Comments on: The Long Mile(s) to Redemption and Stupid Lawyers

By: JiveTurkey

JiveTurkey — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 00:54:36 +0000

I know, and I agree that it should go to their cap the way the rule is now written, I just don’t think it’s fairly written as the NBA is basically at fault here. It was their doctor who said he was unfit and they agreed with the doctor and gave the Blazers the exception. If he was still able to play in any way then the NBA shouldn’t be allowing this exception in the first place. We shouldn’t be waiting 10 games to see if someone can or can’t play, it should be finalized then and there. Like I said, I’d hate for something like this to happen to our team especially if we had no choice in what action to take and had to medically retire someone, whether he comes back or not is on the NBA, not on the team that retired him.

By: mW

mW — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 00:09:38 +0000

Ah, but as the above quoted Eastern Conference exec pointed out, if Miles can play, then the Blazers do not deserve the exemption, and thus the money deserves to be counted against them.

By: JiveTurkey

JiveTurkey — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 23:28:18 +0000

I agree that the Blazers did seem to encourage him not to play last year, but if he was ready they wouldn’t have had a doctor evaluate him, but if the doctor said he’s ok to play then he definitely would’ve just sat on the bench for 2 years. The rule is lame, I remember reading earlier this season that the Cavs might be doing the same with Eric Snow soon. Therefore if the rule’s in place it’s not illegal. I just think the NBA screwed up here more since it was their doctor saying he can’t play, not the team, therefore the rule that his money goes back is what’s wrong in my opinion. If he can play than great, let him, I’m sure if the money were still off the books the Blazers wouldn’t be trying to discourage teams from playing him.

By: mW

mW — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 23:04:27 +0000

The thing is, I’ve never heard of any other team usig this. Every other injured player just sits on a team’s salary cap like dead weight. It sucks, bit that’s how it is. What really suck in this case is that it seems the Blazers encouraged him not to try a comeback.

By: JiveTurkey

JiveTurkey — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 22:23:10 +0000

Ok, just a few questions. Since the NBA and NBAPA’s independent doctor said that Miles shouldn’t play again or he risks needing knee replacement, what else should the Blazers have done instead of declaring him as being “medically unfit to play,” which under the NBA’s rules removes him from their salary cap, and waiving him (he still got paid his salary)? Keep him on the bench for two seasons? Try and trade him? I know if this was one of our players I’d want that to happen so we’d have the cap space to get someone else in to help our team. Also I’d be pretty pissed if someone did sign him for a few games, put the money back on our books, and then let him walk (this remains to be seen with Darius though), and the way some people were talking it seemed like some teams were considering it.

I agree with you, it’s really dumb to send out a letter like that, and I lost some respect for the Blazers front office, but at the same time I’d want the Hornets to do the same if it was happening to us. The fact that Darius is able to play shouldn’t affect the Blazers anymore, they followed the rules and listened to the advice of the NBA and NBAPA’s independent doctor. I think the NBA should review this rule now due to these circumstances.

By: CaptFamous

CaptFamous — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 18:24:51 +0000

The only argument that the Blazers could realistically hope to win is that Miles should not have been medically cleared to play (which, at this point, seems entirely untrue). As you said, if he is physically suited to play, then they have nothing on any team. If they could somehow prove that playing basketball was putting Miles at physical risk, they could then potentially argue that the teams playing him are ignoring that fact, and merely playing him for the salary implications.

However, even if this was true (and it probably isn’t), the odds of Darius Miles submitting to an examination by any doctor who would possibly say this are zilch. So tough luck, Portland.

By: ticktock6

ticktock6 — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 23:49:42 +0000

That was all very legal. I knew immediately when I heard about that email that the players’ association would have a fit over that. There’s no way to prove anyone signed Miles to screw the Blazers. And you can’t prevent someone from attempting to find work in their field.

By: mW

mW — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 22:59:21 +0000

Yeah, they really had no basis to argue about anyone signing D-Miles. A contract is law between the parties that sign the contract, and for the Blazers to be upset about facing the ramifications of that contract is weak.

Kudos to the Blazers lawyers for finding some obscure part of NBA regulations that let them escape that contract (which is half of what lawyers do), if they could do so legally. But with Darius obviously able to play ball it’s obvious that they cannot do so legally. As such, they’re stuck. Too bad. For them.

By: Mark

Mark — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 20:07:54 +0000

Unlike you, I lost all semblance of respect for the Jailblazers organization upon hearing this predicament. You created the contract and knew all it's stipulations before D Miles signed it. Shouldn't a multi-million dollar organization have capable lawyers that knew the dangers of signing any player? Unless the contract explicitly states a clause that allows the contract to be negated under specific conditions (I'm no law student, so I don't know if that's possible), the Jailblazer organization must honor the contract. It sucks for the organization, but the contract is legal and binding. So how're you going to sue another organization for you own faults? It's like me suing another equal qualification student for making it to a university that I was rejected from. It's absurd, to say the least.