Miami quietly fills holes and becomes very deep.

[Roy H.]

I have no problem with Scola refusing to play in New Orleans and demanding a trade.

So, taking this to its logical conclusion, when does the league contract to the 10 franchises that all the good players want to play for?  It doesn't seem like a viable NBA if every player has 100% right to hold out and force a trade to their destination of choice.

I do not see that as a logical conclusion.

Every team will be able to fill it's roster because they have money and players play for money. If the money is good enough, they'll be able to find talented players who are happy to join.

No, because players would take money from the bad teams, and then would attempt to force trades to the good ones.  If we accept this as okay, there will be 10 franchises with all the great players, and 20 franchises filled out by role players.

[Who]

And Gasol refusing to play in Houston? He doesn't want to be there either. 

Yes, I have no problem with Pau Gasol doing so but I don't think that will happen.

Houston have a good situation there and will be able to convince him to join without any real problems. Folks shouldn't over-react to Pau Gasol's initial reaction to the trade and think this is some unmovable stance.

[Who]

I have no problem with Scola refusing to play in New Orleans and demanding a trade.

So, taking this to its logical conclusion, when does the league contract to the 10 franchises that all the good players want to play for?  It doesn't seem like a viable NBA if every player has 100% right to hold out and force a trade to their destination of choice.

I do not see that as a logical conclusion.

Every team will be able to fill it's roster because they have money and players play for money. If the money is good enough, they'll be able to find talented players who are happy to join.

No, because players would take money from the bad teams, and then would attempt to force trades to the good ones.  If we accept this as okay, there will be 10 franchises with all the great players, and 20 franchises filled out by role players.

I disagree.

[dtrader]

I don't understand why Chauncey should have to play for a crappy team (or retire).

I just don't get it. It makes no sense to me.

League rules?

Why should Louis Scola have to go to New Orleans or retire?

to me the difference is that louis scola is not at the end of his career, nor is he at the end of his contract.  he likely would not be willing to give up all of the money he'd get on his contract and play on a good team instead.  billups likely would.


i think a vet like billups, on the last year of his deal, should be able to play where he wants assuming he's willing to give up all the money on the last year of his deal and sign for no more than the veteran minimum anywhere else.

Billups decided to not do that. That's what makes his attitude so bizarre.

It's not bizarre.  Chauncey didnt want to leave Denver.  He wanted to move into a front office position there and keep his family in Denver.  The only reason why he went to NY, was that he was promised a chance to end his career on a contender.  Now that he moved (due to that promise), he's likely to be sent to a junk team (the teams who have 1st pick of amnesty players).  Basically, the exact opposite of the promise he was given.


The situation with big al, rubio, scola, etc, isnt the same, because they probably didnt move their family because they were promised theyd be playing for a contender.  Thats the whole issue.

[barefacedmonk]

Proud of Chauncey. He should stand up for himself.

He should not be forced to play for some crappy team and waste away the twilight years of his career.

Forced? What's preventing him from filing for retirement?

Why should Chauncey be forced into retirement? That is wrong.  

Why should any player report to the city where they're traded, then?

If Al Jefferson was happy in Boston, why is it okay to "force" him to play in Minnesota?  Why is it cool to "force" Marshon Brooks to play in New Jersey?  Why "force" John Wall to play with the Wizards, or Eric Gordon to play with the Clips?

League rules allow waiver transactions, trades, etc.  If players don't like league rules or the contracts they signed, find a new league to play in or retire.  There's nothing wrong about asking a player to abide by the Collective Bargaining Agreement they're bound by.

But Chauncey isnt mad about the terms of his contract (or the CBA).  He's mad that the team isnt standing behind the promises they made to him outside of his contract.  It's more of a personal betrayal of trust than anything else.  Apparently he felt (as I do), that a promise is a promise even if it isnt in writing.  

So they broke that trust with him.  They still followed the contract.  His contract says he has to report to his new team and play.  Fine...he'll do that.  Just dont expect him to play the way you want him to, or act the way you think he should...cuz thats not in his contract.

