Blazers threaten the rest of the NBA [merged]

[Natebishop3]

Players Union is stepping in now.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3822392

The NBA players' union said Friday it will file a grievance against the Portland Trail Blazers after team president Larry Miller threatened litigation if a team picks up Darius Miles simply to adversely impact Portland's salary cap.

"We are shocked at the brazen attempt by the Portland Trail Blazers to try to prevent Darius Miles from continuing his NBA career," NBPA executive director Billy Hunter said in a statement Friday. "Their attempt to intimidate the other 29 NBA teams by threatening frivolous litigation merely for signing this capable NBA veteran is a clear violation of the anti-collusion and other provisions of our Collective Bargaining Agreement. We will vigorously defend Darius' rights."

 

[Boob-No-More]

And can one of the Blazers fans in opposition against this, why do the Blazers deserve to have Miles removed from their cap if he didn't suffer a career ending injury and that it was just a mis-diagnosis.

First, the Blazers didn't do the diagnosis and deem Miles' injury career ending. That diagnosis was performed by a league appointed doctor whose appointment was OKed by the NBA Players Association. Why should the Blazers be held responsible and penalized for a diagnosis they didn't perform or control in any way?

Second, Miles playing for nine minutes doesn't invalidate the diagnosis. The league appointed doctor didn't say his knee would self-destruct the instant he played in another NBA game. He deemed the damage to the knee sufficient that the injury could be considered career ending. In other words, if Miles continues to play on the damaged knee, the knee will continue to get worse over time and eventually become debilitating. Miles is free to ignore that recommendation and continue to play on the knee, but doing so is a risk. A risk he seems willing to take, but his willingness to do so does not invalidate or disprove the diagnosis.

BNM

 

[Natebishop3]

I reread the letter, and I don't see what the problem is. The team did not say "do not sign Darius Miles", the team merely said "if you sign Darius Miles with the intention of hurting us, we will take action." It would be like your ex girlfriend sleeping with your best friend just to get back at you. She isn't doing it because she likes the guy. She just wants to cause you harm.

 

[superfly4201]

I'm having trouble figuring out why everyone is coming down on the Blazers for doing this? Everyone knew that some team would pick Miles up and finish the deed so this letter wasn't going to push a team to pick him up. What it does do is it gets the topic thrown out into the fold so that the league and union can take a look at it, which they seem to be doing this afternoon, mission accomplished!

The Blazers best bet is that the NBA looks at this rule and determines it is flawed and that it leaves the door open to situations where teams can screw other teams and maybe they rescind it.

I would think the Blazers could have the union partially on their side with this. After all, if the Blazers have an extra $9 mil to spend, thats more money in their pocket and that seems to be all they ever care about.

 

[Blazer4life]

The NBA players' union said Friday it will file a grievance against the Portland Trail Blazers after team president Larry Miller threatened litigation if a team picks up Darius Miles simply to adversely impact Portland's salary cap.

"We are shocked at the brazen attempt by the Portland Trail Blazers to try to prevent Darius Miles from continuing his NBA career," NBPA executive director Billy Hunter said in a statement Friday. "Their attempt to intimidate the other 29 NBA teams by threatening frivolous litigation merely for signing this capable NBA veteran is a clear violation of the anti-collusion and other provisions of our Collective Bargaining Agreement. We will vigorously defend Darius' rights."


See thats just it. What NBA career/ His career was deemed OVER by the NBA and players union. Because he chooses to play is up to him but is against medical advice. If they determine he can play, why shouldn't we have leverage in a suit against the NBA for their inaccurate info?

 

[ABM]

Miles is free to ignore that recommendation and continue to play on the knee, but doing so is a risk. A risk he seems willing to take, but his willingness to do so does not invalidate or disprove the diagnosis.

BNM

Then, IMO, the league should waive the cap implications and we can all go home.

