Knicks · Wojo:Kobe willing to hear foreign offers (page 1)
Kobe willing to hear foreign offers
By Adrian Wojnarowski, Yahoo! Sports
2 hours, 3 minutes ago
tweet62EmailPrintFrom across the world, preening over the improbable signing of All-Star point guard Deron Williams(notes), Turkish basketball coach Ergin Ataman was polishing the pitch of his life.
“We want Kobe Bryant(notes) now,” Ataman told Yahoo! Sports by phone on Thursday.
Ataman is the coach of Besiktas of Istanbul, and his basketball club sees the NBA’s owner lockout of players as a once-in-a-forever chance to transform this fledgling franchise’s global image. Once Besiktas was able to convince Williams to make the leap, the team is now determined to make the boldest play of all for Bryant.
More From Adrian WojnarowskiTurkish team to pursue Bryant Jul 7, 2011 Pacers agree to deal with Vogel Jul 5, 2011
Kobe Bryant signed a major endorsement deal with Turkish Airlines last season.
(Getty Images)
Bryant is willing to listen to overseas offers, sources close to him told Yahoo! Sports on Thursday. Those could come out of Europe or the Far East, and, yes, even Istanbul, the gateway bridging Europe and Asia.
It isn’t lost on Besiktas that Bryant spent much of his youth living in Italy, that his marketing machine is strong in Europe where he’s afforded an unparalleled popularity among basketball stars. The organization knows this too: Turkish Airlines, who signed Bryant to a global endorsement deal this year, might want to play a part in bringing the team and star together. As Ataman said, a sponsor – not the organization – would be paying Williams’ contract. Perhaps Turkish Airlines could be Besiktas’ benefactor for Bryant?
For a month, Besiktas had been quietly talking with Williams’ representatives, and finally they closed on an agreement for the Nets guard to play in Turkey for the length of the lockout. For a franchise still smarting over last season’s failed investment with the washed-up Allen Iverson(notes), the signing of Williams alone is an immense coup for the franchise. Yet it also sets up a puncher’s chance to sell Bryant, the biggest basketball star in Europe, on a lockout-long odyssey with Besiktas.
The coach promises his franchise will be seeking an audience with Bryant and Bryant’s agent, Rob Pelinka, in the near future. To make this happen, they had better bring a thick checkbook to sign the Los Angeles Lakers star.
“If Kobe doesn’t want to miss a whole season if there’s a lockout, and likes to live in one of Europe’s greatest cities, in Istanbul, and wants to play with Deron Williams, why not?” Ataman said.
Bryant loves the European game, loves the culture, and is far more inclined to explore signing overseas than most of the NBA’s superstars. Bryant has his arthritic knees of a soon-to-be 33-year-old body to deal with, but he planned to work hard in the gym this summer, and the fairly sparse schedule of a EuroCup League team could hold its appeal. Nevertheless, Bryant won’t simply swoon over the signing of Williams, nor Atlanta’s Zaza Pachulia(notes).
No one should consider Williams’ leap of faith, nor Bryant’s consideration, the beginning of a movement that’ll change the momentum of the NBA lockout. With a salary of approximately $200,000 per month, plus living perks, this is a plumb Euro deal for Williams. And it’s a rare payday overseas now. The economic climate in Europe has changed dramatically in the past two years, and there just aren’t enough good jobs for a mass union exodus to Europe. Overseas, franchises have learned lessons about overpaying American role players, and have mostly corrected them over time.
Williams could take a job as a fire-eater in the circus, and the New Jersey Nets probably wouldn’t blink. Unless Williams somehow had a career-ending injury, the Nets would never move to void the remaining two years, $34 million on his contract. Williams plans to opt-out of his deal in the summer of 2012, and the Nets are determined to partner Williams with Orlando’s Dwight Howard(notes) in free agency.
The players know this: The lockout could go the distance, eliminate the 2011-12 season, and they have to decide whether they’re willing to run the risk of their NBA teams voiding their contracts should a catastrophic injury happen there? Bryant has three years and $83 million left on his deal, but he’s never been afraid to play the game, never babied his body. He still plans to play for the United States in the 2012 Olympics in London, and has considered a barnstorming tour through the Far East this summer.
