Arenas's Gift To The Wizards?

[arenas809]

If the story involving Gilbert and Javaris Crittenton is true, has Arenas given the Wizards a gift; a justifiable reason to void his contract?

He's already been in trade rumors the past couple of weeks, his trade value was next to nothing before, it's beyond nothing now, why not just void his contract?

Is there any reason they couldn't?

[FGump]

If the story involving Gilbert and Javaris Crittenton is true, has Arenas given the Wizards a gift; a justifiable reason to void his contract?

He's already been in trade rumors the past couple of weeks, his trade value was next to nothing before, it's beyond nothing now, why not just void his contract?

Is there any reason they couldn't?

What provision in the contract do you think gives them the right to unilaterally void it?

[turk3d]

Isn't here some sort of personal conduct clause? What felony sconvictions? Are either of those voidable offenses. What does the CBA say about those two itens? Anybody know?

[Mezotarkus]

Isn't here some sort of personal conduct clause? What felony sconvictions? Are either of those voidable offenses. What does the CBA say about those two itens? Anybody know?

No one here has seen the contract language so they can't speak intelligently about it other than speculate.

However, if you will recall the Warriors tried to void Latrell Sprewell's contract after he assaulted PJ Carlessimo twice and tried to choke him the first time. The voiding was overturned in arbitration. So if a player can choke his coach and keep his contract then he might be able to pull a gun on his teammate and keep his contract.

The NBA, where crime happens.

[turk3d]

Carlissimo could have pressed charges (but chose not to) which would have been another matter. However, regarding the CBA, weren't they under a different agreement at the time and since have a new one, which I presume has been modified. Somehow I think that was one of the issues the union gave in to, a stricter personal conduct clause. I guess we really can't say having not see the contract. It just seems that in recent years they've been able to crack down significantly (more than in previous contracts). Perhaps some stronger language has been added to more recent agreements. I guess we'll have to wait and see.

[Telfaire]

From NBA.com:

The language in the NBA's standard contract with players allows teams to void existing contracts if players engage in prohibited offseason activities, such as hang gliding and the like that are viewed as dangerous by the league, if players are convicted of or plead guilty to a felony crime, or if they engage in acts of "moral turpitude," generally defined as behavior that would be viewed as embarrassing for a company or employer if disclosed publicly

[Dunkenstein]

From NBA.com:

The language in the NBA's standard contract with players allows teams to void existing contracts if players engage in prohibited offseason activities, such as hang gliding and the like that are viewed as dangerous by the league, if players are convicted of or plead guilty to a felony crime, or if they engage in acts of "moral turpitude," generally defined as behavior that would be viewed as embarrassing for a company or employer if disclosed publicly

Well, I don't think Arenas's alleged offense falls under the hang gliding or moped category.

Wikipedia defines moral turpitude as "a legal concept in the United States that refers to conduct that is considered contrary to community standards of justice, honesty or good morals." And I doubt that possessing a handgun would be considered conduct contrary to community standards since it is protected by the second amendment to the Constitution.

Therefore, unless Arenas is convicted of a felony, there may not be grounds for terminating his contract.

BTW, just because you quote something from NBA.com, it should be noted that this is not an official statement from the league. It's just the opinion of columnist David Aldridge.

The CBA actually has a section covering firearms.

Whenever a player is physically present at a facility or venue owned, operated, or being used by a Team, the NBA, or any League-related entity, and whenever a player is traveling on any NBA-related business, whether on behalf of the player’s Team, the NBA, or any League- related entity, such player shall not possess a firearm of any kind. For purposes of the foregoing, “a facility or venue” includes, but is not limited to: an arena; a practice facility; a Team or League office or facility; an All-Star or NBA Playoff venue; and the site of a promotional or charitable appearance.

Any violation of (the section) above shall be considered conduct prejudicial to the NBA under Article 35(d) of the NBA Constitution and By-Laws, and shall therefore subject the player to discipline by the NBA in accordance with such Article.

Since none of us have access to the Constitution and By-Laws, we'll just have to wait and see what discipline the NBA feels is appropriate in this case.

[Three34]

No one's contract ever gets voided, anyway. Those that can be never are. Even Jay Williams got a healthy payoff.

[Scoot McGroot]

If Jamaal Tinsley and his repeated violations are any indicator, I'm not so sure that Gilbert's going to be able to be voided.


Either way, you'd have to wait until he's convicted of a felony, which in the US legal system could take 2-3 years for a case of this lower magnitude to wind it's way through.

[Dunkenstein]

If Jamaal Tinsley and his repeated violations are any indicator, I'm not so sure that Gilbert's going to be able to be voided.


Either way, you'd have to wait until he's convicted of a felony, which in the US legal system could take 2-3 years for a case of this lower magnitude to wind it's way through.

Unless he agreed to a plea arrangement like Stephen Jackson did.

[turk3d]

From NBA.com:

The language in the NBA's standard contract with players allows teams to void existing contracts if players engage in prohibited offseason activities, such as hang gliding and the like that are viewed as dangerous by the league, if players are convicted of or plead guilty to a felony crime, or if they engage in acts of "moral turpitude," generally defined as behavior that would be viewed as embarrassing for a company or employer if disclosed publicly

Well, I don't think Arenas's alleged offense falls under the hang gliding or moped category.