 

[The Sebastian Express]

I reread the letter, and I don't see what the problem is. The team did not say "do not sign Darius Miles", the team merely said "if you sign Darius Miles with the intention of hurting us, we will take action." It would be like your ex girlfriend sleeping with your best friend just to get back at you. She isn't doing it because she likes the guy. She just wants to cause you harm.

Because the idea of a franchise standing up for itself after other executives gloated that Portland was going to get intentionally screwed is mystifying to some people apparently. They also want to create more drama and refuse to see that what you said is all Portland is saying. They aren't saying don't sign Darius Miles and try to give him a legitimate come back - they're saying if you have the balls to sign him to a ten day contract, play him in two games for a thirty seconds each game then cut him and it's going to look suspicious and they are going to pursue legal action to protect themselves.

 

[alex42083]

I reread the letter, and I don't see what the problem is. The team did not say "do not sign Darius Miles", the team merely said "if you sign Darius Miles with the intention of hurting us, we will take action." It would be like your ex girlfriend sleeping with your best friend just to get back at you. She isn't doing it because she likes the guy. She just wants to cause you harm.

Good point. We just don't want a team to sign him to a 10-day, play him one minute in two games, and then cut him.
If teams really believe he can help them, sign him to a contract for the rest of the season. But this thing really is turning into a huge mess..

 

[Natebishop3]

I'm having trouble figuring out why everyone is coming down on the Blazers for doing this? Everyone knew that some team would pick Miles up and finish the deed so this letter wasn't going to push a team to pick him up. What it does do is it gets the topic thrown out into the fold so that the league and union can take a look at it, which they seem to be doing this afternoon, mission accomplished!

The Blazers best bet is that the NBA looks at this rule and determines it is flawed and that it leaves the door open to situations where teams can screw other teams and maybe they rescind it.

I would think the Blazers could have the union partially on their side with this. After all, if the Blazers have an extra $9 mil to spend, thats more money in their pocket and that seems to be all they ever care about.

The Union wouldn't look at it logically. They obviously had the knee-jerk reaction of "omg we need to step in and defend our players." This has all become political at this juncture. Whether the Blazers are in the right or not, the media will spin it with Portland as the bad guys, and Miles as the victim. The Players Union will want to make a showing in favor of Miles, so the rest of the players will feel safe if they were in this situation.

 

[Blazer4life]

Then, IMO, the league should waive the cap implications and we can all go home.

Agreed, but I imagine the Blazers already looked into that and the league probably said we would be on the hook, again on the hook for THEIR own mistake.

 

[BalancedMan]

My question in all this:

Point #1: The Blazers are the property of the NBA. They are owned by Paul Allen, but the team still belongs to the NBA, correct? Paul couldn't take the team and move them to another league, or another city, or another country without the approval of the league, correct?

Point #2: How can one part of a corporation sue another part of the same corporation? It's almost like that joke commercial last year, where Coke wanted to sue Coke Zero or whatever it was.

Point #3: Can't the NBA step in and simply say, "no you're not."

Well aren't the individual teams a "Franchise". I can think of where there might be conflict, like when a new Subway opens and steals business from another Subway located near by. I'm sure there are conflicts and arbitration. But when it's all said and done, I think the NBA League office has the final say in things. But I'm pretty sure one team could sue (or get an injunction, whatever) against another.

 

[Furball]

If you read the article on ESPN, one General Manger said that the memo the League sent out regarding Miles being eligible to be signed was unprecedented. He had never seen a memo sent out. Plus, since when do preseason games count? If they counted, why was Miles eligible to play when he was supposed to be suspended?

Also, the Blazers should threaten to sue the NBA issued doctor and the independent doctor who said Miles could never play again.

Personally in my black helicopter mind, I think the NBA is purposely trying to screw the Blazers because they do not want a small market team to dominate the league. They want NY, LA and BOS to reign. If PDX has 5 superstars, we will dominate. Bad for business. I think PDX should boycott all things NBA that do not include the Blazers. I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it.......All right. I chilled.

