Ben Simmons, Sixers Reach Confidential Settlement Over 22-23 Wages

[RealGM Wiretap]

The Philadelphia 76ers and Ben Simmons have reached a confidential settlement on the nearly $20 million withheld from his contract last season.

Simmons cited his mental health for the reason his participation in team activities was limited.

The 76ers maintained Simmons was in breach of contract for failing to show up for the start of training camp and refusing to play in preseason and regular season games.

The 76ers traded Simmons to the Brooklyn Nets at last season's deadline.

Via Adrian Wojnarowski/ESPN

[hyberx]

That means he got paid nicely if not the full amount. Dude got the last laugh.

[spree2kawhi]

That means he got paid nicely if not the full amount. Dude got the last laugh.

Or the opposite.

[cam24thomas]

If he didn't get much in the settlement then Philly will probably leak the details
If he got plenty then Philly leaks nothing

[hyberx]

If he didn't get much in the settlement then Philly will probably leak the details
If he got plenty then Philly leaks nothing

Exactly. Simmons wouldn't take this deal unless he's got plenty. The mental issue is the toughest one to prove false and with that kind of money, he will always be able to find some doctors to support his case. Chicken out in the playoff and not being able to take a shot is some form of mental issue too for a basketball player.

[The Hypnotoad]

What a loathsome group of non wanting to play players on that team.

[Pickled Prunes]

If he didn't get much in the settlement then Philly will probably leak the details
If he got plenty then Philly leaks nothing

Then the leak will come from the other side. We will all know before long.

[dougthonus]

If he didn't get much in the settlement then Philly will probably leak the details
If he got plenty then Philly leaks nothing

Then the leak will come from the other side. We will all know before long.

Wouldn't surprise me much if we never find out (or find out in a really long time after no one cares). Depending how it went, there may have been some pretty strict gag orders put in place or penalties for disclosure, and neither side is particularly incentivized to brag about this. It's a bad look for both sides really.

It would be interesting to know what happened because it may have implications for the league in terms of other players claiming they can't play due to mental health. The problem with mental health as a reason for missing time is that it's hard to envision a scenario where his mental health was so debilitated that he couldn't work. Many people struggle with mental health issues (and I absolutely believe Simmons does too), but even in the NBA we have tons of examples of guys struggling with it and showing up.

Beyond whatever mental health stuff he was going through, he was also clearly just mad at the 76ers and didn't want to be there.

[puja21]

If he didn't get much in the settlement then Philly will probably leak the details
If he got plenty then Philly leaks nothing

From the wording, it sounds like Philly was asking for money back from Simmons

e.g.
Simmons was already paid $16.5M of his $33M before the season (so he had 16.5M left)
BUT
"Beginning with Simmons' first paycheck on Nov. 15, Philadelphia began to take back the per-game salary of $360,000 for each game Simmons missed in the season"
82 games x 360K = $29.52M

So, the Sixers wanted to withhold almost $30M but they only had $16.5M left to "not pay"

Simmons filed a grievance seeking $20M in April (who knows why $20M and not $16.5M). This was 6 weeks after he was traded to Brooklyn. CBA language says this was way too late (need to file a grievance within 30 days of the incident)

So it reads like he wanted the rest of his money for not playing and they wanted almost everything they paid him in the offseason returned.

If they meet in the middle no more money changes hands. Settlement could've just been we both agree to let this go.

[rzzzzz]

Watch on YouTube

;t=58s

[Barcs]

If he didn't get much in the settlement then Philly will probably leak the details
If he got plenty then Philly leaks nothing

Same could be said of the Simmons camp. Silly to assume.

[Barcs]

dp

[cam24thomas]

If he didn't get much in the settlement then Philly will probably leak the details
If he got plenty then Philly leaks nothing

Same could be said of the Simmons camp. Silly to assume.

Well we consistently heard a lot of negative things leaked (or made up) about Simmons over the past few months, so I think its fair to assume Philly will leak if there is something that can hurt Simmons

[Pickled Prunes]

If he didn't get much in the settlement then Philly will probably leak the details
If he got plenty then Philly leaks nothing

Then the leak will come from the other side. We will all know before long.

