Darius Miles & the CBA

[Village Idiot]

Thanks for the info.

I'm pretty sure my disability wouldn't pay if I went back to work and was making money.

Yeah, but this is applies & oranges. In the case of disability insurance, YOU are the insured. You aren't receiving money from your employer as a result of your disability, so the insurance company is reimbursing you. In the NBA case, the player is still making money from the team. It's the TEAM that is the insured -- the insurance company is reimbursing the team for money they're paying the player.

Isn't the team the beneficiary and the player the insured part. Somebody earlier in thre thread stated that the league's insurance company can deny up to 6 player and some number of body parts as part of the insurance agreement. That would mean that the league is the payer, the player is the insured, and the teams or players the beneficiary.

[Dekko1]

Assuming the insurance company won't insure Darius and further what happens under the following scenario?

I assume he will be insured... They get to exclude only 20 players out of about 420, 6 totally and 14 player's risky body parts.
Excluding Amare's knee with a 73 million dollar contract is likely, Miles 1.1 mil knee unlikely.
The insurance does not kick in until after 41 games missed. Then pays 80%

1. Darius plays 11 games and then has another career-ending injury

Likely it is a non-guaranteed contract and the celts just waive him for that end... while it triggers the blazers original contract amount of 9 mil going back on portland's cap.

2. Darius loses the millions the insurance company would otherwise be paying him because his playing voided the insurance payments.

The insurance is or has already paid off the portland contract. That was the contract then insured. Whether or not he can fulfill his celts contract should be separate.

3. Portland is still has a tax-hold on their portion of his salary

More to 'again'. They avoided the tax last year with Miles off the cap.
They should be barely under the tax line without miles... about 8 over with miles.
So throw in what they would have got back.

4. Boston still has to pay a quite a bit of cash for a useless player
5. The league still has to pay a portion of Darius' salary for the vet minimum

I doubt they give him a guaranteed contract. If that is so If he gets hurt before Jan they can just waive him.
If he got hurt say in mid Jan. I think the celts remaining share of the vets minimum should be something under 400K and the leagues under 200k. Insurance would have no effect unless more than 41 games were left.

But that leads me to another question about how the insurance is divided... I will post it separately.

6. The insurance company walks away from a huge obligation.

As answered by Larry it was portland's contract that was insured

Unless my understanding of the facts and my insurance assumption is wrong the only party that benefits financially from Darius suiting up again is the insurance company.

There is always Miles agent. =) Also the Blazers got at least one year of barely falling under the tax threshold saving almost 9 mil plus add in the amount received by being under.

How much did teams under the tax get this year?

[LarryCoon]

How much did teams under the tax get this year?

$3,081,807

[Dekko1]

How much did teams under the tax get this year?

$3,081,807

Thanx.

Now I can quit guessing. =)

[Dekko1]

I do not see my first try, sorry if this comes up twice.

I have more insurance questions....

While it is the league's group insurance do the teams pay the premiums or is it provided out of league funds....and if the team is it by the contracts or some averaged amount or per mil per year?

With the team and league each paying part of the vets minimum does the team pay the total salary and the league reimburse it?
I was wondering how it works if the insurance is paying 80%. While I assume the league just reimburses the 20% of their share to the team....

I had this idea it might be another good incentive to keep teams signing minimum veterans if their total share or most of it was insured and the league self insured its part.

RIP Duck

[chakdaddy]

I am talking of simple language usage of the term being misleading to the rule's time frame.
The doctors test is to decide "contract-ending" disability lasting one year not "career-ending".

Unlike the same 'one season' time period for the exception where the word 'disabled' works fine.

You think so??? I think the fact that the doctor's test can be trumped by a player coming back testifies that the test is intended to confirm a career-ending prognosis, NOT to decide "contract-ending after one year" or whatever we're calling a career ending injury that is not "a real career ender."

I still think that the 1 year is not really material to the defintion of career ending injury - that it's just a waiting period to allow more accuracy in the doctor's prognosis and perhaps to keep the team from getting too immediate and too generous a windfall.

