Stack may also have screwed the Kidd trade

[BillsCarnage]

I'm hearing this on a couple of radio shows...

By opening his big trap and saying he's going to be waived and go back to Dallas is a violation of trade rules. Even if it was agreed to under the table he should have kept his mouth shut.

If the trade goes through and IF he's waived Stern may step in and tell NJ they can't waive him or if he's waived he can't go back to Dallas.

This trade has become a debacle. But hey, it's Dallas... :p:

[Shank]

I'd like to see the wording of the "rules" before pondering the effects of this. Talk is talk.

[monosylab1k]

If the trade goes through and IF he's waived Stern may step in and tell NJ they can't waive him or if he's waived he can't go back to Dallas.
They need conclusive evidence that Dallas & New Jersey conspired to do this, not just hearsay from Stackhouse.

Nice try.

[ancestron]

Thats the very first thing I thought when I read his little "I ain't goin nowhere, 30 day vacation! woohoo!" quote

what a maroon.

[monosylab1k]

from the Chad Ford ESPN chat...


If the league feels that the Mavs and Nets had pre-arranged a deal that would release Stackhouse and then gotten Stackhouse to agree to return to Dallas ... they might try to prohibit Stackhouse from returning to Dallas. To me the league would have to have direct evidence that it happened.

Good luck with all that.

[monosylab1k]

It's been really entertaining to see how insecure Sun fan is about this trade. Finding every way possible to downplay it and figure out any way possible to keep Stackhouse out of Dallas also.

" :cry We don't have the newest superstar trade on the block anymore! Here, read this article about Steve Nash's shoes!!!!!!!"

[Shank]

Avery is pissed that Stack made those comments, as well, and thinks the league may frown upon what he said. But even still, good luck to them blocking it.

Oh, and fuck Dick Breath.

[BillsCarnage]

They need conclusive evidence that Dallas & New Jersey conspired to do this, not just hearsay from Stackhouse.

Nice try.

Stack already shot his mouth off and it's been pub'd.. There's not much more they need.

[Shank]

What Stack says isn't 100% indicative of any dealings between the two teams. They'd have to prove that if it comes down to it.

[monosylab1k]

Stack already shot his mouth off and it's been pub'd.. There's not much more they need.
hearsay.

Stackhouse can easily back out of those statements. Say they were his own thoughts, not anything told to him by the front office, nobody conspired but he hoped it would work out that way, etc.

There's so many loopholes to stay out of trouble here it's basically a non-story. But I appreciate Sun Fan continuing to display their insecurity over this trade.

[stretch]

Stack already shot his mouth off and it's been pub'd.. There's not much more they need.
Mark Cuban said there was no chance of a Kidd-to-Dallas deal happening either.

Word of mouth by one person doesn't mean shit.

[monosylab1k]

They need direct proof that those in charge of making this trade happen conspired to buyout Stackhouse and let him return in 30 days. Not just the words of a player who can easily claim total ignorance & speculation on the subject. Good luck with all that.

[nkdlunch]

the best evidence would be Nets waiving him and Dallas trying to sign him. That's as conclusive evidence as any. At that point, the league might do something about it. Or try to ignore the matter

[monosylab1k]

If Stackhouse said "Donnie Nelson told me........." then maybe this has legs.

But he didn't, so it doesn't.

[Shank]

the best evidence would be Nets waiving him and Dallas trying to sign him. That's as conclusive evidence as any. At that point, the league might do something about it. Or try to ignore the matter

After he's traded to the Nets, he's their responsibility. If the buy him out, then he's a free agent and obviously able to sign with any team. Stack just happens to not want to sign anywhere else and goes back to the Mavs after 30 days. No proof of any wrong dealings anywhere.

[ElNono]

This whole George thing sucks for Stack. I bet he already had a flight booked for Hawaii for the next 30 days. I wonder if he's going to get in George's face for ruining his vacations...

[nkdlunch]

After he's traded to the Nets, he's their responsibility. If the buy him out, then he's a free agent and obviously able to sign with any team. Stack just happens to not want to sign anywhere else and goes back to the Mavs after 30 days. No proof of any wrong dealings anywhere.

correct, not enough evidence for a conviction. but enough evidence for suspicion/investigation and possible halt to the signing.

[fyatuk]

If Stackhouse said "Donnie Nelson told me........." then maybe this has legs.

But he didn't, so it doesn't.

Even without something like that, what's been said is enough proof to initiate an investigation, should it play out as Stack stated. They shouldn't be able to initiate any penalties unless they find better proof, but the league certainly has the basis to launch a nice, distracting investigation.

