Looks like the Rubio situation just went nasty

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

hasoos

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2008
Messages
9,418
Likes
97
Points
48
http://www.hoopsworld.com/HeadlineStories.asp?lc=NBA&c=1&TEAM_ID=&PLAYER_ID=&hd=20090610#STORY_19441

According to this, Rubio went to sue the team for the buyout rights and then fond out that the team had signed his buyout rights over the the Spanish version of the Internal Revenue Service as payment of a debt. So the buyout is actually owned by them now. I do not know if I have seen a dirtier move in my life than that one. In fact, I would have to think that FIBA will be called in to review this, because it seems to me that the way the basketball team has handled this isn't in the interest of international basketball, and may have violated some ethics.
 
If I'm a promising young player, I just crossed Joventut off my list of teams I want to play for.
 
You signed a contract, now fullfill the contract. I would be pissed if I were tham as well. Here's the buyout, pay it.
 
If it's in the contract, it's in the contract. If he had such high aspirations, he should have signed a shorter deal.
 
You signed a contract, now fullfill the contract. I would be pissed if I were tham as well. Here's the buyout, pay it.

You know it's not that I have a problem with. The problem I have with it, is that they sold his contract without even so much as informing him, and if you have any experience dealing with the IRS, if theirs is like ours, it is almost impossible to deal with them. The facts are that the groups should be able to come to an agreement on a buyout that benefits all. But once the tax guys are involved, they will try and squeeze every cent out of it, because that is what they do. So by doing that, they basically screwed him.
 
You signed a contract, now fullfill the contract. I would be pissed if I were tham as well. Here's the buyout, pay it.

A contract signed by an uneraged individual that compels them to specific work years into the future.

Yeah, that flys.

None of these contracts are legal in any normal sense.

Underaged signators.

Monopolies.

Restrictions on right to work.

The whole thing is a mess.
 
A contract signed by an uneraged individual that compels them to specific work years into the future.

Yeah, that flys.

None of these contracts are legal in any normal sense.

Underaged signators.

Monopolies.

Restrictions on right to work.

The whole thing is a mess.

Spain is more socialized than the US. A team here can't just sell off a contract to the US government...yet. Different laws apply in different countries.
 
Spain is more socialized than the US. A team here can't just sell off a contract to the US government...yet. Different laws apply in different countries.

I'm posting from Italy right now . . . driving laws definitely are different here. :)
 
I'm jealous. I love Italy.

Right now I am in the Tuscany hills (Montecatini) for two weeks. . . a much needed vacation to recharge the batteries.

Have not adjusted to the the time though . . . it's 12:30 PM right now
 
Right now I am in the Tuscany hills (Montecatini) for two weeks. . . a much needed vacation to recharge the batteries.

Have not adjusted to the the time though . . . it's 12:30 PM right now

That's chianti time in Italy.
 
I'm 1/2 Italian. My grandmother was born in Torino. Buon divertimento!

I should stop hijacking this thread, but very cool. I find the people in Italy to be some of the nicest people in Europe (outside of Rome).

No parlo italiano . . . parlo ingles? : )

Ciao
 
Underaged signators.

Monopolies.

Restrictions on right to work.

Welcome to Europe. I lived there for 10 years, and finally gave up and came back to the US. I pray that its failures are not following me back to the US.

iWatas
 
I believe his parents signed his contract for him as he was significantly underage when he joined his team.
 
The facts are that the groups should be able to come to an agreement on a buyout that benefits all.
I'm not following your reasoning there... The buyout is the agreement, agreed to ahead of time. What's there to negotiate for mutual benefit? Either play out the contract or pay the buyout... Anything short of that is benefiting the player only, not the team.
 
I'm not following your reasoning there... The buyout is the agreement, agreed to ahead of time. What's there to negotiate for mutual benefit? Either play out the contract or pay the buyout... Anything short of that is benefiting the player only, not the team.


