Professional and College Basketball Forums banner
1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
153 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
This is a question for all of you capologists. With Marshall in the fold, is there anyway that the Bulls might be trying to pull off a stunning trade for Rashard Lewis? It just seems weird that he hasn't reupped with the Sonics, what with all of the signings last week. If Seattle is his only logical choice, why hasn't he signed?

Is it even possible to do a resigned Fizer/Crawford for Lewis type of trade?

Just curious.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,909 Posts
Well since resigning him will make him BYC, I do believe it would take additional players to bring him to Chicago.

I don't think it is an option anymore.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,227 Posts
This trade will never happen. Krauz will not give Lewis $90M over 7 years. $70 over 7 years is decent which i think Krauz may be willing to swallow. The deal can be done if and only if Sonics are will to take ERob along.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,820 Posts
Originally posted by <b>LoaKhoet</b>!
This trade will never happen. Krauz will not give Lewis $90M over 7 years. $70 over 7 years is decent which i think Krauz may be willing to swallow. The deal can be done if and only if Sonics are will to take ERob along.
A deal could still work but would be even more unlikely than before

For ERob to be thrown into the mix they would have to throw a salary like Potapenko back to make it work

And further , given that the whole idea of trading Lewis would be to give surety in the avoidance of paying the luxury tax - and given that even with ERob's low market value currently , the talent differential between Potapenko and ERob is extreme - they would need to give up someone like Joseph Forte or a protected future 1st round pick

But if we insisted upon Joseph Forte to be thrown into the deal - potentially an ideal triangle guard , why the hell did we let AJ Guyton walk ??

Maybe the future first round pick is a better way to go

Anyway ...

Fizer
Crawford
ERob

= $10.8M in salary to Seattle

Lewis @ $7M starting ( with 12.5% raises = 7 years at $71.7M )
Potapenko @ $5.2M

= $12.2M coming back to Chicago

Resulting in $1.4M saving in salary which gives them 13 players at $50.4M as opposed to 12 players at $51.8M with Rashard shown as being on the books for his player's option at $5M .

Anything more than the $5.2M which takes them up to a neat $52M and Rashard himself over the BYC threshhold puts them fairly and squarely into luxury tax land and dollar for dollar penalties - which , for Rashard at $7M starting could mean $2M in penalties for the Supes

But this is beer money compared to the real cost, which is really an opportunity cost - being the escrow refund/distribution back to the franchise owners . This figure varies as to what it may be but it could in the vicinity of around $16M to $20M per franchise that is under which gets directly offset against payroll cost

Percy Allen from the Seattle Times reported a few days ago that the Supes are willing to exceed to the luxury tax limit to resign Rashard however

Being an economic rationalist though , I challenged him on his assertion and am still waiting on a reply . This is what I had to say to him

Percy

Is this an indisputable fact?

Because if it is it means the Supes could forfeit an economic benefit in the vicinity of $18M by exceeding the L Tax to resign Rashard to his contract that I assume would start off between $6M - $7M this year

It would appear that this benefit forfeited would be the average benefit returned to owners from the escrow fund of players salaries ( 10% of total salary ) who manage to stay under the L Tax limit

I mean I know Shard is good but let's say you sign him and he takes you over the limit by $2M if you sign him to a contact starting at $7M ( on my numbers they can only afford to have him starting at $5M to stay under the projected limit at its max of $52M ) Anyway... his $7M is really $9M - which is pre L Tax days he may have got .. BUT if he tips you over the limit and the Supes forfeit say $18M in net payroll cost benefit , is Shard really worth $27M next year ? ( $9M effective cost with dollar for dollar penalty added to base + $18M economic cost )

Because of this 'economic cost" issue of escrow refund I would see this as the single biggest reason why no deal has been worked out with Rashard yet when the most he can get elsewhere in the league ( outside of a sign and trade ) is the mid level exception at $4.5M -which is $100K more than he earned last year - so why would he bother . Additionally he would have to stay with that team for 3 years to get his bird rights back under the CBA.

Further , it is very hard to sign and trade Rashard - almost impossible on his own because if he signs on for more than $5.2M elsewhere he becomes a Base Year Compensation player under the CBA and this means that the Supes could accept up to $5.2M for him in returning player contracts - but the new nominal amount of his starting contract needs to be taken in full by the new team - an they must be under the salary cap limit to do it - which means the only teams that had a capability of doing a sign and trade were Washington , Chicago and the LA Clippers.

