Friday, January 29, 2010

Ohhhhh Gilbert

This incident will pioneer a trail of precedent for the NBA for years to come. Not only will the verdict reached on March 26, at which time Arenas will learn of the legal repercussions to his actions, affect the NBA’s gun policy, it’ll set the stage for the league to review it’s morals clause that is cited in every players contract. Currently the league holds the right to terminate a player should the player “at any time fail, refuse, or neglect to conform his personal conduct to standards of good citizenship [or] good moral character.” It’s obvious that leaving a morals clause this ambiguous for this long leave organizations with an out for outrageously defiant behavior that is detrimental to the team. That makes perfect sense. Why should the Wizards have to continue suffering while their $111 million-dollar man, who has only played in 47 total games since the beginning of the 07-08 season, continues his quest to add All-Star Prankster to his ever-expanding resume that could soon be defined by one word: Felon.

But now back to the real problem at hand

Regardless if the Wizards try to nullify his contract-- and get him and his salary off their books, give Washington a mulligan for the lush contract Arenas received, and give the Wizards a shot of building a bona fide team around Flip Saunders. Or they could just buyout the agreement-- which could have them paying half of the remaining contract just to get rid of him. The league itself will have to transform the clause in order to circumvent this particular case from setting precedent for the league from here on out. So, the NBA will be forced to adopt a rules-based morals clause that will have situations/hazards and potential issues outlined (Much like McDonald's with the CAREFUL COFFEE IS HOT AND WILL CAUSE SEVER BURNS IF SPILLED ON SKIN warning on every cup because some dimwit wanted a huge paycheck for being stupid and thus limiting your options for a suit in the courtroom) In essence this could go one of two ways: The league allowing the team to drop the contract and move on. Or the league enacting the rules-based agenda that gives the NBA a chance to strong-arm players and teams in the court room with their deeper pockets. The league wants to handle this with care due to many teams that are cash-strapped with lazy stars that would be able to wiggle out of any contract citing the precedent reached with this situation.

No comments:

Post a Comment