As mentioned above, if Chauncey feels like he was tricked into signing the contract, he could have negotiated a 100% buyout of his salary, and would have been granted free agency.  That would have cleared up the cap room the Knicks needed.

Instead, he decided that he was entitled to his $14 million, *and* he feels he's entitled to ignore league rules, forcing his way to the team of his choice by being a punk.  I have a hard time feeling sympathy for any "broken promise" when he easily could have been granted free agency.

Exactly. Some people are saying he doesn't care about the money but its very clear that he does. He wants the money and play on his own terms. Can't have it both ways. He can cry on his millions....I have zero sympathy for him.

[BballTim]

Proud of Chauncey. He should stand up for himself.

He should not be forced to play for some crappy team and waste away the twilight years of his career.

Forced? What's preventing him from filing for retirement?

Why should Chauncey be forced into retirement? That is wrong. 

How is it forced retirement? He voted for the new CBA..he knew the whole amnesty and bid thing. Why cry about it now? Either play or retire.

When he left Denver (which he didnt even want to do since he was from there and had his family settled there), he was "promised hed be playing for a contender" (his agents words).  If that is the case, and part of the reason he was ok with going to NY was that promise, then I think his frustration is even more understandable.

  How do you promise someone that he'll play for a contender? If your team has unexpect injuries, are you expected to immediately replace those injured players to remain a contender, or to cut the player you made the promise to? Obviously neither would occur, obviously such a promise would be worthless, obviously a player that's as experienced as Billups would know this. It's a ploy.

[17wasEZ]

Being a glorified nomad is the price of making all this money he already has. You gotta give something to get something. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

In some ways it is possible to have your cake and eat it too.  BBD had a lot of cake during the season last year and ate it too.  He got fatter as the season wore on yet he is cashing in on his 1st half play from last season as well as getting back in shape this past offseason.

But you're right, they are like glorified nomads.

[PosImpos]

I don't understand why Chauncey should have to play for a crappy team (or retire).

I just don't get it. It makes no sense to me.

League rules?

Why should Louis Scola have to go to New Orleans or retire?

to me the difference is that louis scola is not at the end of his career, nor is he at the end of his contract.  he likely would not be willing to give up all of the money he'd get on his contract and play on a good team instead.  billups likely would.


i think a vet like billups, on the last year of his deal, should be able to play where he wants assuming he's willing to give up all the money on the last year of his deal and sign for no more than the veteran minimum anywhere else.

Billups decided to not do that. That's what makes his attitude so bizarre.

It's not bizarre.  Chauncey didnt want to leave Denver.  He wanted to move into a front office position there and keep his family in Denver.  The only reason why he went to NY, was that he was promised a chance to end his career on a contender.  Now that he moved (due to that promise), he's likely to be sent to a junk team (the teams who have 1st pick of amnesty players).  Basically, the exact opposite of the promise he was given.


The situation with big al, rubio, scola, etc, isnt the same, because they probably didnt move their family because they were promised theyd be playing for a contender.  Thats the whole issue.

yeah, i can definitely understand why billups would feel cheated here.  he probably felt like he was going to be a key piece on that team and then they jettison him without a second thought.


probably how JO feels right about now, as it so happens.

[YouGotRondo d]

Proud of Chauncey. He should stand up for himself.

He should not be forced to play for some crappy team and waste away the twilight years of his career.

Forced? What's preventing him from filing for retirement?

Why should Chauncey be forced into retirement? That is wrong.  

Why should any player report to the city where they're traded, then?

If Al Jefferson was happy in Boston, why is it okay to "force" him to play in Minnesota?  Why is it cool to "force" Marshon Brooks to play in New Jersey?  Why "force" John Wall to play with the Wizards, or Eric Gordon to play with the Clips?

