ALL RUBIO TALK HERE

[deeney0]

Yes, if you are drafted, to play in the NBA you have to play for the team that drafted you. But there are other American leagues.

[KWSN-Men]

The draft rules exist for American players too. There is no double standard. And they exist to encourage competition - whether they do or not is arguable, but its better than they alternative. Without a draft the best players would sign with NY and LA and Chicago.

In Euroleague since 1999, 7 teams have made the championship game (out of 26). In the NBA, that number is 12 (out of 30). Neither is particularly competitive, but at least the NBA has a system that tries to encourage it.

American players are not prevented from playing in the NBA under draft rules if the team that drafted them does not sign them or trade them. Foreign players are. Fact. That is both Draconian and a double standard.

Also, the NBA league is dominated by the Celtics and Lakers. The Euroleague has been much more competitive than the NBA, which has been dominated by two teams. So trying to use a history lesson of what each league had in terms of number of competitive teams is pointless. It also has nothing to do with the issue.

[deeney0]

Yes they are. If an American player is drafted a refuses to play for the team that drafted him, he can not sign with another team. You are misinformed. There is no double standard.

[casey]

American players are not prevented from playing in the NBA under draft rules if the team that drafted them does not sign them or trade them. Foreign players are. Fact. That is both Draconian and a double standard.

Can you elaborate on the differences between American and foreign players please? I'm not sure what you're trying to say here.

[KWSN-Men]

Yes they are. If an American player is drafted a refuses to play for the team that drafted him, he can not sign with another team. You are misinformed. There is no double standard.

No, you are wrong and you are refusing to even attempt to try to listen to the explanation to you. No one is talking about if a player refuses to play for the team that drafts him. You are changing the subject for whatever reason.

American players are NOT barred from playing in the NBA if the team that drafts them refuses to sign them or trade their rights to another team. Under NBA rules that NBA team would have to renounce their rights to that player if they have the ability to join another NBA team and wish to do so.

Foreign players however are kept forever under the rights of that team and thus are barred from playing in the NBA.

Once again, see Luis Scola and David Andersen as there are even 2 prime examples for you. How can anyone seriously argue there is not a clear double standard there?

[deeney0]

Spurs tried to sign Luis Scola, they didn't refuse to sign him. I have no idea what you're talking about. Teams don't draft players and then not try to sign them - there don't need to be rules for such a contingency. The only reason a team wouldn't sign a player they drafted was if the PLAYER refused to sign.

The rules are no different for a player coming from the US or a player coming from an international location. You are wrong.

[Genjuro]

Yes they are. If an American player is drafted a refuses to play for the team that drafted him, he can not sign with another team. You are misinformed. There is no double standard.

No, you are wrong and you are refusing to even attempt to try to listen to the explanation to you. No one is talking about if a player refuses to play for the team that drafts him. You are changing the subject for whatever reason.

American players are NOT barred from playing in the NBA if the team that drafts them refuses to sign them or trade their rights to another team. Under NBA rules that NBA team would have to renounce their rights to that player if they have the ability to join another NBA team and wish to do so.

Foreign players however are kept forever under the rights of that team and thus are barred from playing in the NBA.

Once again see Luis Scola and David Andersen as there are even 2 prime examples for you. How can anyone seriously argue there is not a clear double standard there?

Amazing dude. You're overdoing yourself.

Tell us more about the imaginary world you live in. It could be fun.

[KWSN-Men]

American players are not prevented from playing in the NBA under draft rules if the team that drafted them does not sign them or trade them. Foreign players are. Fact. That is both Draconian and a double standard.

Can you elaborate on the differences between American and foreign players please? I'm not sure what you're trying to say here.

NBA teams cannot permanently and forever hold the rights to an American player that they drafted if they refuse to offer them a contract or trade them to another NBA team that wants to sign them. In that case the NBA team has to renounce their rights.

NBA teams can draft American players and send them to Europe or whatever but they cannot block them from joining the NBA permanently. With foreign NBA players they can and often do. The league rules are different. That's a double standard.

[KWSN-Men]

Spurs tried to sign Luis Scola, they didn't refuse to sign him. I have no idea what you're talking about. Teams don't draft players and then not try to sign them - there don't need to be rules for such a contingency. The only reason a team wouldn't sign a player they drafted was if the PLAYER refused to sign.

