Darius Miles Situation Explodes
by Dave on Jan 9, 2009 2:55 AM PST
600 comments
Ohhhh...here we go.
As has been reported (and commented on near 1000 times, no exaggeration) in the sidebar an unnamed NBA team official has leaked a letter e-mailed to all NBA teams from the Portland Trail Blazers' Team President Larry Miller. Sports Illustrated had the story and now ESPN has picked it up. This is going to be all over the universe by morning.
For those who are curious, here is the full text of the letter as reported by ESPN:
"Team Presidents and General Managers,
"The Portland Trail Blazers are aware that certain teams may be contemplating signing Darius Miles to a contract for the purpose of adversely impacting the Portland Trail Blazers Salary Cap and tax positions. Such conduct from a team would violate its fiduciary duty as an NBA joint venturer. In addition, persons or entities involved in such conduct may be individually liable to the Portland Trail Blazers for tortuously interfering with the Portland Trail Blazers' contract rights and perspective economic opportunities.
"Please be aware that if a team engages in such conduct, the Portland Trail Blazers will take all necessary steps to safeguard its rights, including, without limitation, litigation."
First of all I have to admit to you that when I read this--in fact when I read all Darius-related stories at this point--I just keep hearing the lilting strains of Chacarron Macarron go through my head as if the teachers from the Charlie Brown cartoons were speaking. Literally, I'm reading this stuff and that's what I'm processing. I'm not sure this was the effect that Mr. Miller was going for, so I apologize in advance.
Several questions have already come up in the discussion and via e-mail, so let's take our best stab at answers.
What the heck are the Blazers trying to accomplish?
I'm no team president, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn last night. I am guessing that this is a turf-defending measure, no more and no less. This doesn't strike me as a letter that's keying on effective prevention. The bluster is unmistakable, made more stark by the exclusive nature of the intended recipients. It's like standing up in church with a megaphone. Making the point is the goal, not necessarily winning people over. This feels like a letter from someone who knows the battle is lost and is trying to make contingency plans to recover or fight on another field. It reminds me of the video tapes that the Dunleavy-era Blazers sent to the league regarding the referees' favoritism towards Shaquille O'Neal. They weren't necessarily going to get things changed but they were going to be loud about what was going on.
A couple of people have suggested that the Blazers are laying the groundwork for a "bad faith" argument.
HurraKane212 says:
Law Student here... At one of my property lectures an intellectual property attorney introduced me to the concept of worst-case-scenario time travel. Imagine that someone has infringed upon your clients patent and you've not taken measures to protect him and you are in front of a jury. If you could go back in time, what would you have done differently so that you could tell it to the jury? Figure out what that is and do it now, beforehand.
The Blazers are setting up a "bad faith" argument. They are laying the foundation for a formal complaint. If this deters suitors for Miles, all the better. Also, since Miles was ruled unfit to play by an impartial doctor and he is still getting his money, it would be hard for him to push a case against PDX because the detriment to PDX would be unconscionable. He gets his 9mil, and Blazers are both penalized and unable to use his services when neither had reached any sort of buy-out agreement.
Darius will probably play, and PDX will probably appeal, and may use media articles to demonstrate that GM's knew of the detriment to PDX and played Darius Miles in bad faith to hurt PDX's capspace. That whole fiduciary duty thing holds quite a bit of weight, holds you to a higher standard of ethics. If it even smells like bad faith in a fiduciary relationship, it probably won't go well for the "bad-faith-er" (not a legal term, but it's more simple than "tortfeasor")
This will probably not be over for a while...
Mortimer offers a slightly different take:
This frightens off anyone who might have the bright idea of signing Miles to muck with the Blazers, or to make a few extra hundred thousand from the luxury tax payment they'd get from Portland being in luxury tax land. Do you, struggling owner of the Grizzlies, want to battle with PA's billions? Heck nah, phoo!
This is a strong arm tactic that makes sense from the Blazers perspective...The Blazers were obviously at least a little worried that another team would try to mess with us, so they made clear they wouldn't sit back and let it happen easily...
This is a weird situation with no precedent. I don't blame the Blazers for being aggressive, and you can probably assume our aggressiveness will pay off for us. The aggressive team gets the calls, after all.
Whether it's aggression, legal preparation, or just a need to shed a glaring light on the situation it's clear that the Blazers are not going to let this go quietly.
Does this mean that Miles was a bigger issue than we thought?
I don't believe this indicates that Miles or his contract are any more or less important than they ever were. Rather the Blazers find it necessary and responsible to defend their assets, or at least potential assets, no matter what those assets may be. If the league was monkeying with one of their prospective second-round picks we'd probably see the same kind of reaction. That doesn't necessarily mean the pick was critical to their plans. It's just not smart to let anything be taken from you in a way you perceive is unfair.
In the sidebar I compared this to a poker player defending his big blind. He ups the bet because he doesn't want people screwing with him. This doesn't mean that this particular hand is critical to the tournament. Even if he loses the pot he'll be just fine. The statement he's making to the table is the important thing.
This is wholly unprecedented! Is it a good idea?
First of all, we don't know that this is wholly unprecedented. All we know is that having it leaked is wholly unprecedented. There's an old saying in the medical profession that doctors talk to doctors. The fraternity of high-ranking NBA officials has always been the same way. We've always wanted to be a fly on the wall when they talk to each other. One of the fascinating things about this is that this is our chance.
If I had to guess I'd say that this was a rare, perhaps unique occurrence. Certainly this particular subject matter has never been broached before. But maybe all that's unique besides that is that we got a chance to peer inside their world.
As to whether it's a good idea...that would depend wholly on your knowledge of the fraternity and what you were trying to accomplish with them. Having none, I don't think we can say definitively. Somebody at Blazers HQ thought it was a good idea. Then again this crew, for all of their brilliance, is also inexperienced compared to the old guard. Our only recourse is to hope that this is a move of calculation and not just protest, of reason and not just heat. Failing that, we have to hope that the fallout, whatever that may be, will be minor. I think that's highly likely.
We do know one thing. During the Stern era the League Office has been as concerned with matters of decorum and efficiency as much as fairness or justice. Whatever your perception of fairness in the Darius fracas, nothing hinted at in this letter is efficient or decorous. If they hope to win points with the League Administration here they are going the wrong way.
What will the fallout be?
The most immediate concerns that I can see revolve around Darius' legal team or, failing that, at least around the public perception of the effect this will have on Darius' employment opportunities. The ESPN article cited above is headlined, "Blazers Try to Blackball Miles". This is not the effect that the team was looking for, I'm sure. As soon as those insinuations are made you start getting unions and lawyers involved and then even people sympathetic to your situation start protecting themselves. This is the one way the Blazers could come out wrong in this: incurring penalties beyond just the reinstatement of Miles on the cap. The exact wording of the letter makes that unlikely as far as I can see, as it's not untoward for the Blazers to protect their rights and financial prerogatives even if such protection involves a former employee. They are specifically talking about teams and not about Darius himself. However specific wording tends to get lost in the dramatic rush. Therein lies the danger on that front.
[Edit: Because I've seen the accusation a couple places already, let me expand on this. This letter is definitely not collusion. Collusion requires willful participation from two or more parties. In order to prove that you'd have to prove teams did not sign Darius specifically because of this letter (if even that would do it). Clearly that's impossible. There are 100 reasons for not signing Darius besides this. Some burden of proof will almost certainly be on Darius' legal team to prove that this, and not something else, caused him to not be signed should they pursue legal action on his behalf. That's going to be a tough sell, especially since the letter specified the specific circumstances under which the Blazers would pursue litigation...circumstances which were related to team motives and not to Darius himself. On the other hand the Blazers would have a hard time proving motive for a signing, should it occur. In any case it's hard to imagine penalties for this going beyond the mere financial, even were an accusation proven on either side.]
It's near certain that other teams and other teams' fans will view the Blazer hierarchy with a skeptical eye. There's been a fair amount of Paul Allen money resentment over the years...enough that it's leaked through the media screen. It's not likely that a financial argument is going to elicit much sympathy. Unless this was leaked purposely, in concert with the Blazers' desire to make sure everybody knows what's going on, the fact that it was leaked shows some affront already. Nevertheless teams have a way of forgetting past slights when they want something from you and the Blazers have a fair amount of assets that other teams want. The most likely fallout will be other teams' fans having something else to rag on the Blazers about. No real harm there.
The most interesting part of the drama will be seeing how this is negotiated from here. What else will be said? Will the Blazer brass respond today? There are bound to be six different stories coming from different sources with takes on the whole deal.
Beyond that immediate interest this story will either fade into the background after Darius plays those two games (quicker if he doesn't) or will dribble into a series of litigations which will almost certainly take longer than next summer's critical period to conclude. I don't foresee the Blazers having to exceed the already-prescribed cap penalty in this case but I don't see them circumventing that penalty either, especially not through these means.
Stay tuned.
--Dave (blazersub@yahoo.com)
1 recs |
600 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Well at least they are trying to do something. It may not be good for the Blazers but the league doesn't care
about how well Portland does. If anything, they don’t want all the stars going to Portland. They need it to be spread to different markets. Portland is not going to get any favors done. Glad the management is going after teams.
by BRoyInThe4th on Jan 9, 2009 3:00 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I guarantee you they care about Paul Allen's feelings
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Jan 9, 2009 6:42 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Holy!!!
what’s gonna happen??
i personally believe that Darius has no legal standing as far as the “He could sue” rumors go. A league appointed doctor made that call.
I just hope this doesn’t keep us from paying attention to the important season at hand.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fj8DgWnbVng&feature=bz303
MVP *** MVP *** MVP
I've never scored more than 38 ..... not even in Little League.
by Portland89 on Jan 9, 2009 3:07 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
"The most likely fallout will be other teams' fans having something else to rag on the Blazers about."
It will be furious.
"When I have the ball, I experiment." #5
by Sabonis4Ever on Jan 9, 2009 3:08 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
It already is, and that is just the very beginning
http://www.celticsblog.com/2009/1/8/713839/did-the-celtics-make-a-mis
http://www.mavsmoneyball.com/2009/1/8/715079/destroy-portland
http://www.brightsideofthesun.com/2009/1/8/714810/how-to-improve
by Norsktroll on Jan 9, 2009 3:15 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
destroy portland, omg
December 18, 2008.
"Roy is Roy, and if I were to bet my life on a game of 5-on-5, I’d bet on whichever team Roy was playing on." by HurraKane212
by maid tu rek on Jan 9, 2009 3:37 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
you should
be flattered
Blogging Suns Basketball
by Phoenix Stan on Jan 9, 2009 6:36 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Norsktroll and jscot ....
… schooling the NBA blogsphere.
Another reason why among blogs BE is king of the jungle. Elephant big, cheetah quick, rhino tough and hippo dangerous (when we get messed with).
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jan 9, 2009 7:28 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
welcome to the jungle
Welcome to the jungle
We got fun ‘n’ games
We got everything you want
Honey we know the names
We are the people that can blog
More than you know
If you got the knowledge baby
BE is where to go
In the jungle
Welcome to the jungle
Watch it bring you to your shun n,n,n,n,,n,n,,n,n,n,,n,n,,n knees, knees
I wanna see you blog
- Elgin
If you smile at me I will understand, because that is something everybody everywhere does in the same language. - Crosby/Stills/Kantner
by 22baylor on Jan 9, 2009 10:03 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Probably don't matter I say this
But love the line.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 10:05 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
As far as I can see, this is a fallout from the story broken by Yahoo's Wojnarowski about the pre-season games
The e-mail doesn’t threaten the other teams "don’t sign Miles". That would be an indefensible position against the lawyer of Darius and the NBPA. It says "don’t sign Miles with just the purpose of screwing our tax/cap position – or we as a fellow franchise will sue you for damages". I.e. prevent other teams from giving him a ten day contract to just play him for two minutes in two games with the intent of making some luxury tax money (ca. $250K) and prevent the Blazers from being a bigger player in the 2009 free agency. The Blazers couldn’t do much against a team offering him a one-year contract to regularly play him anyway, except file a complaint to review the CBA section pertaining to this “comeback from medical retirement” situation.
by Norsktroll on Jan 9, 2009 3:11 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I wonder what would happen if Kevin Pritchard went to a team and told them to sign Miles to a 2 year contract and never play him.
Then Portland would set up a trade to get rid of Raefs expiring contract and send them a player they want from Porltand, like Sergio or Frye.
by BRoyInThe4th on Jan 9, 2009 3:16 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
it would take more then sergio or fry for that
December 18, 2008.
"Roy is Roy, and if I were to bet my life on a game of 5-on-5, I’d bet on whichever team Roy was playing on." by HurraKane212
by maid tu rek on Jan 9, 2009 3:45 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
One thing is for sure....
I would never play Hold ‘em with either KP or Miller, even if it’s just for beer money…. This email seems to be the equivalent of re-raising while holding eight deuce off suit.
"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace." Jimi Hendrix
by philly420pdxhilo on Jan 9, 2009 3:25 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I'm just worried that this is the Blazers front office expressing desperation.
Like if Miles does get his two games in and this destroys the Blazers off-season plans. Why else would they send that e-mail? to show that they aren’t soft? i don’t think so… guess we just have to wait and see what happens…
"I saw him in the face"
by RoodiePhirnandizz on Jan 9, 2009 3:38 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Unless the big master plan was to bring Kobe to Portland it wouldn’t destroy the off-season, but it would limit his options. And KP likes having options.
by Norsktroll on Jan 9, 2009 3:47 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
IMHO opinion this "threat" seems solely pointed at the LEAGUE...not the franchises
We all know ( including the Blazers) a franchise will soon in fact sign Darius to a 10 day contract ( no one should prevent him from trying to join the league again ). The near future 10 day contract is simply a FACT ( or should be if he is actually capable of helping a franchise.
It seems as though this " Blazer threat" was clearly laid at the League’s feet. With the sole point being….correct this rule to be as it was intended to be…because….
A franchise ( Blazers) followed every league rule in it’s handling of Darius, and by League rules he was ruled incapable of performing his job as the league intends it to be ( including not KNOWINGLY jeopardizing his future health).
Two years later Darius plays for OTHER teams to resurrect his career.
The league rule is flawed because…1. If a player SIGNS a retirement agreement, and the LEAGUE accepts it, then the league should "insert dialog in this retirement agreement to protect the NBA franchise from falling victim to future damages, such as this type of scenario.
2. It’s fairly clear that the “intent of the retirement agreement” is to protect the LEAGUE FRANCHISES from a single franchise taking advantage "of retiring a player with the intent of resigning him for less money,while increasing that franchises OWN cap space.
3. The Blazers had OTHER options if not for this retirement rule..such as..
A. “buy out for less money”
B. a “two for one trade”.. trade to a willing franchise…i.e…
Other Franchise gets> a very promising rookie " low salary" plus Darius " with the hope thst Darius may someday help them as well"
Blazers get a proven, but aging veteran, that matches salaries.
In other words…..The league should NOT harm a franchise from following the LEAGUE’s intent of the rule. Especially with better options available to them with NO FUTURE RISK.
The LEAGUE rule is flawed and needs to be rewritten, to protect ALL franchises and ALL players as it was intended to do!
by roy2rudy on Jan 9, 2009 4:17 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I've made a similar point
as part of my long post just under this one. It is aimed at franchises, but ultimately the league, to ensure that their joint venture partners (the Blazers) are not harmed.
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Jan 9, 2009 4:35 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Joint ventures and millions of dollars
I’ve got news for everyone wringing their hands about this and perception and all that stuff. This is about whether the NBA is a joint venture or not, and millions of dollars.
People around here like to joke about SPAM (Spend Paul Allen’s Money) and I do it myself. I doubt Paul Allen enjoys those jokes as much as some other people do, though.
The NBA is a joint venture. Teams are not supposed to take actions which violate the intent of league rules for the purpose of taking money from a franchise for their own benefit. If you are completely independent, you can look for loopholes to mess over your competitors, but you don’t do that financially to your partners in a joint venture. You can get in big, big trouble.
There were media reports, you’ve all seen them, about NBA executives saying someone was going to screw Portland by playing Darius for a couple of games. To do that would be a violation of the joint venture agreements. As a couple people with legal background have cited in the sidebars, that would be acting in bad faith. The tort lawyers would have a field day.
Why? Guess what, fans, this probably isn’t really what you think it is about. As fans, we care about cap space this summer. As Dave has posted, we can probably do anything KP really wants to accomplish this summer even without the Miles space. KP planned for cap space this summer long before we knew there was going to be a Miles retirement.
This is about millions of dollars of luxury tax that have to be paid this year if Miles goes back on the Blazers’ cap number. About a team paying Darius for ten days to play in two games so they can collect an extra $300K or whatever it is at Paul Allen’s expense.
And Paul Allen is saying, “Not so fast, guys. I’m not really into payiing millions of dollars just so you can divide it among yourselves, and this is not the way a joint venture is supposed to work. And if you do this, I’m going to sue you so fast you won’t know what hit you.”
In one of the sidebar discussions, someone questioned the use of the term “perspective” instead of “prospective”, and said it was the wrong word. It is the right word, and tells the whole story here (do you think that Paul Allen can’t hire lawyers who will know the right word?)
“in perspective”
An object or person that is in perspective has the correct size and position in comparison with other things in the picture.
If a team plays Darius for two games for the purpose of screwing the Blazers, it will skew the “perspective economic opportunities” of the Blazers relative to the rest of the league, their partners in this joint venture.
This does not say, “Don’t sign and play Darius.” It says, “Don’t do what people have been saying in the media is going to be done, or you are going to pay.”
You want to know who David Stern is angry at? It isn’t the Blazers. It’s the stupid NBA execs who were talking about teams screwing the Blazers. I would bet money that David Stern saw that email and raised no substantive objection.
You think something stinks or smells bad? It isn’t the Blazers sending out an email. It’s teams setting out to rip off millions of dollars from the Blazers, their partners in a joint venture.
Note that this was NOT sent out when Darius was with Memphis. If the Griz had guaranteed his contract, no one would have suggested they were doing so only for the purpose of benefiting from luxury tax, and messing with “perspective economic opportunities”.
Timing is everything. The Griz just happened to sign Darius soon enough so they could clear his suspension (they were the ideal team in the league to do it, since they weren’t carrying 12 guys on their active roster), play him two games, and then cut him without having to guarantee his contract. Sorry, but that smacks of collusion with intent to defraud. Some one else would have picked him up, and the Griz could say, “Well, we didn’t do it,” and the other team could say, “We were just looking for a little help, it wasn’t us, we only played him a few games. Too bad, Paul, that’s the breaks. Pay up.”
Every single email between the Griz, Boston, and any team that signs Darius will be covered with a fine tooth comb, if it comes to a law suit. Emails that mention Portland, or cap space, or any mention of free agents and who might be attractive, and whether Portland would want them, all that stuff. Any little side comment about “too bad Portland will be a player, too” is going to suddenly look pretty bad. It would be a big, expensive lawsuit, looking for recovery of the luxury tax plus punitive damages.
SO, WHAT DOES IT MEAN FOR THE FUTURE?
It means Darius is extremely unlikely to get a 10 day contract this year. No one wants Paul Allen slapping them with a huge lawsuit. If Darius gets a contract, he will not play in two games and then be dropped. If you want Darius, you better grab him for the year, and play him in more than 3-4 games, or you had better first review every single email and communication. Is Darius going to help your team enough for ten days to make it worth that?
It means Darius may threaten a lawsuit. His position is weak. First, he’s not been able to make it with Boston (whose bench is very weak), Clippers, Memphis, and maybe other teams he’s tried out for. Memphis cut him when they weren’t even replacing him on their roster with someone else! That’s not L.A., that’s, um, the Griz. It’s going to be hard for him to prove they kept him from having a chance, and hard to prove that he would have made it and has been damaged.
Also, it will be hard to prove that the Blazers hindered him, because it only threatens teams who are “contemplating signing Darius Miles to a contract for the purpose of adversely impacting the Portland Trail Blazers Salary Cap and tax positions.” If you sign Darius for the purpose of helping your team, this is an irrelevance to you. They are NOT trying to blacklist Darius, and any media outlet that suggests that could find itself in litigation if they aren’t careful. They are warning their joint venture partners against intentionally defrauding them.
Also, this was not issued in a vacuum, this was issued after some joint venture partners had said they were going to be defrauded. That also weakens any case Darius may try to bring.
Finally, it means one other thing for the future. If Darius is signed and plays a less than significant role for another team for the remainder of the season, it means that we win our appeal against him going back on the cap. The ground has already been laid for that appeal, because the intent of the CBA clause was not to stick teams who follow the advice of an independent, league appointed, doctor.
So why does this mean we win that appeal? Because the best way to avoid a nasty lawsuit, ugly headlines, disclosure of various unseemly emails, and all kinds of other things, is to make sure that Portland is protected from other teams who are ignoring doctors’ advice and jeopardizing Darius’ future health. If they want to play him, fine, but don’t penalize Portland for that. (And, oh, by the way, Mr. Stern just whispered in my ear that this also means Portland hasn’t been damaged, so that means no big, ugly lawsuit.)
That’s what this is all about. That’s why this is a good and strong move. If you want to rip off one of your joint venture partners by playing games with the luxury tax, expect a lawsuit. A big ugly one.
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Jan 9, 2009 4:22 AM PST reply actions 24 recs
Fully agreed about the franchise thing
I posted something similar under the ESPN article. It’s not in the long-term business interest of the NBA if one franchisee screws another one, only creating bad blood.
by Norsktroll on Jan 9, 2009 4:37 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Great points!....now how would a "supposedly innocent" franchise ( no emails etc ) signing a 10 day contract be effected?
For instance, Denver signing him to 10 day contracts,because Melo is down for 3 weeks?
Realistically, we all would know the REAL reason, but how do you PROVE their true intent of harming us more than helping their team for 3 weeks.
by roy2rudy on Jan 9, 2009 4:46 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
If a team wouldn’t employ him for his own merits, i.e. his services as a player. You can argue the Celtics acted in good faith, playing him fairly extensively in pre-season games to see what he could still do for them. Now after the Yahoo story was reported, giving him a ten day contract just to play him two minutes in two games to make some money from it would be “bad faith” to screw another existing contract situation (the one Darius has with the Blazers), and that’s what I assume the Blazers management is challenging. If e.g. Denver gave him a long-term contract (rest of the year at least) and played him regularly, there would be little the Blazers could do against it except appeal the CBA medical retirement provision itself as we have discussed.
by Norsktroll on Jan 9, 2009 4:58 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Hmm...