[FGump]

2. Darius loses the millions the insurance company would otherwise be paying him because his playing voided the insurance payments.

The insurance is or has already paid off the portland contract.

I doubt that's accurate. Undoubtedly Miles is getting payments gradually, not in a lump sum. An insurance company won't pay until there is a loss, ie until the Blazers are out of pocket for money paid to an injured player.

But even if Miles had been paid in full, there's no reason the insurance company can't come back and reclaim that payment, if it is later proven that the player was NOT permanently injured after all. Their stance would be, ""Nope, that's a payoff that ultimately proved to be for a bad/waived contract, not on an injured player."

If Miles proves to be able to play, It probably won't be publicly known if it voided any future insurance payoffs (and perhaps even recouped past ones already paid out based on the "Miles' career is over" diagnosis), but it would logically seem to be the case.

6. The insurance company walks away from a huge obligation.

As answered by Larry it was portland's contract that was insured.

"Who was the insured" is completely irrelevant to the point being made, and chakdaddy is right on point. If Miles voids the payment of insurance proceeds in playing, by demonstrating he isnt actually injured, the ins co comes out way ahead.

That should be easy and obvious to see.

Unless my understanding of the facts and my insurance assumption is wrong the only party that benefits financially from Darius suiting up again is the insurance company.

There is always Miles agent. =) Also the Blazers got at least one year of barely falling under the tax threshold saving almost 9 mil plus add in the amount received by being under.

The Blazers are NOT benefiting by Miles suiting up again. The fact that they had a prior benefit is not germane to the current evaluation being given by chakdaddy, because that benefit (of avoiding his cap/tax hit last year) is already settled no matter what.

The beneficiaries of Miles playing again are:
Miles by getting a bit of new money, as does his agent.
The insurance company might reap a windfall.
And the Blazers competition benefits in seeing Portland's spending room lessened considerably for a couple of years.

Assuming the insurance company won't insure Darius and further what happens under the following scenario?

I assume he will be insured... They get to exclude only 20 players out of about 420, 6 totally and 14 player's risky body parts.
Excluding Amare's knee with a 73 million dollar contract is likely, Miles 1.1 mil knee unlikely.
The insurance does not kick in until after 41 games missed. Then pays 80%

A blind assumption being made in this discussion is that Miles' Portland contract or knee was not an excluded one.

[FGump]

I still think that the 1 year is not really material to the defintion of career ending injury - that it's just a waiting period to allow more accuracy in the doctor's prognosis and perhaps to keep the team from getting too immediate and too generous a windfall.

Agree 100%.

The DOCTOR is who defines "career ending" injury, not the waiting period.

The waiting period is like the exclusion period on a disability policy, in that the team still is going to incur SOME cap consequences rather than be made whole. That discourages funny business to a degree, in that even if there is some impairment, it's still in the team's best interest to have the player playing rather than have him declared unfit.

And as you note, the waiting period also does help verify the doc's diagnosis, giving a bit of a "buffer" to protect the rest of the league from a faulty diagnosis being able to lead to an immediate competitive advantage.

[Dekko1]

I am talking of simple language usage of the term being misleading to the rule's time frame.
The doctors test is to decide "contract-ending" disability lasting one year not "career-ending".

Unlike the same 'one season' time period for the exception where the word 'disabled' works fine.

You think so??? I think the fact that the doctor's test can be trumped by a player coming back testifies that the test is intended to confirm a career-ending prognosis, NOT to decide "contract-ending after one year" or whatever we're calling a career ending injury that is not "a real career ender."

I still think that the 1 year is not really material to the defintion of career ending injury - that it's just a waiting period to allow more accuracy in the doctor's prognosis and perhaps to keep the team from getting too immediate and too generous a windfall.

I am just talking about language...plain dictionary stuff.

'Career ending'...what comes to mind outside of the CBA?
Secretariat's Jockey Ron Turcotte suffered a career ending injury when he broke his back and was confined to a wheelchair for life.

How is it structured in the alternate universe of the cba?
League doctors offer an opinion that Miles will not be able to play next season.


