Clips and Celts must convince the NBA that Doc and KG are not packaged

They could circumvent around that CBA standard though it will take some clever lawyering but 2 late the whole world knows it is what it is thanks to the press/media.

 

That story is a crock of crap and probably a plant by someone trying to scuttle the trade. There is no way they can "prove" the trades are 2 separate transactions and there is no way the league can "prove" they are one transaction. What makes them 2 separate transactions is how they are presented to the league office. They will be presented as 2 separate transactions. The league will not be able to claim circumvention. Once again this is not circumvention. The story is a crock of crap.

 

LOL.

You know the league can't do that.

 

Are people aware that Stern was the acting owner of New Orleans?

That trade was vetoed for the best interests of selling the Pelicans

 

Interesting, but it's pretty much common knowledge that KG won't go the Clippers if Doc doesn't come along with him. Clippers also won't take one without the other so if they follow these rules it will 99% not go through. I'm sure there will be money dealt under the table.

 

Yes. And that was before the new CBA. And that was an extreme exception. Stern had to cut that deal because if he didn't the owners were going to punish him with locking out for an entire season.

The new CBA was all about providing competitive balance and helping small market teams retain and acquire superstar talent by maximizing luxury tax payments on big market teams and making it cost free agents more $$$$ to switch teams. There won't be another CP3/Pau debacle. It was the exception at the end of the previous CBA. It was the perfect storm and the perfect example of the haves and have-nots because it involved one of the most poorly run franchises in one of the smallest markets losing a top 5 player to one of the best run franchises in one of the largest markets. It was an exception.

There is no way the league can block this transaction or prevent Boston from letting Doc out of his contract or prevent Doc from getting out of his contract. If the league did that, it would shut itself down as all the front offices would question what can and can't be done. And since they themselves negotiated the new CBA, they know better than anybody else what constitutes circumvention. This is not circumvention.

Way too many people are crying "circumvention" every time a unique trade goes down now. Simply because they are looking back at a once-in-a-generation event under the previous CBA when Stern blocked a trade. By the way......that trade wasn't circumvention either.

If the league shuts down this deal for "basketball reasons" it won't be good for the league.

 

nope, the proposed trade happened AFTER the new CBA. The new CBA was agreed after Thanksgiving 2011 and the proposed trade was Dec. 2011

 

You're right about that. It was right at the beginning of the new deal. Point remains the same. It was a one-time thing involving a franchise being managed by the league in a small market. The other owners put immense pressure on Stern because of it. That is not what this is. There is no circumvention here in this deal.

 

I completely disagree. I think the league should approve one, but not both. Then, see if they decide to complete the trade. That's the true test and the only fair thing to do (to actually prove that they weren't related) other than reject both trades.

I'd LOVE to see the league approve only one of the two. That would make for some really interesting drama! :grin:

 

Sure they can. Pick one, block the other, and call their bluff!

 

Which one do they block?

 

Honestly, I don't really care. Either would be incredibly entertaining. Blocking Doc would probably cause a lot more grief and drama throughout the league (meaning, damage to Celtics and team relations, or possibly forcing Doc to go to another coaching situation, etc). So, I guess if you want less impact throughout the league, block the trade and let Doc walk. If the Clips do go forward with it, let it rest of a while, see what info comes out about it, then possibly entertain approving the trade at a later time if the Clips try again. But even then, Clips could be trying to call the league's bluff.

Oh the drama!

 

So, if that's the case then they'll just rescind the deal, change it to DeAndre and 2 picks for KG. Then Boston will cut Doc loose. Now what?

 

The bottom line is if they don't allow the Doc transaction it will be new precedent. Because those sort of deals have happened before.

Look, Ainge is not stupid. He's not going to take a trade to the league office and have it rejected. There will be a call before the call if necessary to clarify what can and can't be done. The league office is not anti-team front office. They're there to make sure the rules are followed. If there is any question it will be dealt with beforehand. Trade will go through if Clips and Celtic agree on terms.

 

I get what you're saying, but if they didn't want to follow the rules, they shouldn't have put it in the new CBA. It's written in for a reason, and this would clearly violate the rule (be honest with yourself here).

I personally think the concept of "trading a coach" (even in this context of a team paying off another to let a coach walk) is absurd and should never be allowed. That's just stupid. But that's my opinion, and I know it has happened before.

 

What are you talking about that has been "written in to the new CBA"?

 

Misspoketyped...

But this is even worse that it's "NBA rules." Now, in all fairness, I haven't personally looked up this rule to ensure it's there or to see exactly what it says, but assuming it's true, I stand by my comments. :grin: If it doesn't say that, it'd still be entertaining.