I think this is the first time I have explaining events with the same person in two different forums… at the same time. You were just on the ESPN page as well, right.
by Salem Stephen on Jan 9, 2009 5:02 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Right, and on Mavs Moneyball with Jscot ;-)
I’m no lawyer, but have some contract background from business.
by Norsktroll on Jan 9, 2009 5:03 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You do a pretty good job explaining it
Most of my criticisms would be based more on semantics and my personal elitism than anything else. Nice synopsis.
by Salem Stephen on Jan 9, 2009 5:07 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That make sense....so meaningful playing time is the innocent's "innocence" measuring stick....
Would you say just playing him 1-2 minutes PT of “game in doubt” or only “garbage time” be “fairly” obvious of their TRUE intent?
Also, if their playoff position was “set or as desired” would any minutes after this juncture be considered “dubious” :)
by roy2rudy on Jan 9, 2009 5:18 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn't say playoff position matters
but PT and the “when” of PT might.
But you DO want scrubs to play garbage time, rather than your rotation players. So if someone’s 5th forward goes down injured, it would very possibly be legit for them to take on Darius to fill garbage time minutes.
But usually, for that role, you want a young guy with potential for the future.
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Jan 9, 2009 5:20 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The standard is "by a preponderance of the evidence"
Which basically means, the facts show that the actions are more likely than less likely to have been in bad faith.
As far as proof, you would get depositions from everyone in the front office and remind them that if they perjure themselves, they will go to jail. You can also request any documents relating to the matter. Emails, memos… everything.
by Salem Stephen on Jan 9, 2009 5:00 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Here's the tricky thing
Who is “innocent”?
If Denver signs him for injury cover, they run the risk of a lawsuit.
So before they will do that, they have to scan EVERYONE’S emails for anything that might look suspicious, or be framed as collusion. Will they bother?
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Jan 9, 2009 5:13 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
One other factor
I should have mentioned. Darius might have a potential case against the league as a whole, not the Blazers. He could argue that league rules make it harder for him to get a 10 day contract in this circumstance, and thus unfairly discriminate against him.
Darius could threaten the league with a lawsuit over that, as well.
The easiest resolution to all of this is to clarify the rule as applying to players coming back with their own team. That would clean up all the messes.
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Jan 9, 2009 5:25 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
We could call it the “Allen Houston rule”. Or the “Darius Miles rule”, in his honor.
by Norsktroll on Jan 9, 2009 5:30 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed... Miles is the next to sue.
Rudyculize: The act of Rudy making others look slow, dim and generally oafish.
http://www.myspace.com/y5k
by Y5k on Jan 9, 2009 5:59 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
I’m curious as to what the PA will do as well, based on their interests/history, it would seem to me they have to back Miles somehow in this situation
Bayless has been testing the fences for weaknesses
by blazeraddict on Jan 9, 2009 9:26 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Good Stuff Jscot
And, certainly something to be thought over. (I’ve always thought Miles getting so many games was just that. But teams stopped short trying to say; “We don’t want to be legally liable for defrauding our partner” type of thing.
Good stuff? Shoot. Great stuff.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 7:34 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed.
I agree that this is more of a statement to the league about the terms of the franchising agreements than anything else. Its a good bet that Portland has been working this through the Commisioners office with unacceptable results. This is more of a reminder to Stern that Portland is treating this matter seriously.
"Greed is Good."
So is Rudy.
by Gekko Mojo on Jan 9, 2009 8:02 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
sweet post Jscot!!!
keep giving the Mavs ur moneyballs!!!
"Step up to my mic!!!" Joel's right and left fist
by broyposse on Jan 9, 2009 8:27 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
jscot you're the man on this one, glad you like to type
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Jan 9, 2009 8:49 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Fast fingers
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Jan 9, 2009 9:21 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
this is the logical course of action of course
which means it’s probably not going to go this way. ;-(
Seriously, if Stern and the NBA wanted to put this WHOLE thing to bed, they could make a pre-emptive ruling on the Cap Space situation and the intent of those segments of the CBA. If they NBA comes out and says “the intent was always to prevent a team from bringing back it’s own retired plyaer at a lesser cap figure, and therefore Portland will not have this money added back to their cap if and when Darius plays 10 games.”, then it’s game over, and everyone wins:
-Portland is free to continue on with it’s plans, and not be hurt because they followed the rules
-Darius is free to sign with any team who wants his services
-Other teams are free to sign Darius if they want, without worry of getting sued over it.
Rule #1 of nitpicking is to get it right.
by douglast on Jan 9, 2009 8:59 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Typo
“Perspective” is the wrong word. It’s as clear as day. As an adjective “perspective” means having to do with point of view. There is no context in which “perspective economic opportunities” makes sense.
The dismissal of “In one of the sidebar discussions, someone questioned the use of the term "perspective" instead of "prospective", and said it was the wrong word. It is the right word, and tells the whole story here (do you think that Paul Allen can’t hire lawyers who will know the right word?)” is terrible weak.
Or should I expect a defense of the typo of “tortious” as “tortuous”, as well? After all, Paul Allen’s lawyers are immune to typos, right?
by Ed O on Jan 9, 2009 1:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Guys... they used the right words
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tortious_interference
I know it STILL sounds shocking, the this letter wasn’t written at 3am after a bender like most of our blog posts. This was poured over and words chosen VERY CAREFULLY as this is a delicate matter.
Mortimer
by Mortimer on Jan 9, 2009 1:41 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That link doesn't have the word "tortuous" in it
I know what tortious interference is. I graduated from law school and pass the bar.
If someone intentionally used “tortuous” (meaning complex) in front of “interference” then they are clever in a way that attorneys are not paid for be clever. Puns and word games create ambiguities that should be avoided… not created.
I’m not claiming that this email was typed up at 3 AM. I am claiming that both “tortuous” and “perspective” are poor word choices, and I bet they’re typographical errors.
by Ed O on Jan 9, 2009 2:02 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Ah ah ah, my mistake then
I read it as Miller writing “tortious”.
However, using the phrase “tortuous interference” in this context isn’t necessarily wrong.
And you’re right— lawyers do typos all the time. We just suspect that this letter had been gone over a few dozen times, and since it’s pretty short and everything has to be worded carefully, we’re assuming they used the words they felt they should use.
Mortimer
by Mortimer on Jan 9, 2009 2:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Tortuous/tortious
may have been intended, or may have been a typo. U is right next to I on the keyboard, which I hadn’t thought of when I posted previously, so that’s an easily understandable typo.
“Perspective” vs. “Prospective” is not a typo. That’s a wrong word, if you are right. Sorry, I don’t buy it. Paul Allen had multiple lawyers review this, and they are all smarter than you or I, probably.
I don’t think this is primarily focused on future earnings, this is focused on a big pot of money this year, and shifting it from one partner to another inappropriately. That changes the perspective.
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Jan 10, 2009 1:16 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You may be wrong on tortuous, too
as I posted elsewhere.
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Jan 9, 2009 1:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I quoted this verbatim
over in my piece at Loaded O on Darius…hope you don’t mind. I thought it explained what the team’s likely motive was, very clearly. I wish more knuckleheads around the league could read it…
by torridjoe on Jan 9, 2009 5:21 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
No problem
Hope you gave the link, though. :)
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Jan 10, 2009 1:17 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Just went over there
No link, but sufficiently attributed that anyone can find it on the Bedge, so that’s cool.
Thanks for the nice words, BTW.
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Jan 10, 2009 1:20 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Another Law Student Here...
I will try to use as little “legalese” as possible:
1. The media has completely misinterpreted the message… though the media’s interpretation may very well be the underlying message.
The ESPN take says that Portland is trying to prevent any other team from signing Darius Miles. That would be illegal. Fortunately that is not what Portland is doing. Portland is reminding the rest of the league that you cannot enter into a “Bad Faith” contract. For the purposes of understanding, lets say a Good Faith contract is “well intentioned” and a Bad Faith is “shady.”
If Portland were to advocate that no team sign him despite the fact that there are teams out there that want to sign him because he would benefit their club… that would be illegal. The Portland letter is simply reminding the rest of the league that while the court of public opinion says “signing Miles to screw the Blazers is good”… it is actually illegal and there are severe repercussions.
2. Portland is preemptively stating that they will sue for “Tortious Interference”
Here are all the elements that they would have to prove:
1. The existence of a contractual relationship or beneficial business relationship between two parties.
2. Knowledge of that relationship by a third party.
3. Intent of the third party to induce a party to the relationship to breach the relationship.
4. Lack of any privilege on the part of the third party to induce such a breach.
5. Damage to the party against whom the breach occurs.
3. Damages… THE BIGGIE
If Portland can prove all of the elements were more likely to have occurred than not (No “reasonable doubt in Torts) then the breaching party will be forced to make the Blazers "whole.” This includes:
1. Compensating the team for all luxury taxes paid.
2. The court will determine a dollar value for the lost opportunity of the cap space
3. Any other damages
4. PUNITIVES – When you are dealing with bad faith, the courts will award additional damages usually so large that it will prevent the party from ever deciding to act in this manner again. (Ford was assessed $125M in punitives for the Pinto… millionaires interfering with sports is not as egregious, but the damages will still be substantial.)
by Salem Stephen on Jan 9, 2009 4:54 AM PST reply actions 7 recs
Agreed on all points
Note the punitives.
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Jan 9, 2009 5:15 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Well done. thanks.
Rudyculize: The act of Rudy making others look slow, dim and generally oafish.
http://www.myspace.com/y5k
by Y5k on Jan 9, 2009 5:58 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Nice
I also think a lot of this is notice that if you mess around here, you’re going to feel the full wrath of a multibillionaires legion of lawyers. That’s got to give even the NBA pause.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Jan 9, 2009 7:07 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Tortious!
Is “tortously” even a word? I think Larry (or Larry’s lawyer) was thinking of “tortiously.” As in, pertaining to a tort. The current usage was done torturously!
Haw!
by torridjoe on Jan 9, 2009 11:28 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It's a word.
And you could conceivably say it was the right one. But…no.
Main Entry:
tor·tu·ous
Pronunciation:
\ˈtȯrch-wəs, ˈtȯr-chə-\
Function:
adjective
Etymology:
Middle English, from Middle French tortueux, from Latin tortuosus, from tortus twist, from torquēre to twist
Date:
15th century
1: marked by repeated twists, bends, or turns : winding [a tortuous path]
2 a: marked by devious or indirect tactics : crooked , tricky [a tortuous conspiracy]
b: circuitous , involved [the tortuous jargon of legal forms]
— tor·tu·ous·ly adverb
— tor·tu·ous·ness noun
And in spite of some reasonable arguments, I sill think “perspective” was also a mistake.
by pualo on Jan 9, 2009 11:51 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It's the right word
He’s accusing them of twisting the provisions of the CBA contrary to the original intent to defraud the Blazers.
You know, I really suspect that Paul Allen’s lawyers would have been over this rather more carefully and thoroughly than Bedgers, and it’s just reasonably possible that they are smarter than us, too.
So we might consider it most likely that they used the words they wanted — and if we think it is the wrong word that, in fact, we are missing part of the message, rather than that they got the wrong word.
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Jan 9, 2009 1:02 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Seriously now...
… do you really believe that Portland’s lawyers and management is more informed and careful then us fans?
Next you will be saying that Nate knows more about coaching than we do.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jan 9, 2009 1:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
no, it's tortious
because he’s referring to the type of interference.
I
by torridjoe on Jan 9, 2009 3:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
nice job, mind if I quote?
I’m going to reprint this verbatim in the LO piece on Miles, if you don’t mind…
by torridjoe on Jan 9, 2009 4:01 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Were you looking to qoute my statement or jscot's
I wouldn’t want to be presumptive…
If you are looking to quote any of my responses, you have my permission.
by Salem Stephen on Jan 10, 2009 12:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
We're drifting again between the two "courts."
During the JailBlazer era, we were in court for marijuana, DUIs, illegal prostiitution… things have changed a bit, but now it’s a bit more formal and “cute” with lawsuits.
I don’t like this situation at all. I sense fans/readers here are blowing this off. The fact that Darius can play in NBA games, even for 2 minutes, seems to indicate that his injury is not career ending.
Basketball should stay on hardwood courts, not jury courts. The fact we are discussing this now, points to a decision that has led us into topics that this franchise claimed was something of a past. We were suppose to be making solid choices. This isn’t one of them. If we knew 2 years ago that this decision would lead us to this point, we would have seriously looked at alternatives.
Reminds me a bit of Steve Patterson.
by hotstuffdb22 on Jan 9, 2009 5:08 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
We haven't put ourselves in this position
Other NBA execs have talked about screwing Portland and teams signing Darius to benefit from the luxury tax. It isn’t Portland that has gone into shady/illegal territory here AT ALL.
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Jan 9, 2009 5:17 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think this situation required thinking beyond the years of our management to make...
I’m not criticizing them, but an email like this seems like it should’ve been placed a long time ago, not near the end of the 10 game stipulation. This seems like one tactical error.
Also, other alternative options likely existed. Perhaps, one of the those options was the better option. We don’t know and will never know. However, what we do know, is that if were to do this all over again, we would play our cards differently. The best case scenario would be to not go to court (and maybe this will happen). However, I think our current path with this seems like were on a disaster course as the focus once again is on things off the court, rather than on the court.
I’m just sick of this stuff with this franchise. I feel they have come a long way, but this shows that we still haven’t left the court-era, unfortunately.
by hotstuffdb22 on Jan 9, 2009 5:29 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The timing was perfect
It came out right after an NBA exec was quoted (anonymously) in national media about screwing the Blazers.
It is their response to that.
Sorry, but your response just makes no sense. Other NBA people are talking to the media about screwing the Blazers out of millions of dollars, in violation of their joint venture agreement, and you are upset that they sent them an email saying, “If you do that, we’re going to sue you. You are violating the agreement.”
Would you prefer that Paul Allen just raise ticket prices so the fans can pay the $9 million (or whatever it is) in luxury tax? Why should he have to pay that?
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Jan 9, 2009 5:35 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
My point was asking why a conditional email like this
wasn’t sent earlier. It was sent recently in response to what you just mentioned. This is what I disagree with. We’re in a situational battle now. What matters now is tactic, response, litigation, law, and mostly, interpretation. I’m simply saying that the Blazers made a tactical error with this email and its timing. Clearly, the Yahoo story broke, and gave information Portland didn’t know. This was a mistake, but led now to a response by Portland that I argue should’ve been placed some time ago. This makes sense.
by hotstuffdb22 on Jan 9, 2009 5:41 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
OK, it does make sense
The problem: previously, Portland probably had nothing substantive on which they could say, “The Portland Trail Blazers are aware that certain teams may be contemplating signing Darius Miles to a contract for the purpose of adversely impacting the Portland Trail Blazers Salary Cap and tax positions.”
Everyone could have said, “You guys are just trying to scare people away from signing Darius.” Now, there is something substantive to which they can point. Until those statements came out in the media, it might have been legally dangerous to send such an email. Darius could have sued over it. Now, they can just say, “Sorry, Darius, this has nothing to do with you. This has to do with specific stuff that was discussed in the media.”
Basically, they probably would have liked to send such an email sooner, but the media statements gave them the legal cover to do so. And the media statements also greatly increased the likelihood of a court case being successful — it isn’t just a paranoid Portland exec that is saying people are out to screw Portland.
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Jan 9, 2009 6:41 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't want to be confrontational ....
… but this seems to follow along a similar line that we see in criticisms of the Blazers that are basketball related – i.e. assuming one knows as much or more than the folks who actually are responsible for doing the work.
Unless one has information to the contrary, one must assume that the decision to send the email, the content of the email and the timing of it were the result of careful deliberation on the part of some very sharp people, including Portland’s legal counsel. You are arguing that they made a tactical mistake (without providing any reasoning why it is). May I ask what this is based on? Prior legal experience. A working knowledge of contract law, or the NBA?
I’ll also point out that it is not “clear” that the Yahoo story broke information that Portland was unaware of. If fact I just saw a reference that Pritchard and Portland management was fully aware of the fact that preseason games counted. Much of the rest of the league apparently did not, but Portland did. They must have felt that, at the time, it was wiser to keep quiet. I would assume this was based on why stir something up and bring attention to it, if isn’t yet a problem. Once talk hit the media about other team management personnel commenting about how a team might “screw” Portland, then the initial reasoning became mute.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jan 9, 2009 7:57 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It seems unlikely to me that
other GMs weren’t aware of the pre season aspect. All the other teams have legal counsel, contract specialists, etc. They were aware, and they would share that info with each other. I suspect that Ainge was fully aware of this. His praise of Miles’ condition was just a smoke screen to justify doing what he was doing. Memphis was very aware also. The Yahoo story broke the news to us, not to the teams.
by crakarjack on Jan 9, 2009 11:15 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I see little other options (from a business perspective)
Tried to outline that in my post this week, second paragraph: http://www.blazersedge.com/2009/1/5/709833/the-darius-miles-chronicle
No team would have traded for an injured Darius Miles still potentially costing them $18 million for nothing if the can’t come back last year. They could have bought him out for a little less money, but then he would be just as well on the cap a la Steve Francis. The medical retirement process was the best option they had at that time, clearing a roster spot immediately and potentially his salary. The only other viable option I could see would have been to ask him to stay away from the team with pay, which the current CBA allows (Indiana is doing this with Tinsley at the moment), hoping they could trade him later when his contract expires in 2010 and everyone tries to get under the cap for LeBron & Co.
by Norsktroll on Jan 9, 2009 5:36 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree, perhaps the alternative options are limited...
the key here, I think, is that had we done the alternative and waited till 2010, perhaps our “transaction costs” would be lower (this is an economic term, let me know if it’s confusing). Right now, this option has escalated our transaction costs.
At the end, I think there are always options or a “way out” in any situation, and we pursued perhaps the best at the time. However, in hindsight, I don’t think this was the best for both the player and the team. We’re in territory now that we should never have gotten involved with. This new Blazer era was suppose to have a higher ethic and standard.
by hotstuffdb22 on Jan 9, 2009 5:47 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I have been thinking about this as well. If he makes his comeback, we have to pay the salary, lost the cap space and the ability to trade his expiring contract so the costs are higher in the end. So it was a bit risky either way. But doctors assured KP Darius’ knee looked very bad and thus he was unfit for service and potentially would re-injure himself more which he didn’t want to take the responsibility for (he revealed that which he probably was not allowed to discuss publicly, leading to a flurry of articles in the summer). Would it have been more ethical to let him sit for two years at the end of the bench or at home? I don’t know about that. The Knicks should have done it with Marbury. I suppose the Pacers are just doing it with Tinsley because he still has some trade value on his own as a player.
by Norsktroll on Jan 9, 2009 6:00 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I refer you to a post by a guy named Norsktroll ...
… who points out the reasons why Portland had little to lose (and still does).
The assumption that Portland’s decision now looks like a poor one can only be based on a) assuming Miles would have been tradeable this summer and b) that Portland has no recourse, should a team sign Miles and his contract come back on the books.
I would argue that the odds of Portland being able to deal Miles over the summer of 2009 would have been no better than 40 – 60. Only a limited number of teams would want to pay $9 million for a guy to sit at the end of the bench, just so his contract came off the books at the end of the season. Assuming some would, you still have to come up with a deal that worked for Portland. That’s not a given.
The odds of trading him at the 09 – 10 trade dealine might have been better, but by then, Portland would have paid out 75% of Miles $18 million (plus an luxury tax payments).
In summary, Portland had very little to lose in a worst case scenario and a considerable amount to gain in a best case scenario. For me, hindsight has not changed what was clearly a very good risk – reward evaluation by Portland management.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jan 9, 2009 8:15 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
From a business perspective it looked like the right move at the time, especially if they were more interested to have cap space in 09 than in 10 even if they could find a taker at the trade deadline. I can’t say it would have been more ethical to let him rot for two years either when they believed chances for a comeback were slim to none, so yeah.
by Norsktroll on Jan 9, 2009 8:36 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
How are Portland's transaction costs higher?
As of this moment, it hasn’t cost them anything.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jan 9, 2009 8:00 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Depends on what you call a career
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Jan 9, 2009 7:06 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
No longer that they the Jailblazers
now they are the Trial-blazers!!!
by tingeyga on Jan 9, 2009 12:30 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
damn
that is much too catchy. I am going to +1 you, but only if we never mention this nickname again.
Jaws were hitting the floor as Greg repeatedly attempted to tear the rim off the backboard...
by TheOdenator on Jan 9, 2009 12:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
i am actually suprised
that no one else beat me to it.
by tingeyga on Jan 9, 2009 3:26 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
the new one is
from jail-blazers to wail-blazers
December 18, 2008.
"Roy is Roy, and if I were to bet my life on a game of 5-on-5, I’d bet on whichever team Roy was playing on." by HurraKane212
by maid tu rek on Jan 9, 2009 7:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I just looked at the Blazers schedule and ran off all the game I think we'll win the rest of the way.
I counted 29 wins. That would bring us to 50 wins. Then there are about 7 or 8 we might win, couple that with the us losing the easy wins, and winning some tough ones. I’m expecting somewhere between 50-56 wins this year. Blazers should not be worried about free agency. I do think it’s nice KP is doing something about it though. It’s better then not complaining at all.
by BRoyInThe4th on Jan 9, 2009 5:15 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
If you read a couple comments above
this is not primarily about free agency. This is about teams talking about using the luxury tax to rip off Portland, and Paul Allen saying, “No way.”
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Jan 9, 2009 5:18 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Question:
If Darius plays no games the rest of this season, and plays only 2 games next season, do they add to the 8 existing and thus go “against” us???
by hotstuffdb22 on Jan 9, 2009 5:21 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
so it's obvious someone will sign him
for the preseason next year. Play him all they want, since those games dont matter and at the same time it will look like they were really interested in him. And it should keep them free of any legal matters having to do with sticking to the Blazers.
by bustabucket on Jan 9, 2009 6:10 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Next season wouldn't really matter. We won't be luxury tax payers then, and have no cap space to speak of for 2010 anyway
by Norsktroll on Jan 9, 2009 6:11 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Sort of
Where it matters is that it forces KP to act before next preseason. He can’t wait for a mid-season trade using the cap space, because of the risk of Darius playing.