[Shank]

They can investigate all they want, but it's worthless unless they find some hard evidence. And Stack shooting off his mouth wouldn't hold up as a piece to convict himself.

[Findog]

It's not a violation of the CBA. This 30 day provision was put in after the Mavs traded for KVH and reaquired Alan Henderson after he was immediately waived by Milwaukee. If and when Jersey cuts him, he becomes a FA free to sign with any team. If he wants to go back to Dallas, he has to wait 30 days, whereas he would be available immediately to play for any other team.

Much ado about nothing. If Stern and the other owners don't like it, they can change the rules in the offseason. Right now, there's nothing wrong with it.

[Shank]

Stack could come out and say "Hey! Fuck you, Stern! I'm going to play along with this trade, fuck some bitches, go to Disney World and whip my cock out on Space Mountain, get paid and then return to the Mavs in a month! Suck it!" and there's not much they can do to penalize the team. It's still just Stack running his mouth.

[fyatuk]

They can investigate all they want, but it's worthless unless they find some hard evidence. And Stack shooting off his mouth wouldn't hold up as a piece to convict himself.

You don't think the distraction of an investigation could hurt a team? A serious investigation could cause numerous problems even without actually penalizing the team.

[nkdlunch]

You don't think the distraction of an investigation could hurt a team? A serious investigation could cause numerous problems even without actually penalizing the team.
not only that. an investigation might delay things, which are already delayed because of George.

If Stack is not released by March 1. Forget playoffs.

Karma is a bitch Cuban

[DisgruntledLionFan#54,927]

Serious investigation? :lol

Please.

[fyatuk]

Serious investigation? :lol

Please.

It would depend on how Stack's 30 days go. If he starts turning down people's MLE money to sign a vet min with Dallas, there would be a fairly serious investigation. Considering some of the credibility hits the NBA has taken recently, it'd be necessary.

If Dallas ends up paying the same as other teams are offering him, then there might be a token investigation or none at all.

[ElNono]

Investigation of what? Following the rules? If the league doesn't like the CBA they signed they're free to sit down with the union once the season is over. Right now, there's nothing they can do.

[DisgruntledLionFan#54,927]

What Stack does means nothing.

The NBA would need direct evidence of his buyout and return to the Mavs being a part of the deal brokered. He's part of the deal but only if you buy him out type of thing. Good luck with proving that, even if it is indeed what happened.

Right now, all they have is a player who learned he is being traded and bought out saying he wants to go back to his original team after 30 days, which is perfectly legal.

[fyatuk]

Investigation of what? Following the rules? If the league doesn't like the CBA they signed they're free to sit down with the union once the season is over. Right now, there's nothing they can do.

Even having an oral agreement for resigning Stackhouse before this trade is done and he's waived violates the CBA in the same manner the Joe Smith fiasco in Minnesota did.

[stretch]

but enough evidence for suspicion/investigation and possible halt to the signing.
care to provide a link to the rule that it is something that can/will be investigated/halted?

[Findog]

Even having an oral agreement for resigning Stackhouse before this trade is done and he's waived violates the CBA in the same manner the Joe Smith fiasco in Minnesota did.

How so? There's a rule: wait 30 days until you return to your original team. That's the disincentive that was put in after the KVH/Alan Henderson trade. The Mavs are willing to wait that long.

Next topic.

[Indazone]

They need conclusive evidence that Dallas & New Jersey conspired to do this, not just hearsay from Stackhouse.

Nice try.

You mean like Memphis and Los Angeles conspired to get Gasol to the Lakers for nothing?

[ElNono]

Even having an oral agreement for resigning Stackhouse before this trade is done and he's waived violates the CBA in the same manner the Joe Smith fiasco in Minnesota did.

No. The Joe Smith fiasco happened because they put it on paper:

This is what happened in 2000 with Joe Smith and the Minnesota Timberwolves. Smith left the Philadelphia 76ers in 1999 (following the lockout) to sign with the Minnesota Timberwolves for their $1.75 million Mid-Level exception. They made an under-the-table agreement that Smith would play under three consecutive one-year contracts at below market value, and the Timberwolves would reward him by using their Bird rights to sign him to a huge contract beginning with the 2001-02 season. Unfortunately, they reduced this agreement to writing, and the written agreement eventually found its way into the league's hands.

But if there's no hard evidence, there's nothing to prove.

[Medvedenko]

Ask Pop and his trade committte..maybe he has the answers.