In so far as the Clippers are concerned they did not need to sign and trade anyone because they could have just paid him the max or near max outright without giving any players back - which leaves Chicago and Washington - both of who would have had around $4M and $6M respectively in cap room if we both had of renounced our free agents and taken the cap room instead of relying on the exceptions to sign free agents. Washington effectively ended this when they used the mid level exception to sign Larry Hughes

This left Chicago on it own that could have sent Jamal Crawford and Marcus Fizer - $5M in salary - renounced our free agents to have $4M approx in uncontested cap - thereby having $9M in salary to pay Rashard starting at say $7M . That would have left us with 9 players at say $37M - with $3M to spread against a minimum of 3 roster spots - and this cost would have been made up of our 2nd round picks Lonny Baxter and Roger Mason Jr and our free agent signing at $1.4M - Corie Blount.

We (my team is Chi ) could have given the Supes young talent where they need young talent ( PF and PG - I can't see Payton coming back ) and the Supes could have positioned themselves in free agency in 2003 with around $15M to spend ( if Glove signed elsewhere and all free agents were renounced ) and with a young nucleus in place of

James and Booth at Center
Fizer at PF
Radmanovic at SF
Mason at SG
Crawford at PG

Plus you would likely have a lottery pick to add to this mix next summer.

OR ....

It would have made sense to deal Payton , Booth and Barry and taken back Othella Harrington , Charlie Ward and Spree . Chicago could have sent Eddie Robinson to New York and we would have received back Brent Barry

Seattle would have looled like :

James/Potapenko/Drobjnak
Fizer/Harrington
Sprewell/Radmanovic
Mason/Forte
Andersen/Crawford/Ward

but would have saved around $4M in salary this year which is the trade exception differential in what it gives out and what comes back in - rebuilding on the fly and young talent acquired and productive vets in Ward Harrington and Sprewell - plus a probable decent lottery position to add to the mix in 2003 , plus the full mid level exception at say $4.5M to add a free agent or two to complement the young core / vets. The point is , Seattle would have definately avoided the Luxury tax dilemna this year

If Glove was dealt and put on a winner - no *****in - if Shard had his money and the Supes facilitated a sign and trade - no *****in

If the Supes did nothing and let Shard walk for the exception to say Dallas - there's *****in from Shard's camp - they get Glove to play out his contract without the intent of giving the Glove his love on payday next summer - the Glove uses Shard's situation to turn up the heat on the Supes in free agency and would have him *****in at them all year - all of which is unproductive in the Supes trying to win and would destine them for the lottery anyway if they are resigned to letting Glove go.

The Supes have to face facts that they are one of four teams vying for two playoff spots ( Clips, Jazz, Rockets being the other three ) and if Glove is probably gone by next summer and they are at best going to be a first round play off team at best and tell Glove to take the Shove , then why would they absorb an overall effective hit of $27M by resigning Shard when they are nowhere near being a true contender with or without Rashard?

Its as simple ( or should be ) as hardcore economic rationalism

By investigating / creating a type of trading scenario like this when it presented itself they had the opportunity to sidestep the luxury tax dilemna/potential costs and rebuilt on the fly by being courageous enough to admit that they need to move forward without Glove and that Shard and Brent Barry are going to make you a marginal playoff team at best for the next several seasons with the young up and coming teams and entrenched power bases that are much better structured ( in terms of their talent ) out West.

Put bluntly, the Clips and the Rockets have all their pieces to be big for a very long time and will replace the Supes and Jazz 's place in the top 8 teams - the others being the Lakers, Kings, Mavs, Blazers, Wolves and Spurs.

With Glove and Booth , New York could have looked like :

Thomas/ Booth/ Doleac
McDyess / Weatherspoon/Knight
E.Robinson/Andersen
Houston/Postell
Payton/Eisley/F.Williams

That's a team that's ready to compete out East now with McDyess and Robinson being healthy - probably an Eastern Conference contender that I reckon would slug it out with the Nets - the battle of the Hudson

Rashard's situation in Chicago would have looked like this :

Curry/Blount/Bagaric
Chandler/ Baxter
Lewis/Barry
Rose/ Hassell/ Hoiberg
Jay Williams/Roger Mason Jr / Kevin Ollie ( FA target )

Curry, Chandler, Lewis , Rose and Jay Williams could have made some serious noise in the East within 3 years ... and for a long time to come after that - Rashard being the perfect long range threat to team with Jay Williams from down town - to the double teams that Eddy Curry and Tyson Chandler will ultimately bring . Plus he would have got long term security with money in big media market Chicago which is healthy for the endorsement dollar .