Unless the league issues a ruling that Darius’ salary only goes on Portland’s cap if he plays the ten games for Portland, which was the intent all along.
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Jan 9, 2009 6:45 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
However only next year's salary would count against Portland's books.
Or so I understand.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jan 9, 2009 8:16 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
it is not retroactive, however. Miles $9M would be added to the Blazers salary pending the immediate petition by the Blazers to reconsider.
by Salem Stephen on Jan 9, 2009 5:24 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Yahoo is citing an eastern conference executive with an interesting take
"The point that everybody is missing is that this isn’t about Portland’s salary cap. It’s about whether this guy [Miles] is healthy enough to play or not," said an Eastern Conference executive. "He obviously is healthy enough to play. It doesn’t matter how good he plays. He can still play, and they said he couldn’t.
"Portland received benefits when [Miles’] injury was ruled career-ending. If he can play, they don’t deserve to have those benefits."
by Norsktroll on Jan 9, 2009 5:40 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Independent Medical Exams are a croc.
i used to work for an IME (independent medical examination) company in Seattle. The doctor is supposedly totally independent of the insurer (employer in most cases) or patient. Here’s the catch, however: The doctor is paid by the insurer through a supposedly-independent company that hires the doctor and sets up the exam. In other words, If insurance company X sends 500 people to this IME company to set up doctor’s appointments that decide whether someone’s benefits are necessary, and the IME company knows Dr. Z usually gives a report saying what the insurer wants, then the IME company has every reason to send the 500 patients to Dr. Z, thus pleasing their client.
It’s an ugly and confusing industry.
Rudyculize: The act of Rudy making others look slow, dim and generally oafish.
http://www.myspace.com/y5k
by Y5k on Jan 9, 2009 5:53 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
the examiner
was hired by the Players Union.
Blazer's fan since '84, Currently exiled in San Antonio
↑ ↑ ↓ ↓ ← → ← → B A
by HurraKane212 on Jan 9, 2009 6:01 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Hmmmm ... So, did he just do a bad job calling the injury career ending? or will Miles fall apart any minute?
Rudyculize: The act of Rudy making others look slow, dim and generally oafish.
http://www.myspace.com/y5k
by Y5k on Jan 9, 2009 6:58 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think the doctor's ruiling was...
the risk of him reinjuring himself is too great for him to keep playing.
This is what Lucas would do. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0aPkIE2qK0
by 123_G.O._RipCity on Jan 9, 2009 8:48 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Why isn't there a 2nd opinion built into the medical retirement process?
Athletes routinely get 2nd and 3rd opinions when considering surgery, so why wouldn’t there be another set of doctor’s eyes looking at the knee when considering granting a medical retirement.
by tingeyga on Jan 9, 2009 12:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That's what the league doctor is
Team doctor, then a second opinion with the league doctor.
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Jan 9, 2009 1:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
but is the team doctor viewed independent
in the relationship?
by tingeyga on Jan 9, 2009 1:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
No, of course not
but you don’t necessarily need a second independent opinion.
Remember, the insurance company has also undoubtedly had him examined in regard to whether they were going to pay out.
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Jan 9, 2009 1:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
As much as I know that insurance companies hate to pay out money
i think that their hands are tied and they have to pay out due to the terms of the agreement they have with the NBA.
Going forward it would probably be wise to improve the medical retirement policies by adding a 2nd independent opinion.
by tingeyga on Jan 9, 2009 1:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Why not require a 3rd and maybe an option for a 4th opinion?
No such thing as being too careful.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jan 9, 2009 1:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Might not hurt
But I’m not sure it changes this situation. The opinion was not that Darius couldn’t play, but that it was very, very risky for him to do so because of the potential damage.
So if another doctor said the same thing, what then? Darius would still be wanting to play, these other teams would still have done what they did.
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Jan 9, 2009 1:16 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Here's the bottom line, the way I see it:
How can somebody a league doctor said should no be playing, be playing?
Rudyculize: The act of Rudy making others look slow, dim and generally oafish.
http://www.myspace.com/y5k
by Y5k on Jan 9, 2009 1:17 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Because doctors can only give advice and opinion.
They cannot prevent a person from going against their advice (in most cases). Tell me you’ve never heard of a doctor telling their patient they need to exercise, lose weight, stop smoking, etc and the patient continuing to act as before.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jan 9, 2009 1:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, yeah ...
But if that advice is the pivot in a contract, that is, changes the fundamental nature of the contract, and one party agrees to adhere to the advice, shouldn’t the other party be forced to as well?
I’m not saying this very well.
OK: Both parties agreed to follow the opinion of that expert. Miles left with medical retirement and sick-pay; Blazers lose the player and gain cap space.
So now Darius gets to double dip? Gets to choose if he plays or not?
It’s not like the Blazers have any options. They can’t choose to trade his contract.
Rudyculize: The act of Rudy making others look slow, dim and generally oafish.
http://www.myspace.com/y5k
by Y5k on Jan 9, 2009 1:28 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It's an expert opinion that changes a legally binding contract.
This rule seems so silly and full of loopholes to me. Either he has a career-ending injury or he does not. If he does not, he should be on the Blazers squad for better or worse. If he does, he should not be playing in the NBA. Period.
So frustrating with all this double-talk.
Rudyculize: The act of Rudy making others look slow, dim and generally oafish.
http://www.myspace.com/y5k
by Y5k on Jan 9, 2009 1:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It did not change the contract.
The contract is still in force and Portland still pays Miles. The only thing it changed is how the contract effected Portland in terms of league rules.
Portland could have kept Miles on the inactive list for two years. It could have had him remain away from the team for that time, tried to trade him or it could have simply released him. They took a look at the rules and determined that they had another option. Nothing changed with regard to the contract between Miles and Portland.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jan 9, 2009 1:35 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Hmmm…
Thanks for that.
There is still something fishy about this whole thing, however.
Rudyculize: The act of Rudy making others look slow, dim and generally oafish.
http://www.myspace.com/y5k
by Y5k on Jan 9, 2009 1:38 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Honestly, I'm no so sure
It’s a real simple logical progression actually.
- Darius gets hurts, rehabs for two years with setbacks
- Portland’s doctors say “He might be able to play at a minimal level again, but at grave risk to his knee”
- Portland asks the NBA’s independent doctor to confirm their findings
- The NBA and Darius’ own players union hires a doctor who says the same.
- Darius is retired. Darius himself signs the paperwork (I believe).
- Darius comes back anyway, despite the risk to his knee
- Even though he’s shown minimal abilities due to his injuries, a couple teams play him just enough to bring his contract back on the books.
- Portland says “hey wait a second… play him because he’s good enough, not just to screw us. That’s bad faith”
when you really look at it, it’s really not as fishy as it sounds at first listen.
by Timmay! on Jan 9, 2009 1:41 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Man, thanks for breaking that down, timg56 and Timmay!
It’s sounds so damn fishy unless you look at it like that.
It comes down to him being not healthy enough for Team A, yet healthy enough for Team B, OR, Team B is engaging in a bad faith contract with Miles. And the doctor did nothing more than let Team A and Miles out of a portion of his contract, not make a determination on his playing eligibility league-wide. (which I really think it should have been)
Rudyculize: The act of Rudy making others look slow, dim and generally oafish.
http://www.myspace.com/y5k
by Y5k on Jan 9, 2009 1:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It wouldn't change this situation
but doctors sometimes make mistakes and having a second opinion should reduce the chances of someone being deemed unable to play NBA-level basketball without long term injury incorrectly.
by tingeyga on Jan 9, 2009 1:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah
THAT Eastern exec is saying that. Another Eastern exec was saying someone was going to “screw Portland”.
That Eastern exec (Ainge perhaps?) is ignoring the fact that the doctor didn’t say Darius couldn’t play, he said that the risk was too great. And that Eastern exec probably knows exactly that, and is playing games with the media.
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Jan 9, 2009 6:48 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That sounds like a smoke screen.
Might even be from one of the executives that was earlier talking about how easy it would be screw Portland.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jan 9, 2009 8:18 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Might even be the exec
that leaked Portland’s email.
Any guesses? I’ve got one.
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Jan 9, 2009 8:33 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Ainge is the easy guess
It is weird that he would have such distaste for an out of conference team, from his home state (he is easily the greatest athlete in Oregon history), that once payed him for his services. That whole Sebastian Telfair for Roy thing must have really got under his skin.
This is what Lucas would do. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0aPkIE2qK0
by 123_G.O._RipCity on Jan 9, 2009 8:51 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Ding, ding, ding!
We have a winner. For guessing the same person as I guessed, you have won
1. One rec.
2. Two cheers.
3. Three large bags of admiration. I know you can put admiration in bags, because admiration is real, and tominhawaii says that everything that is real is measurable.
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Jan 9, 2009 9:23 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I know you can put admiration in bags, because admiration is real, and tominhawaii says that everything that is real is measurable.
That should be someone’s new signature. I like the one I’ve got too much to boot it just yet.
"...we have so many experts who think that you have to play defense, you have to rebound, you have to be a possession coach, you have to execute. I just laugh. Explosive offense is not as intimidating as dominant defense. But it is scary when you don't know how to stop someone." - George Karl, Nuggets coach
by jamon51 on Jan 9, 2009 1:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I did it myself
I know you can put admiration in bags, because admiration is real, and tominhawaii says that everything that is real is measurable.
by jscot on Jan 10, 2009 1:25 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Portland received benefits?
If you mean the benefit of paying someone $18 million (some of that paid by insurance) while receiving no services from that person.
Could Miles dedication to rehabilitation be questioned? Micro-fracture surgery has either been career ending or required extensive rehabilitation to recover from. If Darius Miles is truly fit to play why is he not playing for the Blazers?
Wouldn’t KP and the Blazers have either traded Miles or waived him if his injury wasn’t career ending?
I think you have to believe that the ONLY reason Miles has seen any court time is because of the salary cap and luxury tax ramifications. Especially due to his minimum veteran contract. You’re going to tell me there are no better, cheaper options for NBA teams than Darius Miles? Please.
by loud1 on Jan 9, 2009 11:22 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Fans are riled up, yes ...
… but big corporations send each other hate mail like this all the time. Go down to the court house and read a few lawsuit preambles. They all read this way. This is obviously a “not for publication” type letter. Miller never thought this thing would be read by you and me, so he worded it like lawyers word stuff to each other. But this time, the veil was pulled back and fans are seeing the ugly behind-the-scenes NBA that I’m sure has existed as long as the league has.
Unfortunately, the Blazers can’t really do much in the way of damage control because such action would only call more attention to the problem. Not only that, but Darius could certainly sue if he is slandered, libeled or kept from earning money he would otherwise make.
A legal can o’ worms we will be writing about for five years, I’ll bet. These kinds of legal junk drawers have no bottom, especially if Miles feels like he’s been wronged. Let’s hope he wins the lotto and forgets about the whole thing.
As for other teams, let’s hope the other GMs don’t take this fiasco as an excuse to show how big their testicles are and knock the chip off Miller’s shoulder.
Rudyculize: The act of Rudy making others look slow, dim and generally oafish.
http://www.myspace.com/y5k
by Y5k on Jan 9, 2009 5:48 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Larry Miller is now like Steve Patterson, 2.0
Major Mistake Larry.
Email is never a way to resolve difficult situations. I’ve learned this multiple times. For all the great things that email is, this is one of its biggest weaknesses.
by hotstuffdb22 on Jan 9, 2009 5:50 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
absolutely.
you gotta talk to people face-to-face for the big stuff.
Rudyculize: The act of Rudy making others look slow, dim and generally oafish.
http://www.myspace.com/y5k
by Y5k on Jan 9, 2009 5:54 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I disagree on this one
It’s “unnamed” people who were threatening to screw Portland. The obvious solution is to send a blanket letter (email or hard copy, doesn’t matter) to all parties saying, “I don’t know who is planning on doing this, but if you are, the hammer falls.”
You HAVE to have it in writing for when the lawsuit starts, if it does. And if you send it individually, you are accusing people, including those who you may know full well are innocent. So you send it to everybody.
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Jan 9, 2009 6:51 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I disagree...
this action isn’t obligatory. They could’ve called the teams… there are only 29
by hotstuffdb22 on Jan 9, 2009 6:53 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Now it's public, so nobody can say he didn't know about it. And it probably had to be in writing anyway
by Norsktroll on Jan 9, 2009 6:55 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I see your point... i just would've avoided this stuff...
not a good for us…
by hotstuffdb22 on Jan 9, 2009 6:57 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Lawyers love documentation, unless it's used against them.
Rudyculize: The act of Rudy making others look slow, dim and generally oafish.
http://www.myspace.com/y5k
by Y5k on Jan 9, 2009 6:59 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
How would you avoid it?
Just pay the millions in luxury tax?
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Jan 9, 2009 7:05 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You might have the makings of a lawyer.
At least half of the ones I know are all about risk aversion.
(That wasn’t meant as criticism. A large part of a lawyer’s job is to protect their client or company from risk. )
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jan 9, 2009 8:28 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
In addition, corporations (usually) know not to take stuff like this personally.
We just went through a dispute with a major corporation (the kind identified by just 3 letters) and while there were foks in our company that did not appreciate the tone and content of the initial shot (letter) by these guys (myself included) I kept reminding them that these are people we work with on a regular basis and it is just part of doing business.
We won the dispute by the way.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jan 9, 2009 8:24 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
What a mess
I cannot believe that 6 games played while in training camp is causing this much stir, Those games dont count for anything other then getting players in to shape for the reguler season. I like the throwing the first punch approach by portland, did Miles pre-season games really count? Why doesnt the league just add pick up games at the training facility in July to count also. Thats the Stern way of treating smaller market teams, you can bet if this was LA in this same boat there would be a clear cut statement by the nba indicating Miles Situation is fluent.
I try to help with everything," Fernandez said. "If the coach says go rebound, I go rebound. I work for the team."
by Dragonage on Jan 9, 2009 6:09 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
ESPN changed the headline of its story. Guess someone read the comments or the Blazers complained :)
It read something like “Blazers Blackball Miles”, now it’s “Blazers send e-mail about Miles”
by Norsktroll on Jan 9, 2009 6:32 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Or there own lawyers looked at it
That could have had them in serious trouble.
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Jan 9, 2009 6:52 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
If this isssue is not resolved soon by Stern ( in our favor )....wouldn't our next step be....
…… to " quitely threaten" to file a league suit including requesting “discovery” of all of their documents from all league meeting minutes, pertinent emails & letters, both before and after this rule’s approval. The purpose of this is for understanding the League’s “intent” of the rule.
If they’re favorable to us, then we would probably see a “flurry” of league solutions to our cap space & tax issue’s,
If these documents were not favorable for us, then we would at least know to focus on “franchise duties and responsibilities to each other”…which would still probably achieve many favorable settlement ideas!
by roy2rudy on Jan 9, 2009 6:41 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I think Stern should intervene right now...
I think the damages to both Darius and Portland could both be potentially larger than each originally intended. This should be settled now, so both parties can move on.
by hotstuffdb22 on Jan 9, 2009 6:55 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Completely agree
The situation has set up where Portland could have claims against other franchises and Miles/the PA could have claims against Portland. Messy, protracted litigation with plenty of embarassing (if not incriminating) documents/e-mails = bad business for Stern.
Bayless has been testing the fences for weaknesses
by blazeraddict on Jan 9, 2009 9:37 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think this is right -- the whole thing could be aimed at lighting a fire under Stern
I posted this on an earlier fan thread:
There could be even a deeper strategy
I could foresee this happening:
- Team X signs Miles
- Blazers file complaint with the league
- Blazers file lawsuit if necessary
- NBA decides to resolve the dispute by changing the rule or granting Portland an exemption. Lawsuit goes away.
This would be only right because Miles was waived a long time ago in good faith, and if he’s playing for another team he shouldn’t be a Portland salary. So maybe the PTB are angling for that kind of a resolution.
by Kaboomm on Jan 9, 2009 7:04 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
If you're David Stern . . .
You have a choice between:
- Legal chaos, including your teams suing each other AND Darius Miles suing Portland and the NBA over restraint of trade. This makes the league look ridiculous.
- Take Miles off of Portland’s books, where he doesn’t belong anyway, and let Miles freely sign with any team that wants him. This looks exactly like normal life.
by Kaboomm on Jan 9, 2009 7:08 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
some how, i bet if that happenned, no one would sign him
December 18, 2008.
"Roy is Roy, and if I were to bet my life on a game of 5-on-5, I’d bet on whichever team Roy was playing on." by HurraKane212
by maid tu rek on Jan 9, 2009 7:39 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You forgot the public backlash
now that this is public about unethical dealings of GMs
Blazer fans tell me, where were you,
When our Brandon Roy dropped 52?
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jan 9, 2009 10:34 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
exactly! The league could end all of this in a heartbeat
They could make a pre-emptive ruling on the Cap Space situation and the intent of those segments of the CBA. If the NBA comes out and says "the intent was always to prevent a team from bringing back it’s own retired plyaer at a lesser cap figure, and therefore Portland will not have this money added back to their cap if and when Darius plays 10 games.", then it’s game over, and everyone wins:
-Portland is free to continue on with it’s plans, and not be hurt because they followed the rules
-Darius is free to sign with any team who wants his services and know that he is not being used as a pawn
-Other teams are free to sign Darius if they want, without worry of getting sued over it.
Rule #1 of nitpicking is to get it right.
by douglast on Jan 9, 2009 9:11 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Precisely
and in all probability, that happens very soon.
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Jan 9, 2009 9:12 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Or one could hope
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 9:13 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
What if Portland makes the NBA finals in 2012 and...
Miles is on the opposing team…. and…. it’s Game 7????
by hotstuffdb22 on Jan 9, 2009 6:57 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Blazers 112 / The Other Team 100.
Book it!
Rudyculize: The act of Rudy making others look slow, dim and generally oafish.
http://www.myspace.com/y5k
by Y5k on Jan 9, 2009 7:01 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
As sad as it is (and I wish he could make his comeback – especially if it would not screw our cap space): I doubt his knee holds that long if he would play pro basketball for multiple seasons. I know professional skiers who can still ski better than you and me on cruise control as a “tourist” after severe injuries, but they would blow their knee for good when doing it on a pro course at pro speed every week. I fear it’s the same with Darius and basketball.
by Norsktroll on Jan 9, 2009 7:01 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly
It’s like people are expecting Miles to have to walk with a cane right now, because a doctor said he shouldn’t play anymore. Eddy Curry could drop dead from many moment from his heart thingy, according to his former doctors, and he is still able to play— they just felt the risk was too great. The Knicks’ doctors (or just Isiah) felt otherwise.
Just because a person can do something in the moment, it doesn’t erase the risk that they will greatly re-injure their injury from that act. Darius can run and jump like an average not-that-athletic NBA player right now. The doctors didn’t think it would last very long, however, and that the risk to his knee made it so he should retire.
He still has lanky arms and 2 legs. He can make plays. But his knee won’t be able to handle it, in those docs opinion.
And, if he was still good enough otherwise, he’d be on a NBA team already after two long years.
I have always, always wanted Darius to be able to make a comeback. Watching him both in pre-season and with the Grizz, he doesn’t look very good. I sincerely wish him the best, and hope he can find a home in the NBA.
I also don’t want him jerked around and signed just to screw the Blazers. That would be idiotic, and I know which is “morally worse”… telling people not to do something morally wrong, or doing the morally wrong thing. Signing Darius with only the intent to screw the Blazers financially (not just on the court, but millions of dollars) isn’t a very noble deed, so I don’t mind us heading off those deeds at the pass and saying “nuh uh”.
Mortimer
by Mortimer on Jan 9, 2009 10:15 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That's an interesting point
And only Miles’ backers seem to be making it. Which is rather sad, but whatever. Ways of the world & all that.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 10:18 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Danny Ainge disagrees.
Blazer fans tell me, where were you,
When our Brandon Roy dropped 52?
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jan 9, 2009 10:35 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
guaranteed win?
Blazer fans tell me, where were you,
When our Brandon Roy dropped 52?
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jan 9, 2009 10:35 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Unique situations demand unique responses. I would imagine this is Allen's line in the sand.
Nobody, even a multi-billionaire wants to pay $10 mil+ that he doesn’t have to.
I applaud the move, the rule is clearly not working as intended.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Jan 9, 2009 7:04 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Well, the problem is that "the rule" is a mess to start with.
If a guy is unfit to play, he obviously shouldn’t be playing. Period.
Either the doctor screwed it up, or what he meant was: “I think you should never play again.” not, “you will never be able to play again.” There is a big difference.
The Rule has a big gray area in it.
Rudyculize: The act of Rudy making others look slow, dim and generally oafish.
http://www.myspace.com/y5k
by Y5k on Jan 9, 2009 7:08 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Anyone else thinking " If only the Blazers were this aggressive ON the court"
cmon i cant be the only one
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Jan 9, 2009 7:23 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
P.S. Anything that causes David Stern stress is allright with me.
Oh to be a fly on the wall…
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Jan 9, 2009 7:41 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I thought this was funny.
Don’t worry, they will get there. No way will Portland not be aggressive with McMillan as coach.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jan 9, 2009 8:57 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Personal independent opinion
I’m a Kings fan (for those who don’t know who I am), so from this perspective, it doesn’t matter to me. My personal feeling’s on Paul Allen run a bit differently, in part because I live in Seattle, and Allen lives on Mercer Island (a suburb of Seattle essentially for those who aren’t aware) which is part of the greater Seattle area. I hate what he’s doing with the South Lake Union development (I think the view’s of the water are great, particularly from Capitol Hill, and all that development has taken away from that. But such is life in a place like the Emerald City.)
That all being said, what the Grizzlies did was a step to screw the Blazers. What the Celtics did was understandable, but did not ultimately hurt anything. It seems the Celtics are less to blame here, and the Grizzlies did this to gain something financially. My hope is, that despite the ugly warning letter, despite Miles still wanting to play, he goes oversea’s and does it that way. I don’t really think he can help a NBA team, and I’m willing to bet most NBA teams would rather go with a younger more talented player than Miles. I think Miles is still living a dream essentially.