League rules allow waiver transactions, trades, etc.  If players don't like league rules or the contracts they signed, find a new league to play in or retire.  There's nothing wrong about asking a player to abide by the Collective Bargaining Agreement they're bound by.

But Chauncey isnt mad about the terms of his contract (or the CBA).  He's mad that the team isnt standing behind the promises they made to him outside of his contract.  It's more of a personal betrayal of trust than anything else.  Apparently he felt (as I do), that a promise is a promise even if it isnt in writing.  

So they broke that trust with him.  They still followed the contract.  His contract says he has to report to his new team and play.  Fine...he'll do that.  Just dont expect him to play the way you want him to, or act the way you think he should...cuz thats not in his contract.

As mentioned above, if Chauncey feels like he was tricked into signing the contract, he could have negotiated a 100% buyout of his salary, and would have been granted free agency.  That would have cleared up the cap room the Knicks needed.

Instead, he decided that he was entitled to his $14 million, *and* he feels he's entitled to ignore league rules, forcing his way to the team of his choice by being a punk.  I have a hard time feeling sympathy for any "broken promise" when he easily could have been granted free agency.

Exactly. Some people are saying he doesn't care about the money but its very clear that he does. He wants the money and play on his own terms. Can't have it both ways. He can cry on his millions....I have zero sympathy for him.

Yes, precisely. And if his agent didn't clarify the implications of his decision then he should fire his agent.

But he made his choice and now he has to live with it.

[Moreover]

I have no problem with Scola refusing to play in New Orleans and demanding a trade.

So, taking this to its logical conclusion, when does the league contract to the 10 franchises that all the good players want to play for?  It doesn't seem like a viable NBA if every player has 100% right to hold out and force a trade to their destination of choice.

I do not see that as a logical conclusion.

Every team will be able to fill it's roster because they have money and players play for money. If the money is good enough, they'll be able to find talented players who are happy to join.

But why would any GM offer players contracts? That would be silly. If the players could sign contracts and then simply say "You know what, I don't want to play here".

The proper time for players to decide where to play is in free-agency. Or using their leverage when they're nearing and they can decide to sign or not sign extensions. Otherwise, the league would be a trainwreck, trades would be almost impossible to execute.

[dtrader]

Proud of Chauncey. He should stand up for himself.

He should not be forced to play for some crappy team and waste away the twilight years of his career.

Forced? What's preventing him from filing for retirement?

Why should Chauncey be forced into retirement? That is wrong.  

Why should any player report to the city where they're traded, then?

If Al Jefferson was happy in Boston, why is it okay to "force" him to play in Minnesota?  Why is it cool to "force" Marshon Brooks to play in New Jersey?  Why "force" John Wall to play with the Wizards, or Eric Gordon to play with the Clips?

League rules allow waiver transactions, trades, etc.  If players don't like league rules or the contracts they signed, find a new league to play in or retire.  There's nothing wrong about asking a player to abide by the Collective Bargaining Agreement they're bound by.

But Chauncey isnt mad about the terms of his contract (or the CBA).  He's mad that the team isnt standing behind the promises they made to him outside of his contract.  It's more of a personal betrayal of trust than anything else.  Apparently he felt (as I do), that a promise is a promise even if it isnt in writing.  

So they broke that trust with him.  They still followed the contract.  His contract says he has to report to his new team and play.  Fine...he'll do that.  Just dont expect him to play the way you want him to, or act the way you think he should...cuz thats not in his contract.

As mentioned above, if Chauncey feels like he was tricked into signing the contract, he could have negotiated a 100% buyout of his salary, and would have been granted free agency.  That would have cleared up the cap room the Knicks needed.

Instead, he decided that he was entitled to his $14 million, *and* he feels he's entitled to ignore league rules, forcing his way to the team of his choice by being a punk.  I have a hard time feeling sympathy for any "broken promise" when he easily could have been granted free agency.