[fyatuk]

No. The Joe Smith fiasco happened because they put it on paper:

This is what happened in 2000 with Joe Smith and the Minnesota Timberwolves. Smith left the Philadelphia 76ers in 1999 (following the lockout) to sign with the Minnesota Timberwolves for their $1.75 million Mid-Level exception. They made an under-the-table agreement that Smith would play under three consecutive one-year contracts at below market value, and the Timberwolves would reward him by using their Bird rights to sign him to a huge contract beginning with the 2001-02 season. Unfortunately, they reduced this agreement to writing, and the written agreement eventually found its way into the league's hands.

But if there's no hard evidence, there's nothing to prove.

They were busted because they put it into writing. The act was against the CBA and league rules even if they didn't put it into writing.

If there's no hard evidence, there's no way to prove it without someone admitting it.

Here's the pertinent section:


No Unauthorized Agreements.
(a) At no time shall there be any agreements or transactions of any kind (whether disclosed or undisclosed to the NBA), express or implied, oral or written, or promises, undertakings, representations, commitments, inducements, assurances of intent, or understandings of any kind (whether disclosed or undisclosed to the NBA), between a player (or any person or entity controlled by, related to, or acting with authority on behalf of, such player) and any Team (or Team Affiliate):

(i) concerning any future Renegotiation, Extension, or amendment of an existing Player Contract, or entry into a new Player Contract;

ii) except as permitted by this Agreement or as set forth in a Uniform Player Contract (provided that the Team has not intentionally delayed submitting such Uniform Player Contract for approval by the NBA), involving compensation or consideration of any kind to be paid, furnished or made available to the player, or any person or entity controlled by, related to, or acting with authority on behalf of the player; or
...
c) A violation of Section 2(a) above may be proven by direct or circumstantial evidence, including, but not limited to, evidence that a Player Contract or any term or provision thereof cannot rationally be explained in the absence of conduct violative of Section 2(a).

[nkdlunch]

Ask Pop and his trade committte..maybe he has the answers.

Pop's commitee aproved of the trade because it benefits the Spurs.

[picnroll]

They can investigate all they want, but it's worthless unless they find some hard evidence. And Stack shooting off his mouth wouldn't hold up as a piece to convict himself.
It isn't a court of law and doesn't have to meet those standards. Stern is judge, jury and hangman and if he decides it looks like it's publicly putting into serious doubt the integrity of the league he'll cut Dallas and Shithouse off at the knees.

[Shank]

It isn't a court of law and doesn't have to meet those standards. Stern is judge, jury and hangman and if he decides it lloks like it publicly it's putting into serious doubt the integrity of the league he'll cut Dallas and Shithouse off at the knees.

Yeah, and the NBPA will have no problem with that.

[picnroll]

Yeah, and the NBPA will have no problem with that.
NBPA won't give a rat's ass. It doesn't want to go out and defend every moron in the league.

[phyzik]

Even having an oral agreement for resigning Stackhouse before this trade is done and he's waived violates the CBA in the same manner the Joe Smith fiasco in Minnesota did.

I believe this is correct, will search for the rule when I get home. I could care less what happens either way, but its interesting.

[Shank]

NBPA won't give a rat's ass. It doesn't want to go out and defend every moron in the league.

I'm fairly certain they'd step in to defend the "moron" involved in one of the biggest trades this season. It's not like he's a nobody and this is some inconsequential trade.

[fyatuk]

I believe this is correct, will search for the rule when I get home. I could care less what happens either way, but its interesting.

I don't really care either. It's a violation, but I don't think it's that big of a deal.

[phyzik]

They were busted because they put it into writing. The act was against the CBA and league rules even if they didn't put it into writing.

If there's no hard evidence, there's no way to prove it without someone admitting it.

Here's the pertinent section:

No Unauthorized Agreements.
(a) At no time shall there be any agreements or transactions of any kind (whether disclosed or undisclosed to the NBA), express or implied, oral or written, or promises, undertakings, representations, commitments, inducements, assurances of intent, or understandings of any kind (whether disclosed or undisclosed to the NBA), between a player (or any person or entity controlled by, related to, or acting with authority on behalf of, such player) and any Team (or Team Affiliate):


good find! thats exactly what I thought!

[picnroll]

I'm fairly certain they'd step in to defend the "moron" involved in one of the biggest trades this season. It's not like he's a nobody and this is some inconsequential trade.
They don't give a rat's ass about the trade, whether it gets made or not.

They probably care that some moron is mouthing off and undermining a rule they negotiated so now the league will come back asking for harder rules like more than 30 days or they can't go back to the team that traded them that year.

[Shank]

How magical was it for Alan Henderson to return to the Mavs after the KVH trade years ago? Just an odd coincidence that he came back to Dallas. I'm sure there was no negotiating going on in that case. None at all. Odd how the league didn't pursue an investigation if it was so obvious (as posted by many Mavs beat men at the time) that Henderson would return. The difference is that Henderson didn't speak on it like Stackhouse did (even though Stack was talking before anything was official), but still - there was a negotiation, nonetheless, and it happened as the Mavs wanted it.