Gump pointed it out about the term retirement as used in NBA speak as we have to translate...

[Dekko1]

2. Darius loses the millions the insurance company would otherwise be paying him because his playing voided the insurance payments.

The insurance is or has already paid off the portland contract.

I doubt that's accurate. Undoubtedly Miles is getting payments gradually, not in a lump sum.

Yes guess I should have used "is paying (or from some report I saw) has already paid off the portland contract".

An insurance company won't pay until there is a loss, ie until the Blazers are out of pocket for money paid to an injured player.

But even if Miles had been paid in full, there's no reason the insurance company can't come back and reclaim that payment, if it is later proven that the player was NOT permanently injured after all. Their stance would be, ""Nope, that's a payoff that ultimately proved to be for a bad/waived contract, not on an injured player. If Miles proves to be able to play, It probably won't be publicly known if it voided any future insurance payoffs (and perhaps even recouped past ones already paid out based on the "Miles' career is over" diagnosis), but it would logically seem to be the case."

I do not know if it has already been paid, I was surprised when I saw that reported too.

I do not know if they have to pay it back but I can see an argument that as Portland is still out of Miles services from his injury and followed procedure no matter if he plays again or not.
Depending on how clearly the policy is written I can see either side taking it to arbrtration.

I also formed my opinion partly because a reporter said in an email exchange with me two years ago they did not have to pay it back and said Patterson insisted that was right about the insurance.

"I'm told that if Miles even comes back from the injury... let's even say a year from now... in a miraculous recovery... the team would not owe retro pay, but the salary would go back on the cap.

So just now I saw his blog from a few days ago and he now says they do.
http://blog.oregonlive.com/johncanzano/ ... age_t.html
"The Blazers would also have to pick up the tab for the money the insurance company paid on his "career-ending injury" should he be able to play 10 games next season for any NBA team."

Not that Canzano is known as a great source on the cap stuff....or much else... Knowing Canzano it may be some 3rd thingy. =)

There is always Miles agent. =) Also the Blazers got at least one year of barely falling under the tax threshold saving almost 9 mil plus add in the amount received by being under.

The Blazers are NOT benefiting by Miles suiting up again. The fact that they had a prior benefit is not germane to the current evaluation being given by chakdaddy, because that benefit (of avoiding his cap/tax hit last year) is already settled no matter what.[/quote]

That was an aside from the question I answered, and it was not chakdaddy's post I was answering.

If you are right on the insurance going away for the blazers then...

The blazers choices were to gamble on not having to pay 26 million against the 12 mil they saved for sure, against if Miles plays 10 games...
Miles plays and they pay 14.4 million more of Miles on salary, plus 12 in tax paid and the lost return next summer.
Balance of minus 14.4 mil. difference from if the gamble fails.

But if they had kept him and refused to play him as per their doc's orders (and to keep fans happy) they kept the 14.4 mil in insurance payments over the next two years, but lost the 12 mil from last years tax and return, and knew they would have the 11 to 12 mil difference in tax next year (assuming they signed everyone they have except jackson)
Balance of minus 9.6 difference.

So the gamble was -4.8 million risk for a potential plus 26 mil difference if he does not play
....if I have the math close to right...

The beneficiaries of Miles playing again are:
Miles by getting a bit of new money, as does his agent.
The insurance company might reap a windfall.
And the Blazers competition benefits in seeing Portland's spending room lessened considerably for a couple of years.

And by paying 9 million in tax next summer instead of getting 3 mil. the teams under the tax benefit financially by perhaps a few hundred K.

I assume he will be insured... They get to exclude only 20 players out of about 420, 6 totally and 14 player's risky body parts.
Excluding Amare's knee with a 73 million dollar contract is likely, Miles 1.1 mil knee unlikely.
The insurance does not kick in until after 41 games missed. Then pays 80%

A blind assumption being made in this discussion is that Miles' Portland contract or knee was not an excluded one.

Blurry at least...

