30 teams. That information was bound to come out, and soon. Even if the source was the blazers, where is the rule that was violated if they were the ones that leaked truthful information known by every front office in the league? And since Miles is supposedly trying to get work from those very front offices with that same information, where is the tangible harm from that leak?