OK. Markieff Morris a Raptor? Really??

[e_wheazhy_]

If I'm not mistaken, can he not get into trouble for speaking out against this.

I've signed a few contracts in my day but part of those deals usually involved me not disparaging the film or tv show I was working on

That makes sense. Maybe those clauses don't exist in NBA contracts/ are impossible due to the CBA, as it encroaches the players' right to free speech...?

[DanH]

Players get fined for publicly demanding trades or criticizing their organizations. Standard NBA rules. Not sure if Morris has been fined yet, but if he keeps it up he will be.

[Wild-ling#1]

Here's the thing - he had the option of "working in servitude" for one year and making millions. No need for term - he chose that.

But I am told one can't include a term that voids an NBA contract if another player is traded (and so they can't void the contract on an allegation of a verbal, corollary but illegal term). So it is generally conceded that the very point of his signing for four years was to trade his freedom - and some millions of dollars - to secure an understanding he'd be play with his twin brother for the life of the contract. These things are conceded because of public (and very happy) statements made by both management and the brothers at the time of the signings. Everyone knew it was important to them. If yoyu've ever known identical twind you might have some sense of how very close they can be.

And so it is widely understood he was both betrayed ... and ripped off. People get upset when this happens. Pretty much everybody. (

- Less so when it happens to others, though ... right Dan?

(The question does arise as to whether he and his brother might have both secured no-trade clauses. Speculative. Perhaps there is some reason they couldn't. Perhaps they would have been fine if traded together. Don't know.)

[DanH]

If he signed a contract that didn't stipulate that his brother couldn't be traded, then he was stupid to sign a multi-year deal.

It doesn't matter what the "understanding" is - non-contractual understandings are against the rules of the CBA - the team couldn't have promised not to trade either of them if they wanted to.

Simple solution - if you want to play in the same place as your brother, each sign a 1 year deal - that way any trade only separates you for a few months (also, with PHX both twins would have gotten no-trade clauses).

It clearly was not that important to them - they sold out their ability to stay together for more guaranteed money. A perfectly acceptable choice. But certainly one they made.

Yes, PHX is terribly managed and has alienated players. But they are well within their rights to do so. Morris is not within his rights to want to receive all the benefits of the contract he signed without honouring the terms.

[raptors999]

But I am told one can't include a term that voids an NBA contract if another player is traded (and so they can't void the contract on an allegation of a verbal, corollary but illegal term). So it is generally conceded that the very point of his signing for four years was to trade his freedom - and some millions of dollars - to secure an understanding he'd be play with his twin brother for the life of the contract. These things are conceded because of public (and very happy) statements made by both management and the brothers at the time of the signings. Everyone knew it was important to them. If yoyu've ever known identical twind you might have some sense of how very close they can be.

And so it is widely understood he was both betrayed ... and ripped off. People get upset when this happens. Pretty much everybody. (

- Less so when it happens to others, though ... right Dan?

(The question does arise as to whether he and his brother might have both secured no-trade clauses. Speculative. Perhaps there is some reason they couldn't. Perhaps they would have been fine if traded together. Don't know.)

If he gets fined or not he should file a complaint with the union. He seems to have some reason to be very upset

[Wild-ling#1]

If he signed a contract that didn't stipulate that his brother couldn't be traded, then he was stupid to sign a multi-year deal.

It doesn't matter what the "understanding" is - non-contractual understandings are against the rules of the CBA - the team couldn't have promised not to trade either of them if they wanted to.

Simple solution - if you want to play in the same place as your brother, each sign a 1 year deal - that way any trade only separates you for a few months (also, with PHX both twins would have gotten no-trade clauses).

It clearly was not that important to them - they sold out their ability to stay together for more guaranteed money. A perfectly acceptable choice. But certainly one they made.

Yes, PHX is terribly managed and has alienated players. But they are well within their rights to do so. Morris is not within his rights to want to receive all the benefits of the contract he signed without honouring the terms.

Apparently, the whole City of Pheonix understood what "the deal" was. And I don't think it's necessarily "stupid" to trust people - sometimes informal understandings are better than trying to reduce subtle and changeable matters to print. But I do think Phoenix was stupid to try to screw their guy like this. I'm pretty sure Markieff will get his way, if he's bold and persistent. And I think Phoenix will be worse off (as they were when Dragic left) ... and Morris will be fine.

.... Matter of fact, the team that gets him may find him a very well motivated dude.

[Axel]

But I do think Phoenix was stupid to try to screw their guy like this.

This is where I call BS. Phoenix didn't screw anyone. The Morris twins changed the game and screwed themselves.

Phoenix acted perfectly reasonably when one of their fringe rotation players was charged with felony assault - they traded him to recoup some assets. Whenever a player gets into serious legal trouble, teams will always consider this route (especially if they feel he is guilty).

If the Morris twins wanted to remain together for the life of their contract, not getting arrested and charged with assault would probably have helped accomplish that.

The Morris twins themselves are as much to blame for the situation as anyone in the front office. Sympathy factor = zero.

[DanH]

Who cares if the city understood what the deal was? Get it in writing, or don't count on it. What is it that every single player says whenever there is a trade? "It's a business." Players understand this. It was stupid to imagine that neither would ever be traded.

And they had options to take that would have ensured they could stay together - really ensured it. They chose not to for more money. That's fine. But don't pretend they didn't make that choice.