In short if Chicago were massaged to take on Lewis, Lewis could have got a 7 year $72M contract .

But , all this woulda , coulda , shoulda would have had a hard time getting off the ground as I imagine the Supes would have thought too linear in terms of what they thought was fair and reasonable with what they were getting back for Rashard . In this regard Fizer and Crawford , - if they were ever seriously offered would have been thought of as insufficient ( without other benefits being considered as I have outlined to you ) and that's what would have stopped it right there

As it is we did not renounce our free agents - we took the exceptions and signed Blount and Marshall which means that Rashard has to take less money to leave Seattle and hope that at some future point someone will pay him what he is worth - and, is he not in a mess in the first place because he trusted that his payday would come now two years ago when he took less money to stay in Seattle?

In an environment when "non difference maker" salaries are shrinking and will continue to shrink , there can be no realistic comfort for Rashard to take that he will get his payday in a another couple of years down the track

The reality is ( as I see it from a negotiating tactic point of view ) the Supes do not have to exceed the luxury tax to sign him . They can afford to keep him starting at around $5M - $5.5M starting because this is more than he will make anywhere else and if he yields to taking less to get more later as he did a couple of years ago - this is heavy baggage to have him carrying around with what happened to him 2 years ago which is the direct cause of the mess he is in now.

If Rashard is smart he will know its a zero sum game where he can only come out on the short end .

What he should do - is take his medicine with the Supes and insist upon a 2 year deal with an opt out clause next summer - so that he has two shots at free agency and cashing in over the next two years.

He then should play his *** off and get his value so high that it is impossible to ignore him when he eventually comes back to free agency whether it be in 2003 or in 2004.

And that is how he should maximise his payday

Mark Hayes


If I hear back from him I will post his response - but I included this email here as it addresses RealFan's question as to what is happening with him and why he has not resigned .

The fact is the Supes can stand on the digs and offer him a 7 year $52M contract and lace it with incentives to placate he and his agent, save around $18M in penalties this year and save a further $20M in salary costs over the next 7 years - the difference between maybe what his market worth contract is at ( say $72M ) to what he will likely get ($52M )

So the question I asked Percy was , was Rashard worth an effective cost of $27M this season if he was signed at a nominal $7M starting - but the question needs to be looked at in a different way in terms of cost saving

If they sign him for 7 years at $52M and he starts at $5M and the Supes avoid the luxury tax . The Supes will save/procure say $20M next season in payroll offset in excrow refunds. But they will also save a further $20M over the term of the contract by using the luxury tax as an excuse to keep his contract artificially low - and possibly ( IMO ) $20M under what he is probably realistically worth and entitled to.

So the real cost benefit for the Supes in playing hard ball with Rashard is possibly a $40M saving over 7 years to have his services if Rashard and his agent can be intimidated into a 7 year $52M deal.

What's happening in this case example at the moment is Capitalist Darwinism at its finest

Take your medicine like a man Rashard
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
835 Posts
If the Sonics did the same thing Utah did to Marshall then Lewis would be screwed. He would have to take Dallas mid level exemption, providing that offer is still there. that is about a 5 million a year pay cut.

How good does that guy think he is ? I've never thought of him as all star talent.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,820 Posts
Originally posted by <b>sinkingship</b>!
If the Sonics did the same thing Utah did to Marshall then Lewis would be screwed. He would have to take Dallas mid level exemption, providing that offer is still there. that is about a 5 million a year pay cut.

How good does that guy think he is ? I've never thought of him as all star talent.
He is screwed and the Supes are turning the screws - this is the whole point

And if he takes the mid level exception from Dallas ( which I don't think he will as he would have taken it already if he was serious ) then it is actually a $500K pay cut he would have earnt on his $5M player option this year had he not have opted out to test free agency. It's not a $5M pay cut at all .