 

[igotask8board]

There ya go with the "threat" thing.

If I posted a sign in front of my house that said "Lawbreakers will be prosecuted" you wouldn't think twice about it.... unless you were a lawbreaker. Would it be a threat, or just a warning? Either way, you wouldn't have to worry about it unless your intentions were bad.

What laws? We are talking about NBA teams and NBA players. Forget about intentions, Miles would have played in at least 15 NBA games if this situation never existed and if Miles was somehow in the same shape he is in currently.

 

[noknobs]

Well, I was just listening to ESPN radio down here in L.A., and not surprisingly they reacted to the letter just as I assumed they would. The hosts of the show said that Portland was basically asking teams not to sign Miles. They said the letter was "indefensible". They said the letter basically says to other teams: If you sign Miles, we'll sue you. -- Now clearly, that is false, that's not what the letter is saying at all, but this is EXACTLY how I thought it would be interpreted and told to the masses by ignorant radio hosts and the like, which is why I think the Blazers should have handled it differently.


They had John Hollinger on their program to talk about it: He agreed with the hosts that it makes perfect sense for other teams to sign Miles. You can sign Miles and actually turn a profit, since the 10 day contract would be for less than they'd receive from the Portland Luxury tax. Well that got a big laugh from these Laker homers, and I suppose, rightly so.

Hollinger said he doesn't think Portland has a case, but we're just protecting our interests and if we manage to scare someone off, good for us. But absolutely believes someone will pick up Miles. Doesn't think it will be a good team, since most good teams are up against the cap themselves and they realize that a bad, cheap team will probably do the dirty work for them anyways. He thinks Miles could end up right back in Memphis.

 

[Natebishop3]

If you read the article on ESPN, one General Manger said that the memo the League sent out regarding Miles being eligible to be signed was unprecedented. He had never seen a memo sent out. Plus, since when do preseason games count? If they counted, why was Miles eligible to play when he was supposed to be suspended?

Also, the Blazers should threaten to sue the NBA issued doctor and the independent doctor who said Miles could never play again.

Personally in my black helicopter mind, I think the NBA is purposely trying to screw the Blazers because they do not want a small market team to dominate the league. They want NY, LA and BOS to reign. If PDX has 5 superstars, we will dominate. Bad for business. I think PDX should boycott all things NBA that do not include the Blazers. I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it.......All right. I chilled.

I think everyone needs to accept that the league appointed doctor determined that Miles' injury was career ending, but he didn't say Miles would never walk, run, or play basketball again. Just because his knee is in bad shape, it doesn't mean he can't hobble up and down a court, and if someone wants to pay him to hobble that's their prerogative.

It's obvious that Miles never had any intention of retiring. Whether the Blazers wanted him to retire or not, they can't force him to stop playing basketball. We tried to find a way out of his guaranteed contract, it's obvious it is not working. We really have no one to blame but ourselves on this. We signed him to a guaranteed contract. That's an unavoidable fact. It will suck if he ends up back on our books, but we would have been really lucky if this had all panned out in the first place.

 

[alex42083]

He thinks Miles could end up right back in Memphis.

Wouldn't surprise me either. With Chris Wallace.. anything stupid can happen.

 

[SodaPopinski]

Nothing says "small-time" like wasting a roster spot just to screw another team's cap flexibility.

-Pop

 

[Minstrel]

It should be interesting. I certainly see the validity to the arguments being put forth by both the "This is silly" and "This is the right thing to do" camps. However, I am certain Allen and Pritchard and Miller have been thinking about this since Miles was designated as retired due to career-ending injury. I doubt any point brought up in this thread would be new to them. So, having weighed it all, they felt that this was the best move to make. The current Trailblazer management doesn't strike me as one that would act irrationally, so I suspect that they see a likely total benefit.