[picnroll]

How magical was it for Alan Henderson to return to the Mavs after the KVH trade years ago? Just an odd coincidence that he came back to Dallas. I'm sure there was no negotiating going on in that case. None at all. Odd how the league didn't pursue an investigation if it was so obvious (as posted by many Mavs beat men at the time) that Henderson would return. The difference is that Henderson didn't speak on it like Stackhouse did (even though Stack was talking before anything was official), but still - there was a negotiation, nonetheless, and it happened as the Mavs wanted it.
Did Henderson go off to the press how the trade was bogus to get the deal done and he'd be waived and re-sign with the Mavs after a months vacation?

[Shank]

No, but there was obviously an understanding that he would return and everyone in the Dallas media was reporting as such.

[picnroll]

No, but there was "obviously an understanding that he would return and everyone in the Dallas media was reporting as such.

I guess if questioned Shithouse can always claim extreme stupidity, that he didn't know what he was talking about. Stern would probably buy that

[Findog]

I guess if questioned Shithouse can always claim extreme stupidity, that he didn't know what he was talking about. Stern would probably buy that

What are you so bitter about? Isn't a Kidd to Mavs trade great for San Antonio?

[Shank]

I guess if questioned Shithouse can always claim extreme stupidity, that he didn't know what he was talking about. Stern would probably buy that


Ahahaa...yeah, that's what Stack will try to play off. He changed his tone when on with Stephen A. today, though. Said a lot of "maybes" and "we'll sees". Sounds like someone told him to shut the fuck up and change his tone.

[picnroll]

What are you so bitter about? Isn't a Kidd to Mavs trade great for San Antonio?
Don't like Shithouse. Actually I hope the deal goes through.

[fyatuk]

No, but there was obviously an understanding that he would return and everyone in the Dallas media was reporting as such.

Well, one issue with that comparison is that it was under the old CBA (the current one being signed the following summer).

It didn't have the 30 day provision, since Henderson was traded on Feb 24, waived Feb 25, and resigned Mar 1.

Also, there's no provision preventing negotiating during the wait period in the current CBA, only signing a contract. If there was an agreement before the trade, it violated the CBA because you cannot have an agreement with a player under contract for another team, but one can always assume the interest started when he was waived.

Provided you don't go saying stupid crap like Stackhouse did. That's the only problem is Stackhouse saying that. It draws attention to it and looks suspiscious.

[ludda]

"Stackhouse's mouth may prevent trade" http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_ylt=AnxMG9PILj8jQFHawtPRilS8vLYF?slug=aw-stackhousesnag021508&prov=yhoo&type=lgns

hahaha

[monosylab1k]

Fuhrer Stern back at it again. "I'm going to change the rules to fuck over Dallas. What, the Lakers want to rape the Grizzlies and throw a middle finger at the rest of the league? Sure thing."

[nkdlunch]

difference is, Lakers don't have a dumbass big mouth who screwed the deal.

Stack = OWNED!

[bostonguy]

Wow. If this deal doesnt happen, it is going to get ugly in Dallas. Stacks mouth, George's bird rights fiasco, the team sending the message to Harris that he isnt good enough at the moment to help this team to a championship etc etc. This is going to turn into a horrible crisis leading to team implosion.

[ManuTim_best of Fwiendz]

Who knows about Dallas' chemistry now, maybe this drama will do the team some good, and they start rounding out and look at it as a catastrophe avoided as they're forced to deal another hand for Kidd or other valuable player, or they're forced to stand pat.
Maybe Dallas will end up rationalizing in the end with a pretty good season record, that they were better off with this failed trade happening, just like how the Kobe fiasco of last summer ended up being a non-issue in hindsight and the Lakers are finally at a good place now, despite all that mess.

....on the other hand, unless the Mavs get a decent shake up before the deadline, it's just as likely their chemistry gets fucked up from this debacle. :lmao

[Johnny_Blaze_47]

Stack could come out and say "Hey! Fuck you, Stern! I'm going to play along with this trade, fuck some bitches, go to Disney World and whip my cock out on Space Mountain, get paid and then return to the Mavs in a month! Suck it!" and there's not much they can do to penalize the team. It's still just Stack running his mouth.

I kinda wish he would say that. :lol

[Shank]

I like this word - chemistry - and how everyone thinks the team is going to just shit the bed every night now if this falls through. The players didn't fuck themselves. Cuban did the dealing and was going to screw them over. If anything, Devin Harris gets to prove to Dallas and his teammates just how valuable he can be and that it would have been a mistake to let him go. He loves it in Dallas.

