CBA Doesn't Allow Prearranged Restructured Contracts

[DatWerkk]

circumstantial evidence is just that, circumstantial evidence

there's still no actual evidence

This remains to this day one of the dumbest things people say when talking about the law.

First of all, the NBA does not need to adhere to regular legal rules of evidence to prove things. So there's that.

Second of all, CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE IS ACTUAL EVIDENCE.

Stop watching Law & Order and read a book.

every person that quotes me without reading through the thread where i elaborate further only looks like an idiot, including you

That's fine if you feel that way. I think my day will be okay knowing that Dr Aki thinks I'm an idiot.

Just know that every time you quote and respond you're repeating YOUR idiotic circumstantial-evidence-is-not-actual-evidence stance. It's not my opinion that that's wrong and stupid. It's FACT that that's wrong and stupid.

The end.

[Left*My*Heart]

Is this a new rule or expanded upon rule under our current CBA? I know tampering, collusion and the under the table deals have always been illegal, I was just wondering if this was added after questions came up about the last Decision.

[DatWerkk]

circumstantial evidence is just that, circumstantial evidence

there's still no actual evidence

I don't care terribly much about this issue since everybody cheats (seriously, everybody cheats) but you should realize that circumstantial evidence is, in fact, "actual" evidence. The fact that Haslem and wade opted out of contracts more lucrative than what they could command in the open market is pretty good evidence of an improper agreement and is pretty damning. Evidence of actions taken against the actor's interest is about the best evidence you can have. If you think that "evidence" means somebody has to admit it, or there has to be a secret videotape, or whatever, then you are badly mistaken.

But, if I ever get in trouble, trust me, I want you on my jury. As long as nobody saw me do it, I guess I'm walking.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

if you get in trouble and there's no direct evidence, merely hearsay and circumstantial evidence, i believe you deserve to get off, because how do i really know you're actually guilty?

the reason circumstantial evidence isn't just "still evidence" is that there is absolutely nothing tying them to the actual crime, like someone said before, that's direct evidence.

there are different tiers of evidence, much the same as anecdotal evidence is not the same as peer-reviewed randomised controlled trials.

circumstantial evidence might be something like you were at the scene of the crime when the crime happened, but they can't prove it's you who did it (i.e. murder weapon without your prints or DNA on it).

Oh I see the problem now! You have no idea what the phrase "circumstantial evidence" means!

Silly us for engaging you. Like I said, read a book.

[INKtastic]

What would have been the punishment for tampering anyway?

More draft picks? If so why wouldn't Cleveland go for tampering charges to get more picks?

What about Less picks? Then why wouldn't Miami go for that instead. big deal, get labeled a tamperer pay a fine and give up LESS picks and still get Lebron.

Or maybe the simplest answer is the right one. There was no tampering and the Cavs free agent simply went to another team like hundreds of free agents have done in the past and will do in the future.

The punishment for tampering is a fine, loss of draft picks, voided contracts, team barred from signing the player. Even if it's less picks the heat wouldn't want that.

Even if it's more picks, the cavs wouldn't want that because they don't get the picks. They are just taken away from the Heat.

[XxIronChainzxX]

circumstantial evidence is just that, circumstantial evidence

there's still no actual evidence

Circumstantial evidence is absolutely "actual" evidence - it just means evidence where you're being asked to draw an inference. Lots of criminal cases have convictions on the basis of circumstantial evidence alone.

[Heat3]

What would have been the punishment for tampering anyway?

More draft picks? If so why wouldn't Cleveland go for tampering charges to get more picks?

What about Less picks? Then why wouldn't Miami go for that instead. big deal, get labeled a tamperer pay a fine and give up LESS picks and still get Lebron.

Or maybe the simplest answer is the right one. There was no tampering and the Cavs free agent simply went to another team like hundreds of free agents have done in the past and will do in the future.

The punishment for tampering is a fine, loss of draft picks, voided contracts, team barred from signing the player. Even if it's less picks the heat wouldn't want that.

Even if it's more picks, the cavs wouldn't want that because they don't get the picks. They are just taken away from the Heat.

Yeah, cavs wouldn't want a way to stop Lebron from going to the heat would they.

[INKtastic]

What would have been the punishment for tampering anyway?

More draft picks? If so why wouldn't Cleveland go for tampering charges to get more picks?

What about Less picks? Then why wouldn't Miami go for that instead. big deal, get labeled a tamperer pay a fine and give up LESS picks and still get Lebron.

Or maybe the simplest answer is the right one. There was no tampering and the Cavs free agent simply went to another team like hundreds of free agents have done in the past and will do in the future.

The punishment for tampering is a fine, loss of draft picks, voided contracts, team barred from signing the player. Even if it's less picks the heat wouldn't want that.

Even if it's more picks, the cavs wouldn't want that because they don't get the picks. They are just taken away from the Heat.

Yeah, cavs wouldn't want a way to stop Lebron from going to the heat would they.

Had they gone that route in 2010, he would have signed with a different team and they wouldn't get any compensation. They took the compensation to drop the tampering charges, which worked out better for both teams.