I’d be surprised if this hurts the Blazers, and while I don’t really care, and don’t think it even matters more than anything than simple greed for other teams, it will be interesting to see how this works for the future.
Again, I have no stake in this one way or the other. Keep it in mind. (And, I’ve always thought very ill of Miles game personally.)
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 7:46 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
(I never liked his game either, actually. But don’t tell any of my Blazer buddies here.)
Rudyculize: The act of Rudy making others look slow, dim and generally oafish.
http://www.myspace.com/y5k
by Y5k on Jan 9, 2009 7:48 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
The Grizzlies look really bad in this. If they had kept him through the season, that would be one thing.
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Jan 9, 2009 7:50 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Michael Heisley (Grizz owner) is also a billionaire
He’s just cheap. Similar to Jerry Reinsdorf in that respect.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 7:53 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
who isn't a billionaire these days?
Rudyculize: The act of Rudy making others look slow, dim and generally oafish.
http://www.myspace.com/y5k
by Y5k on Jan 9, 2009 7:54 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm guessing
But you, and this I can say for certain, me.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 7:55 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You're two-for-two on that one. See you in the soup line.
Rudyculize: The act of Rudy making others look slow, dim and generally oafish.
http://www.myspace.com/y5k
by Y5k on Jan 9, 2009 7:57 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Not to be uncouth
But I hope not.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 7:58 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You are not alone.
I’m still working on getting to millionaire status.
(I have a lot of work ahead of me.)
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jan 9, 2009 9:03 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, kind of bizarre
The thing is, for the Grizz, it probably wasn’t just about luxury tax this year, but also about cap space and competition in the FA market this summer.
For the Blazers, I suspect it is more about luxury tax. For the Griz, the tax means $250K, for Paul Allen it means millions.
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Jan 9, 2009 8:00 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yup Yup
But the Grizz had cap space, and didn’t use it last summer. Maybe that had something to do with the Free Agents, but if they wanted any number of players, they could have had them for just cap space.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 8:01 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That's true
I get so used to having an owner that cares about winning….
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Jan 9, 2009 8:02 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm used to 1 owner who mouthes off about it
And whose actions indicate the opposite. (The Kings had a similar owner in Jim Thomas, except he was just better by the end. Under Thomas, the Kings hired Petrie, hired and fired Eddie Jordan, hired Rick Adelman, drafted Peja and Corliss among others, Brian Grant too, J-Will, and of course made the Webber trade.)
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 8:08 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
This isn't about 'class' by the way
This is about a rich man looking out for his interests and that of his company.
I don’t really think Blazer mangement cares about what Boston fans, or Memphis fans, or even naive Portland fans think of this decision.
So the ‘class’ argument is kinda silly.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Jan 9, 2009 7:50 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Not sure what to say here ...
I’m a little disappointed in the team for taking this path, mostly I think because it removes the spotlight from the good things the team has done so far this year. We’ve been playing really well, and now this becomes a bit of a distraction. I hope it doesn’t negatively affect our players …
"These are dreams that we have." --Rudolfo Fernandez
by bfan on Jan 9, 2009 7:56 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Why not claim him on waivers?
Couldn’t the Blazers have claimed him on waivers if they were so afraid of another team signing him for two games? Granted this could be impossible or may have had drawbacks, among the following. 1) It could have triggered the insurance company no longer paying insurance on the remainder of Miles contract; 2) It could be against the rules to claim a player with no intention of having him play; or 3) It may have caused the league to disallow the claim that Miles can no longer play. But, the insurance money would affect Allen’s pocket, but not the Blazers cap space- unless, as in 3) the league puts Miles contract back on the Blazers cap as he is now an “active” player on the Blazers. Sure the Blazers would have to cut and pay Shavlik Randolph, but having stashed Miles on the bench after claiming him on waivers seem to offer a way to safeguard the Blazers cap space, perhaps better than sending that letter. I haven’t seen anything about this in the articles I have read. Is there an easy reason why this wasn’t possible?
by fan in japan on Jan 9, 2009 8:13 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
i think miles would have tu want tu be signed by portland
and somehow i doubt he would go for that.
December 18, 2008.
"Roy is Roy, and if I were to bet my life on a game of 5-on-5, I’d bet on whichever team Roy was playing on." by HurraKane212
by maid tu rek on Jan 9, 2009 8:30 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Question
So even if Miles sues Portland and wins. How much does Portland pay out? Miles is still getting his money from the medical retirement. So if he sues for the salary that the new team would have paid him is that the league minimum?
If it is the league minimum then I would definitely send this memo. I would rather pay league minimum salary vs. spending millions towards salary and luxury tax ramifications.
Am I incorrect in this, and isn’t this just common business practice?
If you let them make you, they'll make you into paper mache.
At a distance you're strong until the wind comes, then you'll crumble and blow away.
- Incubus
by ZooooomByU on Jan 9, 2009 8:18 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
He'd have to prove lost wages I would assume + punitive dmgs?
Still how’s a lazy dude coming off major knee surgery going to prove he would’ve gotten paid in the future? The evidence is pretty flimsy.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Jan 9, 2009 8:51 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah
The risk is pretty small, even if he wins.
He can try to argue that he would have greater future earnings if he’s allowed to start rebuilding his career this year, and that Portland hurt him. Quantifying that is pretty hard.
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Jan 9, 2009 9:03 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Get over it Blazers
For me this all boils down too the Blazers over reacting. If the Blazers felt that teams are thinking of signing Miles just to put his contract back on their books they should talk to the league about this and not threaten the other teams. This is a league were you have to work with other teams in order to get better. In addition David Stern is not a guy you want to piss off. I think this should have been brought to his attention first and handled from a league stand point.
It feels almost like a bullying statement. It makes me feel like the old regime is back and trying to lay down the law.
Look Portland signed him to this contract. When it became more than clear they did not want to have Darius on the team they had a few choices, cut him, trade him, or try to get him to retire. They decided that his knee was bad enough that an independent doctor might rule that he was unable to play on the knee anymore and could file for a medical retirement. They knew the risks when they decided to go down this road. It was the best choice they had and they went with it. Good for them. But now is not the time to whine about it. The Blazers have made many strides over the past few years. Let’s not revert back, hey you win some and you lose some and the Blazers front office has had quite a winning streak as of late. Perhaps it was time for a loss.
portlandmenonsports.blogspot.com
by Derek @Portland Men on Sports on Jan 9, 2009 8:43 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
To be it boils down to a business entity protecting their interests
pretty standard really.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Jan 9, 2009 8:50 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re Talking to Stern
How do you know they haven’t….Dave doesn’t exactly have track record of sending out press releases for this stuff
Homer: "Yikes....a bear is eating my father!!"
Selma: "I'm Selma"
Homer: "A talking bear is eating my father!!"
by 92wastheyear on Jan 9, 2009 8:56 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Precisely
How do you know David Stern didn’t see this and say, “Yeah, you ought to send it out.”
How do you know David Stern didn’t also send an email saying, “Portland is right, this talk about screwing the Blazers has to stop.”
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Jan 9, 2009 9:10 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Cause
In the statement Friday that announced Miles had cleared waivers, the league acknowledged it received the e-mail Portland sent to all teams and seemed to indicate that it would support any club signing the veteran forward.
“Under league rules, teams are free to sign Darius Miles to a Uniform Player Contract if they wish to secure his services as a player, and any such contract would be approved by the NBA,” the statement read.
portlandmenonsports.blogspot.com
by Derek @Portland Men on Sports on Jan 9, 2009 10:33 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
thats what they sent out publicly
you have no idea what he said to the other owners/gms privately.
Professional decorum
Blazer fans tell me, where were you,
When our Brandon Roy dropped 52?
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jan 9, 2009 10:36 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
In that case...
I’m sure that email would get “leaked” to the press as well.
I like the your handle by the way. That needs to be all over the RG.
portlandmenonsports.blogspot.com
by Derek @Portland Men on Sports on Jan 9, 2009 10:42 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
well thanks!
depends who leaked it. If it was the Blazers then yes I agree it would have. If it was Ainge (I suspect him) then of course you dont leak the email that disagrees with you. :)
Blazer fans tell me, where were you,
When our Brandon Roy dropped 52?
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jan 9, 2009 10:43 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Touche
I’m not convince Ainge is that bright.
portlandmenonsports.blogspot.com
by Derek @Portland Men on Sports on Jan 9, 2009 10:44 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I know he appears to be the favorite in "Guess which GM" ...
… but I have to wonder why. He’s Oregon born and bred. Until relatively recently made his off season home in Oregon. Played for the Blazers, (with , as I recall, most Blazer fans in support of him). I can’t see where he has reason to think he needs to get back at Portland. Some point to the Brandon Roy deal, but he turned that into Kevin Garnett. Others have mentioned Portland getting the #1 pick against the odds. Other than idiot fans and one Bill Simmons, how is that cause to be upset with Portland?
I have no insight into Ainge’s thought process, personality, or psyche, so I can’t determine one way or the other. All I have to go on is that there is no obvious cause or motive for him to do this and from what I have observed of Ainge, he’s always been a person of good character. I have to give him the benefit of doubt on this.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jan 9, 2009 11:00 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
there is a difference between
seeking his services as a player and seeking his ability to get you a free luxury tax payment
by tingeyga on Jan 9, 2009 12:54 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Precisely
But the real point of the league’s statement is, “Your honor, we know Darius thinks he has been harmed by league collusion, but you will notice the statement we made as soon as this matter became public.”
Why was that statement made after the email leaked instead of as soon as the email was received by the league offices?
Obviously, cover your backside.
I know you can put admiration in bags, because admiration is real, and tominhawaii says that everything that is real is measurable.
by jscot on Jan 10, 2009 1:32 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I miss the old days when Darius used to just chill out eating ice cream and buying cars with
ridiculously large wheels.
Where’d he suddenly get all this motivation to quit eating ice cream?
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Jan 9, 2009 9:18 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
You are on a roll today.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jan 9, 2009 9:19 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
There could be over a million dollars in it for him if he signs a full contract with a team
I’d give up Ice cream for that kind of scratch
This is what Lucas would do. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0aPkIE2qK0
by 123_G.O._RipCity on Jan 9, 2009 9:20 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That's a potential million dollars worth of ice cream, you have a point
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Jan 9, 2009 9:20 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'd get a swimming pool full of half baked
And then challenge Michael Phelps to an Ice cream eating contest. That boy can eat
This is what Lucas would do. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0aPkIE2qK0
by 123_G.O._RipCity on Jan 9, 2009 9:22 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I acutally don't dislike Miles, but I disliked him on our team and I don't like when we play by the rules and
getting jobbed for it.
Which is what is happening. I don’t think that many people who have followed Darius over the last couple years truly think he’ll ever be capabale of being a legit NBA player. Then again I guess it depends on what you call a ‘career’
The worst part of it all is that it doesn’t sound like ANY of the parties were ever truly clear on the rule.
Also, ice cream is good.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Jan 9, 2009 9:25 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think Ainge was clear on the rule all along
I think he is the eastern GM that sent Yahoo in the direction of finding out about the pre season games counting against us And I think that is the reason Miles was on their preseason roster and played in every game.
This is what Lucas would do. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0aPkIE2qK0
by 123_G.O._RipCity on Jan 9, 2009 9:28 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
This is crazy.
I don’t think Miles is worthy of a spot on any NBA team. If someone does pick him up now it is completely out of spite or with intentions to ruin our salary situation. There is such a thing as respect among the owners, I doubt anyone will sign him now.
by GUnit on Jan 9, 2009 9:19 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
In all seriousness I kinda like the target it puts on our back
I wonder if other teams will boo us on the road lol.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Jan 9, 2009 9:21 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Well I doubt they will cheer
"When I have the ball, I experiment." #5
by Sabonis4Ever on Jan 9, 2009 4:02 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The "Common Sense" solution
Would be for Stern/NBA to
1. Change the rule; establish a certain number of minutes that resembles “reasonable playing time” in order for the medical retirement to be waived. I’d use a formula, something like 50% of the PT of the average player at your salary over those 10 games (ie, if average $9m guy plays 15 minutes a game; Miles has to log 75 total minutes to qualify).
This would prevent sham ‘garbage time’ minutes simply to get a guy an appearance and a notch in the 10-game belt.
2. Simply declare Miles contract off Portland’s book, unless a “blue ribbon panel” or arbiter deem that Miles’ continued play in the NBA actually was meaningful and indicated that his medical retirement unnecessary.
This prevents any team from “screwing” the Blazers in “bad faith” but does not prevent Miles from playing. It simply states that Stern would enforce the spirit of the law, rather than the letter.
M, period. Fresh, comma.
by manzell on Jan 9, 2009 9:31 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
My Insane Conspiracy Theory
I wonder if league has wanted to punish the Blazers for their “no” vote against the OKC move. Of course, it’s unprovable, and in this case, teams have a small financial incentive to stick the Blazers also. But in my weak moments, I wonder.
by chnews on Jan 9, 2009 9:32 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I doubt it
If anything they would be mad at Cuban. His only reason for a no vote was common decency (weird coming from Cuban). Allen made money off of the rivalry, he is a Seattle native, and I believe he is a decent guy too.
This is what Lucas would do. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0aPkIE2qK0
by 123_G.O._RipCity on Jan 9, 2009 9:34 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Paul A and Larry M BLOW IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This action makes as much sense as a small child threatening to hold their breath until they get what they want. All the positive pub about the TB organization wiped away not to mention the repercussions that might occur…ie All Star selection. BAD MOVE!
"The idea is not to block every shot. The idea is to make your opponent believe that you might block every shot." - Bill Russell
by NOWINE on Jan 9, 2009 9:33 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
uhh really?
Blazer fans tell me, where were you,
When our Brandon Roy dropped 52?
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jan 9, 2009 9:53 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
League Office
This should have come from the league office, not the Blazers.
Perhaps there is another, similar, email that states the same thing from Stern.
And…sending it by email is a neat trick. Now, there is a data stream with internal message headers and keywords into every teams email system. Search algoryihms will find references to it and be able to pull much more information in the case of any requests for related communications.
Any team that deletes any email outside of its normal email retention policy (assuming they have one) will now have to explain it. That will look bad for them in front of a judge.
If you shoot the messenger often enough, the message stops being delivered.
by DucRider on Jan 9, 2009 9:36 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
hahaha
your argument is totally valid. completely logical. and yet precedent says you’re wrong.
The d-bag formally known as Clay Bennett got away with STATING we cant wait to move them, and more or less YEAY OKC, screw seattle. Email trail and all. and got away with it.
Blazer fans tell me, where were you,
When our Brandon Roy dropped 52?
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jan 9, 2009 10:25 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
My take
This is a bit of a threat, but the Blazers do have a point. In the spirit of collective bargaining in the league, going out of your way to harm another team is not a smart practice. This letter doesn’t preclude teams from getting Miles, but if they get him they definitely better actually use him. The Blazers can make a good case that getting Miles and barely playing him is a managerial decision meant to punish the Blazers, not to improve the team that signs him. If that scenario does play out, I think that the Blazers are correct that legal action is necessary and they have a good chance through, at the least, arbitration of getting some of the luxury tax penalty decreased for the Blazers.
Chris Dudley for three!
by wilbjammin on Jan 9, 2009 9:36 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I'm not sure what you guys are thinking...
This was a smart calculated move. I highly doubt this is the first time anything like this has been done, its just the first time someone got so pissed they leaked it.
The Blazers will not sue. They would have no chance of winning and they know it. Its not a winnable case because it supposes you could argue for a person’s motives (the GM). Impossible to do.
Its not a threat so much as a notice to GM’s. We know what your doing, and if you do it, be prepared to be blackballed by the community. I would argue that 90 percent of the GMs are on the Blazers sides on this. I think if someone were to get something out of Miles and actually get him some run on the floor, no one would mind, but playing 1 min for two games just to screw with the Blazers, well the entire GM frat would turn on whoever did that. Thats just plain unethical. And once you get the frat against you, good luck making a deal or keeping your job.
I wouldnt however be surprised if the Blazers leaked this themselves. I think it puts pressure on Stern to deal with this publicly now if a GM does this. Its one thing to screw a team behind their back, its a whole nother to do it publicly. Now the public knows exactly what a team would be doing (yes we know it, but the majority of the leagues fans do not) fans of the NBA would put major pressure on Stern to handle this not only logically but with policy change and hopefully some positive repercussions for the Blazers.
Blazer fans tell me, where were you,
When our Brandon Roy dropped 52?
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jan 9, 2009 9:59 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
PA doesn't really have to prove anything, just make it not worth it to pay out the pooper in legal fees over Miles
Miles isn’t worth it. You know it. I know it. And believe me, the other teams know it.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Jan 9, 2009 10:27 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
to win the suit he would have to prove it.
Its more or less a pre-emminant warning that this could backfire and hurt your career if you do it for that reason
Blazer fans tell me, where were you,
When our Brandon Roy dropped 52?
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jan 9, 2009 10:30 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe PA has taken the position...
If some other team is going to make me pay… I’ll take them to court. And even if I lose, I can afford to lose, while the legal fees may really hurt another owner. Are teams really going to risk that? I think they played it brilliantly.
According to forbes, the 18 mil is 1/888 of Allen’s net worth.
by tmundal on Jan 9, 2009 10:38 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The Cavs won't sign Darius, but their owner is not happy with the e-mail
by Norsktroll on Jan 9, 2009 10:05 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
And of course that Adrian guy is the one to post it
Why am I not surprised. /sarcasm
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 10:08 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
He gets BCCed by whoever broke the story I suppose
by Norsktroll on Jan 9, 2009 10:10 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Interesting thing is
Dan Gilbert does have a point too. There are a lot of issue’s here, and I think this is going to cause a re-write of the medical retirement provision in the CBA, and cause it to go back to 2 years. I hope that isn’t the case, because that hurts every team, but if the Blazers end up fighting the battle, they will end up losing the war on this one.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 10:20 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I dont think the goal is to fight
more to let the public fight for them
Blazer fans tell me, where were you,
When our Brandon Roy dropped 52?
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jan 9, 2009 10:24 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not sure I understand his second point.
“"2. Are legal threats through a mass email the best way to circumvent the known potential consequences that could result from the Trailblazers decisions and actions they took with respect to Darius Miles?”
What does Gilbert mean by “circumvent”? I don’t believe there is any intention of circumvention. The issue, to me, is one of prevention.
This sounds like Gilbert getting a bit ticked off because he never contemplated such a move with regard to Darius and took offense at the implication that he might have. I can certainly understand that and can see myself responding as he did. However these days, I believe I’d do it by phone, not email, unless I wanted everyone to know how I felt. Gilbert very well might have.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jan 9, 2009 11:10 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Your 2nd point sounds right
In fact, I’m sure about 25 teams never contemplated it. Maybe that figure drops to 20.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 11:12 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
A question for Mr. Gilbert
Are public statements through the media the best way to respond to a private email that someone else leaked?
Perhaps our leaker isn’t Mr. Ainge, after all. Someone wants to hurt the Blazers’ public image here.
I know you can put admiration in bags, because admiration is real, and tominhawaii says that everything that is real is measurable.
by jscot on Jan 10, 2009 1:36 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Speaking of the CBA
i looked for the medical retirement section and I couldn’t find it. Where is it found?
by tingeyga on Jan 9, 2009 1:02 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I have to agree with the Cavs owner...
However I think Portland wanted this public. And even if it pisses some guys off around the league, if Darius doesn’t play its all worth it. And people aren’t going to hold it against the Blazers trying to protect themselves. I think that every team out there really would like to see Portland win this, as they themselves would not want to be in the same situation.
by tmundal on Jan 9, 2009 10:21 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Its a ploy to make sure the public gets on Stern
If they see someone act in bad faith.
Blazer fans tell me, where were you,
When our Brandon Roy dropped 52?
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jan 9, 2009 10:21 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
In that case Great
Donald Sterling would have been jettisoned years ago.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 10:35 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
HA
good one. That made me laugh out loud.
Sterling is tricky. He makes it seem like they are in the running for huge FA every year and pretends they get beat out at the LAST second. poor clipper fans
Blazer fans tell me, where were you,
When our Brandon Roy dropped 52?
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jan 9, 2009 10:37 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That's a good point
Everything regarding this will be a complete double edged sword, which is why, even though I’m not a Bedger, who does post here on a very rare occasion, I’m posting as much as Bedger’s are. This is something that will effect the Kings at some point too.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 10:22 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
well as far as sac goes
i doubt petrie will sign darius and play that game, but I can bet that if it happens to them, they will be happy portland set a precedent for shady dealings
Blazer fans tell me, where were you,
When our Brandon Roy dropped 52?
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jan 9, 2009 10:23 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I know he isn't
Too deep in F’s already, and secondly, no roster spot without waiving a player first.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 10:35 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
hes gotta be better than the Turtle
and his spendy contract right?
Blazer fans tell me, where were you,
When our Brandon Roy dropped 52?
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jan 9, 2009 10:42 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Whose the turtle?
And I hate MIles. So I wouldn’t want him under any circumstance.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 10:48 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Candace Parkers babydaddy
Blazer fans tell me, where were you,
When our Brandon Roy dropped 52?
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jan 9, 2009 10:59 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Now I'm doing the Eddie Murphy laugh
But, no. Still rather have the “turtle” than Mr " I do weight training with jelly donuts" MIles.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 11:02 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
He oughta spend his time fetching Lebron's dinner
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Jan 9, 2009 10:28 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
TrueHoop is up
Henry pulls his usual “I’m a Blazer fan, so I have to be as hard on them as possible to not appear biased” routine that he’s doing a lot these days.
My favorite part? He conveniently forgets that the medical retirement was specifically due to concerns over long-term knee damage, not that he couldn’t run or jump anymore. Good investigative work, Henry, way to fully present the retirement in a factual manner.