Before  he left Denver, he was ready to negotiate a buyout to avoid going somewhere he didnt want to go.  The only reason he didnt do that, is that NY sold him on the chance to finish his career in NY on a contender.  He didnt want to uproot his family once.  Now that theyre going back on their promise, he'll have to uproot his family again (within a year).  If the teams didnt want to deal with this situation, they could have just not sold him on ending his career in NY, let him negotiate the buyout like he was going to in denver, and let him go where he wanted.  Instead they lied to him.

[dtrader]

Proud of Chauncey. He should stand up for himself.

He should not be forced to play for some crappy team and waste away the twilight years of his career.

Forced? What's preventing him from filing for retirement?

Why should Chauncey be forced into retirement? That is wrong. 

How is it forced retirement? He voted for the new CBA..he knew the whole amnesty and bid thing. Why cry about it now? Either play or retire.

When he left Denver (which he didnt even want to do since he was from there and had his family settled there), he was "promised hed be playing for a contender" (his agents words).  If that is the case, and part of the reason he was ok with going to NY was that promise, then I think his frustration is even more understandable.

  How do you promise someone that he'll play for a contender? If your team has unexpect injuries, are you expected to immediately replace those injured players to remain a contender, or to cut the player you made the promise to? Obviously neither would occur, obviously such a promise would be worthless, obviously a player that's as experienced as Billups would know this. It's a ploy.

Obviously an injury (or car accident, or act of god, etc) could happen at any time.  We still call teams "contenders", based on what the team is at the moment, and what future plans they sell you on.  Otherwise, it wouldnt make sense for anyone on here to say the heat, or lakers, or anyone else are contenders, cuz something could happen unexpectedly at any time to derail that.  If it makes it easier for you to consider, I guess you could say that they promised him the opportunity to end his career playing on "a team that is as good as the knicks appear to be capable of becoming with him, melo, and amare teamed up".  It's just easier to type "contender".

[YouGotRondo d]

Before  he left Denver, he was ready to negotiate a buyout to avoid going somewhere he didnt want to go.  The only reason he didnt do that, is that NY sold him on the chance to finish his career in NY on a contender.  He didnt want to uproot his family once.  Now that theyre going back on their promise, he'll have to uproot his family again (within a year).  If the teams didnt want to deal with this situation, they could have just not sold him on ending his career in NY, let him negotiate the buyout like he was going to in denver, and let him go where he wanted.  Instead they lied to him.

This is the business world. These things happen.

It is no doubt unfortunate, but that is the way things work sometimes. There are many caveats,  such as his generous salary and (EDIT: protections granted from his )inclusion in the player's union.

[Who]

I have no problem with Scola refusing to play in New Orleans and demanding a trade.

So, taking this to its logical conclusion, when does the league contract to the 10 franchises that all the good players want to play for?  It doesn't seem like a viable NBA if every player has 100% right to hold out and force a trade to their destination of choice.

I do not see that as a logical conclusion.

Every team will be able to fill it's roster because they have money and players play for money. If the money is good enough, they'll be able to find talented players who are happy to join.

But why would any GM offer players contracts? That would be silly. If the players could sign contracts and then simply say "You know what, I don't want to play here".

The proper time for players to decide where to play is in free-agency. Or using their leverage when they're nearing and they can decide to sign or not sign extensions. Otherwise, the league would be a trainwreck, trades would be almost impossible to execute.

This is so far off the situations we are discussing. I have no idea how you ended up here but anyway ...

If one party signed a contract with no intent of ever fulfilling it, the other party could sue him for damages. And that would put an end to players doing that quick smart.

--------------------------------------------

I'd like to see teams have to have to negotiate a new contract with players once acquired via a trade. That way the player has a say in where he goes. If it's in his best interests (financially or otherwise), he'll do so. If not, he'll refuse and stay with the team he has a contract with already.

I don't like this setup of contracts being switched from one team to another. Something unsavory about it. Treating players like horses.

[Who]

Ah bugger, got so caught up in this thread and other free agency news that I missed the first half of Real Madrid vs Barcelona!