C's/Clippers Update, Marc Stein Reporting NBA Office forcing reworking

[SHAQATTACK]

I wouldn't blame the LAkers for complaining or Mitch......Stern broke up their party with CP3 .....  another of these run - a -way  players controlling everything sports .

We know who really wears the pants in THE NBA

and it an't  David Stern



CP3   ....decides who go where   ........

Just let Lebron, Howard and CP3 control 50% of what happens in the NBA and what team contends

[RJ87]

No this doesn't make much sense.  The NBA can't set a precedent that they dictate what is considered "appropriate" value in a trade.  Legally, the Heat can trade LeBron James for Brook Lopez if it meets salary regulations. 

The Hornets thing didn't count, because the NBA was acting owner.  The NBA can't say "DeAndre is too much for KG" or "KG is too much for DeAndre".  That's nonsense.  And even if they did, they can't dictate what constitutes appropriate value to make it match.  They can't say "boston needs to give up a draft pick for this to be even".   WHy a draft pick?  Why not Jason Terry?  What one team might consider an overpaid albatross of a contract... another might consider a valuable high-level bench player with championship experience and a history of winning. The is no way the rationalization is literally "DeAndre is too much for KG", otherwise every single trade would be under scrutiny.  Revolk the James Harden trade... the Rockets didn't give up enough.   Send Pau back to Memphis... LA didn't give up enough.  Etc.

Do they have the authority to dictate what is appropriate compensation for releasing a coach from his contract?  Has anyone ever done that?  Is that even legal?

I believe Miami gave the Knicks a 1st for Pat Riley.

[Fafnir]

No this doesn't make much sense.  The NBA can't set a precedent that they dictate what is considered "appropriate" value in a trade.  Legally, the Heat can trade LeBron James for Brook Lopez if it meets salary regulations. 

The Hornets thing didn't count, because the NBA was acting owner.  The NBA can't say "DeAndre is too much for KG" or "KG is too much for DeAndre".  That's nonsense.  And even if they did, they can't dictate what constitutes appropriate value to make it match.  They can't say "boston needs to give up a draft pick for this to be even".   WHy a draft pick?  Why not Jason Terry?  What one team might consider an overpaid albatross of a contract... another might consider a valuable high-level bench player with championship experience and a history of winning. The is no way the rationalization is literally "DeAndre is too much for KG", otherwise every single trade would be under scrutiny.  Revolk the James Harden trade... the Rockets didn't give up enough.   Send Pau back to Memphis... LA didn't give up enough.  Etc.

Do they have the authority to dictate what is appropriate compensation for releasing a coach from his contract?  Has anyone ever done that?  Is that even legal?

Right which is why the C's/Clippers theoretically could just have Doc resign, do the trade as stated for just KG and the Clippers could just wait to announce they're hiring Doc.

I don't see how Stern would stop that like Coon says, just space it out some.

[PhoSita]

No this doesn't make much sense.  The NBA can't set a precedent that they dictate what is considered "appropriate" value in a trade.  Legally, the Heat can trade LeBron James for Brook Lopez if it meets salary regulations. 

The Hornets thing didn't count, because the NBA was acting owner.  The NBA can't say "DeAndre is too much for KG" or "KG is too much for DeAndre".  That's nonsense.  And even if they did, they can't dictate what constitutes appropriate value to make it match.  They can't say "boston needs to give up a draft pick for this to be even".   WHy a draft pick?  Why not Jason Terry?  What one team might consider an overpaid albatross of a contract... another might consider a valuable high-level bench player with championship experience and a history of winning. The is no way the rationalization is literally "DeAndre is too much for KG", otherwise every single trade would be under scrutiny.  Revolk the James Harden trade... the Rockets didn't give up enough.   Send Pau back to Memphis... LA didn't give up enough.  Etc.

Do they have the authority to dictate what is appropriate compensation for releasing a coach from his contract?  Has anyone ever done that?  Is that even legal?

They have the authority, technically, if they feel the only reason the Clippers are giving up what they are giving up is because they know Doc Rivers will be released and sign with them, and KG will agree to waive his no trade only because Doc will be the coach there.


In other words, the league office has "jurisdiction" here because there's reason to believe the deals are not functionally separate -- one has to happen in order for the other to happen, and so the compensation the Clippers are giving up in one thing is related to what the Celtics are giving up in the other things.

