The Rocket organization has a much clearer idea of Eddie's "commitment" to getting better and correcting the issues that are troubling him. This action by the Rockets tells us he is not committed. There is much more to the Eddie Griffin saga that Blindbury alluded to in his article that we do not know yet.
Codell, That's Feigen, a sportwriter adding 1+1. In reality, that is what he was given because he was not returning to the team at the time. If he made the request (of course Rox would have had to let him back), then his attorney could have shown the work circumstances (which are generally a positive in a judges mind, i.e. teturn to "Work") and he could have gotten a modification of the curfew. Happens all the time in non celeb cases...
Which could lead us to believe that the Rockets were not prepared to allow EG to come back off the suspended list yet...therefore, no work to return to. Im wondering how other teams are going to try to sign him as a FA considering that he has a court date soon...I would guess that even if another team is intersted in him, it wont be this season. It all depends on what kind of sentence he gets if found guilty.
From Larry Coon's FAQs: 57. What is a contract buy-out? Sometimes players and teams mutually decide to divorce each other. They do this by mutually agreeing that: The team will waive the player; If the player clears waivers, the compensation protection for lack of skill (see question 90 ) will be reduced or eliminated For example, the Celtics did this with Dino Radja prior to the 97-98 season. They mutually agreed to reduce Radja's compensation protection to 50% of its value, then the Celtics waived him. When he cleared waivers he was paid the 50% he was owed, and he was then free to return to Europe. But there's a twist, which needed an arbitrator's ruling during the 99-00 season to resolve. As detailed in question 90 , on January 10 all contracts become guaranteed for the rest of the season. Compensation protection insures the player against loss of salary after being being waived for lack of skill. But if he is waived after January 10, then he doesn't lose his salary, so the compensation protection does not kick in. Even though the team & player can mutually agree to reduce or eliminate the player's compensation protection, he is still owed his full salary if waived after January 10. This was challenged by John Starks during the 99-00 season. Starks had been traded to the Bulls, and wanted to sever ties with the team after January 10. The arbitrator ruled that in the last season of a player's contract, the team and player could choose to eliminate the contract guarantee that kicked in on January 10. Starks and the Bulls where therefore free to agree to a divorce (with no money owed to Starks) as described above. There is one other type of buyout described in the CBA. When a contract contains an option year, a buyout amount for the option year can be written into the contract. The buyout amount may be up to 50% of the salary for the option year. 90. Are contracts always guaranteed? Not necessarily. There are a few specific types of contracts that must be guaranteed. All other guarantees are a matter of individual negotiation between the player and team when the contract is signed. There are actually several types of guarantees: lack of skill, death (insured or non-insured), injury/illness (insured or non-insured), mental disability (insured or non-insured), and non-insured basketball-related injury. So, for example, a contract might be fully guaranteed for any injury or illness, but not for lack of skill. The required guarantees are as follows: For sign-and-trade contracts, the first season must be protected for lack of skill. For rookie "scale" contracts, all seasons must be protected for skill and non-insured injury/illness for at least 80% of the rookie scale amount. In addition, when a team releases a player, the team may be obligated to pay the player's salary for the remainder of that season. This happens when: The player is released prior to January 10 and the player is unfit to play because of a basketball-related injury, OR The player is terminated on or after January 10. In other words, on January 10 all contracts become guaranteed for the remainder of that season (except for one case -- see question 56 ). ------------------------------ I don't think they can waive Eddie under "lack of skill" obviously. So it seems to clearly state that Eddie's salary is still fully guaranteed (for at least 80%) if he his released for any other reasons, even for a mental disorder.
EG's attorneys will probably file for an extension based on whatever they can come up with to justify it (including personal schedules for other cases). I agree, without a trade opportunity, the Rockets were hog tied. All EG had to do, and he might have, was request a return from suspension. They would probably of had to accomodate him under the circumstances or put him in a pay status. So why do that, might as well cut the cord and see if they can reduse their financial liability in other ways....