I think you are confusing expected earnings with actual earnings he will receive. Big difference.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
835 Posts
I'll rephrase it. It is not a "pay cut" compared to his salary last season.

It is a "pay difference" of what he would make if he signs the contract of 7 years, 70 million. 5 million or so a year.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
835 Posts
Actually, the more I think of it the more it amazes me.

That guy is getting offered 70 million dollars to play basketball. This is not even an all star and he is getting offered 70 mil. What is wrong with this world when a guy like Lewis is unhappy and feels cheated because he is "only" being offered 70 million dollars.

People in this world are starving, living in the streets, sick and dying. This guy is "upset" and rejects that measly offer from Seattle. He could buy a small country with that much loot.

Friggin Gordon Gekko.

I hope no one signs the guy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,709 Posts
Just a CLASSIC example...

Originally posted by <b>sinkingship</b>!
Actually, the more I think of it the more it amazes me.

That guy is getting offered 70 million dollars to play basketball. This is not even an all star and he is getting offered 70 mil. What is wrong with this world when a guy like Lewis is unhappy and feels cheated because he is "only" being offered 70 million dollars.

People in this world are starving, living in the streets, sick and dying. This guy is "upset" and rejects that measly offer from Seattle. He could buy a small country with that much loot.

Friggin Gordon Gekko.

I hope no one signs the guy.
....of WHAT is actually happening in pro sports.....bunch of greedy overrated sports celebrities.

You hope no one signs him? hahaha.....if no one did, I would say I was hopeful about the future of pro sports!! I would rather watch the Donut King El Amin than a bunch of self proclaimed superstars.
 

·
Rollin Wit Da Homies
Joined
·
5,080 Posts
Lewis should just take the $52 M, FJ. That would make the most sense.

Or, he can pull a Tim Duncan and sign for a shorter term, if he has balls. Then he can get something of a raise, but also increase his market value until a strategically chosen year with teams in his sights that he might move to. That's a lot of fortune telling, maybe, but if he has confidence in his playing ability, I'd say he should go in for a 3 year $22 M deal, increasing over the years in such a way that the Sonics stay under the cap.

3 years from now, Rashard Lewis can sign a REAL long term deal for a lot more money, and after the next CBA, which might be advantageous to him... like we've been saying, he might not get signed by ANYONE.

AND it keeps the Sonics happy too, as far as luxury tax issues, as well as salary cap to sign some quality players around 2004 ish.

Even a two year deal would be interesting, but I doubt the Sonics would agree to it, since they probably don't see the Finals within the next two years, and don't want to waste the money on a player that they can't rebuild around.

Three years is the magic number, IMO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,149 Posts
Sonics shopping Lewis

http://www.tribnet.com/sports/basketball/sonics/story/1654990p-1771866c.html

Well, it appears that the Sonics might be looking to trade after all. IMO, FJ's trade would give us a realistic shot at the playoffs and still a tremendous long-term future. I think our lineup would be something like this:

Curry 28, Chandler 8, Potapenko 12
Marshall 16, Chandler 20, Blount 12
Lewis 36, Marshall 12
Rose 36, Hassell 12
JWill 30, Best? 18
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,160 Posts
A Billion Ways to Trade Crawford & Fizer for Lewis

We can only offer Lewis $56M over seven years in a straight up Crawford & Fizer for Lewis S&T.

I don't know if we could include the reported 25% bonuses for each year that he makes the All-Star team that reportedly is being offered by Seattle, but interestingly he probably would be more likely to make the All-Star team in the Eastern Conference.

If he made the All-Star team just once for Seattle in, say the fifth year of his contract, and made it three times for us, say in his third, fifth, and seventh years, his Chicago contract would be worth $62.5M and his Seattle contract would be worth $62.3M.

But I think we would stand a much better shot if we could guarantee $65M-$70M.

We could do so if we simultaneously traded some combination of Robinson, Best, Hoiberg, Oakley, and Bagaric to Seattle or another team for a little less salary. (I am assuming that Robinson has to be included on the Bulls' part, because of the logjam keeping him would cause for us at SF.)

Here are 20 possibilities.