I just watched video of all of his regular season minutes. From the January 6 Grizzles vs. Timberwolves game, we can learn that anyone who tells you he’s permanently broken is blatantly wrong.
by Timmay! on Jan 9, 2009 10:09 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Amen
I find myself skipping Truehoop more and more
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Jan 9, 2009 10:25 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
it's easy to skip truehoop
when half the posts are bullets that came from hoopshype.
henry does have some interesting pieces though and i check it quite often.
by goonerluke on Jan 9, 2009 11:56 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
so many nba blogs out there nowadays...
truehoop has been an after thought to me for some time now.
when i get sad, i stop being sad & become awesome again. true story.
by Net Ranger on Jan 9, 2009 12:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
ok, but its still up to Darius whether or not to try to play
Boomshakalaka
by jksnake99 on Jan 9, 2009 11:00 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
No disagreement there
I’d just like to see a team want to play HIM. Not to use him for free money.
by Timmay! on Jan 9, 2009 11:01 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That's true!
But it also shouldn’t be on the Blazers to have to pay for Miles decision (and another team’s decision) when the Blazers followed all of the rules regarding career ending injuries.
Eddy Curry made a similar choice— the Bulls wouldn’t sign him unless he took a heart test to prove his heart was okay. They offered him a retirement package that was very generous if he WASN’T okay. Curry decided that risking his heart and life was okay, and he didn’t agree to take the test. The Knicks were okay with him not taking the test (but their doctors weren’t, at least for their insurance company, because Curry’s contract can’t be insured).
It’s a risk taken by Curry and the Knicks, and shouldn’t penalize the Bulls because of their medical opinion telling them it was a risk.
If another team and Darius wanna risk it, THAT SHOULDN’T BUG US. But we shouldn’t have to pay for it, either.
Mortimer
by Mortimer on Jan 9, 2009 11:06 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Ohhh here we go...
isn’t that in a Billy Joel song? I can’t get it out of my head now.
"When I die, I want to go peacefully like my Grandfather did, in his sleep -- not screaming, like the passengers in his car"
by you'vegottomakeyourfreethrows on Jan 9, 2009 10:16 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
OMG
me and Mortimer just got Truehooped by proxy (since Dave put our quotes on the front page).
Man, this little event has really rejuvenated my interest in sports and entertainment law, this has been a lot of fun guys. Great debating with all of you!
Blazer's fan since '84, Currently exiled in San Antonio
↑ ↑ ↓ ↓ ← → ← → B A
by HurraKane212 on Jan 9, 2009 10:19 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
happy to bring some light to San An
Blazer fans tell me, where were you,
When our Brandon Roy dropped 52?
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jan 9, 2009 10:22 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I wished I sounded a lil' smarter!
If I had known I’ve be on the front page, let alone True Hooped, I woulda’ written it a lil’ more intelligently.
“Heck naw phoo” sounds ok, but dumb, within the regular post, but taken out and used within something trying to explain some legal issues… hmm. I shoulda’ known better!
You come off lookin’ good though, HurraKane212! I’m gonna start telling people I am 12 years old and from Paraguay, so my comment comes across better.
I am not a legal expert, only surrounded by it, but it seems so obvious to me— Miles was hurt, couldn’t play, the Blazers did the 2 year medical retirement thing, doc said it’s dangerous for him to play (not that he should be in a wheelchair or something crazy), the long process gets done and BLAMMO medical retirement. The Blazers followed all the rules they had to follow.
If another team does not want to follow that medical advice, that’s on them, not the Blazers. And if the cap space is a threat to go back on the Blazers cap (or if the Blazers have to pay luxury tax), this will first be appealed to the league and then to a civil court in real life. Since the rules are not written for this situation, the courts will likely judge in the Blazers favor because they followed all the rules they were supposed to follow but then an unprecedented event happened— the injured player tried to come back for another team during the timespan of his medically insured contract.
If Portland followed the rules that they clearly followed or the players union and insurance companies wouldn’t have allowed it to happen, they should not be responsible for Darius’ contract.
And NO team wants their emails and private memos and notes being poured through, because you KNOW someone at least HINTED at the NOTION that someone signing Darius for some harmless n’ cheap 10 day contracts means they get extra cash for free, plus Portland doesn’t get to use a lot of their cap space.
And, as others smarter than I have pointed out, is a violation of the individual NBA team’s agreements with each other.
And if Darius was okay enough to REALLY play (he was talented, some of us recall), he’d be on a team. He might just need more time to rehab, but it’s clear for RIGHT NOW he isn’t very good still. After the evidences is gone through, I betcha dollars to donuts it’ll be a LOT easier to prove their main motivation for signing him was to hurt one of their partners, and not for the benefit of their own franchise.
No one wants that scrutiny, for good reason— you know they were saying/writing it.
Mortimer
by Mortimer on Jan 9, 2009 10:40 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Doesn't Darius have all of next year to try to play too?
by tominhawaii on Jan 9, 2009 10:54 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yup this is true
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 11:02 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yuh
I think it’s a two year thing, and was intended for the team who he had played for before the injury to not be able to get him medically retired and then re-use him again… like, say, Allan Houston for the Knicks. He retires, the Knicks gets 20 million of insurance money for his contract, but he actually is okay and tries to play for the Knicks again with a new, cheaper contract. This rule was created for that sort of situation.
If Darius plays next season, supposedly the money goes back on our cap, but that is AFTER our cap window of this offseason— but it would still be fought tooth and nail by the Blazers, because it is so expensive and they followed the proper protocol for this situation… it’s just that part of this situation has no protocol (like, Miles still wants to play and another team ignores the player’s union’s doctor’s advice).
Since the Blazers followed the spirit of the rules, I’m sure it’ll be ok on the Blazers end. But, you still protect everything and that’s what this letter to other NBA suits does.
I’m sure that even if they are confident that they’ll get that ‘09 offseason cap space, they don’t want anything to delay it and mess up any possible deals they want to do. As always, the Blazers have been about flexibility and options.
If Darius is ever going to be good again (good enough to NBA it up), it might be next year or the year after. He might need more rehab. Watching him now, he’s not any better than any other young talent without the baggage, if that.
Mortimer
by Mortimer on Jan 9, 2009 11:03 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Morti stealing my Allen Houston example → Or: Once again we are in agreement
by Norsktroll on Jan 9, 2009 11:04 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Hee hee
Once again, we are in agreement. I just remembered his situation being used as the basis for this rule, and they didn’t figure an indy doc and player’s union reps and insurance company docs would all say a player should retire, and then that player go on and try to play for other teams.
It’s a unique situation, to be sure!
And until something comes up that proves me wrong, I’m tending to believe that if Darius was good enough to be worth a roster spot, he’d be on a roster. He’s very cheap for a player of his natural talent (but most of that natural talent is now gone because of several injuries).
Ya know, I just remembered… after his first knee surgery as a Blazer, I ran into him at the Chicago airport. He was visiting some friends, I believe. He had the surgery just a week before or so, and was reportedly on the mend. HE WAS WALKING WITH NO LIMP WHATSOEVER, and I told my then girlfriend-now-fiancee “Look, he has no limp, he looks good! We need him back badly, we’re awful without him and he was having a good year”.
A few days later, that knee was worse than ever and had gotten infected. He needed more surgery. No limp, looking okay, meant nothing. I don’t think he ever played for the Blazers again after that (and, obviously, this was 3 years ago or so)
His knee is likely still in a bad shape. Maybe nothing ever happens to it ever again, but the RISK is there and docs felt the risk wasn’t low enough to play on. The same for Eddy Curry— he may never drop dead, Reggie Lewis style, of a heart problem as a player. But the risk is there.
Mortimer
by Mortimer on Jan 9, 2009 11:12 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Will be interesting to see if we get at least one team that supports us: The Knicks
They want to get Cuttino Mobley off their books now
by Norsktroll on Jan 9, 2009 11:19 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, and I'm trying to argue the risks and such over on Canis Hoopus
To not much avail :)
by Norsktroll on Jan 9, 2009 11:20 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
- Norsktroll, doing Jorga’s job at the same time :)
by Norsktroll on Jan 9, 2009 11:21 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
And of course Canzano whines
http://blog.oregonlive.com/johncanzano/2009/01/the_blazers_and_their_threats.html
Way to completely miss the point John.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Jan 9, 2009 10:25 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
it wouldnt be a story if canzano wasnt wrong
:)
Blazer fans tell me, where were you,
When our Brandon Roy dropped 52?
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jan 9, 2009 10:26 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
My comment last night about Canzano still applies
I’ll be nice and not repeat it.
by Timmay! on Jan 9, 2009 10:27 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Standard Business
Two teams picked up Miles, gave him the minimum non-guaranteed contract, played him a few minutes in meaningless situations, and then cut him before they had to guarantee the contract. A third team could do the same. Pick him up on a minimum non – guaranteed contract, play him for a few meaningless minutes in two games, and then cut him before they had to guarantee the contract. The net result is that three teams, for a cost of 1/8 of the minimum contract, or about $90,000, could cost the Blazers $18 million.
By definition, that’s damages.
As far as whether or not you can prove it, don’t kid yourself. Civil suits do not have the same burdern of proof as criminal suits. Juries do not have to be unanimous, and unless the third team that picks Darius up can convince them that their motives were pure, they could very well lose the suit in a civil, jury trial. Portland is drawing a very effective line in the sand on several levels.
First, the next team that picks up Darius is in jeopardy. Law suits of this nature can easily cost several million dollars if Allen decides to pursue it – and the US does not have “loser pays” rules that would force Allen to pay the other sides legal bills if he doesn’t win the suit. Further, Allen can keep this alive for as many years based on appeals and retrials as he wants.
Secondly, the next team would almost have to keep Miles on the payroll for the rest of the year, to avoid the suit.
Now, the bottom line is that if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it probably is a duck. In this case, we have two teams that advanced the Darius ball down the road far enough to ensure that if a third team does the same thing – Portland will be damaged. Neither have presented any meaningful justification for having Miles on the team at all, and both spent little to affect the Blazers. And the Blazers know it. The idea that they wanted him, or were actually serious, is nonsense. They knew going in that they weren’t going to keep him around – particularly Memphis, who claims they cut him because of “salary” considerations. Well, they knew those salary considerations going in. So what changed. Answer – nothing.
by Eben Calder on Jan 9, 2009 10:25 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
but again burden of proof is difficult
when having to probe a GM’s mind. I think setting the stage for blackballing a GM is more effective than suing
Blazer fans tell me, where were you,
When our Brandon Roy dropped 52?
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jan 9, 2009 10:27 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I replied at BAB
It’s basically about two games, if someone plays Miles two games and then cuts him, then the Blazers will go after them. If they sign him and he stays on the roster, then more power to them and Miles.
It still feels like a line in the sand/dare from the Blazers.
If someone said the same thing above, sorry about that. I skimmed.
by tominhawaii on Jan 9, 2009 10:28 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I have taken over to arguing our case on Mavs Moneyball and Canis Hoopus :)
With help from Jscot, who also took CelticsBlog.
by Norsktroll on Jan 9, 2009 10:30 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh man, now I may have to read those blogs
I was avoiding them, despite Timbo trying to trade me to Boston.
by Timmay! on Jan 9, 2009 10:31 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Where is timbo btw?
He seemed pretty sure last summer that Portland was conspiring to get rid of Miles and that the Portland media was a part of it. I would have thought he’d be weighing in on this.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jan 9, 2009 11:23 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You're kidding right?
Go look at the first fanpost thread last night and search for Timbo.
by Timmay! on Jan 9, 2009 1:22 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
This is the only one I've had time to pay attention to.
And it’s been way too much time. It has effectively made my work day useless. I’m going to have to stick around a couple of extra hours putting in some real work just to make up for it.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jan 9, 2009 1:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Heheheh
I’ll summarize:
Timbo’s posts in the original fanpost thread contain exactly what you’d expect him to say, if you’ve read his opinions prior.
I will never argue that Timbo can’t stick to his beliefs.
by Timmay! on Jan 9, 2009 1:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Besides his belonging to our select fraternity ....
…. I have to like timbo because we both believe in the importance of rebounding (and a few other things, which don’t currently come to mind).
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jan 9, 2009 1:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
As far as I can see there are really no negatives other than other people's hurt feelings
I don’t think the Blazers fear a Miles lawsuit.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Jan 9, 2009 10:30 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
From Adrian (On the Cavs Payroll) Wojeikowski *sp
("The point that everybody is missing is that this isn’t about Portland’s salary cap. It’s about whether this guy [Miles] is healthy enough to play or not," said an Eastern Conference executive. "He obviously is healthy enough to play. It doesn’t matter how good he plays. He can still play, and they said he couldn’t.
"Portland received benefits when [Miles’] injury was ruled career-ending. If he can play, they don’t deserve to have those benefits.")
I bet 100 dollars this is Ainge
Blazer fans tell me, where were you,
When our Brandon Roy dropped 52?
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jan 9, 2009 10:31 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I'll bet you 1 million of SPAM's
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 10:49 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
deal
Blazer fans tell me, where were you,
When our Brandon Roy dropped 52?
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jan 9, 2009 11:00 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Burden of Proof
But, the burden of proof in a civil trial, is not the same as a criminal trial. And the type of legal team Allen has will most certainly have already guarantted to Allen that they can get this case to a jury. Allen, after all, has already asked the question – and you can bet it was answered. This clearly puts the pressure on the third team. Allen doesn’t have to win the suit to win the game, after all, Remember that a judge can set aside the NBA’s ruling on the cap until “after the decision” is rendered by the court. This happens all the time. And then, Allen can keep this case alive for literally years with the right legal team. The NBA, as such, could not penalize the Blazers until the decisions are all rendered, and that does not happen until all appeals are exhaused. In the interim, the other team has to keep writing checks, and the Blazers can keep their cap space.
Bottom line – if you’re going to pick up Miles now then, at a minimum, you’ll have to pay the money to keep him around.
by Eben Calder on Jan 9, 2009 10:34 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
insightful post
lots to think about here. blazers have valid points, but they’re coming off bad in the press. if miles can play, then i’d guess he will somewhere. however detrimental to the rose city blazers. why someone would want to sign him is another question, but i have the prefect front office to make such a ridiculous signing…
the golden state warriors! nah, they’re too busy assembling another version of incompetence…
my avatar was taken at the rose garden, btw. love the rose city!
the stop calling him "beans" movement
by pervisNeverNervous on Jan 9, 2009 10:35 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
ESPN headline
Blazers Issue Threat To NBA
The Portland Trail Blazers are warning the 29 other teams not to sign Darius Miles if they want to avoid legal action by the Blazers. What happens now?
Sheridan can suck it. Thats soooo misleading
Blazer fans tell me, where were you,
When our Brandon Roy dropped 52?
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jan 9, 2009 10:39 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Did you ever expect this to not be blown out of proportion like what's happening?
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 10:52 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
no but I figured that someone would look at it objectively
i figured wrong.
We need our own major writer.. henry needs to step up..
Sheridan is a knicks guy,
Adande is a lakers guy,
Stein is Dallas/San An
Blazer fans tell me, where were you,
When our Brandon Roy dropped 52?
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jan 9, 2009 11:01 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Media look at something objectively?
LOL good one.
by postup on Jan 9, 2009 11:05 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Stein is from LA though
And at one time was a Braves fan before the franchise picked up and moved to San Diego becoming the Clippers.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 11:08 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
hes a texas homer now tho
he went to UC Fullerton as he so often reminds us
Blazer fans tell me, where were you,
When our Brandon Roy dropped 52?
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jan 9, 2009 11:14 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Never came off as a homer to me
But he did cover the Mavs for many years so I understand why people say it.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 12:11 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
They stole our fanpost headine on the sidebar!!! hahahah
"Step up to my mic!!!" Joel's right and left fist
by broyposse on Jan 9, 2009 11:09 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
this is YOUR fault then!!!
December 18, 2008.
"Roy is Roy, and if I were to bet my life on a game of 5-on-5, I’d bet on whichever team Roy was playing on." by HurraKane212
by maid tu rek on Jan 9, 2009 8:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Part of the reason the Blazers are coming off poorly nationally is that most people have no idea how
washed up Darius really is.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Jan 9, 2009 10:39 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
and see my post above
national press aint helping with misleading headlines
Blazer fans tell me, where were you,
When our Brandon Roy dropped 52?
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jan 9, 2009 10:40 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
part of the reason the Blazers are coming off poorly
is b/c it seems they are trying to intimidate the other nba teams with threats of litigation. that’s what the letter says. certainly, we can understand why the blazers would hope no one would sign miles. 18 mil is nothing to sneeze at. but threatening litigation on a broad sweep comes off exactly how it is. a threat to one and all, without contextual evidence that another nba team is simply doing this to screw the blazers.
“Please be aware that if a team engages in such conduct, the Portland Trail Blazers will take all necessary steps to safeguard its rights, including, without limitation, litigation.”
the stop calling him "beans" movement
by pervisNeverNervous on Jan 9, 2009 12:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Let me rephrase, MOST of the reason the Blazers are coming off poorly is that MOST of the country has no clue
about this situtation. Whereas most of us here have been following it for months if not years.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Jan 9, 2009 12:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Right
The key is contextual evidence.
The letter was written in the context of a league exec talking about screwing the Blazers, and they all knew that.
But some exec released this without the context, and some shoddy journalists didn’t report the context. Did they ask Portland WHY they sent that email? I doubt it highly.
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Jan 9, 2009 1:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
To be truthful
Alot of things aren’t being asked. And that’s the worst part about this whole thing.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 1:12 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Another Angle
This might be ticky-tack, but if Miles was suspended for 10 games because of drug abuse, why should the preseason games he played in Boston count towards the 10 games needed to undo the Medical Retirement? It could have been feesible that he played no regular season games, thus avoiding the suspension, but still affect Portland’s cap room.
Take it a little further, he could have played those pre-season games and the team(s) evaluating him could have determined that there was something wrong with his knees and waived him thus Portland would still be stuck with the salary cap issue while having confirmation that Miles’ health was career ending.
Sounds like a flaw in the CBA to me…
by Jimbob91577 on Jan 9, 2009 10:46 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Anyone want to take up the cause...
against the doofuses on Fark today?
by Timmay! on Jan 9, 2009 10:49 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Naw.
With a couple of exceptions, the posters there just show how little they understand. I love the guys who are advocating signing Miles to mess with Portland, because they think a) it would be fun and b) it won’t cost anything.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jan 9, 2009 11:29 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Is anyone else tired and frustrated
At mainstream media and fans who keep saying…
1. The Portland’s doctors retired Darius (when it was an independent doctor approved by the NBA and Darius’ own players union)
2. The Darius clearly doesn’t have a career-ending injury when he can run and jump (since “career-ending” was named due to concerns over long-term catastrophic knee damage if he kept running and jumping)
It’s like people want a reason to be upset, and choose to be ill-informed to do so.
by Timmay! on Jan 9, 2009 10:54 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I only read comments here and on other SB Nation Blogs
I see no value in reading ESPN or YouTube comments because it’s Trollville and Trolltown respectively.
by tominhawaii on Jan 9, 2009 11:13 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
O-live comments are teh youtube of sporting comments
Blazer fans tell me, where were you,
When our Brandon Roy dropped 52?
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jan 9, 2009 11:14 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
hahahah yep
"Step up to my mic!!!" Joel's right and left fist
by broyposse on Jan 9, 2009 11:14 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I haven't read those either...
I’ve seen those two misconceptions right here, sadly.
by Timmay! on Jan 9, 2009 11:14 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, also...
…people actually READ youtube comments?
by Timmay! on Jan 9, 2009 11:14 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Youtube commentary
is possible the lowest form of human communication. grunts are far more advanced
Blazer fans tell me, where were you,
When our Brandon Roy dropped 52?
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jan 9, 2009 11:15 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I tried to argue a bit on ESPN this morning
To not much avail
by Norsktroll on Jan 9, 2009 11:23 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Not really, I'm kind of liking it
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Jan 9, 2009 12:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Henry Abbott is the voice of reason, as usual
http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-38-27/Darius-Miles—Cap-Space—E-mails—Oh-My-.html
Boomshakalaka
by jksnake99 on Jan 9, 2009 10:57 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Other than the little detail that he got his facts wrong
(As I noted a few posts up when I linked this TrueHoop article)
by Timmay! on Jan 9, 2009 10:58 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
my bad, I'll take a look
Boomshakalaka
by jksnake99 on Jan 9, 2009 10:59 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm just frustrated that Henry doesn't note the reason for the medical retirement
Leaving that out causes a spin he wants to create, rather than a factual account.
by Timmay! on Jan 9, 2009 11:00 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Nice to know he's reading BEdge...hahaha
On the other hand, I have heard from all kinds of lawyers. Including many who are Portland fans.
BlazersEdge discusses a theory that this could be setting up a future Portland complaint (to the League? to a judge?) that Miles’ next contract will have been made in bad faith.
"Step up to my mic!!!" Joel's right and left fist
by broyposse on Jan 9, 2009 11:00 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
True Hoop Just posted a response from the league
by ppilot on Jan 9, 2009 10:57 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Interesting stuff, thanks for the update.
It’s going to be fascinating to see this all come down.
by Timmay! on Jan 9, 2009 11:04 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
actually...they might be siding with Portland...
the email says:
The NBA has received the email sent last night by Portland to all teams. Under league rules, teams are free to sign Darius Miles to a Uniform Player Contract if they wish to secure his services as a player, and any such contract would be approved by the NBA.
and this is Henry’s thought:
Pure conjecture, but I also wonder if the extraneous “if they wish to secure his services as a player” could be a signal the other way — indicating that signing Darius Miles to a contract not to play him, but to mess with Portland — would not be so warmly embraced.
"Step up to my mic!!!" Joel's right and left fist
by broyposse on Jan 9, 2009 11:11 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Read it again
The NBA has received the email sent last night by Portland to all teams. Under league rules, teams are free to sign Darius Miles to a Uniform Player Contract if they wish to secure his services as a player, and any such contract would be approved by the NBA.
i wouldn’t call that not siding with the blazers, i believe that’s part of the argument the blazers have acknowledged. It’s not about preventing Darius Miles from playing, it’s about doing it to purposely effect the Blazers.
by brandonmitchell on Jan 9, 2009 11:11 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I like Henry's remark about "if they wish to secure his services as a player"
http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-38-28/League-Sends-a-Message-About-Darius-Miles.html
The Blazers can’t object to that, only to attempts to purely sign him for cap screwing business reasons.
by Norsktroll on Jan 9, 2009 11:12 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
time to pull out the lie detector and taser post a GM signs Darius...
how else to prove intent? this would be a sweet Law & Order episode
"Step up to my mic!!!" Joel's right and left fist
by broyposse on Jan 9, 2009 11:13 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Emails and memos and notes, oh my!