Wouldn't surprise me much if we never find out (or find out in a really long time after no one cares). Depending how it went, there may have been some pretty strict gag orders put in place or penalties for disclosure, and neither side is particularly incentivized to brag about this. It's a bad look for both sides really.

It would be interesting to know what happened because it may have implications for the league in terms of other players claiming they can't play due to mental health. The problem with mental health as a reason for missing time is that it's hard to envision a scenario where his mental health was so debilitated that he couldn't work. Many people struggle with mental health issues (and I absolutely believe Simmons does too), but even in the NBA we have tons of examples of guys struggling with it and showing up.

Beyond whatever mental health stuff he was going through, he was also clearly just mad at the 76ers and didn't want to be there.

I think we will know because it will be a point of emphasis in the next CBA. We already know that Simmons got a big chunk back because he agreed to leave the table.

[dougthonus]

I think we will know because it will be a point of emphasis in the next CBA. We already know that Simmons got a big chunk back because he agreed to leave the table.

Yeah, given he likely had no costs to continue fighting (picked up by his agency or the NBAPA), I'd imagine that you're right. He had to get a good chunk back or would have just kept fighting.

I doubt it will be a point of emphasis in the next CBA, but you never know. I think it's got to happen more than once first. Also teams know that a guy can just Harden it. Show up, be a complete jack ass, not try at all, and they'll just send him home with pay anyway until a trade is worked out.

You simply can't legislate effort, and it's too easy to get yourself banned with pay to worry about trying to close whatever loop hole they think this is. I just can't imagine it's a big enough issue or can be dealt with effectively enough to make it a fight. That said, if they say "mental illness is not an excuse for not showing up except in explicit spelled out cases (like being inpatient somewhere)" and the NBAPA doesn't fight it or view it as much of a chip, then maybe it gets tossed in there.

[Pickled Prunes]

I think we will know because it will be a point of emphasis in the next CBA. We already know that Simmons got a big chunk back because he agreed to leave the table.

Yeah, given he likely had no costs to continue fighting (picked up by his agency or the NBAPA), I'd imagine that you're right. He had to get a good chunk back or would have just kept fighting.

I doubt it will be a point of emphasis in the next CBA, but you never know. I think it's got to happen more than once first. Also teams know that a guy can just Harden it. Show up, be a complete jack ass, not try at all, and they'll just send him home with pay anyway until a trade is worked out.

You simply can't legislate effort, and it's too easy to get yourself banned with pay to worry about trying to close whatever loop hole they think this is. I just can't imagine it's a big enough issue or can be dealt with effectively enough to make it a fight. That said, if they say "mental illness is not an excuse for not showing up except in explicit spelled out cases (like being inpatient somewhere)" and the NBAPA doesn't fight it or view it as much of a chip, then maybe it gets tossed in there.

Well, it hasn't been just once. This was just the longest and most public. The Harden example is the other side of the same coin. Just showing up for work isn't enough for most of us to keep a job. It worked for Haden because HOU was pretty much done with him anyway. They were ready to tank. Draymond has a contract coming up. If he started loafing, jacking up long 3's and throwing the ball away they would bench him without pay almost instantly, or at least they would try. They have something to play for where HOU (after Harden) did not. And that is where player empowerment has gone off the rails. Simmons was empowered because he was a star, but Seth Curry suffers and is now in purgatory because of Simmons' abuse of power. They don't all have power, just those at the top. The players and owners should all be seeking to balance that power out. An NBA version of the "Other 99%."

[dougthonus]

Well, it hasn't been just once. This was just the longest and most public. The Harden example is the other side of the same coin. Just showing up for work isn't enough for most of us to keep a job. It worked for Haden because HOU was pretty much done with him anyway. They were ready to tank. Draymond has a contract coming up. If he started loafing, jacking up long 3's and throwing the ball away they would bench him without pay almost instantly, or at least they would try. They have something to play for where HOU (after Harden) did not. And that is where player empowerment has gone off the rails. Simmons was empowered because he was a star, but Seth Curry suffers and is now in purgatory because of Simmons' abuse of power. They don't all have power, just those at the top. The players and owners should all be seeking to balance that power out. An NBA version of the "Other 99%."