Diop? He's going to do what he does. You're saying it's going to be substantially worse?

Devean George - may be in the doghouse, yes. But it was seen the last 2 nights that Avery and the other players still trust him, even when he throws up 0-11. He was assigned to Nash last night and took over the point at times so Terry could run around.

Stack - obviously, couldn't be happier to stay in Dallas.

It's largely the team/Avery vs. Cuban. And seeing as most of them don't like Cuban much to begin with, I'd say their opinions don't change much after this fiasco. I've written recently that yes, there will need to be a couple moves to help for the playoffs, but nothing on this grand scale that screws the future. I'd still support a move for Kidd, still, but only if I knew Donnie and Avery were more involved and that Dallas wouldn't be getting the short end.

[Findog]

That's outrageous if the league prevents Stack from rejoining the team. There's nothing in the rules that prevent him from doing so -- he wants to return, the team wouldn't mind having him back, and they're prepared to wait 30 days to do so. What is the problem?

[lefty]

Popovich's suggestion (trade comittee) is working !!!! :lmao :lmao :lmao

[Findog]

Popovich's suggestion (trade comittee) is working !!!! :lmao :lmao :lmao

But don't the Spurs want this one to go through? :lol

[lefty]

But don't the Spurs want this one to go through? :lol

:lol

I don't know what to think.

Sometimes, I think this trade would be good for the Spurs, because Kidd is older, blablah

But at the same time, Kidd is still a top 3 PG (damn those stats !), and he could be rejuvenated playing for a contender.

[fyatuk]

That's outrageous if the league prevents Stack from rejoining the team. There's nothing in the rules that prevent him from doing so -- he wants to return, the team wouldn't mind having him back, and they're prepared to wait 30 days to do so. What is the problem?

Because there is a rule that prevents a pre-made agreement to resign him before the trade exists. Duh.

If Stern thinks this is the case and it happens, he can take them to Arbitration (and block the signing pending said arbitration) and the arbitrator doesn't have burden of proof rules like a jury.

[ambchang]

A mentally tough team would be able to use this as motivation to show the world that they are indeed good enough for a championship.
But then, we are talking about the Mavs.

[Findog]

Because there is a rule that prevents a pre-made agreement to resign him before the trade exists. Duh.

They'll have a hell of a time proving that. The Mavs and Stackhouse can make a compelling argument that the Nets don't want his contract and will buy him out anyway. If Stackhouse wants to return to Dallas and the Mavs aren't opposed to his return, then there's no violation of league rules. The best you can argue is that this violates the spirit of the 30-day rule, not the letter.



If Stern thinks this is the case and it happens, he can take them to Arbitration (and block the signing pending said arbitration) and the arbitrator doesn't have burden of proof rules like a jury.

Stern will do whatever he wants to protect the bottom line for other owners, since enough of them are crying foul on this arrangement. Funny how he his hands were tied over a rule last May and he had no choice to suspend Amare and Diaw (which was right btw) but he can disregard the CBA at will to spite the Mavs and placate other pissy owners.

[Findog]

A mentally tough team would be able to use this as motivation to show the world that they are indeed good enough for a championship.
But then, we are talking about the Mavs.

Great analysis, Dr. Phil.

[DisgruntledLionFan#54,927]

It seems a lot of WC GMs/owners are complaining already. Stern may feel his heavy hand is being forced in this situation.

It's a joke if he rescinds this trade solely on speculation, IMO.

[fyatuk]

They'll have a hell of a time proving that. The Mavs and Stackhouse can make a compelling argument that the Nets don't want his contract and will buy him out anyway. If Stackhouse wants to return to Dallas and the Mavs aren't opposed to his return, then there's no violation of league rules. The best you can argue is that this violates the spirit of the 30-day rule, not the letter.


That's just it, THERE DOESN'T NEED TO BE PROOF. All you have to do is be able to convince an arbitrator that it is most likely the case. Not hard with the kind of things Stack said.

Having an agreement that "we will re-sign you after they buy you out", even as vague as that, violates the LETTER of the circumvention clauses of the CBA, and again DOESN'T REQUIRE PROOF, only convincing the arbitrator.


Stern will do whatever he wants to protect the bottom line for other owners, since enough of them are crying foul on this arrangement. Funny how he his hands were tied over a rule last May and he had no choice to suspend Amare and Diaw (which was right btw) but he can disregard the CBA at will to spite the Mavs and placate other pissy owners.