I betcha a team has at least discussed the IDEA of screwing over Portland with Miles.
If they had, and they sign him, oooh boy they in trouble.
No one wants their emails and private memos and notes gone through, and that’s what would happen if they sign Miles and it appears to be only to hurt the Blazers and not because they want Miles.
M—
by Mortimer on Jan 9, 2009 11:16 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I call shenanigans
The dbag formerly known as Bennett got away with EXACTLY that
Blazer fans tell me, where were you,
When our Brandon Roy dropped 52?
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jan 9, 2009 11:17 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
they will find a memo like this:
Ainge to McHale: i hate KP…i got screwed…can you help me out?
McHale: of course, you want Garnett?
Ainge: what do you want for it…
McHale: food
Ainge: Oh ok, cool…will it work for Salary Cap and CBA?
McHale: what’s CBA? is today Monday?
Ainge: i just asked me intern to create a workable trade scenario…on its way!
McHale: i signed it…sorry if i dripped some ketchup on the paperwork
Ainge: Wanna go play catch at halftime of our game? i can still throw a heater!!!
"Step up to my mic!!!" Joel's right and left fist
by broyposse on Jan 9, 2009 11:21 AM PST up reply actions 6 recs
haha!
great!
Blazer's fan since '84, Currently exiled in San Antonio
↑ ↑ ↓ ↓ ← → ← → B A
by HurraKane212 on Jan 9, 2009 11:45 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
genius
Blazer fans tell me, where were you,
When our Brandon Roy dropped 52?
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jan 9, 2009 11:56 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
What Drama!
The deadline is tomorrow, and that no doubt drove the Blazers to this move. Also, reading over the CBA, while I think it is kind of unfair, I am not sure that the Blazers have much of a case. There is not much wiggle room about intent. It simply says, if the player plays, he goes back on the rolls. This is 50-50. Or worse.
by Blazin' on Jan 9, 2009 11:11 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I think the timing may also have been related
To the NBA and Players union having a pre-scheduled meeting today.
by Timmay! on Jan 9, 2009 11:12 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The deadline tomorrow is to guarantee running contracts. It doesn’t prevent anyone from signing contracts until much later in the season.
by Norsktroll on Jan 9, 2009 11:13 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, so
as long as an NBA team waits until after Saturday, they can sign Darius for ten days?
by Blazin' on Jan 9, 2009 11:17 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
yes
if he is on the books tomorrow, he has to be guaranteed for the year.
after that 10 day contracts are ok
Blazer fans tell me, where were you,
When our Brandon Roy dropped 52?
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jan 9, 2009 11:18 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Ah, then as Eben Calder wrote above,
the only discouragement we have from the signing is the threat of a lawsuit. Portland wants to imply that signing to Darius ONLY a 10 day contract will make you culpable. If you really want to hurt us, your going to have to pony up to do it.
by Blazin' on Jan 9, 2009 11:23 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Pretty much. Play Darius regularly during the season and pay him good money, and all the Blazers could do is appeal the paragraph in the CBA (e.g. why there is no league and team independent doctor required to reinstate him, or why the Blazers should carry the risk of him re-injuring himself during his comeback), not sue the opposing team. The legal problem brought up by fans on other blogs is: Why should Darius be the only player in the league not allowed to be signed to a 10 day contract, other players are signed and played sparingly all the time.
by Norsktroll on Jan 9, 2009 11:27 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The ULTIMATE answer SHOULD be, in MY opinion
That Darius should be free to sign as many 10 day deals as he can get his hands on, and any other team should be free to sign Darius if they wish.
BUT, since the Blazers followed the rules and did what they are ‘sposed to do, the Blazers should NOT have to pay for it. That’s not what this rule was for.
I don’t want Darius to be limited in what he can do, but it’s ridiculous to say the Blazers should pay for him.
They’ll likely win the appeal should it come to that, but that’s a ways away and a lotta annoying hoops to jump through. This should be the impetus for a change to the medical retirement rule, where if a player becomes healthy again they can be signed by someone else at no penalty to the previous team (who did nothing wrong, since it was indy docs and player’s union folks who said Darius was too hurt to play without risk).
Call me crazy, but a lot of interest in Darius might dry up if the added benefit of hurting the Blazers wasn’t attached. Like with Livingston, I fully expect teams to take a look at Darius, but after 2, 3 years he still doesn’t look good and it’s not as if the docs made stuff up to be funny.
Mortimer
by Mortimer on Jan 9, 2009 11:31 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
According to ESPN, they put the issue on a meeting today between the league and the players union
But I doubt they will change or clarify the CBA so fast :)
Here are KP quotes from the summer. Of course you can say he makes that statement public because it’s in his interest, but I doubt he lied.
“Two doctors said Darius had the worst microfracture injury they had ever seen. They would never have him play basketball and the odds of having knee replacement surgery is high. I hear that, and as a general manager, I didn’t want it on my conscience – that I had a kid have to go through a knee replacement surgery. That’s a pretty major surgery. They saw (two bones) and replace (the knee). It’s a bad deal.”
In a story posted April 14 on the Portland Tribune’s Web site, Pritchard said, “The doctors had actually said, ‘If you were my son, I’d never have you pick up a basketball again.’ I’m the kind of GM (that) I wouldn’t want that on my head that he ever had to have knee replacement.”
by Norsktroll on Jan 9, 2009 11:42 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
KP never says Darius cant play ball
just that doing so will might ruin his knee for good.
Darius seems willing to risk it
Blazer fans tell me, where were you,
When our Brandon Roy dropped 52?
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jan 9, 2009 11:58 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The timing of the move
was driven by media reports the day before quoting an unnamed NBA exec about screwing the Blazers.
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Jan 9, 2009 11:32 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Can you link me?
I missed that.
Blazer fans tell me, where were you,
When our Brandon Roy dropped 52?
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jan 9, 2009 11:58 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Dave linked it on the main page
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=aw-milesblazers010709&prov=yhoo&type=lgns
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Jan 9, 2009 1:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
(a couple days ago)
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Jan 9, 2009 1:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
ahh thanks man!
Blazer fans tell me, where were you,
When our Brandon Roy dropped 52?
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jan 9, 2009 2:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
the more I read about this
the worse I feel.
The inbound to McGinnis, drives, stops, pumps, shoots, short, no good...AND THE GAME IS OVER! ~ Bill Schonely
by SandbergOnSports on Jan 9, 2009 11:26 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
yeah
I just have the feeling sending a threatening email to every other team is kind of a dumb idea and could backfire.
Boomshakalaka
by jksnake99 on Jan 9, 2009 11:33 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
There is a risk - reward equation with every decision you make.
Most are so small that it doesn’t require any analysis, or the analytical process has become automatic. Others require careful thought. My guess here is that Portland gave this some forethought before sending it. Meaning they weighed the risk of a) it possibily pissing other teams and b) of negative PR once it got out. The assumption is that they determined that not only was the risk worth the potential reward, but that the threat – someone signing Miles just to screw with them – was plausible enough to warrant action on their part.
It may end up being a poor decision. However there has been little evidence that the team of Pritchard, Miller, Penn and others are mistake prone. In fact I’d say they have a pretty impressive track record for making smart decisions. In that light, I believe they deserve the benefit of doubt as to whether they made a bad move.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jan 9, 2009 11:46 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I pretty much agree with your points there
I suppose the main source of my discomfort is that I would be upset if another team was doing this, and I don’t like to think of my orginization as a bunch of arrogant jerks.
That said, I suppose its their job to look out for the interests of the organization and the current Blazer brass does indeed have a good track record.
Boomshakalaka
by jksnake99 on Jan 9, 2009 11:49 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'd feel the same way (as I mentioned above about the Gilbert email).
In fact I experienced something a bit similar at work. We received a letter that I (and others) considered almost offensive, due to the way it either mistated facts or was aquistory in nature. My first response was to want to fire back a letter tearing their arguments to shreds. I held off on that and eventually, we did tear it to shreds, but only after getting legal counsel involved.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jan 9, 2009 12:01 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree that it can be seen as arrogant
But it IS major league sports, where all of our heroes are arrogant in one way or another.
It’s arrogant that Roy assumes that the last shot will go to him, or that he tries to take over. I’m sure KP has come across arrogant to other GMs when discussing deals.
And I still maintain, the arrogance of telling other teams not to sign another player for the sole purpose of hurting the Blazers is far outweighed by the morally and ethical wrongness of another team jerking around a player like Miles just to hurt another team on their way up.
Arrogantly telling someone not to do the wrong thing is not as bad as doing the wrong thing.
Now, it can come down to “what if a team just really wants him”, well, they coulda’ had him for a while now, and still can have him. They just gotta be aware that there will be consequences if they don’t really want Darius for Darius.
Also, again, I should say I want Darius to come back and wish it wasn’t possible to jerk him around in this situation, but that is what will happen because of the accidental side effect of the current medical retirement rules. Even someone more talented and coming back from a lesser injury (and is younger) like Shaun Livingston is having a hell of a time finding a team to stick with, and that’s based on the same sort of risk/award benefits of signing a guy coming off a heinous injury.
The Blazers should not be responsible for paying for Miles, and I don’t blame them to protecting that wish.
The interests of the Blazers and the interests of Darius should not be intertwined anymore, but until they are seperated there will be situations like this— further complicated by other teams possibly hiring Darius just to muck with the Blazers, which brings its own legal complications along with it.
It ain’t a fun scenario, but the Blazers simply can’t allow someone to mess with them like that. I don’t know of a nicer way to accomplish what they need to accomplish, but again… it’s worse to sign Darius when you have no interest in Darius than it is to tell them not to.
Mortimer
by Mortimer on Jan 9, 2009 12:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Can I just copy this to my clipboard
and paste it whenever I’m trying to express my opinion? You covered it for me, and it would save some typing.
by Timmay! on Jan 9, 2009 1:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Please do
I am nothing if not generous and humble.
Mortimer
by Mortimer on Jan 9, 2009 1:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I copied and pasted another of your comments on Canis Hoopus
Didn’t completely convince them either ;-)
by Norsktroll on Jan 9, 2009 1:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I am shocked and flabbergasted!
We can safely assume that many of those who have no vested interest in these matters will believe what they want to believe if they want to believe the Blazers are being mean bully heads.
It is, what it is.
Even the normally reasonable and smart Tom Ziller had a silly post on AOL Fanhouse, but it’s just from not thinking it through.
So, the Blazers should have to pay for Darius even though league rules said if he is medically retired from an awful injury? And if he comes back we don’t get to have his services? We lose both a player, AND cap space? Even though the Blazers followed the rules completely?
It was a two year process, it’s not like they kicked Miles out of the arena and made up a bunch of crap.
People are just being people, and aside from talking to my fellow Blazer fans here it’ll be much too messy to get everyone up to speed on what is the goings on elsewhere, when you’re already starting at a place where they really want to believe that the Blazers are being jerks and not just reacting to others wanting to STEAL 10 million bucks both in real life cash and cap space.
Mortimer
by Mortimer on Jan 9, 2009 1:38 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Amen!!
Homer: "Yikes....a bear is eating my father!!"
Selma: "I'm Selma"
Homer: "A talking bear is eating my father!!"
by 92wastheyear on Jan 9, 2009 1:42 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
92 and I agree on something.
And it took Darius Miles and Kevin Pritch—- I mean, Mortimer, to bring us together.
by Timmay! on Jan 9, 2009 1:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
lol
yay! Friends
Homer: "Yikes....a bear is eating my father!!"
Selma: "I'm Selma"
Homer: "A talking bear is eating my father!!"
by 92wastheyear on Jan 9, 2009 1:47 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
$9 million in luxury tax
I don’t think it’s arrogant, when people are talking about screwing you, to point out that it can bring liabilities.
Eliminate the Yahoo story with that quote, and you don’t have this email.
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Jan 9, 2009 1:12 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
So if for instance, someone tampered with Lebron and Gilbert sent out an email (intended to be private)
warning against such action, you’d be like “omg what a jerk”?
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Jan 9, 2009 12:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That is a great analogy
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Jan 9, 2009 1:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
it would depend on the nature of the tampering and the language of the email
Boomshakalaka
by jksnake99 on Jan 9, 2009 1:37 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
A little light-hearted (or not?) ...
I hated and knew we should never have used that arrogant term “Pritch Slapped”. No one likes to be taken advantage of. Could part of what we’re seeing with certain teams plotting to screw the Blazers be attempts to slap back? Especially if it’s Ainge who’s involved?
Brandon Roy just destroyed everything in his path. There's your rational analysis -- Dave
by TwoDeep on Jan 9, 2009 11:33 AM PST reply actions 1 recs
Right!!
They plot revenge because some random fan used the term Pritch-slap. That is highly unlikely
Homer: "Yikes....a bear is eating my father!!"
Selma: "I'm Selma"
Homer: "A talking bear is eating my father!!"
by 92wastheyear on Jan 9, 2009 11:34 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It was more than a random fan.
It was everywhere on this site as well as other Blazer blogs. It also made it to at least one national blog.
Brandon Roy just destroyed everything in his path. There's your rational analysis -- Dave
by TwoDeep on Jan 9, 2009 2:42 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It is still just fans
Homer: "Yikes....a bear is eating my father!!"
Selma: "I'm Selma"
Homer: "A talking bear is eating my father!!"
by 92wastheyear on Jan 9, 2009 2:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yep
but GMs have egos, too.
Would they spend a lot of time trying to come up with a way to screw Portland because of that term? No. Would it give them a little motivation if they had a chance? Possibly.
It wouldn’t be the driving force, but it could be a subliminal factor.
I know you can put admiration in bags, because admiration is real, and tominhawaii says that everything that is real is measurable.
by jscot on Jan 10, 2009 1:46 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Ok.......here is the breakdown
99.90% -—Screw the Blazers out the tax money
00.09———Help their team get better
00.01———Pritchslap revenge
Homer: "Yikes....a bear is eating my father!!"
Selma: "I'm Selma"
Homer: "A talking bear is eating my father!!"
by 92wastheyear on Jan 10, 2009 12:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The term is just part of an aura
Paul Allen buys picks that they can’t.
KP makes big moves and comes out the winner.
The media calls him a draft day genius.
And Blazer fans adopt this term which gets picked up in the media.
It all adds to a perception that they are being viewed as lesser, inferior people who are being taken advantage of, and they wan’t revenge. And that is indeed part of the picture here, IMO. It’s not just about the money.
Is it just the Pritchslap term? No, not at all. But that helped to feed the resentment that was already building, I would guess.
Read the article in Yahoo. Resentment is a significant part of the picture.
I would guess this is about 75% money and about 25% resentment. And no one will ever admit that “Pritchslap” is part of that resentment, but it is. If it hadn’t been picked up in the media, it wouldn’t be. If there weren’t other factors, it wouldn’t be, either. But it’s pretty likely that it helped to feed the resentment that was already building, which is rarely a profitable thing to do.
I know you can put admiration in bags, because admiration is real, and tominhawaii says that everything that is real is measurable.
by jscot on Jan 10, 2009 10:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Isn't this just about raising the bar?
Teams now have to demonstrate that they are hiring Darius for what he can do, which could include:
— does the team even have a need for a small forward?
— which other players have been looked at?
— how much time did Darius actually put in (including team practices)?
As I recall, when the Blazers first applied for the relief, their position was not that Darius could not put in a couple of minutes here and there; but rather that any extensive time would be a risk to re-injuring the player. They said that the danger of re-injury was too great and that they did not want to have that hanging on their conscience. So isn’t this move by the Blazers, restating their initial position; and requiring that teams have a genuine interest in Darius’ ability to play without risk of re-injury?
by FromAfar on Jan 9, 2009 11:37 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
An excellent article ....
… to use as proof that profession sports writers can be just a clueless as your sports blog commentator.
His very first sentence should have been a warning that reasoned and logical thought was gong to be absent. Exactly what does the play where Potland had 6 men on the court have to do with the Miles story?
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jan 9, 2009 11:51 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Everybody likes a villain
It looks like Portland has been nominated.
"I never scored more than 38, even in Little League." ~ Roy, 52 pts
by shralpster on Jan 9, 2009 11:55 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
yeah, agreed
He comes off as a fan of another team who just doesn’t like the Blazers.
Boomshakalaka
by jksnake99 on Jan 9, 2009 11:56 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't know, blaming the Blazers for the six-man rule is pretty awesome
And by awesome I mean what a total moron.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Jan 9, 2009 12:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh man
That was a baaaaad article.
Does SI have any GOOD writers? They are always riddled with mistakes and are at the same level of writing you’d find in the Statesman Journal (that is not a compliment).
Yes, teams should jerk Miles around to screw over the Blazers out of 10+ million bucks, that is the right thing to do in this situation.
Mortimer
by Mortimer on Jan 9, 2009 12:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The Blazers deserve it since they played 6 players against the Celtics
by Norsktroll on Jan 9, 2009 12:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It was all part of our secret plan to gain one point and win by more
Pwned.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Jan 9, 2009 12:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
We're always trying to pull something!
We deserve what’s comin’ to us, and Miles deserves to be a pawn in our quest to show them Blazers what for!
OOOOH DEM BLAZERS PICKLE MY GRITS I HATES EM SO.
Morty
by Mortimer on Jan 9, 2009 12:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
it's only fair.
Blazers cost Boston “greatest ever” assignation by cheating.
by Blazin' on Jan 9, 2009 12:26 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
when i get sad, i stop being sad & become awesome again. true story.
by Net Ranger on Jan 9, 2009 12:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
gimme 5... um wait...
make that six!
"An investment in knowledge always pays the best interest" · Benjamin Franklin.
by hisblazergrrrl on Jan 9, 2009 10:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
SI has an online site?
Huh, who knew.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Jan 9, 2009 12:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
What a classically stupid article
He says that they can rip off the Blazers by paying Miles a pittance and getting 250 grand back from Portland, he flat out acknowledges that, and then says the “fiduciary duty” sword has no edge? Hello?
That is the whole point of the fiduciary duty statement.
One wonders if he, knowing lawyers helped construct that email, even talked to a lawyer before he wrote that. Well, one doesn’t wonder.
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Jan 9, 2009 1:21 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
This is a real handy day
To separate the good sports writers (the well researched, thought-out articles) and the hacks who make it up as they write.
I’ve had at least one surprise today due to that.
by Timmay! on Jan 9, 2009 1:28 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Doesn't it look like Aschburner is putting "fiduciary duty" in quotes because he doesn't understand the concept?
Which is awesome because then he says it has no bite.
When I’m talking to someone and a word is used that I’m unfamiliar with but is also crucial to the discussion, I try to use it in the same context as the original use so I don’t sound like an idiot misusing it. That use of quotes kinda looks like the written equivalent of that verbal crutch.
"I never scored more than 38, even in Little League." ~ Roy, 52 pts
by shralpster on Jan 9, 2009 1:28 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It's probably in quotes
because the email used the term?
I suspect he actually thinks he knows what it means. He may even actually know what it means, but not in the context in which it was being used in that email.
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Jan 9, 2009 1:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Are you a renaissance man or something?
A lil legal advice here, some financial stock juggling there, a dash of paprika for you sir? Jeesh.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 1:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Jscot does it all
But try getting him too take out the trash for once, YEESH!
—comment courtesy of Jscot’s 3rd ex-wife.
Mortimer
by Mortimer on Jan 9, 2009 1:49 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
One of the best threads I've been a part of recently
Thankfully. It’s getting a bit tired crying about an awful team, not that I really care. But you get the idea. Relief is always welcome.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 2:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Sign Darius, and I sign up for Sactown Royalty along with a lot of new "friends" :)
by Norsktroll on Jan 9, 2009 2:12 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You think you'll be mad
I guarantee you there will be all kinds of nasty things said.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 3:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The women do tend to say
that I do it all.
For some reason.
I know you can put admiration in bags, because admiration is real, and tominhawaii says that everything that is real is measurable.
by jscot on Jan 10, 2009 1:48 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The reason I said
he probably knows what “fiduciary duty” means is because the term is used in regard to a corporation’s responsibility to its shareholders. It just means “financial responsibility”, really. They have the responsibility to earn money for their shareholders, within legal and ethical bounds, of course.
Now, he said that since this was a money-making move for a team, it blunted the fiduciary duty charge. That means he was thinking of the fiduciary duty to team ownership.
The stupidity was not reading the Blazers’ email carefully enough to know which fiduciary duty it was discussing — the duty to your partners in a joint venture.
The reason I know all this is because I work in financial services, so I am very much up on finance and related stuff, including the odd smattering of legal matters.
I know you can put admiration in bags, because admiration is real, and tominhawaii says that everything that is real is measurable.
by jscot on Jan 10, 2009 1:53 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Hear me out...
Now assuming another NBA will sign Miles, and his contract will go back on the books, why doesn’t Portland try to sign him for a little more money than anyone else would offer him. Now I don’t know if Portland is allowed to sign him and I doubt that Miles would do it but to save yourself $18 million on the books you could just take off like $2 million. I know it’s far-fetched but it could be a way to save us.
Red Hot and Rolling
by BlazerFan88 on Jan 9, 2009 11:38 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Darius has to agree to that
not gonna happen
Blazer fans tell me, where were you,
When our Brandon Roy dropped 52?
by GreatOden'sRaven on Jan 9, 2009 12:00 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Not how it works sadly.
Miles gets his 9 mil in addition to his salary regardless of which team signs him. So if the Blazers signed him we’d be on the hook for the 9m and whatever the new salary was. Interestingly we might be able to sign him to a contract and then just not play him thus not kicking the 9m back on our books. We do have our entire mid-level exemption still. It goes like this “Miles how about a 5m dollar bribe to not play this year?”
Think he’d say yes?
whaa happen?
by Toby on Jan 9, 2009 12:42 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah that is what I was getting at initially...
we could sign him and not play him.
Red Hot and Rolling
by BlazerFan88 on Jan 9, 2009 3:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The issue
Who a team signs to a ten day contract isn’t generally impactful. They sit or play scrub minutes for a few games. The odds of such a player increasing your win total by even one game is pretty out there.
That said, why would a GM sign Darius when it doesn’t really matter that much on the court and potentially means depositions and the league rifling through your email? Why not sign another unemployed SF of similar skill?