Technically, that's against the rules.


Still, it's silly that the league is blocking this.  The teams have negotiated hard and come up with an exchange that each side thinks is more or less fair.

It seems like other teams in the league are complaining b/c one of their rivals is about to get a lot better and they don't want it to happen.

[blink]

No this doesn't make much sense.  The NBA can't set a precedent that they dictate what is considered "appropriate" value in a trade.  Legally, the Heat can trade LeBron James for Brook Lopez if it meets salary regulations. 

The Hornets thing didn't count, because the NBA was acting owner.  The NBA can't say "DeAndre is too much for KG" or "KG is too much for DeAndre".  That's nonsense.  And even if they did, they can't dictate what constitutes appropriate value to make it match.  They can't say "boston needs to give up a draft pick for this to be even".   WHy a draft pick?  Why not Jason Terry?  What one team might consider an overpaid albatross of a contract... another might consider a valuable high-level bench player with championship experience and a history of winning. The is no way the rationalization is literally "DeAndre is too much for KG", otherwise every single trade would be under scrutiny.  Revolk the James Harden trade... the Rockets didn't give up enough.   Send Pau back to Memphis... LA didn't give up enough.  Etc.

Do they have the authority to dictate what is appropriate compensation for releasing a coach from his contract?  Has anyone ever done that?  Is that even legal?

I agree 100%.  Otherwise no team will ever make a trade again because it will be 'subjectively' nixed by the league because of what they deem as 'fair value'.  No one trades because they think the trade is 100% fair.  Wow, the NBA is really out of bounds on this one.

There isn't any 'fair value' definitions in the CBA correct?  If the salaries match and the players pass their physicals it should be a done deal.

If Stern / NBA required that the C's give up more in the trade then Boston needs to go to the owners directly, or DA should just back out of the trade.

[RJ87]

No this doesn't make much sense.  The NBA can't set a precedent that they dictate what is considered "appropriate" value in a trade.  Legally, the Heat can trade LeBron James for Brook Lopez if it meets salary regulations. 

The Hornets thing didn't count, because the NBA was acting owner.  The NBA can't say "DeAndre is too much for KG" or "KG is too much for DeAndre".  That's nonsense.  And even if they did, they can't dictate what constitutes appropriate value to make it match.  They can't say "boston needs to give up a draft pick for this to be even".   WHy a draft pick?  Why not Jason Terry?  What one team might consider an overpaid albatross of a contract... another might consider a valuable high-level bench player with championship experience and a history of winning. The is no way the rationalization is literally "DeAndre is too much for KG", otherwise every single trade would be under scrutiny.  Revolk the James Harden trade... the Rockets didn't give up enough.   Send Pau back to Memphis... LA didn't give up enough.  Etc.

Do they have the authority to dictate what is appropriate compensation for releasing a coach from his contract?  Has anyone ever done that?  Is that even legal?

Right which is why the C's/Clippers theoretically could just have Doc resign, do the trade as stated for just KG and the Clippers could just wait to announce they're hiring Doc.

I don't see how Stern would stop that like Coon says, just space it out some.

But because there's no reason time limit stated in CBA and all of the publicity its gotten, Stern may still take issue.

[Who]

I imagine the league wants Doc removed from the deal and the trade package readjusted to reflect that.

[PhoSita]

I imagine the league wants Doc removed from the deal and the trade package readjusted to reflect that.

Fine, trade KG now and get DJ + 1st.  Then we'll announce Doc isn't coming back as our head coach and commence the search for a new one.

Meanwhile, a week or two from now we'll announce that Doc is going to be allowed to join the Clippers and they'll give us a future 1st round pick as compensation.

Done.

[BleedGreen1989]

If Danny has to add anything, I pray Tebow he just walks away

[Who]

I imagine the league wants Doc removed from the deal and the trade package readjusted to reflect that.

Fine, trade KG now and get DJ + 1st.  Then we'll announce Doc isn't coming back as our head coach and commence the search for a new one.

Meanwhile, a week or two from now we'll announce that Doc is going to be allowed to join the Clippers and they'll give us a future 1st round pick as compensation.

Done.

I imagine the league will block it.

I am guessing they will allow (1) Doc to sign with LAC for no compensation (2) Doc can leave for compensation if he goes to any team other than LAC (3) Doc can move to LAC for compensation in the distant future but not this summer / next season. In 2014 or after 2013-14 season. 