Yes and if you have watched the history of buyouts, typically teams and players are able to come to an agreement for less than originally agreed upon in the buyout. It has happened over and over again. It benefits both sides because for one, the player doesn't want to play there anymore. Any club with that hanging over their head it is just like having a permanent storm cloud following you around and raining on you. It doesn't go away until the player is gone, and it is hard for the team to move past it. The club also gets money out of it. Much more than they paid the player in the first place. The player gets to go and play where he wants to play. That is to his benefit. To say that money is the only object, when team cohesiveness is very important is lacking in vision.
 
Yes and if you have watched the history of buyouts, typically teams and players are able to come to an agreement for less than originally agreed upon in the buyout.
I would rephrase that as "less" than originally agreed upon... In quotes because it's more of a token gesture, with the amount knocked off the top fairly minuscule compared to the total.

Also, Rubio's situation is the exact opposite of the typical NBA buyout, where a team is paying a player to get rid of him early. With Rubio, he's paying a team to let him go early. What is their incentive to do so? They have nothing to gain by letting him go, so it's in their interest to collect as much buyout as possible in exchange. The buyout is there to protect them from being a farm team... They don't want to invest all that development time and money for nothing.
 
I would rephrase that as "less" than originally agreed upon... In quotes because it's more of a token gesture, with the amount knocked off the top fairly minuscule compared to the total.

Also, Rubio's situation is the exact opposite of the typical NBA buyout, where a team is paying a player to get rid of him early. With Rubio, he's paying a team to let him go early. What is their incentive to do so? They have nothing to gain by letting him go, so it's in their interest to collect as much buyout as possible in exchange. The buyout is there to protect them from being a farm team... They don't want to invest all that development time and money for nothing.

I don't agree with that. I have seen several buyouts lowered over the years, like 50% reduction. True enough though I can also say I have seen a few teams not budge.

What actually would be funny is if Rubio played for the spanish team, and stuck them with the 6 million dollar bill from his buyout which is never coming.
 
I'm not following your reasoning there... The buyout is the agreement, agreed to ahead of time.


I think Rubio's reasoning is that it was an unfair agreement. I think he made 70k this past year, but his buyout is over 5 million. That being said, his parents should have been smarter than that when signing his contract. Having a buyout clause that much higher than your salary and higher than what you'd make as a rookie in the NBA is incredibly stupid since there's no possible way for you to pay it.
 
Wasn't the buyout amount set just recently? Seems really sketchy to me that there would be such a large buyout on a contract with a 15-year-old kid making five figures...
 
I have seen several buyouts lowered over the years, like 50% reduction.
I must have missed those...

I think Rubio's reasoning is that it was an unfair agreement. I think he made 70k this past year, but his buyout is over 5 million.
I'm not sure there's such a thing as "fair" or "unfair" when it comes to living up to a contract you signed.
 
I'm not following your reasoning there... The buyout is the agreement, agreed to ahead of time. What's there to negotiate for mutual benefit? Either play out the contract or pay the buyout... Anything short of that is benefiting the player only, not the team.

The leverage the player has is that if the team refuses to make a deal on the buyout, he can stay and just dog it all year, fake injuries, be a cancer in the locker room and say bad things about the team to the press. And sleep with the owner's wife and steal his dog. And key his car and TP his house.

barfo
 
I must have missed those...


I'm not sure there's such a thing as "fair" or "unfair" when it comes to living up to a contract you signed.

Huh. Yeah, too bad Rubio couldn't give true consent since he was so young.

If you can't vote, serve in the military or drive a car in the eyes of the law how can you be allowed to sign away your future work rights?
 
The leverage the player has is that if the team refuses to make a deal on the buyout, he can stay and just dog it all year, fake injuries, be a cancer in the locker room and say bad things about the team to the press. And sleep with the owner's wife and steal his dog. And key his car and TP his house.

Yep, but most players do not have the mental focus to do all that. Too many of them TP the locker room, injure the owner's home, sleep with the owner's dog and steal his wife. Most owners would look at this as a positive!
 
"women mutilated, and cattle raped." :sigh:
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top