My belief is still that the idea is simply to promise great financial cost, via attorney cost, to any team who tries to pick up Miles in a transparent attempt to game the system. Winning or losing the case is immaterial...they are just guaranteeing that it will be an expensive decision to make. That may be enough to dissuade teams from doing so. Cutting Portland's cap space from $25 million to $16 million may not be an important enough thing to teams to incur the legal fees that it would provoke.

 

[noknobs]

Nothing says "small-time" like wasting a roster spot just to screw another team's cap flexibility.

-Pop

But they're also doing it because it benefits them financially.



I just think the whole concept is ridiculous and Portland is getting royally fucked raw. We pay the contract anyways, and if an NBA doctor ruled that it was a career-ending injury, his contract should not go back on our cap if that doctor is proven to be full of shit. We're basically having to pay over and above his contract and pay every other team due to an NBA doctor being wrong. That is so flawed it's incredible.

 

[igotask8board]

Multiple posters are claiming Miles still gets paid either way. He only gets a fraction of the remaining $18 million from insurance if he doesn't play in two more games.

The Trailblazers need to pay for their actions. The point of having a salary cap and guaranteed contracts is so teams wouldn't go around throwing money to get every athletic prospect. The Blazers are part of the reason NBA players are getting paid too much money.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

Nothing says "small-time" like wasting a roster spot just to screw another team's cap flexibility.

-Pop

That is what it was up until the email. Blazers just threw out the challenge and now wasting a roster spot says I won't back down to big bad PA and his team of lawyers.

I thought Memphis looked small time and petty for what they were pulling off and I feel the Blazers just lowered themselves to Memphis level.

Blazers could have handled this situation with respect and class and not complained about potentially being screwed which could have endeared us with the NBA and maybe other teams. Instead, Blazers took the low road, sent out an offensive email to all other teams and made the Blazer organization look like either bullies or crybabies.

 

[Денг Гордон]

But there also isn't a rule that says the Blazers can't sign him and sit him...yet both of these situations seem to be in violation of the INTENT of the rule which is to objectively evaluate the severity and career "ending-ness" of an injury...

If the Blazers sign him, the 10 game thing goes out the window, and he immediately goes back on the cap.

 

[The Sebastian Express]

Multiple posters are claiming Miles still gets paid either way. He only gets a fraction of the remaining $18 million from insurance if he doesn't play in two more games.

The Trailblazers need to pay for their actions. The point of having a salary cap and guaranteed contracts is so teams wouldn't go around throwing money to get every athletic prospect. The Blazers are part of the reason NBA players are getting paid too much money.

No, he gets his entire salary.

 

[DaRizzle]

Well I read the last few pages of this thread. All I can say is POR is fighting a lost cause. He will sign somewhere. I dont see how you can prove in court that the team that signs him did it ONLY to screw over POR. Its not like you can argue the method of building a team in a courthouse with an obvious right or wrong answer. Sorry guys, he's going back on the books sooner than later.

 

[Денг Гордон]

I also want to add that while I feel the same way about this whole Miles situation as the Blazers do, I think they went out with guns blazing and handled the situation rather poorly. I think they could of been more discrete and their real beef should be with the NBA (since their independent doctor agreed with our prognosis). Why should we be penalized for their (the NBA's) findings? Doesn't seem right to me and why is no one mentioning that in the paper, on tv, ect....

You're not being penalized by the NBA if Miles makes it through 10 games. If Miles plays 10 games, he will have proved to the NBA that it was not a career ending injury, therefore, he should never have been removed from the cap. If the NBA were to rule that Miles shouldn't go on the cap, even if he played the set amount of games, the NBA would be rewarding Portland for a mis-diagnosis.