How is he disregarding the CBA when he's doing an investigation into a possible violation of it? The question is whether the MAVS and NETS disregarded the CBA, not whether Stern is.

If Stack had kept his mouth shut, no one would have cared. It's not like this kind of thing is exclusive to the Mavs, other teams violate the CBA often enough. The NBA can't afford to tolerate open flaunting of those violations though, especially after the last few years have resulted in several hits to the leagues credibility.

[Findog]

How is he disregarding the CBA when he's doing an investigation into a possible violation of it? The question is whether the MAVS and NETS disregarded the CBA, not whether Stern is.

The rule is that in this scenario, a player must wait 30 days to return to his original team after being bought out, while he is free to play immediately should he sign with any other team. There is no stipulation in the trade proposal itself or any of the papers submitted to the league that the Nets will buy out Stack and it's a done deal for him to return to Dallas. Stackhouse is only expressing his preference to play for Dallas again and wait the 30 days if the Nets buy him out like he's expecting them to do so. Another team can come along and make a better financial offer. Players eschew bigger paydays all the time for a chance to play for a contender. And it's not ironclad that the Mavs will make a bid to resign him. They might not be done making moves after this trade and might find themselves out of options and unable to sign Stack. If they trade for Mike Miller or Kurt Thomas, or sign PJ Brown, they might not have the roster spot or salary slot left to sign him.

As for your argument regarding "proof," it's true that Stern can do whatever he wants and the standard of evidence is lower. My argument is that forbidding Stack to return to Dallas would make him a hypocritical piece of shit.

[fyatuk]

The rule is that in this scenario, a player must wait 30 days to return to his original team after being bought out, while he is free to play immediately should he sign with any other team. There is no stipulation in the trade proposal itself or any of the papers submitted to the league that the Nets will buy out Stack and it's a done deal for him to return to Dallas. Stackhouse is only expressing his preference to play for Dallas again and wait the 30 days if the Nets buy him out like he's expecting them to do so. Another team can come along and make a better financial offer. Players eschew bigger paydays all the time for a chance to play for a contender. And it's not ironclad that the Mavs will make a bid to resign him. They might not be done making moves after this trade and might find themselves out of options and unable to sign Stack. If they trade for Mike Miller or Kurt Thomas, or sign PJ Brown, they might not have the roster spot or salary slot left to sign him.


That's not the rule in question. The rule in question is part of the circumvention clauses, not the 30 day rule. The 30 day rule doesn't even prevent them from negotiating with him after he's waived, only that he can't sign with them. Unless he's already signed a contract (which would be a whole 'nother ball of wax and would end up forcing the leagues hands into hefty penalties), there is no problem with the 30 day clause, and that's not what the investigation is about.

The whole problem is Stack's statement suggest an agreement was already made, which violates the circumvention clauses (you can't have more than one agreement with a player, you can't have an agreement with a player that would be on another team (if the trade happened he would be a Net for 1 day), etc).


As for your argument regarding "proof," it's true that Stern can do whatever he wants and the standard of evidence is lower. My argument is that forbidding Stack to return to Dallas would make him a hypocritical piece of shit.

He wouldn't forbid it unless he was sure he could win the arbitration. If he has a good argument about the circumvention clause, then he'd probably still just put it on hold pending arbitration, which they might be able to fast track.

I don't see how upholding the rules in the CBA would make him a hypocrit, but meh.

[BonnerDynasty]

Keeping your mouth shut.

So easy, a cavema.....


Nvm.

[mardigan]

Sources: Stackhouse's hint at return to Big D raises eyebrows
By Chris Broussard
ESPN The Magazine
(Archive)
Updated: February 15, 2008, 12:21 PM ET

Devean George's refusal to consent to being traded to the New Jersey Nets is not the only hindrance to the Jason Kidd-to-Dallas deal, according to several league sources.

Although there has been no public comment from the NBA on the matter, sources say that league officials are not pleased with Jerry Stackhouse's brazen announcement that he would soon return for a Mavericks playoff run if traded to New Jersey.

"I get 30 days to rest, then I'll be right back,'' Stackhouse told The Associated Press on Wednesday in response to the proposed trade. "I ain't going nowhere."

Stackhouse is referring to the widely reported assumption that New Jersey would immediately buy him out of his contract, which would allow him to re-sign with another team. Stackhouse's preference is to return to Dallas, but according to league rules he'd have to wait at least 30 days.

The 30-day rule was added to the league's collective bargaining agreement as a response to a trade between Boston and Atlanta in 2005. In that deal, Boston sent Gary Payton to Atlanta to reacquire Antoine Walker with the understanding that the Hawks would immediately waive Payton, who then re-signed with Boston three days later.

