the lockout and suspensions

[snaquille oatmeal]

I have a question about the lockout and suspensions.
for argument's sake let's talk about Andrew Bynum. he is suspended for next seasons first five games without pay. The NBA scheduled all the games for next season already, but if the owners lockout forces the season to be cancelled would Bynum's suspension be served because he was not allowed to play and was not paid? while the answer may seen obvious and that is that he would have to serve his suspension the following season. it just doesn't seem right since it is not a players strike, but an owners lockout. I guess a good lawyer could make a decent argument, but that's just me talking out of my butt. does anybody know what the rules or protocols are regarding the lockout and suspensions?

[34Dayz]

I have no idea but I'd assume he would serve the 5 game suspension whenever the lockout ends / season resumes.

[snaquille oatmeal]

It's funny that it seems natural to assumed that he would serve after the lockout ends, but technically at the start of the upcoming scheduled games he is under contract and he would be ready to fulfill his end of the contract and serve his his suspension as ordered by the NBA, but the owners are telling no he can't serve his suspension during scheduled games.

[spacemonkey]

I thought that players are no longer officially under contract until a new CBA agreement is reached. Since the contract was signed under the terms of the original CBA, now that that CBA no longer exists, the contract is null and cannot be enforced?

Am I being a huge idiot here?

[SheedsWeed]

I have no idea but I'd assume he would serve the 5 game suspension whenever the lockout ends / season resumes.

This is my guess too. I know what you're saying though snaquille.

[34Dayz]

Yea you have a good point Snaq but I think it would sort of undermine the league as a whole and make them look a bit silly if they didn't enforce it and allowed Bynum to get off on a technicality especially considering what he was suspended for.

Maybe if it was for just getting too many technicals or something petty they would let it go but on a hard flagrant I doubt it.

@Spacemonkey : Pretty sure all current contracts are guaranteed so they will need to be paid regardless.

[snaquille oatmeal]

that's is a good point, but I seem to recall that there was some sort of rush to sign new contracts under the old CBA because those terms would carry over after the CBA. Then again I talking out of my butt because I really don't know the details about the in-between CBAs rules.

[NOODLESTYLE]

I would think whenever the first 5 games are actually played after the lockout is when he'll be suspended. He is under contract, but as someone already mentioned, during the lockout no players get paid so contracts aren't being counted.

Unless you were thinking of something like, Bynum decides to play overseas during the lockout and continues to stay for the 1st 5 games when the lockout is over to try and see if he can serve the 5 game suspension that way.

[snaquille oatmeal]

I would think whenever the first 5 games are actually played after the lockout is when he'll be suspended. He is under contract, but as someone already mentioned, during the lockout no players get paid so contracts aren't being counted.

Unless you were thinking of something like, Bynum decides to play overseas during the lockout and continues to stay for the 1st 5 games when the lockout is over to try and see if he can serve the 5 game suspension that way.

by that logic if a players contract expires in 2013 and the entire 11-12 season is cancelled then that players contract would expire in 2014?

[NOODLESTYLE]

I would think whenever the first 5 games are actually played after the lockout is when he'll be suspended. He is under contract, but as someone already mentioned, during the lockout no players get paid so contracts aren't being counted.

Unless you were thinking of something like, Bynum decides to play overseas during the lockout and continues to stay for the 1st 5 games when the lockout is over to try and see if he can serve the 5 game suspension that way.

by that logic if a players contract expires in 2013 and the entire 11-12 season is cancelled then that players contract would expire in 2014?

No what I meant was the contracts aren't being honored, but it wouldn't skip an entire year. If the lockout continues into November, none of the players are playing anyways so Bynum isn't really fulfilling suspension.

[snaquille oatmeal]

the games aren't being played because of an owners lockout not because of a league lockout. it is the league that suspended the player, it is the league that scheduled the games, the player is ready to serve his suspension, but it is the owners that are saying no games. all I'm saying is that there is an argument to be made in this topic. I wish there was some sort of reliable and clear place were we could read up on the facts and terms of the lock out.

[spacemonkey]

that's is a good point, but I seem to recall that there was some sort of rush to sign new contracts under the old CBA because those terms would carry over after the CBA. Then again I talking out of my butt because I really don't know the details about the in-between CBAs rules.

That's also a good point.

Interesting.

[Tommy Udo 6]

I would think this will be covered in the new CBA. it will have a clause about suspensions under the old CBA being carried forward

Logically, it will be the first 5 games of the season after the lock out since the point is to deny him his salary. He doesnt get paid for games that are not played due to lockout