Haha. I meant the declaration that the previous diagnosis was bullshit. It appears to me that you are asking, short of simply screwing over the Blazers, how can Miles be signed by a team without a doctor disagreeing with a previous finding. I'm telling you that he can either help the team or not--and that the previous diagnosis isn't relevant. Ed O.
OK. Then we agree. I'm responding to posts like mediocre man's when he says, "I am just getting sick of everyone saying it was Portland who said he couldn't play anymore." Clearly Portland DID say that. They said it before the doctors looked at him, and they said it after the doctors looked at him. The Blazers said it by asking doctors to look at him and then they said it after the doctors looked at him. This goes back to my post of pointing out who was driving this process... not Miles and not doctors. The Blazers were. But: WHY should those doctors come forward now? The doctors were not making a final determination. They were not condemning Miles's career or limiting it in any way. They gave opinions that allowed the Blazers to waive him because Miles had injuries that, if he were to retire, could have been considered responsible for that retirement. Ed O.
What you're saying implies that, supposing the Rockets tired of McGrady, they could just have a string of doctors look at his back (which, I'm assuming, is just as problematic as knees, if not more) until one said it was career-ending? Is it really that much individual opinion? That would be scary. I remember hearing back when Tim Hardaway was playing, that even while he was still at Golden State he essentially had no cartilage in his knees (the grisly phrase "bone on bone" kept being thrown around), but I guess he continued to play for many years. Could some doctor have declared that a "career-ending condition"?
That would not be relevant unless McGrady didn't want to play basketball any more. Doctors cannot prevent him, any more than they can Miles, from signing with and playing for other teams. Ed O.
Here's the difference: MM is claiming that, if the Blazers said it, they were simply reporting what the Doctors actually said. In other words, the DOCTORS MADE THE DECISION. You appear either to be outright denying this or trying to weasel round it in lawyerese. I'm not sure what you mean by "driving": yes, the Blazers clearly wanted it to be the case that Miles's injury be declared career-ending. No shit. Same deal for actually calling in the doctors. They may even have paid the drivers who drove the doctors to and from their offices. But that doesn't mean that they SAID it was career ending without Doctors first making that diagnosis. They would have had a legal shitstorm if Larry Miller had just come out and said, prior to any medical examination, "I'm going to have Miles declared medically unfit to play". Because I desire it. You really are a slippery customer, aren't you? Of course they're not condeming his fucking CAREER. They're declaring that his KNEE is a complete mess. And, I will bet you that the words "career-ending" had to come out of some doctor's mouth before anyone in the Blazers could officially declare it. This smells of bullshit. Clearly not just ANY reason that any player could give would count (certainly the league isn't going to give up cap space THAT easily). "I'm bored of the game" could be a reason a player could give for retiring. "It just isn't fun any more." "My back aches in the morning." "It hurts when I piss." None of those would do. Don't get me wrong - as I've said, the Blazers look like arseholes (and smell appropriately) in this, but what you're saying is pretty facile.
Let me ask you a question: suppose somebody lost both his arms in a horrific accident. His team wants cap relief so they get his injury declared "career ending" just like the Blazers. But some other team wants (let's say, purely hypothetically) to screw that team's cap space and sign the player, who still thinks he can play (he can play good positional defense still, even if his shot blocking is not what it was). That's legit? If not, then define "career-ending injury" for a player who still wants to play.
I think in that case that it would be clearly an effort to screw the other team. (Of course, it doesn't answer whether that would be illegal under the CBA or not...) One can take almost any position to an absurd one, though, and then try to apply that concept to a real-world situation. Miles can run. He can block shots. He can PLAY. Might he have worse knees for it? Absolutely. I guarantee that, though, that Brandon Roy's knees are going to be MUCH worse than mine are when we're both in our 60's... because I am naturally indolent and when I exercise it's all low- or no-impact stuff for my legs. My point by bringing that up is that athletes make trade-offs between health and career every year and every day. Until and unless doctors are given the go-ahead to shut a player down for his career, I don't think that they have the importance you're attributing to them in this thread. Ed O.