The league frowned on this move, and instituted the 30-day rule. By flouting the rule so publicly, Stackhouse may have given the league no choice but to eliminate him from the deal or prevent the Mavericks from re-signing him.

"If Stackhouse had kept quiet, the league wouldn't have been able to prove anything,'' one Western Conference executive said. "Now, it's obvious that he talked to Mark Cuban about coming back to the Mavericks.''

One executive said the league is looking into the matter and could very well block Stackhouse from being involved in the trade. That could be a deal-breaker, because Cuban definitely wants Stackhouse back.

"Obviously, George needs to give his consent for the deal to happen, but the Stackhouse thing could now be a bigger problem than George,'' a person with knowledge of the teams' trade negotiations said.

Another executive said team owners have been calling commissioner David Stern to complain about the Stackhouse part of the deal and that several GMs would be incensed if he allows the trade to go through with Stackhouse in it.

"Every GM from a potential playoff team in the Western Conference is complaining about this,'' the executive said. "If the league allows this trade to go through, it'll have a major credibility issue on its hands. Our collective bargaining agreement's not worth anything if this goes through.''

Meanwhile, George's agent, Mark Bartelstein, told 1050 ESPN New York's Andrew Marchand that George would consider the trade if it would improve his situation.

"If he felt like his playing opportunity would be so much better in New Jersey than Dallas [he would consider it,]" Bartelstein said Friday morning. "He is starting in Dallas for a championship contender. New Jersey is rebuilding. He would have to give up his Larry Bird [free agent rights.] It has nothing to do with the Nets or not wanting to go to New Jersey."

Chris Broussard covers the NBA for ESPN The Magazine. Andrew Marchand also contributed to this report.


http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3247183

[BonnerDynasty]

Another executive said team owners have been calling commissioner David Stern to complain about the Stackhouse part of the deal and that several GMs would be incensed if he allows the trade to go through with Stackhouse in it.

"Every GM from a potential playoff team in the Western Conference is complaining about this,'' the executive said. "If the league allows this trade to go through, it'll have a major credibility issue on its hands. Our collective bargaining agreement's not worth anything if this goes through.''

Trade Committee FTMFW!

[Shank]

Does Bartelstein even know what the fuck is going on with his own player? Shitbag - he's only starting because Howard is hurt and Jones isn't cutting it. When everyone is healthy and they gear up for the playoffs, your client won't come anywhere near the starting lineup. And as for his Bird Rights? Do you really think the Mavs are going to re-sign George and pay him that increase after all this shit?

Fucking idiot.

[fyatuk]

Does Bartelstein even know what the fuck is going on with his own player? Shitbag - he's only starting because Howard is hurt and Jones isn't cutting it. When everyone is healthy and they gear up for the playoffs, your client won't come anywhere near the starting lineup. And as for his Bird Rights? Do you really think the Mavs are going to re-sign George and pay him that increase after all this shit?

Fucking idiot.

It's also about sign and trade opportunities. If his agent could arrange a sign and trade utilizing early bird rights, he could get 175% of his current salary. Without that, sign and trade is only 120%.

He's a guy on the tail end of his carreer looking out for his last possible payday. I understand the rationale, but I doubt anyone would be willing to pay him the 3 mil under the bird rights (or really even the 2 mil or so he's making now).

[Findog]

It's also about sign and trade opportunities. If his agent could arrange a sign and trade utilizing early bird rights, he could get 175% of his current salary. Without that, sign and trade is only 120%.

He's a guy on the tail end of his carreer looking out for his last possible payday. I understand the rationale, but I doubt anyone would be willing to pay him the 3 mil under the bird rights (or really even the 2 mil or so he's making now).

Again, a sign and trade utilizing his Bird rights requires Mark Cuban's cooperation. Devean and his agent are fucking stupid, after cockblocking the trade, Cuban isn't going to do George any favors.

[ludda]

I don't think Stackhouse's big mouth will amount to anything. Maybe a slap on the wrist, most likely not the deal buster.

This is becoming comical by the minute. I feel for you mavs fan...almost.

Devean George is pretty fucking stupid though. I read in the latest ESPN article that he was happy about his increased playing time and situation in Dallas. Also that the Mavs and Nets were taken completely aback by his change of heart since he had wanted to be traded earlier.

Sucks to have such a mindless dipshit on your team!

[Cry Havoc]

No Unauthorized Agreements.
(a) At no time shall there be any agreements or transactions of any kind (whether disclosed or undisclosed to the NBA), express or implied, oral or written, or promises, undertakings, representations, commitments, inducements, assurances of intent, or understandings of any kind (whether disclosed or undisclosed to the NBA), between a player (or any person or entity controlled by, related to, or acting with authority on behalf of, such player) and any Team (or Team Affiliate):


good find! thats exactly what I thought!