2 years ago I asked that of canzano also and he answered:
From: <JohnCanzano@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2006 18:34:08 EST
Subject: Re: Miles and the cap

"Well... I don't have time to call the league office again... but I'm assured by Patterson that Miles is covered."

When he signed his portland contract he had not been injured much and had missed only 3 games the season before, no reason to exclude him that I can see. The knee injury was halfway though the next season.

[FGump]

Dekko, no one is questioning whether the Blazers had something to gain by getting the original diagnosis and exemption on Miles. Obviously it was "found money" to them when he was excluded. Now the only question is, will they have to give some of their windfall back? But they are playing with house money, so to speak, no matter what happens.

As to whether he is insured, if someone already asked the question of Blazers mgmt as to whether Miles was insured and they said yes, I see no reason to question it. I expect Portland's media to be able to ask questions and report the results reliably.

Where I would be skeptical is if they hadn't even asked the questions and just said it was so. In the times I have read their work, I've repeatedly concluded that Portland media is dumb as a box of rocks on cap issues, as historically I've seen them often strew cap-impossible "facts" into print when discussing what's supposedly going on. So to the extent they are giving their own assumptions and analysis rather than asking questions, I'm leery of the reliability of the result.

[chakdaddy]

In the times I have read their work, I've repeatedly concluded that Portland media is dumb as a box of rocks on cap issues, as historically I've seen them often strew cap-impossible "facts" into print when discussing what's supposedly going on. So to the extent they are giving their own assumptions and analysis rather than asking questions, I'm leery of the reliability of the result.

I don't think that's unique to Portland media!!!

[Dekko1]

Dekko, no one is questioning whether the Blazers had something to gain by getting the original diagnosis and exemption on Miles. Obviously it was "found money" to them when he was excluded. Now the only question is, will they have to give some of their windfall back? But they are playing with house money, so to speak, no matter what happens.

I know.. I just did the math to see how big of a gamble it was compared to keeping him on the books.

As to whether he is insured, if someone already asked the question of Blazers mgmt as to whether Miles was insured and they said yes, I see no reason to question it. I expect Portland's media to be able to ask questions and report the results reliably.

Except he twice claimed sources and in that old email exchange he said the blazers told him they did not have to pay it back...now he says they do. Either he had it then or has it now backwards... or one of the blazers powers-that-be did so.
I will take Canzano for 100 alex...

The more recent one supports your side.... I will check with him again for what it is worth, he should be back from china.

Where I would be skeptical is if they hadn't even asked the questions and just said it was so. In the times I have read their work, I've repeatedly concluded that Portland media is dumb as a box of rocks on cap issues, as historically I've seen them often strew cap-impossible "facts" into print when discussing what's supposedly going on. So to the extent they are giving their own assumptions and analysis rather than asking questions, I'm leery of the reliability of the result.

Even when JC claims a source he seems to screw it up anyway... ...I do not think he understands what the GM is saying...

I really should not have even bothered with using him, but I remember part that and that was likely why I had leaned my opinion on...but then later after laughing though that whole old exchange I thought... oh dear... never mind...


<Edit: Snipped the exchange ...funny stuff but decided better of it>

[Dekko1]

Sorry... I thought of another question....
If Miles played say 12 games for Boston and it goes on the blazers cap and then the same injury flared up and he was forced to quit...

Can the Blazers still re-apply for the next season for the doctors to re exam him one year after he was waived... or does the clock reset and they have to wait for a year after his last game played for the celts?



"How should we Democrats select the next presidential nominee?
Smoke filled rooms? Brokered convention? National primary?
Personally, I prefer jump shots from the top of the key."
--Bill Bradley

[Dunkenstein]

The CBA states: "After a player’s Salary for one (1) or more Salary Cap Years has been included in Team Salary in accordance with this Section 4(h)(4), the player’s Team shall be permitted at the appropriate time to re-apply to have the player’s Salary (for each Salary Cap Year remaining at the time of the re-application) excluded from Team Salary in accordance with the rules set forth in this Section 4(h)."