The email is unfair, as it is a de-facto limitation of Darius’ employability. On the flip side, the rules should’ve been written to exempt Darius’ from affecting the luxury tax and creating a conflict of interest.
by Engineering Problem on Jan 9, 2009 12:00 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
Making Money
is what employability is about to me…
Darius is getting his, no one is keeping him from any earnings for this year and next.
If you shoot the messenger often enough, the message stops being delivered.
by DucRider on Jan 9, 2009 12:11 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
but not being in the market now
hurts his ability to play down the road.
Greg Oden, where posters happen.
by ratbastird on Jan 9, 2009 12:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
What should have hurt his value is a doctor saying he should never play again.
Rudyculize: The act of Rudy making others look slow, dim and generally oafish.
http://www.myspace.com/y5k
by Y5k on Jan 9, 2009 12:28 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
No kidding..
Just because some doctor in Tijuana says his knee is fine, doesn’t mean NBA execs should believe it.
by tmundal on Jan 9, 2009 12:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Most don't remember
But now that I think about it, the “doctor” who said Miles shouldn’t ever play again looks REMARKABLY similar to Kevin Prtichard with a fake mustache and a monocle…
Just a coincidence, I’m sure. He had a French accent, after all!
Mortimer
by Mortimer on Jan 9, 2009 12:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Here's a photo of that Doctor getting his Subpoena
Rudyculize: The act of Rudy making others look slow, dim and generally oafish.
http://www.myspace.com/y5k
by Y5k on Jan 9, 2009 12:38 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Awesome photo
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 12:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Here is the file photo of the doctor who ruled Miles injury to be career ending
I remember the article also said he seemed to alternate between an odd French accent and a German accent, all while using British phrases such as “jolly good” and “blimey gov’nor!”.
Something isn’t adding up, guys!
Mortimer
by Mortimer on Jan 9, 2009 1:19 PM PST up reply actions 8 recs
lol +1 lol
Man, that guy looks familiar. Well, he looks like an upstanding chap. Carry on!
"I never scored more than 38, even in Little League." ~ Roy, 52 pts
by shralpster on Jan 9, 2009 1:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
....and, rec.
Thanks for the big laugh.
by Timmay! on Jan 9, 2009 1:29 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
"Guten Hola, Herr Meeels, I'm Doctor Pritch ... errnnn ... no... Dr. Pratchenup. Let's have a look at that knee."
Rudyculize: The act of Rudy making others look slow, dim and generally oafish.
http://www.myspace.com/y5k
by Y5k on Jan 9, 2009 1:42 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm Dr. Pevin Kitchard!
Ich Bin MEIN GOODNESS GOLLY ME, Zees is zee worst knee me ever did seen!
Oh no me dear boy, yous should no play no more, crikey my stars! What iff zee Queen should zee ziss knee!
Now… Darius, is it? No, Sir Darius my boy, you should never, uh… how you say… “Play basketall for a NBA team, any of its partners, or take part in 10 games over two seasons that violates the eventual cap space your medical retirement brings”… no? Yes.
Ah, chin up ol’ chap! Zis ees not so bad!
—that’s an excerpt taken from the audio recording of the event, recorded for posterity.
Mortimer
by Mortimer on Jan 9, 2009 1:48 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Watergate tapes got nothing on this.
Rudyculize: The act of Rudy making others look slow, dim and generally oafish.
http://www.myspace.com/y5k
by Y5k on Jan 9, 2009 1:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The more I see NBA fans around the country whining like babies, the more I like this email
We should send them out weekly.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Jan 9, 2009 12:22 PM PST reply actions 3 recs
I have to rec this one as well as Mort's photo above.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jan 9, 2009 1:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
What interest is there...
In a guy who is slow, and out of shape, and his knee could explode at a moments notice?
I honestly can’t see why any team would want to sign the guy. He is horrible. Its pretty easy to argue (not legally obviously) that any team that would bring him on would only do it to go against Portland.
by tmundal on Jan 9, 2009 12:28 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
100% true
but proving it will be darn near impossible without a smoking gun/whistleblower from the organization in question
Bayless has been testing the fences for weaknesses
by blazeraddict on Jan 9, 2009 2:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Dan Gilbert cracks me up with his response to the Blazers...
yahoo story that is shown above too:
we should respond by saying “FINE, we will not take Lebron for Raef!!!”
"Step up to my mic!!!" Joel's right and left fist
by broyposse on Jan 9, 2009 12:31 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
When Lebron speaks Dan Gilbert rembles
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Jan 9, 2009 12:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
its good to see
that the Bedge has a better grasp of the situation than enemy GMs.
Wait or is that a bad thing?
by postup on Jan 9, 2009 12:37 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I love that he says the CBA is so clear in that regard
When even the best experts admit they are unsure. Oh, and that he won’t sign Darius.
by Norsktroll on Jan 9, 2009 12:56 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Perhaps Portland
hopes to get the Union to take Darius’ side on this. Assuming he does want to play basketball, the doctor’s ruling and potential litigation are an impediment to that. Any legal minds know the process for making an exception to the CBA? Seems like this is likely to get drawn out. Must any such exception be agreed to by all the teams?
by Blazin' on Jan 9, 2009 12:32 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
How about some team signs Miles, his knee blows out, and he sues them lol
Please God make it happen.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Jan 9, 2009 12:32 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
bad karma leeroy...let's not hope for anyone to blow their knee
"Step up to my mic!!!" Joel's right and left fist
by broyposse on Jan 9, 2009 12:35 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
His knee is going to blow regardless
Just a matter of time. So that’s on God, not me. I’m just laughing at the conseunces to Dumb Team X
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Jan 9, 2009 12:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I say, instead of rooting for Miles to get hurt
(which is awful), root for the Blazers’ interests and Miles’ interests to no longer be intertwined. THAT’s the real problem.
If that was the case, as it should be, there would be no problems.
Mortimer
by Mortimer on Jan 9, 2009 1:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think the real problem Mortimer
Is how dicey this is from every angle. And this is not in everyone’s best interest for Portland to be screaming lawsuit, when your owner is probably the irchest in the Association, and not only that, but also because what the organization perceives to be sour grapes. This is bad for all concerned, but it doesn’t change the fact that letter smells to me (again to me) as a bit of bullying under the guise that there are legal ramifications.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 1:41 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
To me is sounds like
“Oh you are just calling the cop because a crime has been committed….you didn’t need that jewelry anyway”
Homer: "Yikes....a bear is eating my father!!"
Selma: "I'm Selma"
Homer: "A talking bear is eating my father!!"
by 92wastheyear on Jan 9, 2009 1:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yep I get that part too
This is a tricky point, and there is no way to get around that. The problem really is, 92, and mortimer, is that everyone is right. So where do you go from there?
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 2:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That's true
The Blazers shouldn’t have to pay for Darius, and Darius should be free to find employment wherever he wants.
The only “wrong” here is other teams just signing Darius to steal money away from the Blazers.
We remove that aspect of it, and remove the Blazers and Darius’ interests from being intertwined, and we’re all okay.
This is different from drafting a player before another team does, or beating them out for a free agent. Or having better coaching, etc. This is messing with pure financial matters when the teams aren’t supposed to do that intentionally.
The ruling and everything around this needs to be hurried into an agreement to everyone can move on. We don’t gotta pay, Darius can sign with whomever, and we all go our seperate ways.
I hope that if Darius is able to stick with a team, it isn’t just because they wanna stick it to us. That’s not “right” for anyone.
Mortimer
by Mortimer on Jan 9, 2009 2:10 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Here's the flip side Mort
When you medically retire a player, it’s in your best interest to make sure he wants to stay that way. I honestly think the Blazers would have been better off, in the long run, and I know you won’t agree with this because of bad karma, letting him play, even though they felt he was no longer capable, and then make the case concrete when he finally blew out his knee for good. As sad as that it is, I fear there is no legal resolution to this issue.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 2:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You would have had to wait another 2 years is why
in which case the contract expires anyway…karma or no
Homer: "Yikes....a bear is eating my father!!"
Selma: "I'm Selma"
Homer: "A talking bear is eating my father!!"
by 92wastheyear on Jan 9, 2009 2:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe Maybe not
But this is an ugly deal, and whether or not people like Miles, there is an issue of whether he did his best to get himself back to the point where he wanted to play basketball again.
No matter how you look at this, there is going to be some nasty side effects as a result.
But, I think Canzano made a solid point. It was in fact Paul Allen who was enamored enough with Miles to give him the big deal in the first place. You reap what you sow…..
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 2:16 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Is it possible
Miles played through tremendous pain just to get that contract?
If he did so wouldn’t he be misleading the Blazers?
by loud1 on Jan 9, 2009 2:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, the Darius contract was never a "good" contract
UNLESS Darius never got hurt and continued to build on his best season of his career, which he was experiencing when he got hurt that season.
He was leading our team in points and assists, playing better than ever. Then, he got hurt.
Who knows how his career would have gone if he didn’t get hurt. He may have been worth his eventually-9 million a year contract (it built up to that amount, it was cheaper in previous years).
If a player gets a contract, he should get the money. But insurance is there to cover teams financially if that player has an unforeseen injury. That’s what happened to Darius— he got hurt, couldn’t play for YEARS, and a doctor said he should never play again.
There is no “reaping what they sowed”, because the Blazers did as they are supposed to do, and even went and got Darius whatever trainers he wanted, personal chef out of the team’s pocket, etc.
No one should be responsible for Darius contract aside from the previously arranged agreements between the Blazers and the insurance companies, because Darius injury is legit. Whether or not Darius deserved the deal is 100% irrelevant, since that isn’t what this is about. He had the talent to earn it, but no one can know one way or another whether he’d fulfill that promise (but a lot of guys don’t play up to their deal, it doesn’t mean either party should be punished for it).
Mortimer
by Mortimer on Jan 9, 2009 2:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I get it mort
Again, it’s just not that simple. I see your point of view, and I’m glad it’s being stated. This is not simple clear cut stuff (like why you can’t trade Brandon Roy for LeBron James for instance).
Again, there is nothing good about this situation, and everyone on Bedge aside, there is a bit of angst going around about this.
What I would like to see, is that Miles’ contract be cancelled if he insists that he is ready to play in the NBA. That, ot me, is the fairest thing to do for all parties. Forgetting insurace for a moment. Cancel the whole damn thing. You wanna pursue the paper chase Darius? Go for it. Lose your life changing contract.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 3:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, it's a tricky situation
Personally, I am for guaranteed contracts, but I’m also pretty sure the doctor gave his opinion with Darius’ best interests in mind. I am fine with Darius doing whatever he wants with that opinion and pursuing his career further.
But, the Blazers shouldn’t have to be punished for it.
The sooner our interests aren’t mixed up with Darius’ the better. That’s all that has to be done.
Mortimer
by Mortimer on Jan 9, 2009 3:21 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Well, if threatening to sue one who is plotting to steal 10+ million of dollars is wrong...
…yeah, it’s a “bullying tactic” to get other teams from signing Darius, if their only purpose was to muck with the Blazers.
I don’t think anyone will argue it isn’t telling them not to do so, and using both their previous legal agreements as two NBA teams, and the threat of litigation to uphold those agreements.
Just because PA is rich as hell, doesn’t mean he should lose 10+ million bucks in real life money AND cap space. It’s his money, and taking it from him when the team did nothing wrong and followed the CBA exactly as far as the medical retirement procedures go…
How is it okay to take his money for no reason? His wealth should be irrelevent… except when you consider he has more resources and lawyers to fight this, than someone else does. Doesn’t mean he will just say “aw geez I’m rich what’s 10 million bucks to me”.
Mortimer
by Mortimer on Jan 9, 2009 1:54 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
How predictable was it that Canzano would write this?
by Jiggamant on Jan 9, 2009 12:35 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Did he just finish talking to Sergio and Rudy?
But they sure feel desperate, no?
"Step up to my mic!!!" Joel's right and left fist
by broyposse on Jan 9, 2009 12:37 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Very
Canzano’s kind of spineless actually.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Jan 9, 2009 12:56 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
i absolutly refuse to read canzano, or quick
they r tu me, basikly frachise parasites, or high profile trolls
December 18, 2008.
"Roy is Roy, and if I were to bet my life on a game of 5-on-5, I’d bet on whichever team Roy was playing on." by HurraKane212
by maid tu rek on Jan 10, 2009 2:04 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Law
The Blazers are members of a joint venture whose members have a responsibility to each other to act in good faith while pursuing joint goals, in this case making money by selling basketball products (tickets etc.)
The legal question is not interested in marketing, public relations or roster management unless damages in those areas can be quantified. It is only interested in quantifiable damages and responsibility for those damages. In this case the 7.9m luxury tax that would be distributed among the other teams under the salary cap if Miles is signed is the most obvious damage.
In this case the Blazers are threatening to argue that one of their partners is intentionally damaging the Blazer’s ability to make money in a joint venture. This would be mean that any contract Miles signed would be in bad faith, thus a violation of the joint venture agreement underpinning the NBA.
Dave got one thing wrong the burden of proof is NOT on a team that signs Miles.
The Blazers would be the petitioner, and thus must prove their case. However, this is not like a criminal case. The standard by which the Blazer’s case would be proved is a rational basis. They do not have to prove that the other team was acting in bad faith beyond a reasonable doubt. Rather they must prove it was more likely than not that considerations other than the joint venture’s goals were foremost in the decision to sign Miles. RE: Hurting the Blazers’ cap or forcing them to pay luxury tax.
To use layman’s terms the Blazers have to prove to about 50% certainty that the team that signs Miles is doing so to damage the Blazer’s opportunity to make money in their joint venture. That would indicate that they are operating in bad-faith and are responsible for damages the Blazers prove (most obviously the luxury tax).
With the evidence available to the general public the Blazers would probably have a tough time making their case. Medical retirement is not a career death sentence for a player, it simply allows the team to claim the insurance money on the player based on the fact that it is unlikely that the player will play again. As such the team that signs Miles has a very simple argument that they are doing so with the intention of making their team more successful thus furthering the goal of the joint venture. When it comes down to it a judge (jury) will be asked to judge the motivations of the team that signs Miles. Even at the lower standard I’m not sure there is enough evidence to convince me that a team that signs Miles is doing so MOSTLY to hurt the Blazers.
whaa happen?
by Toby on Jan 9, 2009 12:39 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Whoa! I just realized this is good for Darius.
Basically the Blazers are saying if a team signs Darius and then cuts him after two games that the Blazers are going to sue them. This means that when a team signs Darius, they have to keep him on the roster and maybe have him play more than two games to prove the are not doing it just to mess up Portland’s cap space. This means more playing time for Darius.
by tominhawaii on Jan 9, 2009 12:42 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Good point, Miles has more to gain than to lose
It’s also possible that a team that was interested in signing him only because of the cap and tax implications now won’t sign him to a 10 day. In that scenario, this could prevent him from getting a short (and pretty irrelevant, considering his ongoing PTB checks) contract that he wouldn’t deserve on his own merits anyway.
However I think it’s more likely that he’ll get a longer contract somewhere, as you suggest.
"I never scored more than 38, even in Little League." ~ Roy, 52 pts
by shralpster on Jan 9, 2009 1:11 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
This is bullying on the part of the Blazers, pure and simple.
The best commentary I’ve read about this is from the Memphis Grizzlies blog, Beyond the Arc. After noting that Miles would be better than 1 or 2 frontcourt players on 80% of the league’s teams, and giving evidence to back this up, he calls this for what it is: bullying.
I’m going to hazard a guess and say that if this were the Lakers, Jazz or Nuggets, Blazer fans would be screaming bloody murder. That’s why I find the response of many of the posters here so disappointing.
It is, however, nice to see that even a few of the Blazer faithful are ashamed or embarrassed. I certainly would be if I were a Blazer fan.
by plinytheelder on Jan 9, 2009 12:44 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
rofl @ Miles, you're clueless. Simply clueless.
“After noting that Miles would be better than 1 or 2 frontcourt players on 80% of the league’s teams, and giving evidence to back this up, he calls this for what it is: bullying.”
LOLOLOLOLNO. And I promise you I know more about Darius Miles than you do.
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Jan 9, 2009 12:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
PS. This is the greatest thing Paul Allen's ever done, Microsoft pshaw..your hate feeds me
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Jan 9, 2009 1:00 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I dunno...
Experience music project is pretty sweet.
by tmundal on Jan 9, 2009 1:01 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
don't take my word for it,
take it from the horse’s mouth. Here’s the pertinent section from that Grizz blog, Beyond the Arc:
As one of the few NBA media people who has seen Miles play in person in a regulation NBA game since he left Blazers, let me say that he looks like he’s capable of contributing.
Miles played nine minutes in his two appearances with the Grizzlies last week. In his seven-minute stretch against the Timberwolves, he missed his only two shots — one at the rim, one a 20-foot jumper — but he grabbed two rebounds (one an offensive board that led to a Hakim Warrick layup) and, more impressively, blocked two shots (one a thunderous rejection of a Randy Foye lay-up, the other a muffling of a 10-foot Al Jefferson turnaround.) In a game that the Grizzlies lost, they held their ground with Miles on the floor. I was surprised. So were the other press people I was sitting with. I was also surprised when Miles threw down a windmill dunk in shootaround.
Maybe Miles didn’t put the proper effort into his rehab for Portland. Maybe the team doctor(s) who pronounced Miles’ injuries “career-ending” were coming up with the conclusion the Blazers wanted. I don’t know. Grizzlies general manager Chris Wallace did tell me — after the team decline to guarantee his contract for the season — that trainers who had been working with Miles told him that Miles would look better in games than in practice drills. And that was the case.
Based on what I saw, Miles is better than a lot of players on NBA rosters right now. He’s certainly better than Grizzlies reserve center Hamed Haddadi. I’d imagine he’s probably better that Mark Madsen and Calvin Booth, who sat on the bench for the Timberwolves that night. If he can help a team, even in a small way, then why shouldn’t one of the 29 other NBA teams take a chance? Because of a “gentlemen’s agreement” with Portland. Or because of intimidation from Portland.
If I were an NBA GM and my team had injury concerns in the frontcourt, I could do a lot worse than signing Miles. Here’s hoping Cuban or someone has the balls to do it.
by plinytheelder on Jan 9, 2009 1:00 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
One bloggers opinion that provides all of 3 examples to back up a claim
that Miles is probably better than at least one frount court player on (80% ?) of NBA teams. With no supporting evidence that even those three are not as good as Miles.
Her’s a wager – I’ll bet a poll of NBA coaches and GM’s would show more of them selecting Madsen than Miles, if they had to make a choice.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jan 9, 2009 1:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think that depends
Madsen has a huge contract for a player of his abilities, while Miles likely could be had for the minimum. That alone would likely swing it in Miles’ favor.
However if you are looking for a guy who can speak Spanish and dance goofy, then Madsen wins hands down.
by tingeyga on Jan 9, 2009 1:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I love that comment
And therefore, I’m rec’ing it! Of course, make sure you watch out for the Hispanic Lawyer association! They might sue you for writing Spanish & goofy in the same sentence.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 1:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Miles is extremely cheap
With a contract half paid for by the NBA, literally, since it is a vet minimum contract.
He still wasn’t signed even though he is what, 26? and was always a skilled player— albiet one who relied on his length and athleticism above all else.
He ain’t the same guy he used to be, athletically, and he didn’t have much beyond that even at his peak. He might still be healing and getting better, but if someone wanted him they could have him for (in NBA terms) “nuthin’”.
I’m sure Miles is better than Haddadi (the Iranian center guy), but he’s a project. Miles, unless he experiences rapid return of his previous athleticism (and who knows, it could happen), is what he is.
Morty
by Mortimer on Jan 9, 2009 1:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Depends why they'd be selecting him.
If they wanted a nice end-of-the-bench guy who worked hard in practice (though not in the off-season to improve his skills) and waved towels well, then yeah, they’d probably take Madsen.
If they wanted a guy who could actually provide short-term help in the frontcourt, i.e. someone who could step in and play NBA-level defence right now (especially to fill in for someone who’s injured), then it’s Miles, hands down.
by plinytheelder on Jan 9, 2009 1:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The fact that the Grizz blogger refers to "team doctors" shows that he lacks a basic grasp of the most fundamental facts.
No “team doctor” had anything to do with Miles medical retirement.
by raoulduke on Jan 9, 2009 4:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
you, sir, are completely wrong
this email is simply a reminder that signing darius purely to screw with portland IS ILLEGAL and that violating the law will result in legal action, just like any criminal activity should.
Please go back to your minnesota site.
by postup on Jan 9, 2009 12:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I thought anyone could post here?
The MN sites get plenty of comments from Blazer fans.
by plinytheelder on Jan 9, 2009 1:02 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
of course you can
but it would just be nice if you got some facts straight first.
1) responding to other GM’s desire to screw you over is not “bullying,” it’s called standing up for yourself.
2) the article you site says a “team” doctor. this is incorrect. the doctor was league appointed and approved by both the league and players union.
3) darius was here for years. do you really think that memphis fans who saw him get 9 minutes of court action are better qualified to judge him than us?
by postup on Jan 9, 2009 1:11 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
1. “Bullying” is definitely my interpretation, and that word is either used or implied by most of the articles I’ve seen on this. I think it’s 100% accurate; I think any other word would be misleading.
2. On that point you’ll have to take it up with the guy who wrote the article.
3. “for years” seems to be the key passage in this sentence – years ago, mind you, would be just as accurate.
by plinytheelder on Jan 9, 2009 1:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
well it seems we can agree
to disagree. good day, sir.
by postup on Jan 9, 2009 1:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
A couple questions
Well, more than a couple, maybe.
1. Is it appropriate for partners in a joint venture to set out to screw another partner to the tune of millions of dollars by using a loophole which is in violation of the intent of the original agreement?
2. Is it appropriate for such partners to say they are doing so in statements to the media?
3. Is it inappropriate, if #1 and #2 are happening, for the partner who is “screwed” to privately say, “Hey, wait a minute, we’re in a joint venture, and if you violate it I’m going to sue you?”
4. Is it appropriate for a recipient of that message to leak the message to the media without noting the context of #2 actually having happened?