“We cannot give him the same money as he gets from the NBA, but if the money isn’t everything in this…” Ataman said. Well then, who knows? Kobe Bryant is willing to listen, and Besiktas and the rest of Europe and the Far East is undoubtedly willing to sell.
It’s still July, the lockout has a long way to go, but the game’s biggest basketball star is thinking about global possibilities. This could yet still be a wild, fascinating season – wherever in the world David Stern’s shunned stars are playing basketball.
This turkish team made a big deal for Iverson then really backed off when he was not in tippy top shape.
Is there a turkish word for "practice"?
CrushAlot wrote:My only issue with it would be where does the union stand on this. Does it weaken or strengthen the union's position? I have read articles that made the point that it gives the players leverage. I am not sure if everyone feels that way.
I agree. I think this sends a horrible message to the other players. There are a limited amount of roster spots and money available overseas, and we know its going to go first to DWill, Kobe and the like. Those guys are the ones that are least in need of the money. This sends a bad message to the less fortunate players, who are the ones that probably have the bills to pay.
Why should the mid to lower tier players suffer (respectively) while the top guys get paid. Shows no solidarity, and IMO will lead to ill feelings and an agreement with the owners sooner than later.
tkf wrote:these nba players have no idea how good they have it in the nba.
Neither side does. The only difference is that the owners want absurd rules that would be laughed at in any other industry.
Bonn1997 wrote:tkf wrote:these nba players have no idea how good they have it in the nba.
Neither side does. The only difference is that the owners want absurd rules that would be laughed at in any other industry.
absurd rules like what?
these guys would still be the highest paid atheletes in the world on average...
what other industry would laugh at that..
want to know whats funny.. a guy can sign a 100 mil contract, never playmore than one season and still get every penny.... NFL owners are ROFL.....
tkf wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:tkf wrote:these nba players have no idea how good they have it in the nba.
Neither side does. The only difference is that the owners want absurd rules that would be laughed at in any other industry.absurd rules like what?
Congress has passed many exemptions so that sports team owners can do nonsense that wouldn't be put up with in any other industry. A few examples:
You can't initially sign with whatever organization you want to (even if they want you). You must sign with the one that "purchased your draft rights"
You can't sign with an organization for any price or year total that you want to (even if they are willing to).
You can be sent against your wishes to 29 other locations in the continent at any moment (may apply in some other industries but it's rare).
You can't have any performance incentives in your contract (I think).
I'm sure there are many others.
tkf wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:tkf wrote:these nba players have no idea how good they have it in the nba.
Neither side does. The only difference is that the owners want absurd rules that would be laughed at in any other industry.
want to know whats funny.. a guy can sign a 100 mil contract, never playmore than one season and still get every penny
That's called the real world. It's one of the rare instances where owners haven't gotten a special privilege (ability to void a contract when employee does nothing wrong) that no other industry gets anyway.
lebron signing overseas signals a b!tch move.
Bonn1997 wrote:tkf wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:tkf wrote:these nba players have no idea how good they have it in the nba.
Neither side does. The only difference is that the owners want absurd rules that would be laughed at in any other industry.
want to know whats funny.. a guy can sign a 100 mil contract, never playmore than one season and still get every penny
That's called the real world. It's one of the rare instances where owners haven't gotten a special privilege (ability to void a contract when employee does nothing wrong) that no other industry gets anyway.
that's false.
I signed an at-will contract when I worked in Libya, similar to what Pritchard signed with Indiana, and my employer could terminate whenever they wanted and for whatever reason.
While the at-will contract could allow me to walk away whenever too, the employer held a superior bargaining position.
Also, the game is considered a public good for public consumption. That's why the President meets with each league champions even to the college level. Movement laws exist so various consituencies can enjoy
SupremeCommander wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:tkf wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:tkf wrote:these nba players have no idea how good they have it in the nba.