1. Eddie Robinson for Vitaly Potapenko
2. Eddie Robinson for Calvin Booth
3. Eddie Robinson for Brent Barry
4. Eddie Robinson for Avery Johnson
5. Eddie Robinson for Jahidi White
6. Eddie Robinson for Christian Laettner
7. Eddie Robinson & Travis Best for Jahidi White & Chris Whitney
8. Eddie Robinson & Travis Best for Christian Laettner & Chris Whitney
9. Eddie Robinson & Norm Richardson for George Lynch, Bryce Drew, & Matt Bullard
10. Eddie Robinson for Kurt Thomas
11. Eddie Robinson for Clarence Weatherspoon
12. Eddie Robinson & Norm Richardson for Howard Eisley
13. Eddie Robinson & Norm Richardson for Charlie Ward
14. Eddie Robinson & Travis Best for Nick Anderson & Bimbo Coles
15. Eddie Robinson & Travis Best for Greg Ostertag
16. Eddie Robinson for Jason Caffey
17. Eddie Robinson for Anthony Mason
18. Eddie Robinson & Travis Best for Toni Kukoc
19. Eddie Robinson for Danny Fortson
20. Eddie Robinson & Norm Richardson for Bobby Sura

If these trades would get the Lewis trade done, I would accept any of them. If a player like Mason or Fortson become too troublesome, we could just try to buy-out their contract.

But I think JK still is high on Crawford or thinks Lewis is not worth $70M. Or more likely Seattle would rather get nothing than Crawford & Fizer.

And without Robinson, Crawford, & Fizer, we would have plenty of playing time for Lewis, Rose, Marshall, and Hassell.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,160 Posts
Actually, we can do a little better without involving a third team!

We can trade Crawford, Fizer, and Richardson (signed at the minimum) for Lewis signed at $61.7M over 7 years. That is more than he is being offered by the Sonics.

Since Richardson is signed at the minimum, he counts for the Bulls in trying to figure out how much salary we can accept, but not for the Sonics. That is why this works for the Sonics. This would put the Sonics at less than $50.5M in guaranteed contracts (according to a site that I think is better than HoopsHype), which should be safely under the luxury tax threshold.

Here is a possible rotation after this trade.

PG: JWill (30), Rose (18)
SG: Rose (17), Hassell (22), Robinson (9)
SF: Lewis (35), Robinson (13)
PF: Chandler (17), Marshall (31)
C: Curry (25), Chandler (8), Blount (15)

Hoiberg, Baxter, Mason, and Bagaric provide injury support. I think eventually we would trade Robinson for a veteran PG or C, but we could find him time on a team with four guys who could play major SF minutes (Rose, Marshall, Robinson, and Lewis).

And if Rose signs on after 2006/07 for two years at 75% of his 2006/07 salary, he would be making almost 60% more than Lewis over this seven year period. Rose is a better complete package than Lewis right now, but over this seven-year period, there is no way he is worth 60% more than Lewis.
 

·
Beware of Elbows
Joined
·
18,500 Posts
Originally posted by <b>RealFan</b>!
This is a question for all of you capologists. With Marshall in the fold, is there anyway that the Bulls might be trying to pull off a stunning trade for Rashard Lewis? It just seems weird that he hasn't reupped with the Sonics, what with all of the signings last week. If Seattle is his only logical choice, why hasn't he signed?

Is it even possible to do a resigned Fizer/Crawford for Lewis type of trade?

Just curious.
I think Eddie Robinson would have to be included in that deal, because otherwise the Bulls would have too many very good SFs. Unless they moved Marshall to PF. But if they didn't move Marshall to PF, the Bulls would want a PF in return.

The Sonics probably wouldn't trade Potapenko, since they just got him from Boston, and I doubt they'd trade Vladimir Radmanovic.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,820 Posts
I think the only way Shard signs a 7 year deal is if it is $70M +

And even if he was going to sign a 7 year $60M deal with incentives, $1.7M over 7 is not a sufficient enough incentive for him to leave Seattle

For him to leave and come to us , we have to take Potapenko (the most surplus and least valued - but with the biggest contract big man ) and we throw in ERob - and start Rashard at $7M with 12.5% raises ( $71.7M contract )

You may be right . We may not want ERob at that price and Jerry may be as unwilling to part with Jamal and Marcus as what Seattle are to receive them

Whatever way Seattle and Rashard go they are all screwed (except for Rashard in this S and T proposal to Chi)

As I have said before this is inextricably tied to Payton as well.