The correct answers are:
1. No, it is not appropriate.
2. No.
3. Yes, entirely appropriate.
4. No, not appropriate.
Last question.
5. Isn’t Pliny the Elder dead? Oh, wait, it’s a T-wolves fan, I guess. Is there a difference?
I am wondering exactly what you think Portland has done wrong here. The day before they sent this, one of their business partners in this joint venture said in the media that a partner was going to play him two games to screw Portland. So they sent an email saying, if you sign him for that purpose, we’ll sue you. End of story.
If you can't convince them, confuse them -- Harry Truman, U.S. President
by jscot on Jan 9, 2009 1:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
re: 1-4: who, “in statements to the media,” said he would “set out to screw” the Blazers? Honest question, I don’t know about this.
re: 5: I don’t see what individual put-downs brings to the table? I think I’ve spoken in pretty good faith here.
re: your comment as a whole: I don’t think I’ve said anything about anyone doing something to “screw Portland”; on the contrary, I quoted the post from Beyond the Arc to make the point that if someone signed Miles, it would be because he’s capable of contributing.
by plinytheelder on Jan 9, 2009 1:47 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
There was a Yahoo article by Adrian Wojnarowski
quoting some GM saying that a team would sign Miles & play him a few garbage mins just to screw the Blazers. That’s where much of jscot’s position is stemming from. (I"ve watched him argue this for about 8 hours now, and including some excellent stuff that got deleted cuz of me.)
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 1:49 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
What got deleted?
The stuff that ended in cordob what’s his name getting his panties in a knot?
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jan 9, 2009 1:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yup
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 1:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I just take responsibility for my actions
Since some of what I said was probably not right, but still funny & accurate. I’ve known more than a few Mexicans in my lifetime, and it’s safe to say, they are a country people. Being from the Central Valley, I know a bit about being Country. Enuf said, and moving on.
But that guy was a complete idiot. And for the idiots whom I’ve offended, I do apologize.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 1:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I also have the bad habit of being offended by idiots.
It’s a tough one to shake – sort of like a recovering alcoholic getting a job as a taste tester for Jack Daniels.
But I have Dave to serve as a role model. I just ask myself – what would Dave write.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jan 9, 2009 1:56 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I have this problem
I curse, alot. Being mean comes naturally. If you aren’t smart enough to get it, I say beware Darwin. And last but not least, idiots who want to piss others off by saying stupid things are not welcome in my view.
I do manage to get in my share of fights, but usually, I’m not starting it. (I thought the idea of someone posting a clear English thought, and then claiming their grasp of English wasn’t up to snuff, and completely bogus. There is one Spanish fan on StR, who lives in Spain, and English is his 2nd language. Did that guys command of English seem lagging to anybody here? Didn’t think so.)
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 2:01 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Here's the reference in question
The money quote that jscot refers to:
All in all, league executives have been rooting hard for Miles to play those 10 games after he missed two years with a knee injury that Portland and league doctors declared was career-ending.
"Someone is going to scoop him up and play him those two games now," one Eastern Conference executive said when told the news on Wednesday night. "Portland is screwed."
One West GM thinks the Denver Nuggets, who moved under the luxury tax threshold on Wednesday, will be motivated to sign Miles.
by Timmay! on Jan 9, 2009 1:54 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Bingo! Yahtzee
And I’ll repeat, this is going to get ugly. And the conontations stretch from shore to shore….and that Canadia place too….
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 1:56 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
that's interesting, I hadn't seen it.
That said, it is a business. Let me say this: if it turns out that Miles is signed purely for this reason, it will be a real shame, and in this case, Blazer fans will have a legitimate gripe. They still probably won’t have a leg to stand on legally, but they’ll have a legit gripe.
Then again, would it be all that surprising? Remember that thing in the NFL a couple of years ago between MN and Seattle, Hutchison and…what’s his name, really nice WR. Can’t remember what exactly happened, but it really underscored the fact that this is a business.
If a team is going to sign Miles, I’d personally like it to be because he can still contribute. It sure looked like this was the case when he was blocking Al Jefferson’s shot and filling the lane last week.
by plinytheelder on Jan 9, 2009 2:02 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
then again,
where’s the line between signing this guy honestly and dishonestly? Let’s say Denver does it for cynical reasons. They have a pretty brittle frontcourt, to say the least; if any of those guys goes down, Miles could indeed help them. I’d take 10 solid minutes of D and rebounding from him any day.
To me, the bottom line is this: teams are within their legal rights to sign him, and it would be pretty easy to show, even if it weren’t true, that they were doing so out of need.
by plinytheelder on Jan 9, 2009 2:07 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I wonder pliny
If this is going to reinforce the NBA’s position that when you legally medically retire a player, you better make sure he is going to stay retire before you do it.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 2:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Stay retired^
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 2:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
How?
How is a team supposed to be able to do that?
They should get rid of the entire “medically retire” rule or change it so no matter what, the team who accepts that ruling from a third-party doctor is no longer liable no matter what happens afterward.
by portlandpete on Jan 9, 2009 2:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I didn't say I agreed with it
I said I wonder if this is going to re-inforce the NBA’s position on the matter.
Personally, I think if Miles wants to play, then he should, and his contract with Portland should be cancelled.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 3:18 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Aside from the obvious benefit to the team I root for
I like that idea. I mean, right now Darius is pulling in a fat paycheck that by all accounts he hasn’t even begun to earn. Now if a player is brutally injured and can no longer play, I’m all for that guy having his contract as a cushion to soften the blow of any lifelong injuries.
However, if said player can actually play again and collects another contract in addition to the original contract, what is that first team still paying him for? They can’t play the guy. They can’t trade the guy. And by the time he is medically retired, they haven’t gotten anything out of him for years.
"I never scored more than 38, even in Little League." ~ Roy, 52 pts
by shralpster on Jan 9, 2009 3:35 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
This comment is 100% correct
To prove it would be very difficult, but email trails can turn up some interesting things.
To me, the bottom line is this, though: If your joint venture partners start running around saying they are going to screw you to the tune of millions of dollars, there is nothing wrong with sending them a private email saying they’d better not.
And Larry Miller effectively said this was sent in response to that media report.
One more note, pliny. I never meant the comment about plinytheelder to be a personal slam, but a joke about the T-wolves struggles this year. It fell flat, and I apologize. It wasn’t funny, and would have been far better left out.
I know you can put admiration in bags, because admiration is real, and tominhawaii says that everything that is real is measurable.
by jscot on Jan 10, 2009 2:10 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I have some problems with your statements
Facts are not opinions. What you stated is your opinions on this subject. That is not a fact. I am a KIngs fan, and therefore do not care, but frankly, what the Blazers did by writing that letter was a subtle attempt at bullying. That isn’t a fact, but my opinion. I’m not wrong or right by saying such.
Now, the Blazers are in a tough spot, and I emphathize with that, but I do not emphathize with many Blazer fans who feel they are being picked on. More than a few have a sort of sneering “we know it all” attitude that turns many off. So, to retaliate, I see many people are saying: Haha you’re SOL. When you’re at the top you deal with it.
Last, but not least, you’re not more qualified to talk about how the state of Darius’ abilities in 2009 than a Memphis fan who saw him play there last week, provided you were not at the game yourself. Unless you are a doctor, and did see Darius’ knee, then you are not an expert. It is still your opinion.
Last, and not least, this is only my opinion. I reserve the right to piss anyone off with it at any time. Good day.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 1:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I’m subbing in for our usual ambassador.
by Norsktroll on Jan 9, 2009 1:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
hehe
She’s nice, contributes fairly regularly.
by plinytheelder on Jan 9, 2009 1:16 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
She is. I didn’t want to come across as abrasive either, just state our side and give a bit of background info as we see it.
by Norsktroll on Jan 9, 2009 1:17 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It's a heated issue,
I think the conversation’s been plenty civil. ;)
by plinytheelder on Jan 9, 2009 1:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
When the discussion is between folks who live in Minnesota...
… and Oregon, it can’t help but be.
Minnesota was the nicest place I ever lived – until I moved to Oregon.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jan 9, 2009 1:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Larry Miller is an idiot
This is just going to end up embarassing the Blazer organization and us; the fans. Pritchard has a lot of anti-idiot immunity saved up so all the blame falls on Larry Miller. Every media outlet is going to mock the Blazers over this and in the end Miles will get signed, I predict no lawsuit will be filed, all this for nothing.
by neutroticblazerfan on Jan 9, 2009 1:31 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I am positive that Blazer brass did not take this lightly
They knew exactly what they were doing.
Unfortunately, a side effect will be the Blazers team being seen as villains for at least one generation to come. At least among less-informed fans, and possibly Henry Abbott.
by Timmay! on Jan 9, 2009 1:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Who is turning
into an intentional less-informed fan.
by TSE on Jan 9, 2009 2:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
"Blazers team being seen as villains for at least one generation "
Nah, Kobe is a superstar again, doing kid friendly public interest announcements, what, three years from a rape trial?
by raoulduke on Jan 9, 2009 5:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
On the other hand, some columnists
still use the term Jail Blazers, 7 years later.
by Timmay! on Jan 9, 2009 5:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
A lot of people
are indeed predicting that this will backfire.
by plinytheelder on Jan 9, 2009 1:32 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
This stinks...
I’m no Darius fan, in fact, I couldn’t be happier that he’s no longer on our team. But, having said that, whatever the motivations or intentions of management were for sending out this memo, I think it stinks.
As someone who has gratefully guzzled a gallon of Kevin Pritchard and Co.’s “culture” kool-aid, this move seems to contradict what the organization supposedly stands for.
I realize Blazer brass are looking after the franchise’s best interests.
I understand what’s at stake here.
No matter the intent, I don’t like this tactic. I’m embarrassed to be a Blazer fan today.
by Heizer on Jan 9, 2009 1:47 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Not I
At first glance I was on your side, but after taking into account all the things that have happened, I believe that we were correct in doing exactly what we did. What I wish is that some GM hadn’t come out and said that he or one of his fellow GM’s would basically screw the Blazers by signing Miles so they could get a piece of the luxury tax payments.
"I saw him in the face" Sergio's quote on the latest alley-oop to Rudy.
by blazermaniac32 on Jan 9, 2009 1:54 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
They may not like how this makes them look....
… but isn’t it possible that they reached the conclusion that the threat from some team trying to sign Miles just to benefit at Portland’s expense was real enough to warrant action they otherwise would have preferred not to take?
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jan 9, 2009 2:00 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
My first reaction was that this was going to come back to bite us, and sure enough, the Player’s Union has already filed suit. No shock there.
My problem is that it makes our franchise look like bullies—like we’re trying to strongarm the other teams that might sign him. If another team wants to sign him just to screw us over there’s really no way we could ever prove it. So what’s the point of threatening people? All it does is make us look desperate.
I just don’t get it.
by Heizer on Jan 9, 2009 5:28 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I guess mostly, I just don’t like how this email made me feel. It felt petty and cheap and desperate, and I thought we were moving in a new direction. I still think we are, but I would love to know just what management’s endgame was, and how they thought this email could achieve it.
by Heizer on Jan 9, 2009 5:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think Heizer's comments
go right to the heart of the matter.
by plinytheelder on Jan 9, 2009 5:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Serious question for you two
This letter that Portland sent is really not unusual in a business environment. It just normally wouldn’t leak to the press (and don’t forget, Portland did not release this, some other team did it. It should have stayed a private matter.). It’s reasonable to assume similar things have happened before, about different problems, that didn’t leak publicly. NBA owners/teams don’t always get along.
Is this really a matter of not having a taste of seeing the inner workings of these business dealings?
There’s nothing wrong if your answer is “yes, I just don’t like seeing this side of the sport and the team”, and this isn’t a trick question. There’s no followup “gotcha” question or anything. I’m just trying to understand what about this letter is bothersome to some people.
by Timmay! on Jan 9, 2009 5:47 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think you're wrong -
I don’t think these kind of things are par for the course at all. I’m not talking about the business world in general, about whose inner workings I don’t have the knowledge to make blanket statements. I’m talking about the NBA. The letter is newsworthy because it is unusual – Thomsen, in the article that broke the story, used that word in his very first paragraph if I remember. I don’t buy the idea that these kind of things happen all the time, we’re just not privy to them – on the contrary, let’s face it, there are no secrets in the world, there are some very good reporters out there with very good access to the teams they cover, and if this were commonplace we’d know about it.
I do agree with you on this: veiled threats are often used in negotiations. But to put such a bullying gesture in writing, then so disingenuously wonder what’s wrong…wow, that’s some serious stupidity on the part of the Blazers FO.
I’m sure all owners/GMs are asses to some extent. Hell, I even think they should be. This is a highly competitive environment, and they’re working to make their teams better. The mistake isn’t in trying to influence others, through cunning, ruses, etc. The mistake is in using threats and bullying to try to dictate the actions of others. And the stupidity is in thinking that there will be no ramifications. It’s the history of the last 8 years of American politics in a nutshell.
by plinytheelder on Jan 9, 2009 5:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The NBA is a business
Unfortunately we get reminded of this more often then sometimes we would like. But let me assure you that while it is never pleasant, it is indeed quite common in a business environment to have letters like this float around. And yes it happens with clients, competitors, vendors, etc… It unfortunately is necessary in today’s society (and I wish it weren’t this way, but it is) that you have to put things in writing and sometimes use strong language to get your point across and to also leave any ambiguity out of the message that is being delivered.
The problem here is that the NBA’s dirty laundry is being aired in a public forum. First the GM says the Blazers are screwed (to a reporter), then another GM (or maybe the same one) leaks the Blazers response, then another leak when Cleveland’s GM’s e-mail is sent to a reporter. There is a lot of posturing going on here and in the end no one benefits. Plenty of sleaze going on around here and while I wish the Blazers didn’t have to send the e-mail the sleazy acts of others forced them to. And it’s not bullying. It’s stating there position in a private forum that was made public.
"I saw him in the face" Sergio's quote on the latest alley-oop to Rudy.
by blazermaniac32 on Jan 9, 2009 8:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It's clearly bullying,
as pretty much everyone outside Portland has asserted. Look, my point isn’t that what’s at stake here is putting something in writing. It’s the sheer stupidity of thinking that you can determine what 29 other teams do. Things don’t work that way, in business or elsewhere. Incredible arrogance: “I don’t like the rule, so I’m going to piss in everyone else’s pot.” This is going to generate – has already generated – a huge amount of resentment. It’s truly incredible how politically naive a move this was.
by plinytheelder on Jan 9, 2009 8:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh but it does
I see it quite frequently. But we can just agree to disagree.
"I saw him in the face" Sergio's quote on the latest alley-oop to Rudy.
by blazermaniac32 on Jan 9, 2009 8:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The political naivety
was the failure to make specific reference to the media reports that teams were going to screw Portland in the email itself. And to fail to say in the email itself (as they’ve said in public statements since) that they have no objection to a team legitimately signing Darius for the purpose of helping their team win games.
I know you can put admiration in bags, because admiration is real, and tominhawaii says that everything that is real is measurable.
by jscot on Jan 10, 2009 2:15 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Forget about Boston.
We’re now the #1 hated team in the league.
by JoeBlazer on Jan 9, 2009 1:49 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I don't see how..
I mean… KG is still a jerk, and nobody gives a damn about Darius Miles. Really…he is a has been with one knee a bad attitude, and moderate skills.
People will forget about this fairly quickly…
by tmundal on Jan 9, 2009 2:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
we're getting there
We have a deep pocketed owner, a front office that is now seen as a bunch of bullies and a fan-base that comes up with terms like “pritch-slap.”
We’re not going to win any popularity contests any time soon. Thankfully, we are also represented by Nate McMillian, Brandon Roy and Greg Oden, three very classy dudes. That saves our image somewhat.
Boomshakalaka
by jksnake99 on Jan 9, 2009 2:07 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I always thought the Pritch slap thing was funny
And I’m still thankful that Portland took Bayless.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
by pookeyguru on Jan 9, 2009 2:10 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Indiana took Bayless
Portland just traded for him :)
Boomshakalaka
by jksnake99 on Jan 9, 2009 2:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think Portland "Took" him same as we did Brandon and LaMarcus.
Rudyculize: The act of Rudy making others look slow, dim and generally oafish.
http://www.myspace.com/y5k
by Y5k on Jan 9, 2009 2:28 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That's what I was meaning.
All of our players are good so there’s nothing there on that front. But there is going to be a strong dislike of us because of what upper management has done.
by JoeBlazer on Jan 9, 2009 2:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Somewhat?
Just because some people around the league are envious of Allen’s deep pockets, Pritchard’s ability to evaluate talent and then go and get it and some plain old fashioned luck, does not make us the bad guys.
Portland does not have any image problem. What we certainly don’t need are fans who over concern themselves with what a minority of outsiders think and lose track of the bigger picture.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jan 9, 2009 2:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I didn't say we were bad guys
I do understand why fans of other teams dislike us, however.
Boomshakalaka
by jksnake99 on Jan 9, 2009 2:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
that's a very fair statement
But it’s worth noting that most fans who dislike us due to yesterday’s leaked e-mail, actually dislike us for opinions that are often ill-formed.
Most non-Blazer-fans who have a full understanding of the events leading up to yesterday tend to fall under “well I wish they could have handled it differently, but I understand why they sent that out.”
by Timmay! on Jan 9, 2009 2:38 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Who dislikes us?
Before and momentarily after this hubbub, who hates us?
Most admire the team and I never run out of people I meet who don’t count the current Blazers as one of their favorite “side” team to root for when not rooting for their team.
I agree with Tim the G from 1956… some of us just worry too much about what other internet folks (like us) think, when the vast majority of the NBA fans of the world like the Trail Blazers. This current situation will go away shortly like it has before, maybe pop up again, people can pretend they care and get all “OOH THOSE BULLIES I LOVE DARIUS” for a few more minutes, and then promptly forget about it because they don’t really care.
The only fans who dislike us are angry about where we are at, such as Bulls fans. No one REALLY dislikes the team for any other reason aside from stuff like that (some will use this as an excuse, again, until they forget about it).
Mortimer
by Mortimer on Jan 9, 2009 2:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
the communities of Blog-a-Bull, Canis Hoopus, Celtics Blog, Hornets247 and several other blogs
come to mind as people who are not crazy about the Blazers.
Any opposing franchise that engaged in this type of behavior (talking about the tone of the letter here and the sense that they want to prevent Miles from working) would instantly make my list of “love to hate” teams.
I guess it doesn’t matter, but I’m not thrilled that the Blazers are becoming one of the more disliked NBA franchises.
Boomshakalaka
by jksnake99 on Jan 9, 2009 2:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Was gonna happen anyway
as soon as start winning
Homer: "Yikes....a bear is eating my father!!"
Selma: "I'm Selma"
Homer: "A talking bear is eating my father!!"
by 92wastheyear on Jan 9, 2009 2:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
we
Homer: "Yikes....a bear is eating my father!!"
Selma: "I'm Selma"
Homer: "A talking bear is eating my father!!"
by 92wastheyear on Jan 9, 2009 2:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It's the price you pay for being good
Well, not even GOOD really because we’re just okay for now, but GONNA be good, with a GM who has done well, a rich owner, AND the largest community of fans on the internet out of the entire NBA.
There is, almost literally, no way to be liked by some other fans of teams that are already set on not liking your team, especially if you are good.
If a team is in eternal youth movement (Bulls), constantly failed youth movements (Wolves), got bamboozled in a trade (Celtics, though it worked out just fine for them obviously), and… uh, why do the Hornets hate us? That’s just wierd. ANYWAYS, those fanbases have reason to not like Portland but only because we got one over on them or were better at what they were trying to do— which is the nature of competitive sports.
You can be good, you can be loved by all, you can’t be both. Every good team has people who hate them unless they are not seen as a threat to that team. Who wants to be everyone’s lil’ brother, like the Warriors (everyone except Mavs fans can like them, because they haven’t hurt anyone aside from Mavs fans in recent history)?
It’s just a side effect of what we get to enjoy. You can’t let it bug you, because it’ll make ya go crazy.
I care about our behaviour on other websites, and making us come off good. But, there’s just too many of us Blazer fans online, and we’re gonna be too good as a team. Haters be hatin’!
Mortimer
by Mortimer on Jan 9, 2009 3:10 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Hornets fans hate us because
Chandler smacked Joel’s broken wrist and then gave Prizzly an el-blow. How can you not hate Joel just for being there? And of course you also have to blame his teammates for being… his teammates? I mean, after all, NO won that game, and you know how much fans hate beating the opposition.
But seriously, I agree, some fans will dislike the Blazers just because our SBN fanbase will spill onto their less trafficked site and overwhelm their paltry post-counts. There have been plenty of times when another site has several BE “representatives” posting in their threads and then everything goes to poop when one Blazer troll (ahem, timbo) pipes in to give us all a bad name. That kind of thing is hard to avoid and not something to lose sleep over.
"I never scored more than 38, even in Little League." ~ Roy, 52 pts
by shralpster on Jan 9, 2009 3:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It's not like whole fanbases are running around hating on us. Just a few individuals. Very few, I must say
by Norsktroll on Jan 9, 2009 3:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That's how I see it too
You could say the Bulls fanbase doesn’t like us, is annoyed with us, but many of them like us alot and admire what we got going on.
I’ve only seen a few people reacting after some of us get annoying with happiness and go post on other sites being happy and annoying.
We got a loveable team, and most like us quite a bit. ALWAYS gonna be others who think otherwise, and I’d say thats certainly the exception.
If this makes them hate the Blazers, they were likely always inclined to hate the Blazers. OR, like I keep saying, they’ll forget about it soon.
Morty
by Mortimer on Jan 9, 2009 3:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Why hate any team?
Live is too short to hate.
I loved it when we beat Boston. They are the defending champs and had the best record in the NBA when they came to town. Yet two years ago beating Boston was not that big a deal.
There is one team I love, a few I like alot (often because of a specific player or two), a couple that I don’t particularly care for (again often because of a specific player) and a bunch that I don’t really care about one way or the other. I don’t worry about any of them, except the one in the first category. And I don’t worry about what some fan of any other team thinks. Spend much time on blogs and you quickly realize that a large percentage of what you see is mostly uninformed opinion. Why should I care about an opinion that is lacking in reason or fact.
hakkaa päälle !
by timg56 on Jan 9, 2009 3:17 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs