Possible Arbitration on Bird Rights after waiver claims

[d-train]

Look at the definition of "Prior Team." The only way a player can change his "Prior Team" is through some form of free agency. Otherwise, his team (or his Prior Team) is always the team that has him under contract, or who last had him under contract. And, it doesn't have to be the same team. Teams can transfer player’s contracts and the transfer doesn't constitute a renegotiation of contract.

[HartfordWhalers]

Look at the definition of "Prior Team." The only way a player can change his "Prior Team" is through some form of free agency. Otherwise, his team (or his Prior Team) is always the team that has him under contract, or who last had him under contract. And, it doesn't have to be the same team. Teams can transfer player’s contracts and the transfer doesn't constitute a renegotiation of contract.

And thus we are back at the wording should (does?) mean this argument.

[DBoys]

Look at the definition of "Prior Team." The only way a player can change his "Prior Team" is through some form of free agency.

I don't see any crucial point to be made about the "prior team" which is always the team the player played with when the contract ran out.

[d-train]

Look at the definition of "Prior Team." The only way a player can change his "Prior Team" is through some form of free agency. Otherwise, his team (or his Prior Team) is always the team that has him under contract, or who last had him under contract. And, it doesn't have to be the same team. Teams can transfer player’s contracts and the transfer doesn't constitute a renegotiation of contract.

And thus we are back at the wording should (does?) mean this argument.

No, the wording of the agreement is clear. A player's Prior Team is the team he signed with the last time he was a free agent or whichever team he was last assigned to since he was last a free agent.

[d-train]

Look at the definition of "Prior Team." The only way a player can change his "Prior Team" is through some form of free agency.

I don't see any crucial point to be made about the "prior team" which is always the team the player played with when the contract ran out.

The crucial point is when the contract with the "Prior Team" begins. That is clearly defined by when the "Prior Team" changes. It can only change through a change of teams via free agency.

[DBoys]

Look at the definition of "Prior Team." The only way a player can change his "Prior Team" is through some form of free agency. Otherwise, his team (or his Prior Team) is always the team that has him under contract, or who last had him under contract. And, it doesn't have to be the same team. Teams can transfer player’s contracts and the transfer doesn't constitute a renegotiation of contract.

And thus we are back at the wording should (does?) mean this argument.

No, the wording of the agreement is clear. A player's Prior Team is the team he signed with the last time he was a free agent .....

That is not the definition of Prior Team. Using terms as they are defined makes a difference.

[d-train]

Here it is:

(qq) "Prior Team" means the Team for which a player was last under Contract prior to becoming a Qualifying Veteran Free Agent, Early Qualifying Veteran Free Agent or a Non-Qualifying Veteran Free Agent.

A player can't change his "Prior Team" until he becomes some kind of free agent.

[DBoys]

Here it is:

(qq) "Prior Team" means the Team for which a player was last under Contract prior to becoming a Qualifying Veteran Free Agent, Early Qualifying Veteran Free Agent or a Non-Qualifying Veteran Free Agent.

A player can't change his "Prior Team" until he becomes some kind of free agent.

The definition of a QVFA doesn't talk about a "change of Prior Team" so trying to create such a discussion is simply a diversion to irrelevancy.

A free agent has a defined Prior Team, which is the team when his contract ran out. If he played for that PT for 3 seasons, he is a QVFA. If he didn't play for them for 3 seasons, no dice ...unless he fits into one of two exceptions. It's that simple.

[d-train]

Here it is:

(qq) "Prior Team" means the Team for which a player was last under Contract prior to becoming a Qualifying Veteran Free Agent, Early Qualifying Veteran Free Agent or a Non-Qualifying Veteran Free Agent.

A player can't change his "Prior Team" until he becomes some kind of free agent.

The definition of a QVFA doesn't talk about a "change of Prior Team" so trying to create such a discussion is simply a diversion to irrelevancy.

A free agent has a defined Prior Team, which is the team when his contract ran out. If he played for that PT for 3 seasons, he is a QVFA. If he didn't play for them for 3 seasons, no dice ...unless he fits into one of two exceptions. It's that simple.

It's simple all right. It's all laid out in the CBA.

"Prior Team" is relevant to the definition of "QVFA". The definition of "QVFA" refers to "Prior Team" twice and the references are significant. "Prior Team" is a reference to a period of time that can include more than 1 "Team." "Prior Team" encompasses a contract or series of contracts a player has with 1 or more “Team(s)” between free agency periods.

Here are the defined terms together:

(qq) "Prior Team" means the Team for which a player was last under Contract prior to becoming a Qualifying Veteran Free Agent, Early Qualifying Veteran Free Agent or a Non-Qualifying Veteran Free Agent.