[Wild-ling#1]

Well, the sense, from at least some NBA writers, and especially reporters out of Phoenix, is that Markieff (like Dragic) was betrayed/slight and/or "hoodwinked" ... whatever you (or I, for that matter). think.

But while you might call him "naive". Or conclude that he was poorly advised (though, as I've suggested it might have been contractually difficult to guarantee that both brothers remain). You might also conclude that money was was more important than stability (though I'm not certain pf this because of what I just said (between the last brackets).

YOouhave these options, and possibly more, before you go on to call the man "stupid". And I don't think intelligence - however useful - is a moral virtue, Dan. Otherwise the term "evil genius" would be oxymoronic - and that we know is simply not true.

BUt I think kindness, fairness and moderation, in one's behaviour and remarks, can be moral virtues ... would you not agree?

[DanH]

Contractually difficult? Sign a one year deal, automatic no-trade clause. Not sure how that could be considered contractually difficult.

[DanH]

I call him one of two things - either willing to leave his and his brother's fates in the hands of team ownership for more money, or not doing a modicum of research (ie asking his agent for his options) before signing probably the most important contract of his life. That's either greedy or stupid. Or he actually doesn't care that much about sticking with his brother.

[Wild-ling#1]

This is where I call BS. .... If the Morris twins wanted to remain together for the life of their contract, not getting arrested and charged with assault would probably have helped accomplish that.

The Morris twins themselves are as much to blame for the situation as anyone in the front office. Sympathy factor = zero.

People are held innocent until proven guilty not only because it seems unfair to judge people before the allegations are tested and all persons with knowledge of the events are heard from (though this is fairly important to some) but also because further facts may cast events in a different - and even quite unexpected - light.

I have read that the man in question had been estranged from the Morris family for years. But it seems the reason for the estrangement remains private - and this might be quite significant, might it not? And it also remains possible that the Morris brothers might not have participated in the assault. But it does seem likely that they are the very best targets for a civil suit. Ans such suits are quite routinely settled - and as a mere matter of convenience and financial prudence - for tens of thousands of dollars.

But you say: "Sympathy factor = Zero."


While I do not condone assaults, I do have some sympathy up-front where - whatever happened, and whoever acted most forcefully - the motive was, in some sense, to protect Ms. Morris (their mother).

[Wild-ling#1]

Contractually difficult? Sign a one year deal, automatic no-trade clause. Not sure how that could be considered contractually difficult.

Yeah, sure, sounds simple enough, right? But I don't think that's necessarily so.

Renegotiating contracts every year would present, by itself, significant risks ... and distractions/tensions/headaches. But trying to tie the team's hands for the full four years might also have been thought problematic - by all. So they may have been willing to settle for an assurance that, for the foreseeable future (meaning a couple of years, say?) they were going to give the current roster a chance.

This is speculation on my part, of course. But what is not speculation, I don't think, is that the Suns management has simply not denied giving some such assurance to the Morris brothers. And this might be difficult not for the simplest possible reason - that the Suns management are all blind and deaf-mutes - but because the news reports that accompanied the signings are still available on the 'net.

[Axel]

People are held innocent until proven guilty not only because it seems unfair to judge people before the allegations are tested and all persons with knowledge of the events are heard from (though this is fairly important to some) but also because further facts may cast events in a different - and even quite unexpected - light.

I have read that the man in question had been estranged from the Morris family for years. But it seems the reason for the estrangement remains private - and this might be quite significant, might it not? And it also remains possible that the Morris brothers might not have participated in the assault. But it does seem likely that they are the very best targets for a civil suit. Ans such suits are quite routinely settled - and as a mere matter of convenience and financial prudence - for tens of thousands of dollars.

But you say: "Sympathy factor = Zero."


While I do not condone assaults, I do have some sympathy up-front where - whatever happened, and whoever acted most forcefully - the motive was, in some sense, to protect Ms. Morris (their mother).

But the assault was really just the tip of the iceberg. All season long the twins have fought with coaches, refs, media, opponents and fans. Assault charges weren't the beginning of the problems they caused Phoenix but it was obviously the end for at least one twin.

[DanH]

Yeah, sure, sounds simple enough, right? But I don't think that's necessarily so.

Renegotiating contracts every year would present, by itself, significant risks ... and distractions/tensions/headaches. But trying to tie the team's hands for the full four years might also have been thought problematic - by all. So they may have been willing to settle for an assurance that, for the foreseeable future (meaning a couple of years, say?) they were going to give the current roster a chance.

This is speculation on my part, of course. But what is not speculation, I don't think, is that the Suns management has simply not denied giving some such assurance to the Morris brothers. And this might be difficult not for the simplest possible reason - that the Suns management are all blind and deaf-mutes - but because the news reports that accompanied the signings are still available on the 'net.

I don't care if they gave assurances. If it's not in writing, it means nothing, and anyone who follows the NBA, let alone someone who actually plays in it, would know that. And they couldn't have given solid assurances - it is against the rules. There may have been an "understanding", but if it is truly important to me to play with my brother, I'm not going to rely on an "understanding".

Especially when I have a very easy solution that gives me full control. Sitting right there. One year contracts. Done. Easy.

Again, yes, if the goal is to ensure lots of extra money, and negotiate as much as possible, yes, that is a reason not to do that. Of course, it would also support my "cared more about money than staying with brother" suggestion. The reality is the Morris Twins had every opportunity to put themselves in legal control of whether they played together and they passed on that opportunity for more guaranteed money. They have only themselves to blame for that.