RealGM

chitowndish wrote:I guess if the NBA knows enough to tell people that they want to make an example out of us I really wish they wouldn’t wait a month to get on with it. I agree though my main concern was the Ball trade falls through, the penalty prevents the DD trade and we lose Zach in FA and then have no draft picks. It sounds like they are going to make an example with us but if it’s one FRP and a significant financial penalty it sucks but I can deal with it. We could trade back into the late first round if we need.

I am really glad to see the Ball signing go through I don’t think they would have finalized it if the NBA was just going to unwind it so I think this indicates the trade will stand. All of the smoke about them gearing up to make an example of us kind of sucks though but whatever if it’s heavy financial and up to a FRP I can deal with it. Hopefully they don’t go the FRP route though I think that is pretty severe but it does sound like they want to make an example of us so I wouldn’t be surprised.

bad knees wrote:

Betta Bulleavit wrote:

bad knees wrote:The Pels were a victim of the Bulls’ tampering, but they at least were able to get something out of it and, by participating in the trade, actually facilitated the Bulls’ tampering.That, I think, is why Marks talks about the Pels being in trouble in his video. The other victims were the teams that wanted Lonzo but could claim that they were denied that opportunity by the Bulls jumping the gun. I am inclined to think that one of those teams is the complainant here. Or maybe the NBA initiated the investigation on its own in light of the 5:00 pm tweet announcing the deal. The NBA would look like fools if they did not investigate in that circumstance.

How do you know that the Pelicans were somehow “victims” in all of this? If they truly felt that tampering had occurred, they could have blown the whistle and not even engaged in any talks with the Bulls as the league was investigating. Yet they not only agreed to a deal but finalized it. At this point, it feels like you are actively hoping that the Bulls get nailed regardless of how much (or little) we know.

Huh? The Pels were victims because they benefit from the no gun-jumping rules that could create a multi-team bidding war for Lonzo. The Bulls undercut that right by jumping the gun. Then the Pels decided that the best thing to do was to go along. They can be both a victim and a perpetrator.

And my statement had nothing to do with the Bulls and even less than my hopes for what happens to them. I was just addressing the question of how the investigation started. Of course, I hope the Bulls get off scot free. But based on the facts, I don't think that this will happen, and I am annoyed that AKME put the team that I root for into this position.

WindyCityBorn wrote:

bad knees wrote:

Betta Bulleavit wrote:How do you know that the Pelicans were somehow “victims” in all of this? If they truly felt that tampering had occurred, they could have blown the whistle and not even engaged in any talks with the Bulls as the league was investigating. Yet they not only agreed to a deal but finalized it. At this point, it feels like you are actively hoping that the Bulls get nailed regardless of how much (or little) we know.

Huh? The Pels were victims because they benefit from the no gun-jumping rules that could create a multi-team bidding war for Lonzo. The Bulls undercut that right by jumping the gun. Then the Pels decided that the best thing to do was to go along. They can be both a victim and a perpetrator.

And my statement had nothing to do with the Bulls and even less than my hopes for what happens to them. I was just addressing the question of how the investigation started. Of course, I hope the Bulls get off scot free. But based on the facts, I don't think that this will happen, and I am annoyed that AKME put the team that I root for into this position.

What evidence other than the deal being announce soon quickly?

bad knees wrote:

WindyCityBorn wrote:

bad knees wrote:
Huh? The Pels were victims because they benefit from the no gun-jumping rules that could create a multi-team bidding war for Lonzo. The Bulls undercut that right by jumping the gun. Then the Pels decided that the best thing to do was to go along. They can be both a victim and a perpetrator.

And my statement had nothing to do with the Bulls and even less than my hopes for what happens to them. I was just addressing the question of how the investigation started. Of course, I hope the Bulls get off scot free. But based on the facts, I don't think that this will happen, and I am annoyed that AKME put the team that I root for into this position.

What evidence other than the deal being announce soon quickly?

Press reports in the days leading up to the draft quoting sources about Lonzo going to the Bulls for four years and more than $80 million. Which is exactly what happened at 5:00 pm when FA opened.

bad knees wrote:

WindyCityBorn wrote:

bad knees wrote:
Huh? The Pels were victims because they benefit from the no gun-jumping rules that could create a multi-team bidding war for Lonzo. The Bulls undercut that right by jumping the gun. Then the Pels decided that the best thing to do was to go along. They can be both a victim and a perpetrator.