If Seattle are muscling Shard into a below market long term deal and refuse to negotiate an opt out next season or thereafter on a shorter term contract - he is better off walking leaving Seattle with no compensation ( but avoiding the L Tax )

Seattle may not be too busted up about this but ( IMO ) they severely underestimate the Payton factor and the ramifications it creates there with Glove and Aaron Goodwin b*tchin at them all season long and using the Lewis situation as leverage to beat them up in the press until they trade him to a contender - in which case they still stand to get players back they don't want which is maybe the situation with Lewis and Fizer/Crawford.

If they have Glove play out his season and he goes for zip as Rashard has done ( if he does ) - they will have failed to parlay some value from their two biggest assets and they will have missed the opportunity to add young talent at two positions where they need it most vitally - point and power forward

They will go into free agency with a boatload of dough but what free agent is going to come to Seattle without a support structure in place and an unproven nucleus in place in Rad, Mase, Booth James??

Free agents - particularly marginal big time free agents do not want to do it on their own - they have not got the balls for it.

So the Supes would be in a situation of having all this caproom and not being able to control their own destiny

The alternative is to accept the young talent in Crawford and Fizer that they could effectively "rent" for the rest of the year ibn a try before you buy scheme ( in that they can still cut them lose in free agency next year by not picking up their options and thus preserve the cap room if they do not feel they will work with the Supes going forward )

If young talent comes back with no proven young vet then this isolates Glove as well and you still got the same wildcard factor with him all season long being a disruptive force as he has done in the past.

The call to make ( IMO ) is deal Shard to someone that will pay him his money ( presumably us but I am not convinced we would ) and have a deal lined up for Glove at the same time where you get vet help back in Spree, Ward and Harrington - the latter two only have 2 years to run , Spree has 3 years to run .

At least these 3 with the young nucleus of talent and a likely lottery pick in 2003 will allow you to avoid the L Tax and position yourself attractively to get someone reasonably decent in free agency with the mid level exception next year

And who knows , Fizer or Crawford could turn out to be the bomb - and it is for this reason on a long term talent / contribution issue that I struggle seeing the equity in a Fizer/Crawford for Lewis trade - a trade I would still be inclined to do however for balance and structure in the interests of the team as opposed to making one dimensional assessments of talent v talent.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
153 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
I think by the lack of movement on the Sonics part (along with Lewis), and the link posted above that sign and trades are being actively explored, that the Bulls may be involved in these discussions.

Perhaps Seattle has asked for a combination which includes Crawford, Fizer and filler. And perhaps Krause, knowing that Seattle has very few options and that the Bulls don't need to do a deal, is trying to hang on to one of Fizer or Crawford while still landing Lewis.

I assume that ERob would have to be part of the package no matter what, along with one of Fizer or Crawford and filler.

But until Lewis signs, I think something might still be up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,160 Posts
FJ, I really have no idea what is going on inside the heads of the Sonics' owners and Lewis. I think they are frustrated enough with each other that anything is possible.

Either JK doesn't really care much for Lewis or he is the best bluffer in the history of the free agent market. He certainly has not given any impression that Lewis is even on the radar screen.

But maybe as the price for Lewis continues to fall, Crawford & Fizer will someday soon be above the asking price and this trade will get done. As FJ pointed out in another thread, Seattle does have the option of not picking up the options of one or both of these two, which means that they probably are better off than just letting Rashard go.

One last thing. FJ, when you send e-mails to sportswriters and executives, I think it works better to have much shorter and focused e-mails. I have only had one case out of six where I have not received a response to an e-mail using that strategy and there happens to be one prominent sportswriter who actually e-mailed me six times today in an ongoing conversation. I have also received two return e-mails from another sportswriter, two return e-mails from an economist who has consulted for the NBA Players Association and currently is doing the same for the MLB Players Association, a phone call from a prominent Bulls' executive, and e-mails from top lawyers for the NBA and NBA Players Associaton. My only partially unsuccessful e-mail was a blanket one that I sent to NBA.COM that actually ended up getting answered by an NBA lawyer after getting a better contact.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,820 Posts
NC

Well that's all well and good and thanks for the tip -but we are not dealing with remedial economics - there are broader business issues here that are complex

And where it is complex you need context

When a hack comes out and reports with no clear understanding of the financial implications that will drive the business case - well there are things that need explaining

And yes Frank has responded to my emails too
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top