Does that mean we have to PAY HIM the money or does that just mean the money comes off our books and he doesn't get any of it? That would suck if he actually got the money!!!
His salary will likely be put back on our books. Shortly thereafter, we will file an appeal to the League Office to have it taken back off. We will likely also begin suing a lot of people. This isn't over. We're being messed with and from my own tangential sources, folks at One Center Court are none too pleased.
This is just going to get uglier and uglier for the franchise. Hopefully the NBA steps in before it gets too ugly for Portland.
But does Miles HIMSELF get that money? Or does he not get to see a penny of it and it just goes on our books?
He gets his money from the contract he signed with us regardless if he plays the 10th game or not. Contracts in the NBA are gauranteed. Insurance is covering most of it (80% I think).
Just HOW is this so ugly? The Blazers are merely trying to maintain their position as a key player in the 2009 FA sweepstakes. I don't feel uncomfortable with anything the Blazers have done to this point.
He was ALWAYS going to get the money. He's getting paid by the Blazers RIGHT NOW. The only difference is whether or not his salary gets counted against the cap. When he hits ten games he becomes like a player a team just waived to get rid of, taking the cap hit. What I wonder is whether or not the Blazers could legitimately say "hey, if that Doctor hadn't declared him unfit, we wouldn't have waived him. So, if you the league are now saying that the doctor was wrong, then we take back our waiving, which was entirely conditional on that decision, and Miles is our player again." Why would they do that? Clearly not because they want him back. It would be one of two reasons: (a) to punish him (which would not be right), or (b) so that they can trade him (bundle him with Raef, for example), and get his salary off the books that way I don't see anything wrong with (b), and it seems to me that the Blazers should fight for that right.
I wonder if the insurance issue comes into play? Does insurance still pay 80% or can they make a claim that the Blazers duped them with a medical report that Daruis can't play and now that he can they aren't paying his salary under the insurance policy. In any event, I think once Darius plays his 10th game, this whole thing will be put to rest. Blazers will make the smart business decision and let this thing go. How they let it go (if they do) will be interesting. Announcement they aren't taking action or just take no action and leave it at that?
No doubt the lawyers will get a ton of $ to untangle this. My understanding is that not only will Miles count against the cap, they will also pay the luxury tax on his money, true?
Nice. I agree (except for trading Outlaw for a second-round pick). Memphis did the dirty work for every other NBA team, and sold out just for a few hundred thousand because their franchise sucks and no one cares about them. They're last in attendance, and I highly doubt Miles will be with them next season. Why would they think he'd be a key contributor when they've got guys like Gay, Mayo and Warrick to develop? The Grizz are a joke.
The NBA did step in and denied the Blazers' claim of a waived player. A player that was not the property of any team, and a player who was waived by one of the worst franchises in the league the day before.
Once Miles plays his 10th game... Miles' salary is paid to Darius 100% by Paul Allen. Miles would have only gotten paid 80% of $26.5 million by insurance if he didn't get play in 10 NBA games. This move will save money for many people, but will cost Paul Allen a lot of money.
For the 100th time (not 100th time for you), the Blazers didn't make the call. The NBA and the players' union agreed to an independent doctor who made that call, and Darius signed the paperwork validating that call. This is actually covered specifically in the CBA, unlike the NBA's denial of the Blazers claiming Miles off of waivers.
And for the 100th time, Blazes initiated the process. But you are the one lost on the issue . . . I raised the insurnance issue, which comes down to the policy between the franchise and the insurance carrier. So it is the policy that controls that issue and I'm guessing you have no idea wht is int he policy (like I don't). If Raef plays this year, insurance doesn't cover his contract. So my thought was I wonder if the insurance company can now say Miles played this year, we aren't covering his contract. Again, I don't know because I don't know what the policy says . . . but it is not a CBA issue or player's union issue.
The insurance company clearly agreed to pay as to the terms of the CBA and by all reports is doing so at this point. If Miles plays 10 games, I imagine the team pays 100% regardless of any legal action the Blazers take against the NBA. Seems pretty obvious to me. Where does a lawsuit come into it? The insurance claim likely has nothing to do with any legal manuevering the team. I don't understand how you can say the team filed a false claim when the insurance carrier is already conducting business as to the terms of that claim as spelled out in the CBA.