Owns the thread. What Stackhouse said is obviously against the league rules.

[monosylab1k]

It's largely the team/Avery vs. Cuban.
So what the fuck does Donnie do in his office all day? Jack off to internet porn? Why the hell is he not involved in this?

And if Avery/team is insisting they can get it done despite obvious flaws......I say fine, let them go for it. I won't bitch about this trade not being done for the rest of the season.

BUT if they don't make it to the WCF minimum, I will scream my lungs out that this team gets blown up and Avery gets fired (not that it will matter, but maybe daily e-mails to Cuban will make a slight....no that won't work either).

Avery's putting all his eggs in the "we like our team" basket and if he fucks this thing up again in the playoffs, then he's proven all he can prove to me, and it's time to move on.

[Findog]

^, true, the League has a vested interested in getting Kidd out of Jersey.

[monosylab1k]

now knowing this whole team vs. Cuban thing, I think it's pretty obvious Avery or someone else whispered "hey you can reject this trade if you want. just saying" in Devean's ear before it went through.

His agent HAS GOT to be smarter than this. Some HAS to be telling them "reject this trade". And if Avery was really for the trade, he'd have sat Devean's ass at the end of the bench last night.

It's obvious now that Avery is in on this.

[Shank]

It's obvious now that Avery is in on this.

...to spite Cuban, maybe?

To show him - "Hey, Mark. These guys you were just wanting to trade away? They actually play for me and fit into roles for which I need them. Don't go off and make some stupid fucking trade without consulting me and my players."

[Cry Havoc]

This is delicious. So many plotlines. I've never seen Mavs fans so suddenly suspicious of their own players and coaches.

[Shank]

This is delicious. So many plotlines. I've never seen Mavs fans so suddenly suspicious of their own players and coaches.

Starts with the owner and his meddling ways.

[ludda]

Cuban is blaming George's agent for swindling them, not George:

"I feel bad for Devean George," Cuban said. "I really, really do. I think he got thrown under the bus by his agent. I think he's a great, great, great, great guy."

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent...84e63.html

[mavsfan1000]

...to spite Cuban, maybe?

To show him - "Hey, Mark. These guys you were just wanting to trade away? They actually play for me and fit into roles for which I need them. Don't go off and make some stupid fucking trade without consulting me and my players."
If that's the case, expect Avery to be gone after this season. George is the one making the decisions I believe. No one else got involved except his agent.

[monosylab1k]

...to spite Cuban, maybe?

To show him - "Hey, Mark. These guys you were just wanting to trade away? They actually play for me and fit into roles for which I need them. Don't go off and make some stupid fucking trade without consulting me and my players."
it's definitely a possibility IMO. if he really truly believes that this team can do it all, then I'm willing to give him another chance. but if this thing flames out yet again, Avery should be the first against the wall when the Revolucion! arrives.

[baseline bum]

Wow. If this deal doesnt happen, it is going to get ugly in Dallas. Stacks mouth, George's bird rights fiasco, the team sending the message to Harris that he isnt good enough at the moment to help this team to a championship etc etc. This is going to turn into a horrible crisis leading to team implosion.

It worked out fine for the Rockets when they traded Horry in 94, only to have to take him back when Sean Elliott failed his physical.

[Cry Havoc]

I wonder -- would the league have brought up this issue with Stackhouse if George would have agreed to the trade in the first place?

[monosylab1k]

Starts with the owner and his meddling ways.
Maybe so, but it's his toy and he has every right to do what he pleases with it. And if it's painfully obvious that this team, as currently contstructed, won't be winning jack shit this year, then he has a right to demand that changes be made. If his GM is too busy watching Stormy videos in the office with the blinds drawn, then he has every right to get on the phone himself.

And Avery needs to stick to coaching the team. Maybe teach the team a new play besides "Throw it in to Dirk at the high post, let him dribble it while making a pathetic attempt to back his guy down for 18 seconds, then either throw up a desperation fadeaway or his turnaround layup that rarely hits the rim"

[clambake]

trying to catch up here.

is the trade officially dead?

[monosylab1k]

trying to catch up here.

is the trade officially dead?
not yet but i'm starting to think that it is.

[Cry Havoc]

not yet but i'm starting to think that it is.

It's over. Stack won't go through on the trade. The players involved will have to be seriously revamped and it will look like a completely different trade afterwards.

A pity too, as I thought this removed too much depth from the Mavs to make them serious contenders.