Reply With Quote
Thanks Kolko.
Scola no pierde la ilusión de jugar en la NBA
Hernán Sartori
[email protected]
Después de una práctica privada en San Antonio, los Spurs lo eligieron en la segunda ronda del draft de 2002. Entonces, ¿por qué Luis Scola no será ahora compañero de Manu si hace tres años que los Spurs tienen sus derechos, si el entrenador y el manager general lo querían y si el mismo Scola estaba decidido a saltar a la NBA?
San Antonio dio el primer paso y después de asegurarse a Robert Horry por tres años, levantó el teléfono y finalmente hizo la oferta por Scola. Los representantes del argentino pidieron tiempo para solucionar la salida del Tau. Y ahí comenzó el problema.
"Se ve que los tiempos que se manejan en la NBA son diferentes. El arreglo de la cláusula no se soluciona levantando el teléfono y diciendo: 'Listo, me voy'", le explicó ayer a Clarín el agente de Scola, Claudio Villanueva.
Ahora bien: los Spurs confiaban en que si Scola quería jugar en su equipo, tendrían que haberse arreglado los detalles de su desvinculación con anticipación. Porque si hay algo que desvelaba en San Antonio, era el contrato de Scola con Tau.
Cuando los abogados de los Spurs accedieron a una copia de ese contrato, vieron una cláusula de 12 millones de dólares. Sin reconocer el monto, Villanueva aclaró: "Una cifra importante se pautó sólo en caso de que un equipo europeo lo quisiera. No era lo mismo si se interesaban desde la NBA".
Tau se puso firme con los Spurs en ese dinero, porque a Scola lo habían elegido en segunda ronda y no en primera. En la franquicia eran optimistas en que un arbitraje les daría la razón. Pero ese sí legal llegaría en setiembre. Y eso era ísimo. Entonces fueron por Fabricio Oberto, la segunda opción.
"Esto es un mercado profesional y Luis no se siente traicionado ni decepcionado —dijo Villanueva—. Sigue ilusionado con llegar a la NBA". Scola felicitó por teléfono a Oberto, quien se recluyó en Las Varillas. El cordobés espera al viernes para la confirmación oficial de ser NBA. El porteño aún deberá esperar.http://www.clarin.com/diario/2005/07...es/d-08701.htmAfter a private workout in San Antonio, the Spurs drafted him in the second round of the 2002 Draft. So, Why Scola won't be Manu's teammate if the Spurs have his rights and the coach and the GM wanted him and Scola wanted to play in the NBA?
San Antonio made the first step and after re-signing Robert Horry for three years, picked up the phone and finally made the offer. Scola's agent needed time to resolve the exit from Tau. There is where the problem began.
"It seems like times in the NBA are different. The buyout problem doesn't solve picking up the phone and saying 'Ok, I'm going'", explained yesterday to Clarin Scola's agent, Claudio Villanueva.
If the Spurs trusted that Scola wanted to play for the team, they had to solve the buyout problem with anticipation. Because if there was something that San Antonio didn't know, was Scola's contract with Tau.
When the Spurs lawyers got a copy of the contract, they saw a buyout of $12M. Without knowing the number, Villanueva explained: "An important amount was the buyout only for other teams in Europe. It wasn't the same for NBA teams".
Tau wanted that money, because Spurs had drafted Scola in the second round and not in the first one. The franchise was optimistic that an arbitration would lower that number. But the decision would have come in September. And it was very late. So they went after Fabricio Oberto, the second option.
"This is a professional market and Luis doesn't fell betrayed or disappointed" Said Villanueva. "He is still dreaming of getting to the NBA". Scola congratulated Oberto by phone, who stayed in Las Varillas (his hometown). The "cordobes" (Oberto, from the state of Cordoba) is waiting until next Friday when the official confirmation will be made. The "porteño" (Scola, from Buenos Aires) will have to wait.
Thanks Kolko.
Awesome find, thanks.
Scola doesn't seem mad. That's good.
If the Spurs had to wait until September to know if Scola was going to be free, there is no way they could have waited. The Spurs made the smart move and Scola can continue to improve in Europe.
Perhaps next year the buyout will be more clear and the Spurs will then proceed to bring him over. Does anyone know if the Scola's agent and Tau will go to arbi ration so they can work this out? It'd be nice to know if the Spurs will be able to bring him over any time soon.