And my statement had nothing to do with the Bulls and even less than my hopes for what happens to them. I was just addressing the question of how the investigation started. Of course, I hope the Bulls get off scot free. But based on the facts, I don't think that this will happen, and I am annoyed that AKME put the team that I root for into this position.

What evidence other than the deal being announce soon quickly?

Press reports in the days leading up to the draft quoting sources about Lonzo going to the Bulls for four years and more than $80 million. Which is exactly what happened at 5:00 pm when FA opened.

WindyCityBorn wrote:

bad knees wrote:

WindyCityBorn wrote:
What evidence other than the deal being announce soon quickly?

Press reports in the days leading up to the draft quoting sources about Lonzo going to the Bulls for four years and more than $80 million. Which is exactly what happened at 5:00 pm when FA opened.

That’s not evidence that can be used against us. Hearsay.

Magilla_Gorilla wrote:

bad knees wrote:

WindyCityBorn wrote:
What evidence other than the deal being announce soon quickly?

Press reports in the days leading up to the draft quoting sources about Lonzo going to the Bulls for four years and more than $80 million. Which is exactly what happened at 5:00 pm when FA opened.

Wasn't that the max contract the Bulls could offer?

bad knees wrote:

WindyCityBorn wrote:

bad knees wrote:
Press reports in the days leading up to the draft quoting sources about Lonzo going to the Bulls for four years and more than $80 million. Which is exactly what happened at 5:00 pm when FA opened.

That’s not evidence that can be used against us. Hearsay.

This is not a court of law. There are no rules of evidence. The NBA gets to decide what the standard of proof is and what evidence to consider.

WindyCityBorn wrote:

bad knees wrote:

WindyCityBorn wrote:

That’s not evidence that can be used against us. Hearsay.

This is not a court of law. There are no rules of evidence. The NBA gets to decide what the standard of proof is and what evidence to consider.

That level of flimsy evidence will not be enough.

bad knees wrote:

WindyCityBorn wrote:

bad knees wrote:
Press reports in the days leading up to the draft quoting sources about Lonzo going to the Bulls for four years and more than $80 million. Which is exactly what happened at 5:00 pm when FA opened.

That’s not evidence that can be used against us. Hearsay.

This is not a court of law. There are no rules of evidence. The NBA gets to decide what the standard of proof is and what evidence to consider.

StunnerKO wrote:

Read on Twitter

?s=21

kulaz3000 wrote:I mean, what's taking them so long to put down a ruling? What are they waiting for? If you're going to take picks, take them. I'm just asking why it's taking them so long? Do they need to come up with a valid reason that EVERYONE talks to agents, teams and players well before the actual time when they are supposed to, but they simply don't want certain transactions announced publicly, because it's a stupid rule to begin with.

I mean, c'mon NBA. You can't punish teams for hush hush rules which you have no real intention of truly enforcing. Just like how you don't enforce legitimate play-calling by your referees, most fans know this but we still buy-in to the sceptical and fun, just let it be. This entire situation is just such nonsense.

HomoSapien wrote:

kulaz3000 wrote:I mean, what's taking them so long to put down a ruling? What are they waiting for? If you're going to take picks, take them. I'm just asking why it's taking them so long? Do they need to come up with a valid reason that EVERYONE talks to agents, teams and players well before the actual time when they are supposed to, but they simply don't want certain transactions announced publicly, because it's a stupid rule to begin with.

I mean, c'mon NBA. You can't punish teams for hush hush rules which you have no real intention of truly enforcing. Just like how you don't enforce legitimate play-calling by your referees, most fans know this but we still buy-in to the sceptical and fun, just let it be. This entire situation is just such nonsense.

Apparently the Bucks investigation lasted a month.

Kurt Heimlich wrote:I made the "no first round pick to take" joke on page one of this thread, but I'm going to laugh (out of bitter rage) if we become the first team to violate the Steipen rule bc of a tampering penalty.

andyhop wrote:

Kurt Heimlich wrote:I made the "no first round pick to take" joke on page one of this thread, but I'm going to laugh (out of bitter rage) if we become the first team to violate the Steipen rule bc of a tampering penalty.

The Timberwolves beat you to that honour thanks to Joe Smith