The rules are no different for a player coming from the US or a player coming from an international location. You are wrong.

It is clearly impossible to have a rational discussion with you.

[Genjuro]

The KSWN-dude forgets that it's all a matter of being under contract with another team or not. Obviously it's not a matter of which country you've been born in.

But again, who needs a 197 IQ...

[deeney0]

Spurs tried to sign Luis Scola, they didn't refuse to sign him. I have no idea what you're talking about. Teams don't draft players and then not try to sign them - there don't need to be rules for such a contingency. The only reason a team wouldn't sign a player they drafted was if the PLAYER refused to sign.

The rules are no different for a player coming from the US or a player coming from an international location. You are wrong.

It is clearly impossible to have a rational discussion with you.

Feeling the same way, dude. Explain yourself instead of spouting steam and maybe we can get somewhere.

[KWSN-Men]

The KSWN-dude forgets that it's all a matter of being under contract with another team or not. Obviously is not a matter of which country you've been born in.

But again, who needs a 197 IQ...

Clearly you don't.

[KWSN-Men]

Spurs tried to sign Luis Scola, they didn't refuse to sign him. I have no idea what you're talking about. Teams don't draft players and then not try to sign them - there don't need to be rules for such a contingency. The only reason a team wouldn't sign a player they drafted was if the PLAYER refused to sign.

The rules are no different for a player coming from the US or a player coming from an international location. You are wrong.

It is clearly impossible to have a rational discussion with you.

Feeling the same way, dude. Explain yourself instead of spouting steam and maybe we can get somewhere.

I explained it several times. I am just going to ignore you so I don't have to read your posts anymore. Back to Rubio please.

[Genjuro]

Feeling the same way, dude. Explain yourself instead of spouting steam and maybe we can get somewhere.

I explained it several times. I am just going to ignore you so I don't have to read your posts anymore. Back to Rubio please.

For how many seconds are you going to ignore him?

Just out of curiosity, you know.

[deeney0]

NBA teams don't draft players they don't intend to sign, and rookie scale contracts are set by the CBA. So the situation you describe - a team drafts a player they refuse to sign - does not happen. If a team drafts a player and they don't sign him, it's because the PLAYER refuses to sign (whether because of a contractual obligation to a non-NBA club, like Rubio or Scola, or otherwise).

[casey]

NBA teams cannot permanently and forever hold the rights to an American player that they drafted if they refuse to offer them a contract or trade them to another NBA team that wants to sign them. In that case the NBA team has to renounce their rights.

Being American has nothing to do with it. Being under contract with a non-NBA team does. If an American sits out a year, then the team loses his rights. If a foreigner sits out a year, then the team loses his rights. If an American signs with a non-NBA team, the team still has his rights. If a foreigner signs with a non-NBA team, the team still has his rights. It's the same.

[younggunsmn]

Think like what? I know you're having a hard time grasping the NBA's rules, but where exactly are you missing on this? If he wants to play for the NBA, he has to play by the rules laid down by them. Just like if I want to keep the job I have, I have to follow their rules.

It's not a tough concept to grasp.

It's called Ugly American. I am not saying you are ugly or insulting you or even saying you are an ugly American, but what you are typing here is clearly showing that you appear to think the way that Americans do that get labeled that way. So many Americans say and think like that. To most of the rest of the world such comments are an outright insult.

This is yet another example of outright anti-american racism. You need to be banned, you have contributed NOTHING to this thread but reacting to everyone's posts with your own ugly opinions.
No links to any real news, no verifiable links to euroleague salary information (which you claim to be such an expert on), no precedents for spanish court arbitration for buyouts (which would be really helpful). Pages and pages of nothing but your own conjecture and crying like a baby because people call you out for not backing up anything you post with links to hard information.

Genjuro, you contribute alot with spanish news updates and translations, thank you.

My american hating greek friend, you clearly understand nothing about the american economic system, where we fight for jobs instead of having them rationed by the government or labor unions. Working for a company here is not a right, it is a privilege.

