OT: Legal minds - Stackhouse

by bdavison94 on Feb 15, 2008 6:51 PM CST Comment 13 comments

Here is my question for you lawyer types.

How could the league stop Stackhouse from negotiating with anyone once the 30 days is up? If the collective bargaining agreement states that once the 30 day window is up Stack is allowed to sign with anyone how can the league stop him from negotiating? That would seem to be a violation of the CBA and his right to work. Would the league not be open to testing it's anti-trust exemption at that point?

How does the potential oral agreement between the nets, mavs, and stack play into a violation of the CBA? Like the Boozer issue neither side could be held to that "promise".

0 recs | Comment 13 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

i think the issue here

is that they were planning on going around the whole trade rule (about value) by buying him out and then him resigning with the mavs.

i think the issue is that assuming he's a net, teams aren't allowed to have contact with players? something like that.

has nothing to do with him negotiating with teams AFTER he's bought out...i think

send me nominations for the Hall of the Very Good
http://www.buchanan4pres2008.org/
NIXON: NOW MORE THAN EVER

by gossamer on Feb 15, 2008 7:08 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

I think....

if the nets, mavs, and stack set that down on paper then you have a violation on the part of all three.

If the mavs make the trade they have no ability to 1) force the nets to buy him out 2) make stack agree to a buyout 3) force stack to sign with the mavs as a free agent.

So where is the violation at that point? If Stack wants to come back to the Mavs at the end of 30 days they mavs don't even have to agree to take him.

Again I reference Carlos Boozer. They had an "agreement" and Carlos isn't in Cleveland.

by bdavison94 on Feb 15, 2008 7:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

well

the implication is that since stackhouse was so certain he would be back with the mavs, that the mavs must have assured him that they would just sign him afterwards. that's not allowed.

however, i don't see how they can prove that just from stackhouse's comments.

by ab03 on Feb 15, 2008 7:16 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

exactly

if the NBA doesn't want a player to return to his old team after 30 days, just say that he's ineligible to return to his old team if he's bought out.

Why 30 days?!

I have to think that Cuban could win if he challenged this. I'm not sure if I really "want" him to win because I'm kind of indifferent on the trade in general, but the NBA has no business ruling on this in this manner.

Who is to say that Stackhouse wasn't just speculating that the Mavs would even WANT him back? NBA can't prove that.

Greatest Inventions Ever? 1. TiVO, 2. Boobs, 3. Baseball

by willamos2 on Feb 15, 2008 9:22 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I have a problem with the NBA...

making new rules as the go....

Obviously the NBA put the 30 day rule in there to limit teams from require the traded player, but if they were truly against it they could have said "1 year to date" or "until a season ends"

for them to turn around and say he can't sign here is bush league.

by clinton33 on Feb 15, 2008 9:58 PM CST reply actions 0 recs