New wojo article on Thomas just now said teams spoke today and cavs have backed off a young player or top line pick being added
Said Thomas is adamant he is not damaged
Link: http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/20501325/isaiah-thomas-says-return-hip-injury-same-player
The article says:
"The Cavaliers could be inclined to complete the deal for a late first-round pick or second-round considerations, league sources said."
I know many people want them to pound sand, but if 2nd round considerations are all it takes, I'd do it just to be done with this.
Why? They agreed to the trade as is. Why should they extort another pick?
Because not acquiring a top 12 player in a star's league when you otherwise have no PG, so you can hold onto the 56th pick in a 60 player draft, is madness.
I get the whole "no negotiating with terrorists" thing but the downside if the deal doesn't go through is IMO gigantic enough that an asset I consider to be negligible isn't worth the risk of sinking the ship.
I'm also more interested in the long term, I.E. 7 years of peak Kyrie, than I am in the short term of sticking it to Gilbert and ending up with a worse team.
I'd be stunned if all it took was a 2nd rounder at this point. If Cleveland held up this trade for a week and trashed ITs value just to get a guy who won't even play in the league likely, than my god, the league needs to discipline them. I think this deal will be harder to complete than people think
An interesting post that someone else made here;
http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=93318.msg2381427#newbet the lawyers are already involved and by now they must have warned the Cavs about the intricacies of Contract formation and the concept of anticipatory breach of contract. This is why you have not heard a peep out of the Cavs. If they as much as make a counter demand or request the first contract could be terminated by the Celtics. The Cavs while they won't to Jack the Celtics don't want to jeopardize the deal in place. They want the deal but also an opportunity to ask for more. How do they get this? They leak they are not happy and hope the Cs blink and sweeten the pot. Danny should ignore the leaks and wait them out.
If they do not repudiate the deal it becomes final. If they repudiate the deal they expose themselves to a potential breach of contract suit.
Article 24(m) of the NBA Constitution pretty much complies with State Corporate Law by subordinating the so-called exclusive powers of the commissioner to the Laws of the State of New York, which must be the State of Incorporation of the NBA.
You see, all the Corporate and Organizational By-Laws are subject to the laws of the State of Incorporation. So regardless of the exclusivity clause of Section 24(d), the Commissioner like all corporations in the State of New York, must obey the Corporate Law of the State of New York.
Of course the Celtics can sue the Cavs, Section 24 just requires that they first exhaust their administrative remedies by going to the Commissioner first. If they do not like the Commissioner's decision they simply file a lawsuit naming both the NBA, the Commissioner, and the Cavs. Just a matter of Civil Procedure.
Now lets deal with the Contract Formation and the By-Laws dealing with Intra-Association Assignment of Contractual Rights. These rules are contained in Section 4 of the By-Laws, with the trade procedures governed by Section 4.02., that states as follows;
(a)In order to conduct any Assignment Transaction, the parties thereto shall state their agreement on the terms and conditions of the transaction during a conference call with the Association Office (the “Trade Call”). Such terms and conditions shall include, without limitation, all details with respect to amounts of money, terms of payment, and draft choices, if any. An Assignment Transaction shall not be deemed to be completed until all conditions thereof agreed upon during the Trade Call have been satisfied and the parties thereto have received written notice from the Association Office confirming that all such conditions to the Assignment Transaction have been satisfied. Any term or condition of an Assignment Transaction not disclosed to the Association Office on the Trade Call shall not be enforceable. If it is subsequently discovered by the Association Office that an Assignment Transaction included a term or condition not disclosed on the Trade Call, then the Commissioner shall have the right to impose a fine on each of the parties to the Assignment Transaction in an amount not to exceed $5,000,000.
Please read the bolded part very carefully, and it shows you that the NBA acts as a clearinghouse for the parties AGREEMENT. The parties must agree on all the conditions of the agreement. If you agree to include an injured player in a deal, you cannot vitiate the deal because the player is 'injured'. Interpretations of conditions are such an essential part of contracts that entire sections of Contract Treatises are devoted to jurisprudence of Conditions in Contract formation. Conditions are an essential part of interpreting both the formation and performance of contractual obligations. Perhaps that is why Section 4.02.(b) of the NBA By-Laws states:
(b) All terms and conditions of an Assignment Transaction shall be set forth in detail in a Trade Memorandum to be prepared by the Association Office following the Trade Call. In the event of any subsequent dispute concerning the terms and conditions of the transaction, the Trade Memorandum shall govern.
There goes that word 'conditions' again. If anyone does not think lawyers are already all over this, and that there can be no lawsuit from one party trying to go outside the terms and conditions that were given to the league office all I can do is 'shrug'.
By the way, there is also a 'full disclosure' section in the By-Laws. Check out Section 4.03(a)
4.03. Full Disclosure. (a) A Member shall disclose during a Trade Call all relevant information in its possession, custody, or control concerning the health of a Player whose contract or negotiating rights the Member is assigning. For purposes of the foregoing sentence, “relevant information” shall include any information concerning current or prior injuries, illnesses, or other health conditions that could affect the Player’s ability to play skilled basketball at any point during the Player’s career. No Member shall misrepresent or fail to disclose any such relevant information.
So you think Boston did not tell the Cavs about IT's hip? The only way out for Cavs is if Celtics withheld information. If they did the deal should be cancelled, and Celtics cannot gripe. If not, the deal goes through or the Celtics sue........
Topic: WojBomb - Cavs evaluating options after IT physical... (Read 161250 times)