Wikipedia defines moral turpitude as "a legal concept in the United States that refers to conduct that is considered contrary to community standards of justice, honesty or good morals." And I doubt that possessing a handgun would be considered conduct contrary to community standards since it is protected by the second amendment to the Constitution.

Therefore, unless Arenas is convicted of a felony, there may not be grounds for terminating his contract.

BTW, just because you quote something from NBA.com, it should be noted that this is not an official statement from the league. It's just the opinion of columnist David Aldridge.

The CBA actually has a section covering firearms.

Whenever a player is physically present at a facility or venue owned, operated, or being used by a Team, the NBA, or any League-related entity, and whenever a player is traveling on any NBA-related business, whether on behalf of the player’s Team, the NBA, or any League- related entity, such player shall not possess a firearm of any kind. For purposes of the foregoing, “a facility or venue” includes, but is not limited to: an arena; a practice facility; a Team or League office or facility; an All-Star or NBA Playoff venue; and the site of a promotional or charitable appearance.

Any violation of (the section) above shall be considered conduct prejudicial to the NBA under Article 35(d) of the NBA Constitution and By-Laws, and shall therefore subject the player to discipline by the NBA in accordance with such Article.

Since none of us have access to the Constitution and By-Laws, we'll just have to wait and see what discipline the NBA feels is appropriate in this case.

If he pulled a gun on someone, then I think this puts him in this category. This could be quite different than anything else we've seen if true.

[Three34]

One thing the Arenas/Crittenton saga has taught me is that "turpitude" is my new favourite word.

[answerthink]

The alleged actions of Gilbert Arenas are a violation of NBA rules, punishable by the commissioner in accordance with Art 35(d) of the NBA Constitution.

Art 35(d) reads:
The Commissioner shall have the power to suspend for a definite or indefinite period, or to impose a fine not exceeding $50,000, or inflict both such suspension and fine upon any Player who, in his opinion, (i) shall have made or caused to be made any statement having, or that was designed to have, an effect prejudicial or detrimental to the best interests of basketball or of the Association or of a Member, or (ii) shall have been guilty of conduct that does not conform to standards of morality or fair play, that does not comply at all times with all federal, state, and local laws, or that is prejudicial or detrimental to the Association.


Whether the Wizards could terminate his contract is a separate issue, governed by the terms of his contract. If his contract were to be terminated, in order for the Wizards to be able to stop paying him they would need to show Arenas violated Sec 16(a) of his contract.

Sec 16(a) reads:
The Team may terminate this Contract upon written notice to the Player if the Player shall: (i) at any time, fail, refuse, or neglect to conform his personal conduct to standards of good citizenship, good moral character (defined here to mean not engaging in acts of moral turpitude, whether or not such acts would constitute a crime), and good sportsmanship, to keep himself in first class physical condition, or to obey the Team’s training rules…

Such a decision does not seem to require a guilty verdict, but it would likely require more details than have currently been made public. Since such a decision may be arbitrated, a guilty verdict would certainly help. Of course, whether or not the Wizards would even want to pursue this course of action is not yet clear.

[daddyfivestar]

I think you have to go Rae Carruth to actually get your contract voided these days.

[turk3d]

It appears they can, according to sec. 16. It would make sense that they would/should wait until the final outcome (proven one way or the other) since if he denies it, I think they would open up a potential lawsuit by Arenas should they terminate before he's either found guilty of cops to it publicly. Even though the NBA plays by its own rules in a sense, we are still supposedly innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Thanks for the actual clauses that appear to apply. Regardless, Arenas is in a heap of trouble. 4 guns unpermitted. The man's insane.

[arenas809]

Suspended indefinitely.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=4802267

[Scoot McGroot]

If Jamaal Tinsley and his repeated violations are any indicator, I'm not so sure that Gilbert's going to be able to be voided.


Either way, you'd have to wait until he's convicted of a felony, which in the US legal system could take 2-3 years for a case of this lower magnitude to wind it's way through.

Unless he agreed to a plea arrangement like Stephen Jackson did.

Yeah, but didn't Jackson plea to the misdemeanor to have the felony charges dropped? If Arenas does something similar, I would think that his lawyers would have a field day with the Wiz if they tried to terminate his contract on that.

[Three34]

I think the difference there may be that while Jackson did plea down from a felony to a misdemeanour (as have Jamaal Tinsley and Sebastian Telfair in the past), he didn't do what he did inside an NBA arena. Even if Arenas pleas down in criminal court, the NBA and the Wizards may still do their thing because of what he did at a game, not outside a strip club.

Not sure how much that'll matter, or if that even makes sense, as I'm no lawyer. But there would appear to be absolutely no precedent here. The precedent for voiding contracts is incredibly short, but the precedent for punishments for bringing loaded firearms into the locker room is so short that it doesn't exist.

[Dunkenstein]

The precedent for voiding contracts is incredibly short, but the precedent for punishments for bringing loaded firearms into the locker room is so short that it doesn't exist.

As I understand it, only teams can terminate a contract. The league only has the right to suspend a player for a specific amount of time (or indefinitely in Arenas's case) or for life. Can anybody think of a single case where a team actually terminated a contract? I can't. There are several situations where the league suspended a player for life.

[Three34]

Sprewell's contract was voided, but was reinstated in arbitration. That's all I got.