If jumping to conclusions in this Forum on Friday could be measured in inches, some of the less mature posters in here would have 40 inch vert.
Thanks, kolko.
thank you kolko! Great Job!
AMEN!!! (WHOTTT)
someone told me that they heard Scola on the radio and he really didn't sound angry and it went along the same lines as this does that he really seemed happy for Oberto to make it to the NBA.
The English translation implies that the Spurs should have fixed this ahead of time (not Scola, his agent and Tau). It does this by incorrectly translating the second half of perhaps the most important sentence in the article. Below is how a pretty good translation would read which does not miscommunicate the main facts of the case.
Now, then, the Spurs trusted that if Scola wanted to play on their team, the details of his buyout would have had to have fixed themselves ahead of time.
This is more accurate. This correctly gives the meaning of the sentence. The English translation places they where the details belongs, clearly implying the Spurs should have worked this out ahead of time. This is not what the writer was stating.
If you changed it to:
If the Spurs trusted that if Scola wanted to play on their team, they would have had to have fixed the details of his separation ahead of time
you can see what a big difference there is.
The second translation pretty much comes right out and faults the Spurs for not taking care of this contract stuff ahead of time. The first one does not blame anybody directly; there may even exist an implication that it is Scola's fault if it is anybody's ( because it uses the word trust (confiar)- the Spurs trusted the Scola to have taken care of this stuff if he wanted to play on their team makes more sense than- the Spurs trust the Spurs to have already taken care of this stuff ahead of time if Scola wants to play on their team- the latter makes no sense at all)
I'm not trying to be critical, but the translation from Spanish to English makes it sound as if the Spurs are the ones who ought to have fixed the contract ahead of time (ie with anticipation). However, that is not what is written in Spanish. This first part isn't super important, but it helps start to clear things up. Ahora bien really should not be translated if. Ahora bien is just serving to connect the changes of the times (ie the new difficulties with the present case (Spurs and Scola)). What the writer means is Now, then . I know that is not a literal translation: I know that bien means well, and ahora means now. However, in this context, it is just a tie in. If suggests adds an implication not quite there.
The key word which makes everything clear is confiar which means to trust (and is correctly translated). It makes sense to think of the Spurs trusting that Scola and his agent and Tau to have made acceptable arrangements ahead of time. It does not seem to make sense to think of the Spurs trusting themselves to have arranged to have fixed this ahead of time (which would not make sense anyway sense they were not a party in the agreement). After all, it is more normal to think of trusting another person. The fact that it is in the imperfect past tense also strengthens this argument.
Here is where the translator really got off on a detour: A reflexive verb was used in passive voice: The details was the subject. The subject should not be a vague they. It should have been the details. However, reading it in English (if one does not know Spanish), one would get the impression (which would not make sense) that the Spurs are the subject.
Last edited by themanurules; 07-17-2005 at 04:06 AM.
Thanks for the translations people, good to finally have something concrete on the situation.
whottt, my man, looks like you jumped to conclusions too quick.
I trust you are not like MB, who when proven wrong, he will come out and discredit everybody hardly ever admitting his mistakes.
As for Walton "I'm the straw that stirs the drink" buy off me, well that dude is beyong appologies.
Last edited by smeagol; 07-17-2005 at 07:35 AM.
I still have no doubt that Scola was very disappointed - I'm sure the guy just really wants to play in the NBA and hates all the business stuff - but it's great to see that he called Oberto and that things are settling down a bit. With more details known now, perhaps they can work things out for next year.
Thanks Kolko!
The article clarifies many things and debunks many local myths:
Oberto is a better fit based on the Spurs' preferences.
Scola was the first option and Oberto the second option. All the speculation that Oberto was a better fit is not justified by the Spurs' actions, since they did offer a contract to Scola first. Only after the lawyers got a copy of the contract they concluded that a decision regarding arbitration, albeit possibly favorable, would arrive too late, and they decided to go to the second option and offer a contract to Oberto instead.
Scola is angry, mad, furious, feels betrayed, etc. etc.
It seems nothing further from the truth. He personally called Oberto to congratulate him, and he is hopeful that one day he will join the Spurs.
However, the article does not clarify one important point:
Now, what happens?
Does Scola's agent and Tau go to arbitration? Will all the contract saga be sorted out by next year?