RR, You are assuming that Feigen is just doing 1+1. I am assuming that he is "in the know" and came to the conclusion after talking to the Rockets. Why else would he even mention that in his article? Feigen is a pretty responsible writer and I dont think he would just automatically make the assumption that Eddie cant be with the team from 6PM to 6AM without verifying it first. Furthermore, seeing as how the curfew was imposed at Eddie's arraignment a few days ago, it can't just be a coincidence that the Rockets decided to release him a few days later. IMO, restrictions imposed on Eddie at the arraignment are the straw that broken the camel's back and the Rockets decided that because of that, there was no way Eddie would be back with the team this year, or could be back, even if he wanted to.
That Rocket organization is as transparent as it get. I cannot agree with this move. The article talked about a move for community as if a move to rehab EG would not be a move for community. There are a number of ways to skin a cat. I am not endorsing what EG did and there may be stuff that I do not know that they know; however, the team could have waited for the case to be called. What is the rush? This kind of move is not going to fill the seats, Mr. Les. What anguish and deliberation? Where was that anguish and deliberation when he went and signed MoT and Moochie?
Codell, I think the key to negotiating it may be "and non-insured injury/illness" which would go to the 80%. His "illness" was insurable, thus the 80% would not apply, right. I think they can negotiate under that circumstance. It does seem the 1/10 date had significance. I wonder if the Rockets can show he has diminished skills - mental disorders still being treated. We would have to know what he is diagnosed with and whether that has reasonably diminished his skill level over the length of the remaining contract. Besides that, I wonder if there was a buyout already contemplated in the contract for the last year?
It is the stuff we dont know about that led to this imo... I suspect it has something to do with the Jan 10th deadline mentioned in the CBA faq above... and this has nothing to do with Mooch and MoT, you want to rant about them...save it for another thread...its offtopic here.
Codell, On your last point: You may be correct. It could be part of the judge's decision was based on the Rockets letting the court know that he wasn't welcome back. I'm sure the court wanted to know his current and short term work status before setting a curfew that would stop him from working and not allow a return. I would think any judge would want him to be productive and busy to get him back into the normalcy of his life under the conditions. He is not guilty (yet?) Then again, maybe the judge knew that his mental state would not allow him to return to work which would explain in part why he is untradable. Teams may take a chance on him, but not by trading.... ?
Regardless, it states that the Rockets would still have to pay his contract (up to 80%) if they release him since its a rookie contract. Furthermore, it seems that the negotation would only be applicable if his release were due to "lack of skill". I dont think the Rockets can prove "lack of skill" because there is no on the court evidence that proves that since Eddie hasnt been playing. Clearly, "lack of skill" and mental disorders are two totally different aspects of the CBA and in no way overlap each other (i.e. I dont think the team can say Eddie's skills have diminished due to his mental disorder). Last, rookie contracts are guaranteed for 3 years for 1st round picks. That is standard for every rookie that is drafted in the 1st round. I dont think the CBA allows for buy outs to be inserted into rookie contracts since they are all standard contracts. If that were the case, then we would see all type of 1st round busts having their contracts bought out. I dont recall this happening since the new CBA has been in place.
RR, IMO, the judge is not there to look out for Eddie's well being. He is not there to help Eddie rehab his life. Curfews like that are put into place so that the accused cant get into any more trouble or hurt anyone while his court date is pending. Also, if the Judge could impose the curfew, but allow Eddie to play games and travel with the team, then why impose the curfew at all?? Eddie would have to break the curfew 2-3 times a week and also travel out of state where no one could keep tabs on him. If so, the Judge could impose a curfew that falls outside of the times he would be committed to be with the team (i.e. if you are not practicing, or traveling with the team or playing a game, then you have to be confined to your home). Obviously the judge feels that Eddie needs to be at home during the times where he has a history of getting into trouble. And Feigen, IMO, rightfully came to this conclusion. IMO, the judge either knows, or has been informed about Eddie's known hangout habits (hanging out late at night with the wrong crowd) and feels leading an "NBA life" is not in his best interest right now until his trial is settled.
Griffin's agent is the same jerk that represents Nomar Garciaparra. Poor Eddie, maybe he can get his life straightened out. It is a sad day when you have to admit that Richard Jefferson was right all along - that the Rockets should have kept him.