Sort of like an embargo on a Doc-LAC for compensation until then for trying to circumvent the rules by trading a coach along with a player.

[blink]

I imagine the league wants Doc removed from the deal and the trade package readjusted to reflect that.

Fine, trade KG now and get DJ + 1st.  Then we'll announce Doc isn't coming back as our head coach and commence the search for a new one.

Meanwhile, a week or two from now we'll announce that Doc is going to be allowed to join the Clippers and they'll give us a future 1st round pick as compensation.

Done.

I think that is fine for the C's.  We get something for KG and get rolling.  But the clippers have more to lose if the NBA doesn't allow part 2 (Doc being let out of his contract to go to the clippers)  If the NBA nixes the Doc part, then Doc probably resigns.  We get a new coach, but we still moved KG for parts.  The clippers don't get what they really want which is Doc to make CP3 happy.

[tarheelsxxiii]

My "conspiracy" take on it... the league will try to delay it until next week so it doesn't overshadow Game 7 of the Finals (the NBA Superbowl).  KG and Doc going to the Clippers is a big story... no need to have it happen on the same day as the biggest game of the year.   Use that publicity pop between Game 7 and the Draft.

I wouldn't say that's a conspiracy at all.  It's totally logical and I saw a report last week saying the NBA would tell Danny and whoever the GM of LAC is to keep talks hush-hush until the Finals ended.

Agree that this is definitely a possibility as well. Shrewd assessment.

[PhoSita]

I imagine the league wants Doc removed from the deal and the trade package readjusted to reflect that.

Fine, trade KG now and get DJ + 1st.  Then we'll announce Doc isn't coming back as our head coach and commence the search for a new one.

Meanwhile, a week or two from now we'll announce that Doc is going to be allowed to join the Clippers and they'll give us a future 1st round pick as compensation.

Done.

I imagine the league will block it.

I am guessing they will allow (1) Doc to sign with LAC for no compensation (2) Doc can leave for compensation if he goes to any team other than LAC (3) Doc can move to LAC for compensation in the distant future but not this summer / next season. In 2014 or after 2013-14 season. 

Sort of like an embargo on a Doc-LAC for compensation until then for trying to circumvent the rules by trading a coach along with a player.

Yeah, you're probably right.

I would just tell Doc he's not coming back and wait for some other opportunity to open up where the other team can give us compensation.

If KG is still interested in being traded to the Clippers w/ out Doc going, I'd say let's do the deal for DJ and a 1st.

If KG doesn't want to go to LA w/ out Doc, just let him retire.

[LarBrd33]

No this doesn't make much sense.  The NBA can't set a precedent that they dictate what is considered "appropriate" value in a trade.  Legally, the Heat can trade LeBron James for Brook Lopez if it meets salary regulations. 

The Hornets thing didn't count, because the NBA was acting owner.  The NBA can't say "DeAndre is too much for KG" or "KG is too much for DeAndre".  That's nonsense.  And even if they did, they can't dictate what constitutes appropriate value to make it match.  They can't say "boston needs to give up a draft pick for this to be even".   WHy a draft pick?  Why not Jason Terry?  What one team might consider an overpaid albatross of a contract... another might consider a valuable high-level bench player with championship experience and a history of winning. The is no way the rationalization is literally "DeAndre is too much for KG", otherwise every single trade would be under scrutiny.  Revolk the James Harden trade... the Rockets didn't give up enough.   Send Pau back to Memphis... LA didn't give up enough.  Etc.

Do they have the authority to dictate what is appropriate compensation for releasing a coach from his contract?  Has anyone ever done that?  Is that even legal?

I believe Miami gave the Knicks a 1st for Pat Riley.

Interesting...

"n 1995, Riley resigned from the Knicks via fax to become the head coach of the Miami Heat. The move caused some controversy, as the Heat were accused by the Knicks of tampering by pursuing Riley while he still had a year remaining on his contract with the Knicks.[12] The matter was settled after the Heat sent their 1996 first round pick (which the Knicks would use to draft Walter McCarty) and $1 million in cash to the Knicks on September 1, 1995."

McCarty was the #19 pick.  A little different, though because that frames it as a punishment for tampering and not a mutual decision.

[gpap]

This whole thing is getting REALLY, REALLY stupid.