Another thing that isn't answered is, will the Spurs keep or trade Scola's rights? I read where the Spurs had discussed trading Scola's rights. I hope Spurs keep him b/c I would hate to see him in another team and showing us fans what the Spurs could've had!
Why does it feel like to me that we went through this all last year as well? Reports that Scola was angry with the Spurs then later reports that he was never angry at the Spurs but rather the situation he was in with Tau.
To me this could mean one of two things.
1) Media jumps the gun and starts putting words in Scola's mouth
2) Scola is really angry and has a knee jerk quick temper reaction then he and his agent go into spin control.
I normally give people the benfit of the doubt but this has happened twice and really has me wondering.
So the Spurs get Oberto and keep Scola's rights for another year. A decent summer movie so far. Now let's re-sign DBrown, add a vet 3 like GRob or Kukoc or a young 3 like DJohnson, RWhite or JJones and close this puppy.
Oh, and smeagol, whenever you prove me "wrong" will be your first time.
-MB
This buyout is Scola's responsibility and he or his people should have had all this contractual stuff worked out months ago with his team-- or they should have gone to arbitration/legal route. Since most leagues always side with the contractual agreement there doesn't seem to be much doubt that TAU held all the cards.
Scola was 17 when he signed the contract. His lack of business sense now can't be laid off on youth and inexperience. Maybe it's the manana at ude.
Smeagol and Manumania...
I based my opinion on past interviews and what that reporter thought..I felt the reporter was right, and if he did want to be traded, that we should send him on his merry way. If he wants to play here then by all means welcome. And I've got no problems with being wrong on this. I am still not totally convinced though because that is a quote from his agent and not him. But part of my anger was that he would say something like that publicly and blame the team...so if he didn't even if he was mad then my feelings change anyway. I know he's firey.
But I'd also like to point out that, even a wrong whottt is never totally wrong...most people were blaming the Spurs yesterday and were equally jumping to conclusions...so the people that were trying to pin this on the Spurs need to realize their error also(which is about 90% of the people I was arguing with).
I still like Oberto better though.
That explains pretty much everything.But the decision would have come in September.
Yeah no , many people need to come correct in here. All of you with that little blue and white flag underneath your avatar who were sitting there calling the Spurs front office all kinds of things need to man up.
Whottt did it, lets see if anyone else does.
Oh and the "reporter" who was on the Ticket the other day is a . It was his comments that started everything and gave the impression of Scola's anger. He obviously didn't know .
He had talked to Scola's manager and that's what they told him. That reporter on the radio and the reporter in Argentina who wrote this story in this thread talked to Scola's manager and they both told me the exact same thing. What you are probably seeing now is that Scola is cooling off. Even on the radio the guy said that after Scola cools off, he'd probably react different. So the reporter wasn't out of line at all.Oh and the "reporter" who was on the Ticket the other day is a . It was his comments that started everything and gave the impression of Scola's anger. He obviously didn't know .
Kori, doesn't it seem like to you like we were hearing two different stories from the Scola camp (1) he is mad and (2) he isn't
But, it sounds like probably the best guess is that at first Scola was upset which was correctly conveyed to the reporter and to us, then kind of calmed down, realized it was maybe bad pr and not completely fair and not, and so decided to act as if he was never mad in the first place. That seems to make the most sense or am I wrong? Is that how you are taking it?
if scola doesn't play for the spurs the terrorest have won
I don't know about Kori but, that's how I'm taking it too.Kori, doesn't it seem like to you like we were hearing two different stories from the Scola camp (1) he is mad and (2) he isn't
But, it sounds like probably the best guess is that at first Scola was upset which was correctly conveyed to the reporter and to us, then kind of calmed down, realized it was maybe bad pr and not completely fair and not, and so decided to act as if he was never mad in the first place. That seems to make the most sense or am I wrong? Is that how you are taking it?
whottt, I remember the interview the TV did to Scola right after winning the gold. He had been part of one of Argentina's greatest sporting accomplishments ever and the guy asks him about the Spurs. In that context (of winning the gold) his answer made sense.
And MB, I probably never proved you wrong 'cause you are so much more intelligent than I am, but I remember one thread abaout a year ago about being a Cowboy fan and a Spur fan, and how the Spurs were a class organization and the Cowboys were not. Boy were you proven wrong on that discussion!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