 

[Natebishop3]

It should be interesting. I certainly see the validity to the arguments being put forth by both the "This is silly" and "This is the right thing to do" camps. However, I am certain Allen and Pritchard and Miller have been thinking about this since Miles was designated as retired due to career-ending injury. I doubt any point brought up in this thread would be new to them. So, having weighed it all, they felt that this was the best move to make. The current Trailblazer management doesn't strike me as one that would act irrationally, so I suspect that they see a likely total benefit.

My belief is still that the idea is simply to promise great financial cost, via attorney cost, to any team who tries to pick up Miles in a transparent attempt to game the system. Winning or losing the case is immaterial...they are just guaranteeing that it will be an expensive decision to make. That may be enough to dissuade teams from doing so. Cutting Portland's cap space from $25 million to $16 million may not be an important enough thing to teams to incur the legal fees that it would provoke.

The thing is, Miles wasn't designated as retired. To my knowledge, I do not believe the league or any team can force a player to retire unless he breaks some rules. They can simply stop signing him, but it's obvious that some teams are still interested in Miles.

I'm guessing the process went something like this:

*Miles wasn't progressing. His knee is in really bad shape.

*The Blazers ask him to retire and he says no, because he doesn't want to forfeit his contract.

*The Blazers approach the league and plead their case, stating something along the lines of "this guy is just sitting on our bench collecting a paycheck, but he's unfit to play. Help us!"

*The league assigns a doctor and determines that Miles' knee is in bad shape, so they allow the team to cut him without any penalties or responsibility, with the caveat that he must stay inactive.

*Miles sees an opportunity to make more money, so he tries to get back in shape and make another roster.

Are the Blazers at fault for signing Miles? Yes and no. Miles was always a paycheck player. He showed some real talent in 04. They got tired of paying a guy to sit on their bench and do nothing. With that said, I'm not 100% sure it was all Miles. I don't think the Blazers wanted him around the team. I'd be really interested to know more about what went on behind the scenes before Miles was cut.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

Multiple posters are claiming Miles still gets paid either way. He only gets a fraction of the remaining $18 million from insurance if he doesn't play in two more games.

The Trailblazers need to pay for their actions. The point of having a salary cap and guaranteed contracts is so teams wouldn't go around throwing money to get every athletic prospect. The Blazers are part of the reason NBA players are getting paid too much money.

I think you have this wrong. Miles gets his cash from the contract . . . paid either by insurance and Blazers or all by the Blazers.

 

[SodaPopinski]

The Trailblazers need to pay for their actions. The point of having a salary cap and guaranteed contracts is so teams wouldn't go around throwing money to get every athletic prospect. The Blazers are part of the reason NBA players are getting paid too much money.

Ummm ...

Miles got injured after signing a long-term deal with the Blazers, then proceeded to loaf around during his rehab and had setback after setback. An NBA and players union-approved independent doctor evaluated Miles and said that he is not medically able to carry out the duties of his contract and the Blazers are eligible for compensation for his inability to fulfill his contract.

The Blazers obviously feel like the spirit of the insurance compensation rule for injured players under contract is being violated.

This is an issue the NBA needs to address. It's not like the Blazers hired some phony doctor just to get money back because they didn't like the guy's character. This was a doctor approved by the NBA and the players union.

There just happens to be a loophole in the NBA rulebook that allows teams to sign medically fragile players for the purpose of fucking over a competitor's salary flexibility.

-Pop

 

[The_Lillard_King]

Does anyone know who payed for the diagnosis by the doctor?

 

[Natebishop3]

You're not being penalized by the NBA if Miles makes it through 10 games. If Miles plays 10 games, he will have proved to the NBA that it was not a career ending injury, therefore, he should never have been removed from the cap. If the NBA were to rule that Miles shouldn't go on the cap, even if he played the set amount of games, the NBA would be rewarding Portland for a mis-diagnosis.

Jesus would you please get it in your head that:

AN NBA APPOINTED DOCTOR RULED MILES AS HAVING A CAREER ENDING INJURY.

This wasn't just Portland trying to pull a fast one. There weren't any shady dealings here.