Larry Coon lowers the boom on JB and any Utah Offers

The agent usually makes all the decisions for his player. An agent is usually someone a player trust, players are usually not involved in any contract negotiations besides when they need to sign their contract. BJ, wether you believe it or not, is the one giving DMO advise because a player usually doesn't get into or understand the CBA rules (even though they should). I'm sure DMO is at home chillin while BJ is telling him "sign here, don't go here, wait here".

 

Good analogy. The one MAIN difference is, there's TWO DIFFERENT REALTORS who can accept terms.

Agent can say Realtor A can include the 20% furniture. Realtor B WONT INCLUDE it. If you cant close with Realtor A because they don't accept your down, then only Realtor B WILL - BUT with NO furniture.

Realtor B does NOT have to "Price Match" Realtor A.

 

AGREE on this. (I worked with a company that played the keep-away game with its own employees money all the time. Sleazebags always trying to make arbitrary rules that favors themselves.) Bad working relations, they lose employees regularly anyway with their arrogance.

I dont its a cool move by the Rockets to cancel the incentives. If they are UNLIKELY to be made, like only 20% likely, odds still are you WON'T have to pay them so what's the big hangup on it. Leave them as sweetener for a job WELL done since they'd be EARNED

There's reasons against incentives too still. I don't know maybe they still have to be included in the cap figure, reducing cap space. And incentives could be DIS-INCENTIVE to even PLAY D-Mo, keeping him out to not give him a pay bump, so it'd be conflict of interests of sorts and still cause resentment. But I'd still offer since its a fair contract anyway.

 

But like others have mentioned already, Nets incentives may include stuff that are hard to achieve for Nets, but not for Rockets, for example making the playoffs. That incentive is like guaranteed money and loses the sole purpose of "incentive ". It's not fair for ROX to match stuff like that.

Best to sit down and reneg new incentives and bonuses that make sense to both sides.

 

This is obviously an exaggeration, but what if the Nets included a bonus of $2 million to D-Mo if they ever hire a coach named Mike? This was obviously something that they didn't ever envision paying D-Mo, but now we have people saying Houston should owe him this money he was probably never going to get even though there is absolutely nothing saying we need to?

Legitimate question: can anyone find a scenario where a team matched guaranteed AND incentives in a situation like this? I'd honestly be shocked if it has ever happened. I think way to many of you guys are anticipating backlash against the Rockets that just won't be there.

 

But the seller didn't tell you anything. The seller assumed you would read the terms of the contract and understand what you were signing. The seller assumed that you understood the basic tenets of house-buying.

Maybe YOUR agent told you that you would get the furniture, but should the seller be punished for you (and your agent's) ignorance and incompetence?

 

Not correct, but nice try bro

At the end of the day, a PLAYER chooses his agent. He has the right to hire & fire his agent at any time. The player has a list of objectives the agent has a obligation to meet. If BJ was doing something against DMo's will he'd have been fired a long time ago. Ppl need to stop placing blame other places other than DMo. If this was Dwight doing this last year you guys would be ALL OVER his azz about this lol. It goes to show the bias some of you have for certain players you feel personally attached too. DMo is a scumbag for pulling this, NOT his agent. Stop making excuses

 

Except that if there's a rule that said, "No owner is obligated to give their furniture to the buyer no matter what the contract says," then it was your ignorance, not the seller, that had "deceived" you. Of course you could still sue your agent for neglecting to inform you that, which definitely should be part of his professional service to you.

 

If the agent told me furniture was included, I'd look for that clause in the contract before I signed it.

I understand where you're coming from. Relationships matter. I've been critical on this DMo mess for the same reason. My view though is that that bridge was already burned some time ago. DMo does not like this team and does not want to play here, period. Morey knows the relationship is now untenable. He didn't match so he can repair the relationship and ride DMo to a championship. He matched so he'd have another asset he can trade a year from now. In that context, he shouldn't give DMo a penny more than he has to. To do so would make his asset more expensive and harder to trade. And the goodwill he'd get in return would be wasted.

I don't know. I assume the Nets thought there was a chance Houston wouldn't match; otherwise why bother offering. Morey showed his hand by matching. DMo managed to reduce his value further by being a faithless counterparty, but we still see what the tradeable asset is worth to Morey and how he'd decide on the trade-off between cap room and assets. So maybe the next team offers just a little bit more to put just a bit more stress on Morey's calculus.

 

Sue him for what exactly?

 

For malpractice (if he lied or mislead me to sign a contract which is completely different than what I was told).
Sorry mate I'm really tired of talking about this subject and this guy. I think my view of the situation is well established in the [too many] posts I wrote on this thread.
Can we get back to talk about basketball?

 

I feel bad for both sides. D-Mo wants more money and the Rockets would like a chance to possibly better the team (as buyers near the deadline it's better to be closer to the NBA soft cap than
NBA hard cap +apron). It allows for a little more wiggle room. I hope for everyone's sake they
can meet somewhere in the middle. As fans we are kinda the kids or step kids caught in the
middle of a divorce. "If" this is a case of a player/agent manipulating or bypassing Restricted
Free Agency by forcing a team to place a player in RFA multiple times fishing for the best
deal obtainable, I'm against that. IMO, the players would not like a team/owner manipulating
the system in a manner like this to get the best of a players situation ("if" that is the case here).
Hopefully this will be settled soon...But D-Mo you don't get a do-over or reset....apparently.

 

Has anyone posted the Larry Coon & Kevin Pelton article on the front page of ESPN's NBA section? It says it was posted today - it's not the same thing posted in the first post of this thread is it?

 

Yes, that Insider article is in @finsraider's DMo thread.

 

(click here to see post #56 in that thread - it's in the SPOILER)

 

In anything I wrote did I ever show bias towards dmo?No. TBH I personally don't like the guy, shows how much you DON'T know how to read. I never said a player doesn't choose his agent, so that statement was wrong. I also never said an agent does things against a players will (another wrong statement). I never said I was only blaming his agent (wrong again). And to close my argument what I said is not wrong, a player doesn't get involved in contract negotiations which is why they hire what's called an agent. You see a sports agent procures and negotiates employment and endorsement contracts for an athlete. Agents are responsible for communications with team owners, managers, coaches, and other individuals. Primarily, agents are used to broker and negotiate contracts for their clients.
With that said, Yes a player does set guidelines for his agent, which I never said they didn't, but the guidelines usually consist of value and team preference. In this case it's been known that dmo was never against coming back to HOU until his $6mill wasn't part of the deal. How is someone suppose to know that unless their agent tells them? You really think a player understand all the technical terms in a contract? Trust me, I took a tech communication class and contracts are one of the hardest and trickiest things to understand if you have no experience in it.
So again I'm not only blaming his agent but yes he does hold the biggest blame bc he is DMO's representative and voice as of now.

 

Breach of fiduciary duty, if Dmo reasonably relied upon BJ's interpretation and presentation of the contract. There's probably a litigation waiver in Dmo/BJ's contract though.

 

I really like Donatas.

It's a shame he picked a dumb agent. Don't play chess with Morey.