(ss) “Qualifying Veteran Free Agent” means a Veteran Free Agent who, prior to becoming a Veteran Free Agent, played under one or more Player Contracts covering some or all of each of the three preceding Seasons and either played exclusively with his Prior Team during such three Seasons, or, if he played with more than one Team during such period, changed Teams only (i) by means of trade, or (ii) by signing with his Prior Team during the first of the three Seasons.

[DBoys]

(qq) "Prior Team" means the Team for which a player was last under Contract prior to becoming a Qualifying Veteran Free Agent, Early Qualifying Veteran Free Agent or a Non-Qualifying Veteran Free Agent.

"Prior Team" is a reference to a period of time that can include more than 1 "Team." "Prior Team" encompasses a contract or series of contracts a player has with 1 or more “Team(s)” between free agency periods.

No.

"Prior Team" is a reference to a team, not a time period. And by definition it can only refer to a single team, not multiple teams.

A free agent's Prior Team is the team when his contract ran out. If he played for that PT for 3 seasons, he is a QVFA. If he didn't play for them for 3 seasons, no dice ...unless he fits into one of two exceptions. It's that simple.

You're trying hard to make it confusing. It's not.

[d-train]

You can call the "Prior Team" a singular team if you prefer. But, the strict definition of "Prior Team" is the team a player was last under contract prior to becoming a free agent. So, if "Prior Team" is a singular team the player’s last team might be different from his "Prior Team." The players "Prior Team" can only change after the player becomes a free agent.

[d-train]

I can't find where in the CBA a trade is defined, but if the CBA doesn't disqualify a waiver assignment from being a trade, a waiver assignment is a trade.

[DBoys]

I can't find where in the CBA a trade is defined, but if the CBA doesn't disqualify a waiver assignment from being a trade, a waiver assignment is a trade.

“Traded Player” means a player whose Player Contract is assigned by one Team to another Team other than by means of the NBA waiver procedure (including the waiver procedures set forth in Article VII, Section 12(i)).

[DBoys]

You can call the "Prior Team" a singular team if you prefer. But, the strict definition of "Prior Team" is the team a player was last under contract prior to becoming a free agent.

Correct.

So, if "Prior Team" is a singular team the player’s last team might be different from his "Prior Team." The players "Prior Team" can only change after the player becomes a free agent.

Inaccurate. When a player's contract is assigned from one team to another, he becomes "under contract" to the new team.

[d-train]

We are not going to have to wait long to get the arbitrators decision.

It sure didn't take long to have our first controversy over the terms of the CBA. The last one I can remember was years ago, the 2 Chris Dudley cases. The 2nd Dudley case was a genuine controversy but the first was a ploy. The NBA new they were going to lose the first Dudley.

[d-train]

The most interesting thing about this dispute is how there can even be a dispute. The NBA is claiming a significant change from the prior CBA and the union is denying any change. The arbitrator’s first question is going to be how that can happen. How can 2 parties agree to such a massive change and before the ink is dry, one party claims no such agreement occurred.

I hope we learn more than just the arbitrator’s final decision. I would like to know the details of each party’s case.

[DBoys]

The NBA is claiming a significant change from the prior CBA and the union is denying any change..

The NBA is claiming no such thing. Where do you come up with this nonsense?

As a matter of fact, you've outlined it exactly backwards. The NBA says this is the same as it's always been.

Coon's FAQ, for what it's worth, has said the same as the NBA's current stance (that a waiver resets the Bird clock) all the way to 1999, which shows that the generally understood viewpoint over many years has been the same as the NBA's.

[DBoys]

I hope we learn more than just the arbitrator’s final decision. I would like to know the details of each party’s case.

The NBA's case is no mystery. They'll point to the CBA, show what's clearly written there, cite the fact that it's the same rule for years, and perhaps cite Coon's FAQ as evidence that it was generally understood.

I'm not sure what the PA will use as a case ..."We wish it was different"? "We don't like the CBA"? " It looks to me like they're tilting at windmills.

[HartfordWhalers]

The NBA is claiming a significant change from the prior CBA and the union is denying any change..

The NBA is claiming no such thing. Where do you come up with this nonsense?

As a matter of fact, you've outlined it exactly backwards. The NBA says this is the same as it's always been.

Coon's FAQ, for what it's worth, has said the same as the NBA's current stance (that a waiver resets the Bird clock) all the way to 1999, which shows that the generally understood viewpoint over many years has been the same as the NBA's.

The problem with generally understood, is that it assumes anything was generally understood.

In terms of CBA minutia (Lin-sanity aside this is), these things aren't generally understood. Thus the competing views early about which way it might be with Lin.

That said, I think the union will certainly have an uphill battle.

[d-train]

Does anyone know where to get documents like the briefs from both sides?