When you successfully apply for a job there are simple guidelines you have to follow which are unique to every company. Maybe they imply dress code, hours of work, safety issues, salary guidelines, what have you. You can quit at any time and find a different career. Often when you have proven you are too valuable an employee to lose you can start negotiating on your own terms.

The NBA is no different, you must enter the draft, your salary slot is set for 4 years, the last 2 of which are team options, and then you become a restricted free agent where your team has matching rights. 2nd round picks have a different standard. The NBA is for all intents and purposes ONE LARGE COMPANY with 30 separate divisions. A player is assigned to a division, and after 5 years he gets to choose which one he wants to work at and negotiate a pay raise. He also can be relocated at any time. It's really as simple as that.

Rubio is still in the drivers seat here.

It's my understanding that if another team pays his buyout, he has to sign another contract with said team with yet another buyout in place, which is sufficient to keep him from fleeing to the NBA. Otherwise it makes no sense for the team to pay his buyout.

I think this is being driven by joventut, because they probably can get another team to pay more of the buyout than the 3 million US ricky has offered. Say they got a team to pay 4 million euro for the buyout with a 1 million euro salary for ricky for 2 years, that is 3 million euros a year (plus taxes and living expenses) for ricky. This would put him in the upper echelon of players in the euroleague as far as expense to his team. While he is good, according to 197-man his playing ability is not yet in that echelon, so is he worth that kind of commitment?

Ricky would have to agree to such a deal for it to go through, and would only give him a roughly 900k euro raise over two years. However every year he delays starting his rookie contract costs him up to 13 million dollars in future earnings because he hits NBA free agency a year later.
So earn 900k more now, lose 13 mil later.

Ricky has 2 things going in his favor:
1. court case
2. playing for joventut this year (and they get paid nothing for the buyout).

The longer this drags out the better the chances he ends up playing in the NBA this year.
Ultimately what happens depends upon how badly ricky wants to come to the NBA.

Ricky offering to pay a 3 million (US) buyout shows without a doubt that his first choice is to come to the NBA.

"Selling" his rights to another spanish club is appealing to joventut because it will probably garner them more money, and it may be slightly more appealing to ricky from a financial perspective to playing another year for joventut (provided is is only a 2 year contract with NO buyout for the 3rd year). But no team in their right mind will do this unless ricky wants to play there.

As we get closer to the court date and then the start of the season there is a good chance joventut will lower the buyout amount or at least negotiate. Trying to sell him to other spanish teams is the next step in this poker match.

Joventut also faces the stigma of being the team that kept ricky from the NBA. They are going to have a harder time signing young players if they gain the reputation of not being open to negotiating buyouts.

Also, with respect to minutes, we can offer him 32+. In euroleague, if I'm not mistaken, the bench plays alot more and starters only play 25-28 mins. Worst case for me is that he is sold to another spanish team and plays a backup role of only 15 mins per game.

I've read that Alberto Miralles had a similar lawsuit against joventut and he lost his arbitration hearing. Perhaps Ricky is different because he signed his deal at 14? genjuro maybe you can shed some light on this, because precedents could be important here.

[KWSN-Men]

NBA teams cannot permanently and forever hold the rights to an American player that they drafted if they refuse to offer them a contract or trade them to another NBA team that wants to sign them. In that case the NBA team has to renounce their rights.

Being American has nothing to do with it. Being under contract with a non-NBA team does. If an American sits out a year, then the team loses his rights. If a foreigner sits out a year, then the team loses his rights. If an American signs with a non-NBA team, the team still has his rights. If a foreigner signs with a non-NBA team, the team still has his rights. It's the same.

No, it is not. NBA teams have to renounce their rights to American players if that player gets another contract offer from an NBA team and the team that owns the draft rights refuses to sign him. The team holding the draft rights then has to make an offer or renounce the rights.

For foreign players they can simply hold the player hostage permanently. It's quite interesting to know that people consider this exactly the same thing.

[KWSN-Men]

This is yet another example of outright anti-american racism.

The site mods have explained that "American" is not a race. They have also explained that "Spanish" and "European" are not a race. This is the explanation site mods here give of their world view point and they set site policy to it.

And I have said nothing "anti-American". If you can provide any place I said something against the country of the United States please do, otherwise kindly stop attempting to bait flame wars and rudely labeling people things like "anti-American".

[Esohny]

And?