My interpretation is that the Blazers could re-apply to have Miles's 09-10 salary removed from their team salary on the first anniversary of his last game as a Celtic.

[FGump]

The CBA states: "After a player’s Salary for one (1) or more Salary Cap Years has been included in Team Salary in accordance with this Section 4(h)(4), the player’s Team shall be permitted at the appropriate time to re-apply to have the player’s Salary (for each Salary Cap Year remaining at the time of the re-application) excluded from Team Salary in accordance with the rules set forth in this Section 4(h)."

My interpretation is that the Blazers could re-apply to have Miles's 09-10 salary removed from their team salary on the first anniversary of his last game as a Celtic.

As to "the appropriate time to re-apply" in the text cited by Dunk, the CBA further says ...

"...the career-ending injury or illness of a player who plays in more than ten (10) games in any Season shall not be deemed to have occurred prior to the last game in which the player played in such Season."

"Beginning on the first anniversary of the injury or illness, the Team may apply to the NBA to have the player’s Salary for each remaining Salary Cap Year covered by the Contract excluded from Team Salary."

That wording supports Dunk's interpretation that the re-application would have to be on or after the 1st anniversary of Miles' last game (of the last season in which he plays 11+).

[Dekko1]

Thanks guys.
And since Miles has two seasons left on his contract it would become moot.

Past the blazers....
I think if that happened, especially if he only played a very few total minutes that would, instead of proving he could play at the NBA level as originally intended by the CBA... it actually showed he could not have fulfilled the original contract because of the injury...
So if they keep the performance test they might decide to take a look at changing the criteria for it going back on the cap in the next CBAs? Say (throwing out a number) make it 10 games or 300 minutes whichever comes last.

So if he plays 10 games and the insurance company is truly off the hook and the team owners want to adjust the rule...
If it does kick out the insurance also it is obviously tied to the CBA rule.

In a negotiation on the next CBA between the NBA/NBPA the insurance company has a proven interest. So that also makes me wonder...
I know I am likely asking just for opinion/speculation...

In a negotiation between the NBA/NBPA for a new CBA do you think the insurance company gets to have any input on rules that effect their interests past lobbying for them?

[FGump]

The insurance company doesn't set your course as a company. But your premiums and your coverage options will be determined by what choices you make, so they obviously might be consulted to determine the ramifications of the alternatives being negotiated.

But your what-if as pertains to insurance doesn't reflect the situation. It makes the consequences of the current course more dire than they actually are, and I'm not sure they require a change.

You say, "If he plays 10 games and the insurance company is truly off the hook ..." with the implied assumption that he's only playing 11, rather than with the assumption that he is well again.

But you've forgotten. If he's well enough to only play 11, then INSURANCE WILL START AGAIN when he is again unable to play!! Boston and Portland will both get paid, I'd think.

And if instead he returns and keeps playing, then there is no valid insurance claim. Again, it's still equitable.

So Portland ends up getting insurance reimbursement IF IT'S MERITED - and doesn't get it if it's not. That doesn't seem to necessitate a rules change, in my estimation.

[Dunkenstein]

And since Miles has two seasons left on his contract it would become moot.

No it wouldn't. If his last game with the Celtics is in the 08-09 season, the Blazers can apply on the anniversary of his last Celtic game to have his whole 09-10 salary removed from his Blazers team salary when it comes time to calculate luxury taxes.

[Dunkenstein]

You say, "If he plays 10 games and the insurance company is truly off the hook ..." with the implied assumption that he's only playing 11, rather than with the assumption that he is well again.

But you've forgotten. If he's well enough to only play 11, then INSURANCE WILL START AGAIN when he is again unable to play!! Boston and Portland will both get paid, I'd think.

Since Miles has a one year, non-guaranteed contract, Boston would likely waive him soon after his last game. So I doubt that they would have much of an insurance claim. As for Portland, it's possible that after his 11th game, Miles's Portland insurance policy would be superseded by his Boston policy, and would not be reinstated when he is waived by Boston. I admit that's just a guess as the machinations of the NBA's insurance plan is basically a mystery to me.