[Mookster]

oh please this is just a conspiracy theory on top of a conspiracy theory with nothing to back it up.

Just judging from Dan Gilbert's letter after the Decision, does anyone believe he wouldn't have lashed out and tried to screw over Lebron if he could reveal actual tampering?

What would have been the punishment for tampering anyway?

More draft picks? If so why wouldn't Cleveland go for tampering charges to get more picks?

What about Less picks? Then why wouldn't Miami go for that instead. big deal, get labeled a tamperer pay a fine and give up LESS picks and still get Lebron.

Or maybe the simplest answer is the right one. There was no tampering and the Cavs free agent simply went to another team like hundreds of free agents have done in the past and will do in the future.

I could of sworn Dan filed Tampering/collusion charges or something against the heat. Cavs getting them picks makes more sense then my personal conspiracy theory that league promised the Cavs all them number 1 draft picks to convince them to drop the charges.

[KingDavid]

Before the official start of free agency on July 1, Adrian Wojnarowski reported that the Miami Heat had "the framework of deals in place" with LeBron James, Chris Bosh, Dwyane Wade and Udonis Haslem to remain with the team.

"Everybody has their [contract] number and has left a little bit of room to let [Pat Riley] maneuver," one source briefed on the contract discussions reportedly told Wojnarowski.

The NBA's collective bargaining agreement, however, does not allow a team and players to have an "express or implied" deal in place in what essentially becomes a restructured contract.

The risk of loss for some Wade and Haslem would be severe since the contracts they opted out of are considered vastly more lucrative than what they would command as free agents on the open market.

The following text is from Article XIII of the CBA in regards to circumvention:

Section 2. No Unauthorized Agreements.

(a) At no time shall there be any agreements or transactions of any kind (whether disclosed or undisclosed to the NBA), express or implied, oral or written, or promises, undertakings, representations, commitments, inducements, assurances of intent, or understandings of any kind (whether disclosed or undisclosed to the NBA), between a player (or any person or entity controlled by, related to, or acting with authority on behalf of, such player) and any Team (or Team Affiliate):

(i) concerning any future Renegotiation, Extension, or other amendment of an existing Player Contract, or entry into a new Player Contract;

-----

(c) A violation of Section 2(a) or 2(b) above may be proven by director circumstantial evidence, including, but not limited to, evidence that a Player Contract or any term or provision thereof cannot rationally be explained in the absence of conduct violative of Section 2(a) or 2(b).

http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/23 ... -Contracts

The CBA doesn't allow pre- IT DOESN'T MATTER!

[madmaxmedia]

The players can all decide to opt out and take less assuming it is offered. And it's an easy assumption on their part that they'd get offered new contracts by the team in an attempt to bring them back. Why wouldn't the team want to bring them back? There's nothing to worry about on the players part. Why would they have any fear that the Heat wouldn't want to try to bring them back at all costs if they opted out?

So, they players get together, hash out what kinda money they all feel they would need while leaving enough to allow the team to get them more help. Opt out. And then ask for that amount the players determined when FA starts.

None of that is against the rules...

This is technically correct, but they can't present in a manner of which Miami will directly benefit off it, meaning it'd have to go something like this to be fully legal:

LeBron, Wade and Bosh and their teams review the cap thoroughly, and calculate specific salary demands that indirectly (key word right there) will leave Miami with the opportunity to have a specific amount open for other free agents.

In essence, LeBron, Wade and Bosh can't sit down with Riley and say "Well, how much does Player X want so we can adapt accordingly?" - It would have to be two separate motions independent of each other that needs to come together.

EDIT- I guess if the FA players actively discuss amongst themselves what they want to do, that wouldn't be construed as violating this rule? But that's amongst the players themselves, and not between "team and players" as mentioned in that rule.

If FA players are allowed to discuss potential future contracts and how they might fit together on the same team, then its not hard for Miami to avoid violating this rule, as long as they are relatively careful. Which seems to be the same scenario you posted as legal in the first place (sorry, just trying to wrap my head around it.)

[madmaxmedia]

every person that quotes me without reading through the thread where i elaborate further only looks like an idiot, including you

please read the OP

(c) A violation of Section 2(a) or 2(b) above may be proven by director circumstantial evidence, including, but not limited to, evidence that a Player Contract or any term or provision thereof cannot rationally be explained in the absence of conduct violative of Section 2(a) or 2(b).

Signing Haslem to any contract that ensures he gets the 4.6 million he just opted out of that will clearly fit this definition.

The reasoning is that the only motive Haslem would opt out of a deal just to sign the same deal again, is to help the Heat sign more players, and that it can only be rationally explained that Miami promised or intimated to Haslem that they would take care of him.

Is that correct? I'm not questioning it, just asking. If they were to sign a significantly different deal (say an extra year), would that provide a rational explanation that doesn't violate the rule?

[WiggOuts]

What difference does it make, its not like they are gonna do anything to stop this from happening. The big 3 make their own rules

[mandurugo]

How many times are we going to have this discussion on the GB? Just lock it already. Everyone knows that pre-arranged contracts are against the CBA, but the reality is that it happens all the time anyway and nobody cares

Wolves fans care.