I was speaking specifically of putting in a mental health clause in the CBA doesn't seem like something worth fighting hard for the owners.

As for stars vs owners vs regular players, the stars are the most important facet of the league by far, and so they will wield the most power. That is how it is. No one cares about the other 99% of the players, with the limited number of roster spots and the maximum contract restricting the amount stars can make, the wages of the other 99% are already well above what they would be in a salary capped free market like the NFL.

To me, I think people are upset with star players demanding out and I get why it bothers fans, but I also get why players do it. They want to win because the legacy and narrative around their whole career is also built around winning. I've always felt there is an implicit promise when you have a superstar that you will try to win the NBA title and do what it takes. If you don't, then that guy won't be happy, and if he isn't happy and the team and player aren't on the same page, then just like any company not on the same page with any employee, there is a risk that employee will start mailing it in. Some will, some won't. People are just built different.

I've said this in other threads, but I just don't think this is a problem that a solution exists for. Like if you could make any rule you want and pass it, you still couldn't solve the problem, because you just can't make people care and a player's attitude and makeup is one of the things you have to consider when signing him. There is injury risk, but there is also personality risk. Some guys get the bag and just fall off a cliff.

[Pickled Prunes]

Well, it hasn't been just once. This was just the longest and most public. The Harden example is the other side of the same coin. Just showing up for work isn't enough for most of us to keep a job. It worked for Haden because HOU was pretty much done with him anyway. They were ready to tank. Draymond has a contract coming up. If he started loafing, jacking up long 3's and throwing the ball away they would bench him without pay almost instantly, or at least they would try. They have something to play for where HOU (after Harden) did not. And that is where player empowerment has gone off the rails. Simmons was empowered because he was a star, but Seth Curry suffers and is now in purgatory because of Simmons' abuse of power. They don't all have power, just those at the top. The players and owners should all be seeking to balance that power out. An NBA version of the "Other 99%."

I was speaking specifically of putting in a mental health clause in the CBA doesn't seem like something worth fighting hard for the owners.

As for stars vs owners vs regular players, the stars are the most important facet of the league by far, and so they will wield the most power. That is how it is. No one cares about the other 99% of the players, with the limited number of roster spots and the maximum contract restricting the amount stars can make, the wages of the other 99% are already well above what they would be in a salary capped free market like the NFL.

To me, I think people are upset with star players demanding out and I get why it bothers fans, but I also get why players do it. They want to win because the legacy and narrative around their whole career is also built around winning. I've always felt there is an implicit promise when you have a superstar that you will try to win the NBA title and do what it takes. If you don't, then that guy won't be happy, and if he isn't happy and the team and player aren't on the same page, then just like any company not on the same page with any employee, there is a risk that employee will start mailing it in. Some will, some won't. People are just built different.

I've said this in other threads, but I just don't think this is a problem that a solution exists for. Like if you could make any rule you want and pass it, you still couldn't solve the problem, because you just can't make people care and a player's attitude and makeup is one of the things you have to consider when signing him. There is injury risk, but there is also personality risk. Some guys get the bag and just fall off a cliff.

Well, the other 99% of players care about the other 99% of players, even if no one else does. And there are definitely rules you could put in place to negate this. How about one of these options:

1) A player can not be traded until their final guaranteed year. In that case, a player on a four year deal couldn't be traded until their 4th year. A player on a 3+1 (team or player option) could be traded in their 3rd year.

2) A player can not be traded until half of their guaranteed contract had been fulfilled. In that case, a player on a five year deal would be eligible to trade after 205 games. Injuries and DNP's would count towards that number but playoff games, suspensions and holdout games would not.

Both of these ideas would be hard on teams and players, but it would also give security to both teams and players. Everything is a compromise.

[Barcs]

If he didn't get much in the settlement then Philly will probably leak the details
If he got plenty then Philly leaks nothing

Same could be said of the Simmons camp. Silly to assume.

Well we consistently heard a lot of negative things leaked (or made up) about Simmons over the past few months, so I think its fair to assume Philly will leak if there is something that can hurt Simmons

What did philly leak about Simmons? All we knew is that he was supposedly suffering from mental illness.