Elton Brand is no Carlos Boozer

[sk33]

I've only read the first two pages, but correct me if I'm wrong and nobody has pointed this out. Based on what we know,

Boozer:

1. Cavs try to get a leg up and come to an agreement against league rules to not pick up his 700k option and sign him to an MLE deal instead of waiting and having to pay him big bucks the next year.
2. Boozer gets a monster offer from Utah for tens of millions of dollars more and goes there.

Brand:

1. Brand opts out of his contract.
2. Brand convinces his friend to come play for the Clippers
3. Brand in some way tells the Clippers that if they sign his friend, he will re-sign with them.
4. Clippers now can't pay him quite as much as some other teams, but still a massive amount of money that's 10-20 mil off
5. Brand bolts.

Business is business, but honestly I can't see how anybody who isn't an interested party here (Cavs fans) can argue that what Brand did is 100x worse than Boozer. Boozer was in effect released by his team who tried to get a leg up and got sideswiped. In the Brand situation, it looks like he was pulling the strings, and the the Clippers were an 'innocent' party.

[inmate347]

Boozer:

1. Boozer comes to the Cavs and tells them he doesn't want to play another year for the league minimum and wants to get a big paycheck now

2. Cavs tell Boozer that they need to exercise the team option on his contract and wait a year to offer him a contract higher than the mle (all parties are aware that Boozer can get more money on the open market)

3. Boozer tells the Cavs that he is willing to take a smaller deal for the mle now rather than wait a year for a larger contract

4. Cavs agree to not pick up the team option and Boozer agrees to sign for the mle (Cavs get a great player for under market value and Boozer gets more money immediately and the security of a long contract)

5. Boozer signs with Utah for more than the Cavs could offer (the Cavs lose a great player that they could have kept another year for the league minimum and offered whatever they wanted after the season because they trusted Boozer)


That is how it all went down with Boozer. While making the deal with the Cavs did violate league rules, these rules are all but ignored by every team in the league and in all likelihood Utah also violated the rules by having contact with Boozer (or his agent) while all of this was happening. The reason so many free agents agree to deals so quickly after the negotiating period begins is because every team in the league has contact with players (or their representatives) prior to the negotiating period.

[eatyourchildren]

After hearing what Dunleavy had to say, I find him and Boozer to be on similar levels of despicability.


Look, the Clippers and Cavs both had something to gain from offering Boozer and Brand what they offered. That's indisputable. But that doesn't make them [the franchises] bad guys. THAT'S WHAT A BARGAIN IS. both sides are supposed to gain.

You guys are acting like parties that are deep pockets are somehow more culpable because they are richer. You would be the same jury that awarded some lady some crazy windfall sum of money for spilling mcdonald's coffee in her lap. boohoo corporate america. Parties in contract/bargain should get what they reasonably expect. The only mistake the Clippers and Cavs made was not getting that stuff in writing. They paid the price for believing in honesty.

Boozer wanted early money, so the bargain would be that the Cavs would sign him on a cheaper contract (than what would happen if he stayed an extra year under his rookie deal)

Brand wanted better teammtes, so the bargain would be that the Clips sign him on a cheaper contract (to be able to sign Davis to a big one as well).

What both guys did was renege on a handshake agreement. Sure, that's legal, but also sleazy when you don't give the other party notice of that fact.

Sports lawyers (agents) are sleazy. Nuff said.

[jazzfan1971]

I think if you give your word you should honor it. Even if that means leaving millions of dollars on the table.

Now, I can't say for certain if either of these guys had a clear verbal deal in place, with a handshake. But, it would seem to me that the organizations acted as though they had a deal in place.

I think probably both Boozer and Brand are guilty of dishonoring thier word.

Not what I'd do, personally, but, it's really not that surprising in todays world.

[BubbaTee]

Loyalty in professional sports is so damn overratted. And this is coming from a Heat fan who had to watch Zo in his prime retire, be in the Heat's payroll as a maxed out player, miss 2 of the next 3 years, then bolt to NJ, for what was at the time, a better chance at a ring. I understoond he had to do what's best for him, and welcomed him back as a fan with open arms.

Get over the "loyalty" in pro sports! There is none on the ownership side or player side.. it's a freeking business man..

Fine, forget about loyalty in business.

What about loyalty to your friends, eg Brand's "friend" Baron Davis? Are they also to be lied to, in order to pad one's already fatter than 99% of the world wallet? I guess with "friends" like that, who needs enemies?

[jman3134]

I fall under the camp that believes Brand did the wrong thing to the Clippers organization. Just because the LA Clips have been one of the most losing franchises does not mean that they somehow deserved to be treated this way. If you agree to a contract, it would be nice to honor it....because your word should hold some value to you. Instead, people seem to have lost this sense these days- honor, loyalty and the like do not really hold much value in the money driven society that we live in.

[MartyConlonJr]

Elton Brand, Carlos Boozer, LA Clippers and Cleveland Cavaliers are all partially scum in my book. I know all 4 did something dodgy in all of their discussions. Any one defending any of the 4 is likely to either be a fan of the team that lost the player, or the team the player is on now. If I had to rate them, it would probably go

1. Cavaliers - illegal salary cap circumvention
2. Boozer - obviously misled the Cavs to get out of contract
3 - tied. Brand/Falk and the Clippers. Clippers are terrible negotiators, Brand is a puppet, and Falk is an egotistical idiot.

[eatyourchildren]

Elton Brand, Carlos Boozer, LA Clippers and Cleveland Cavaliers are all partially scum in my book. I know all 4 did something dodgy in all of their discussions. Any one defending any of the 4 is likely to either be a fan of the team that lost the player, or the team the player is on now. If I had to rate them, it would probably go

1. Cavaliers - illegal salary cap circumvention
2. Boozer - obviously misled the Cavs to get out of contract
3 - tied. Brand/Falk and the Clippers. Clippers are terrible negotiators, Brand is a puppet, and Falk is an egotistical idiot.

Being a bad negotiator doesn't make you scum. Clippers are still a profitable franchise (i think) because of the NBA revenue sharing rules.


Brand had every right to now be on the Clippers next year. It's the fact that he agreed to be, and then covertly did the opposite, that makes it bad. Clips had no notice, no opportunity to even try to trade him before his contract was up.

[MartyConlonJr]

^ well, they still admitted to contacting Brand directly, it's bad negotiating and possibly more if there is an illegal element to speaking to players with registered agents. All I'm saying is no party is totally innocent.

1. Cavs should have taken the option for 695,000 and ponied up a year later, no agent/player would ever blame a team for it.

2. Boozer either should have manned up to the contract's third year or played for what he agreed to (despite the fact the whole deal was illegal and he could get away without it.

3. Clippers should have just offered Brand what they could.

4. Falk shouldn't have ignored the Clippers calls, Brand should have forced his agent to reach out a bit.

I don't feel sorry for any of them. They all screwed up.