Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 72
  1. #46
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Bushwood Country Club
    Posts
    81,179
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    Joe Smith's career feels like "whatever" is a fine descriptor. I don't remember that fine.

    Carlos Boozer should have been fined for screwing the Cavs.
    Just looked. The Wolves were fined $3.5M, and had 5 straight first round picks taken away. Joe Smith's deal was also voided.

    I mean, if anyone is crying about how this is handled now, pardon my french, but cry me a river.

    Stern hated the Wolves, and I never understood why. All I know is, under Stern the Wolves had 0 #1 draft picks. Under Silver, they have 2...

    If you want the ultimate, you've got to be willing to pay the ultimate price. It's not tragic to die doing what you love.

  2. #47
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    42,495
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawkeye15 View Post
    Just looked. The Wolves were fined $3.5M, and had 5 straight first round picks taken away. Joe Smith's deal was also voided.

    I mean, if anyone is crying about how this is handled now, pardon my french, but cry me a river.

    Stern hated the Wolves, and I never understood why. All I know is, under Stern the Wolves had 0 #1 draft picks. Under Silver, they have 2...
    Wolves got 1 of the picks back.

    Forgot all about that thing. McHale said "8 or 10 other teams do it all the time" ... seems like the sort of thing the NBA would follow up on.

  3. #48
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    9,142
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    Joe Smith's career feels like "whatever" is a fine descriptor. I don't remember that fine.

    Carlos Boozer should have been fined for screwing the Cavs.
    Never liked Boozer but why? Whether he straight up lied or he was sincere until he got a gigantic offer, that was a risk the Cavs FO took. At least it wasn’t like what one of the Morris goofs did last year or whenever where the Spurs traded someone to make room (Bertrans) that they wouldn’t have traded otherwise.

    Scummy, but not breaking any rules (besides the Honest Man Code or whatever).

  4. #49
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    42,495
    Quote Originally Posted by Saddletramp View Post
    Never liked Boozer but why? Whether he straight up lied or he was sincere until he got a gigantic offer, that was a risk the Cavs FO took. At least it wasn’t like what one of the Morris goofs did last year or whenever where the Spurs traded someone to make room (Bertrans) that they wouldn’t have traded otherwise.

    Scummy, but not breaking any rules (besides the Honest Man Code or whatever).
    Because he lied. He and Utah should have been penalized even if it was unwritten.

  5. #50
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    9,142
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    Because he lied. He and Utah should have been penalized even if it was unwritten.
    People lie all the time. Plus, Boozer denied it. And even if Boozer lied (he probably did) what did Utah do wrong?

  6. #51
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Bushwood Country Club
    Posts
    81,179
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    Because he lied. He and Utah should have been penalized even if it was unwritten.
    If you are an unrestricted FA, you are unemployed technically. You owe nothing to an employer if you haven't signed something.

    What were the details of the Boozer thing again? Seems like ages ago since ol' neckroll mattered

    If you want the ultimate, you've got to be willing to pay the ultimate price. It's not tragic to die doing what you love.

  7. #52
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    42,495
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawkeye15 View Post
    If you are an unrestricted FA, you are unemployed technically. You owe nothing to an employer if you haven't signed something.

    What were the details of the Boozer thing again? Seems like ages ago since ol' neckroll mattered
    IIRC The Cavs had him for an additional year on an option, but if they picked up his option his next contract would be limited, they offered to not pick up the option to pay him much more. He agreed to re-sign with the Cavs, so they didn't pick up his option and he immediately signed with the Jazz who knew what he did.

  8. #53
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    9,142
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawkeye15 View Post
    If you are an unrestricted FA, you are unemployed technically. You owe nothing to an employer if you haven't signed something.

    What were the details of the Boozer thing again? Seems like ages ago since ol' neckroll mattered
    From his Wikipedia page:

    After the 2003–04 season, the Cavaliers had the option of allowing him to become a restricted free agent, or keeping him under contract for one more year at a $695,000 salary. The Cavaliers claimed to have reached an understanding with Boozer and his agent on a deal for approximately $39 million over six years, which he would have signed if they let him out of his current deal.

    Cleveland then proceeded to release him from his contract making him a restricted free agent. During this period, the Utah Jazz offered Boozer a six-year, $70 million contract that Cleveland chose not to match due to salary cap considerations. On July 30, 2004, Boozer officially signed with the Jazz.
    Either he played them or something better came along so he went back on his word. Either way, not worth a fine or suspension or prison term or whatever the **** Scoots thinks.

  9. #54
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Bushwood Country Club
    Posts
    81,179
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    IIRC The Cavs had him for an additional year on an option, but if they picked up his option his next contract would be limited, they offered to not pick up the option to pay him much more. He agreed to re-sign with the Cavs, so they didn't pick up his option and he immediately signed with the Jazz who knew what he did.
    yeah, that's right...

    totally slimy, but not worth a suspension.

    If you want the ultimate, you've got to be willing to pay the ultimate price. It's not tragic to die doing what you love.