Neither side does. The only difference is that the owners want absurd rules that would be laughed at in any other industry.
want to know whats funny.. a guy can sign a 100 mil contract, never playmore than one season and still get every penny
That's called the real world. It's one of the rare instances where owners haven't gotten a special privilege (ability to void a contract when employee does nothing wrong) that no other industry gets anyway.that's false.
I signed an at-will contract when I worked in Libya, similar to what Pritchard signed with Indiana, and my employer could terminate whenever they wanted and for whatever reason.
Well I don't know about other countries' laws.
Bonn1997 wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:tkf wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:tkf wrote:these nba players have no idea how good they have it in the nba.
Neither side does. The only difference is that the owners want absurd rules that would be laughed at in any other industry.
want to know whats funny.. a guy can sign a 100 mil contract, never playmore than one season and still get every penny
That's called the real world. It's one of the rare instances where owners haven't gotten a special privilege (ability to void a contract when employee does nothing wrong) that no other industry gets anyway.that's false.
I signed an at-will contract when I worked in Libya, similar to what Pritchard signed with Indiana, and my employer could terminate whenever they wanted and for whatever reason.
Well I don't know about other countries' laws.
It was a US contract for US payroll with a US company enforceable under US law. Sorry for any ambiguity
Other than hoping that the fans look at their own earnings and hold that against the players, do they have any other real argument???
I see that the other leagues are around 56 percent for player salaries, so why not use that as a bases for how much the players should make. I know the other 3 leagues also have many more players, but the roster size doesn't really effect anybody but the lower end players salary. The Tom Bradys and Arods of the world are still going to make 100 of millions of dollars. The players in positions of need are still going to make 10's of Millions, so why is the NBA trying to squeeze their players when other leagues are around the same percentages to field a team??? Though they have less players, no other league depends on each player to do or play more either.
The NBA needs to open their books to prove that they aren't just greedy.
Star players having the leverage to play overseas is a good message to the owners. Stars can make a living without the NBA. The owners need to know that it is not a one-sided negotiation.
The problem is if the joe shmoes of the league outvote the star players, and the star players don't play in the new CBA. Then the league will be pretty much dead. Do you think the owners would negotiate in good faith if this was not a possibility though? Right now the owners think they have all the leverage (based on their proposals) and the players need this kind of leverage to strike a fair bargain.
SupremeCommander wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:tkf wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:tkf wrote:these nba players have no idea how good they have it in the nba.
Neither side does. The only difference is that the owners want absurd rules that would be laughed at in any other industry.
want to know whats funny.. a guy can sign a 100 mil contract, never playmore than one season and still get every penny
That's called the real world. It's one of the rare instances where owners haven't gotten a special privilege (ability to void a contract when employee does nothing wrong) that no other industry gets anyway.that's false.
I signed an at-will contract when I worked in Libya, similar to what Pritchard signed with Indiana, and my employer could terminate whenever they wanted and for whatever reason.
Well I don't know about other countries' laws.It was a US contract for US payroll with a US company enforceable under US law. Sorry for any ambiguity
Did the contract or your company's manual have a termination clause in it? I think that would have to be explicit.
Bonn1997 wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:tkf wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:tkf wrote:these nba players have no idea how good they have it in the nba.
Neither side does. The only difference is that the owners want absurd rules that would be laughed at in any other industry.
want to know whats funny.. a guy can sign a 100 mil contract, never playmore than one season and still get every penny
That's called the real world. It's one of the rare instances where owners haven't gotten a special privilege (ability to void a contract when employee does nothing wrong) that no other industry gets anyway.that's false.
I signed an at-will contract when I worked in Libya, similar to what Pritchard signed with Indiana, and my employer could terminate whenever they wanted and for whatever reason.
Well I don't know about other countries' laws.It was a US contract for US payroll with a US company enforceable under US law. Sorry for any ambiguity
Did the contract or your company's manual have a termination clause in it? I think that would have to be explicit.