I remember your writing being sharper than this Ed. Are you drunk right now? Positions are not the same things as concepts, for one thing. For another, clearly the point of my hypothetical is to show that the notion of a career-ending injury for a player that still wants to play makes sense, so it is absurd to claim that a team like Memphis can NEVER in ANY CIRCUMSTANCES be justifiably held to be acting in bad faith. This is then a precursor to making some effort to outline the limits of the notion of a career-ending injury for a player who still wants to play. (And actually, I don't need to keep adding that qualifier "who still wants to play" because the league presumably doesn't care if he still wants to play - they just don't want to be tricked into giving cap space to a team that's just making shit up.) My armless player can run. He can block shots with his head. He can PLAY - at least, he can take a charge. Ah, the Donald Rumsfeld method of asking a question you want to answer and then answering it. I notice that you still haven't defined what a career-ending injury is. Clearly the league recognises such an idea, because it granted it in the Miles case. So what is it? But actually, I think I've got a solution to avoiding shitstorms like this: the League should simply remove the ten game rule. That just muddies the water. It absolutely opens the door to this kind of bad blood between teams. They should either get rid of the idea of a career ending injury altogether or they should just accept the doctor's decision for that team, and still allow another team to sign the player. That is, they should allow a player with a "career-ending injury" to play for another team because, as you have pointed out, if the player wants to risk himself and the other team doesn't care, then why not? Also it might be the case that an amazing surgical technique is invented in the interim. (Something like that actually happened with Jeff Ruland, who retired medically then came back years later when they invented a better technique to fix the ACL, I think it was.)
I've never claimed that they can't act in bad faith. Can he score 11 points in 8 minutes in an NBA regular season game? Miles can. This is RIDICULOUSLY simple. I have no idea why you can't understand it. There are two components: 1. An absence from NBA games for a certain period, and 2. A medical reason for that absence. Miles did NOT suffer a career-ending injury. His career is continuing, and after one more appearance the allowance Portland was granted is no longer in effect. The doctors' opinions, therefore, are irrelevant at this point. Ed O.
I suspect the league & player's union would not approve of seeking multiple opinions in order to get the desired response. The Blazers got lucky with their first expert opinion, ran with it, and look foolish now.
They don't look foolish, in my opinion. The Blazers knew Miles' knee was in bad shape, and they knew that he wouldn't play for a while... if ever. They filed for a medical retirement for Miles and it all worked... until this year. Good try. It didn't work, but that doesn't mean they look foolish. Ed O.
I'll agree with this now, solely because it makes the legal case that much stronger for the Blazers. The Blazers were not allowed to claim and, by doing so, guarantee the contract of an active and available NBA player. So what if Portland didn't want to play Miles? There is no rule against stashing a player on the bench so he can't play elsewhere, is there? The Marbury situation seems to answer that question.
The try itself didn't look foolish, but everything that came after it did, including KP's public comments immediately afterward that were not received well.
Don't you feel this change of position indicates that you're not being serious about how you're looking at the situation? I'm not convinced that the Blazers were not allowed to claim Miles. I was in favor of the Blazers attempting to claim him. I think that your points about the unfairness of the Grizzlies being able to claim him while Portland could have upgraded its 15th spot and/or denied other teams the services of Miles but were denied are pretty legit. IF the Blazers were denied the claim and/or threatened by the NBA. Ed O.
Thank you, Euthyphro. Wow, I had no idea that Martell Webster was retired! Does he have to be able to score 11 points in 11 minutes for this to happen? Otherwise my hypothetical no-armed man's career is equally continuing. So (on your logic) loss of arms is not a career-ending injury. Neither, in fact, is just about anything. You could be paralyzed from the neck down and if your teammates could help you on to the floor for one second of court time, your "career" would be "continuing".
And no one has said he couldn't play anymore. Independent doctors said that his injury was severe enough that forcing Miles to continue to play (i.e., earning his contract) would, with a high degree of certainty, result in significant long-term damage to his knee joints. It's the NBA equivalent of worker's comp.
However, a diagnosis of a degenerative knee condition is pretty easy. First, you take a look at the thickness of the cartilage and the coverage on the knee and make a mathematical calculation. Next, you examine all the MRI's taken over the past few years and compare and contrast them. In Miles' case, his knees got much worse over the past two years. In this case, there's not a lot of guesswork. Miles' joints aren't properly protected by what should be there. The microfracture procedure he underwent didn't work. It's a certainty that he's facing a knee replacement in the future if he continues to play or at the very least excruciating pain. You can't ask someone facing that future to fulfill their contract. On the flip side, if he chooses to risk his own joint health, the Blazers shouldn't be held accountable.