  10. #55
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    23,933
    Quote Originally Posted by Saddletramp View Post
    From his Wikipedia page:



    Either he played them or something better came along so he went back on his word. Either way, not worth a fine or suspension or prison term or whatever the **** Scoots thinks.
    so to just clear this up since there is some confusion on it. Boozer was a 2nd round pick and as such you have 2 options when a player gets to his 3rd year. you can either pick up his team option for a really small amount and have that player for that year, but the year after he becomes a unrestricted free agent. the other option is that you can decline the player option at which point he is a restricted free agent. I do remember that was some obscure rule that allowed the Jazz to offer Boozer that deal because he was a 2nd rounder or something like that. whatever the rule was it was gone soon after.

    The question becomes did the Cavs actually get a commitment from him or not. He says not, but the cavs say he did. there could easily have been a misunderstanding as well. Either way the Jazz offered him a much larger deal, so thats the risk you take when you let him get to free agency. the Cavs could have also matched the deal, but decided not too.

    Also, they had 15 days to match the deal. could you imagine it being that long today?

  11. #56
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    9,142
    Quote Originally Posted by dhopisthename View Post
    so to just clear this up since there is some confusion on it. Boozer was a 2nd round pick and as such you have 2 options when a player gets to his 3rd year. you can either pick up his team option for a really small amount and have that player for that year, but the year after he becomes a unrestricted free agent. the other option is that you can decline the player option at which point he is a restricted free agent. I do remember that was some obscure rule that allowed the Jazz to offer Boozer that deal because he was a 2nd rounder or something like that. whatever the rule was it was gone soon after.

    The question becomes did the Cavs actually get a commitment from him or not. He says not, but the cavs say he did. there could easily have been a misunderstanding as well. Either way the Jazz offered him a much larger deal, so thats the risk you take when you let him get to free agency. the Cavs could have also matched the deal, but decided not too.

    Also, they had 15 days to match the deal. could you imagine it being that long today?
    Yeah, like I said, never liked Boozer but he didn’t do anything worthy of a suspension or fine. If it’s true that he lied or went back on his word, then the Cavs can only be mad.

  12. #57
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    42,495
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawkeye15 View Post
    yeah, that's right...

    totally slimy, but not worth a suspension.
    I said fined not suspended. Even so I'm not at all surprised he wasn't fined.

  13. #58
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    19,242
    Quote Originally Posted by crewfan13 View Post
    I tend to agree with punish all or none, but the league has actually been fairly consistent recently. If things are widely reported to be done prior to a certain date and it's blatantly obvious to the casual fan that contact occurred before the legal period, they investigate. It's basically a punishment for being an idiot.

    Its like when you're in college and live in the dorms. Outside of the power trip RAs, they all know most kids are drinking. They don't really care that most kids are drinking. Just don't be an idiot and throw a party with your radio cranked up as high as it goes or just casually walk around the hallway with an open beer in your hands. That's the nba with tampering. They don't actually want to catch you, but if you make it impossible not to get caught, they have to do something about it.
    But I see this case as league wide self policing by the owners. Batum doesn’t move the needle and so leagu wide not a single owner cared and they let it pass. James Harden does move the needle and owners league wide were very bothered by them trying to get away with it. It’s actually a great way to govern these type of rules because it allows for gray area that is always taking into the account and really based solely off the temperature of the nba owners. *** it should be. It’s there league

  14. #59
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    19,242
    Quote Originally Posted by dhopisthename View Post
    so to just clear this up since there is some confusion on it. Boozer was a 2nd round pick and as such you have 2 options when a player gets to his 3rd year. you can either pick up his team option for a really small amount and have that player for that year, but the year after he becomes a unrestricted free agent. the other option is that you can decline the player option at which point he is a restricted free agent. I do remember that was some obscure rule that allowed the Jazz to offer Boozer that deal because he was a 2nd rounder or something like that. whatever the rule was it was gone soon after.

    The question becomes did the Cavs actually get a commitment from him or not. He says not, but the cavs say he did. there could easily have been a misunderstanding as well. Either way the Jazz offered him a much larger deal, so thats the risk you take when you let him get to free agency. the Cavs could have also matched the deal, but decided not too.

    Also, they had 15 days to match the deal. could you imagine it being that long today?
    No way you can expect someone to take 39 when his market value is 70. Cavs tried to save some money but we’re really tryin to get Booz for 31 mill…that’s how I take it.

  15. #60
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    42,495
    Quote Originally Posted by IKnowHoops View Post
    No way you can expect someone to take 39 when his market value is 70. Cavs tried to save some money but we’re really tryin to get Booz for 31 mill…that’s how I take it.
    The thing is they couldn't sign him to the larger contract without letting him out of his current contract. They didn't HAVE to let him out of his contract. That's where the dishonesty comes in. Nobody would have a problem with a player choosing the bigger money contract. The issue is that he agreed to the smaller contract and in the execution of the mechanics of that deal he split and signed a different one.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •