I totally agree... The league needs to set at least a full season before they resign the player they just traded...
Teams can close this loophole themselves - suspend traded players who fail to report or refuse to suit up for their new team or don't give them buyouts.
Whelp. Ill be the one to not agree then. The loophole is fine. The fact that you have to match salary makes things too complicated and damn near impossible. At least this way things can get done. Loophole is a necessity and not a big deal IMO. The Nuggets never wanted McDyess. The Pistons never wanted to trade McDyess. They simply had to.
This is a good idea to close loophole, the league should concerns much about every trade, do not let trade like Lakers and Grizzles happen again
Problem is, the team trading for that player, more than likely only included that player to match salaries. I don't recall any recent trades where the player that Team A actually wanted, refused to show up. Seattle didn't make that trade to get Barry, Portland didn't need Francis and Denver didn't make that trade to get McDyess back.
lol it's obvious he was going back alll along......his agent saying it was a tough decision is just to cover up the legalities..........he just didnt want to be the idiot like stackhouse who blurted out he was coming back anyway........here's a way to close the loophole.......the guy getting traded can't go back to his original team after the new team waive/releases him.
He didn't lose his starting position. He's more comfortable coming off the bench. He'll be playing pretty much the same minutes. He's definitely missed in Detroit's rotation. I'm still not terribly fond of the Iverson deal, but I understand it.
If they are going to ignore the rules why have them in the first place? Let's just let teams conduct trades any way they want.
I don't understand why its considered a loophole or why people say they're breaking a rule. No rules are being broken. I think if a team decides to buyout someone's contract the player should be able to sign wherever they want to. That contract is now over.
That is the definition of the loophole: From wiki When people write laws, it's hard to anticipate and spell out every little details. It's the intent or the spirit of the law that was broken.
I agree on closing the loophole. Besides defeating the point of the salary-matching requirements, it also defeats the maximum on cash considerations. In McDyess' case, Denver ends up paying well more than $3 million (the max), which subsidizes Detroit's operation. Essentially, Denver traded Iverson and $6 million for Billups.
the buyout and him resigning with the Pistons are 2 separate transactions from the original trade. The initial intent is conserved. The salaries matched and the Nuggets will pay Mcdyess' salary. The Pistons will pick him up for a different salary. I don't understand what people think is so underhanded about that. I believe a player should be able to go wherever he wants when he is no longer under contract. I would rather do away with buyouts than a players' right to resign with the same team.
What he said. If the Nuggets wanted McDyess they would not have bought him out. A player gets bought out he's free to go where he wants.
If they didn't want McDyess, he shouldn't be part of the trade. If you leave that loophole in there, you might as well do away with the salary matching requirement. A lot simpler.
This isn't a loophole; it is a CBA rule that is clearly spelled out. If the league thought it was destroying the fabric of salary matching, the rule would be more than 30 days waiting period. Besides, first the player has to clear waivers. If that player is desirable, any team can grab him and his contract in 48 hours...except Detroit. McDyess has no say in the matter if another team grabs him off waivers. Another team can even use a Trade Exception to grab him. These types of trades aren't going to occur that much, because there is a measure of gambling involved. You have to be sure that no other team in the league will accept the player's contract and claim him off waivers. Plus you have to be completely sure the player will indeed refuse to sign with anyone else for 30-days should he clear waivers. Not to mention you have to find a team like Denver who is willing to waive the player and negotiate a buyout in the first place. The combination of all those things happening will make it rare that a team can trade a desirable player and get him right back in 30 days.