Sad day for the Rockets. I remember hearing about Eddie Griffin's punching incident at Seton Hall and reading an article on ESPN.com about his talent and troubles. Later that year, a poster on the College and Draft forum here talked about how the Rockets should pursue this guy. I predicted that he'd be a cancer and that any team would be a fool to pick him up. However, when the Rockets managed to trade for him in 2001, I have to admit that I did a 180. Despite his reputation, his talent seemed unquestionable and I thought that it might inject some excitement into the lineup. My excitement was bolstered by his performance that December and January. Even the Chronicle was impressed with Griffin after the game against the Lakers (where Eddie blocked Shaq and made a nice reverse dunk in traffic). If anything can be learned from this, it's that a team should never draft a player whom they haven't interviewed. No matter how much "research" CD says the Rockets did, I can't help but wonder if they would have made a different decision if they had actually met Griffin first. Of course, the draft is a crapshoot, and although Eddie will be the posterboy for 2001 busts, he won't be the only one (Kwame Brown, Sagana Diop). But I don't think the other teams passed on him simply because they thought their draft choice(s) were better players. I suspect that something about Griffin's personality turned them off, and I wonder if CD and Rudy might have sensed his demons if they had sat down and talked to him beforehand. In any case, Griffin is history. Although I hope he resolves his mental and legal problems, I also hope he never plays NBA basketball again. Call me bitter if you will.
Codell, Most of what you said is right. However, he is accused - not convicted. He is not on parole. I suspect the harshness of the curfew is the result of the Rockets not allowing him to come back combined with the fact he had this other (albeit minor) possesion charge. Another factor may have been that EG and his attorneys stipulated to certain facts in the case (I shot the gun, I punched her, whatever) - which damaged his chances for more freedom. In any case, I don't see why Feigan would be so "informed" and then say he will latch on with Orlando, Philly etc. right away. That's puzzling.
It's spring already. Consider it a house cleaning. Message to Maurice Taylor. Stay clean or consider yourself a free agent. I'm sure we are still going to help Eddie as much as we can. People have overcome much worse. He just has to rise up and correct the things that lead to bad decisions.
What a waste. It sucks that we got screwed w/ this pick from the 2001 draft, but we have to move on. I thought the Rockets would at least trade him for someone useful on this team, but I guess this was the right thing to do.
RR, Its like the chicken and egg theory. Did the Rockets release him because they judge imposed a curfew that wouldnt have allowed him to be with the team?? Or did the Judge impose the curfew because he knew the Rockets were going to release him?? IMO, its the former. The Rockets could have released him before the Judge's curfew, but they didnt. Yet, they now release him after the judge imposed the curfew. Too much of a coincidence. Again, I think Feigen is right. Also, the Rockets, as an organization, have ZERO to do with these charges. So I doubt the judge had inside information about the Rockets intent to release him. Nor do I think he cared.
Codell, The Rox didn't need to release him prior only because they weren't paying him. I wonder what the CBA says if the player is "cured" and wants/asks to come back. Are the Rox obligated? Or do they have to unsuspend him since he is "fit for duty" and start paying him not too come back if that is their desire. releasing him merely made a roster spot available I guess. I don't think the judge needed inside information. EG's attorney would have been asked what the work status was anyway. The attorney would have already have been in touch with the Rockets about that, an eminent return after a short succesful rehab would have made EG look more credible to the court. They are saying the girl broke in and is lying anyhow. The attorney would have wanted that ready to go back to work and is card. When was the curfew imposed? He was charged about a month ago. He was just released from rehab right? His next court date was 1/7. More than likely that is to lay out the case and what the timetable will be. The Rockets obviously were not getting him back before 1/10 then (with this and just getting in shape), so this is understandable from that aspect if they do have a way to reduce the contract they would release him and do so before 1/10. Maybe he was in Atlanta to talk with them about a job? If the Judge isn't going to allow him to play here, then why did he allow him to go to Atlanta? If he didn't have a real need, the judge wasn't going to let him out of the curfew. At least that's my best guess. I guess we will see very soon! Nevertheless, bring on that MoT clone Okur....