Well I just looked up what you're talking about. From wikipedia: "At-will employment is a doctrine of American law that defines an employment relationship in which either party can break the relationship with no liability, provided there was no express contract for a definite term governing the employment"
That's completely different from what the NBA has and what the owners were proposing. If a contract has a specific time period (like in the NBA or other sports and many professions), then as far as I'm aware, you can be fired only with cause--only if you violated your end of the contract. You can't sign someone for two years and then after six months realize you made a mistake and decide to void that contract (unless the employee is violating his/her end of the contract--and even then you'd have to prove that in court). Only in NBA-owner fantasy land could something like that exist.
Bonn1997 wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:SupremeCommander wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:tkf wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:tkf wrote:these nba players have no idea how good they have it in the nba.
Neither side does. The only difference is that the owners want absurd rules that would be laughed at in any other industry.
want to know whats funny.. a guy can sign a 100 mil contract, never playmore than one season and still get every penny
That's called the real world. It's one of the rare instances where owners haven't gotten a special privilege (ability to void a contract when employee does nothing wrong) that no other industry gets anyway.that's false.
I signed an at-will contract when I worked in Libya, similar to what Pritchard signed with Indiana, and my employer could terminate whenever they wanted and for whatever reason.
Well I don't know about other countries' laws.It was a US contract for US payroll with a US company enforceable under US law. Sorry for any ambiguity
Did the contract or your company's manual have a termination clause in it? I think that would have to be explicit.Well I just looked up what you're talking about. From wikipedia: "At-will employment is a doctrine of American law that defines an employment relationship in which either party can break the relationship with no liability, provided there was no express contract for a definite term governing the employment"
That's completely different from what the NBA has and what the owners were proposing. If a contract has a specific time period (like in the NBA or other sports and many professions), then as far as I'm aware, you can be fired only with cause--only if you violated your end of the contract. You can't sign someone for two years and then after six months realize you made a mistake and decide to void that contract (unless the employee is violating his/her end of the contract--and even then you'd have to prove that in court). Only in NBA-owner fantasy land could something like that exist.
To also cite Wikipedia: any hiring is presumed to be "at will"; that is, the employer is free to discharge individuals "for good cause, or bad cause, or no cause at all," and the employee is equally free to quit, strike, or otherwise cease work.
And second, while it is different the NBA situation, I was citing an example where the owners can terminate for whatever reason they wish, as it is more common than one would think... especially when the service industry comprises 70 percent of the US workforce.
As I said previously, while either side is free to walk, the power in this 'bargaining' situation is far from an even split, as most people want to hang onto their job and most employees are replaceable
Pritchard hired by Pacers, but still available
Posted on: July 8, 2011 3:47 pmScore: 193
Log-in to rate:Log-in to rate:Log-in to rate:
In a savvy move to bolster their basketball operations staff, the Pacers have reached a deal with former Trail Blazers general manager Kevin Pritchard to be their director of player personnel, sources familiar with the hire confirmed to CBSSports.com.Pritchard, fired hours before the 2010 draft, will report to general manager David Morway, sources said, under a unique at-will arrangement that both sides can end at any time. Pritchard will be paid about $200,000 annually under the deal.
Pritchard will begin evaluating the roster and preparing for potential trades and the pursuit of free agents in advance of the eventual end of the lockout. With team president Larry Bird undecided about his long-term future, Pritchard's role could expand. But he also would be available to be considered for more permanent and higher-profile GM jobs as they become available.
One team thought to be a sensible landing spot for Pritchard was the Knicks, who elevated Glen Grunwald to the interim general manager position after team president Donnie Walsh stepped down last month. The arrangement comes with the understanding that Grunwald's contract will be extended for the 2011-12 season -- whenever that may be. Members of the coaching staff and some key members of the front office, such as vice president of basketball operations Jamie Mathews, director of pro scouting John Gabriel, director of pro player personnel Mark Warkentien, and regional scout Mark Hughes, also are expected to be retained for next season.
Coach Mike D'Antoni is entering the final year of his contract, and no indications have been given as to whether Madison Square Garden chairman James Dolan intends to offer him an extension.
Grunwald, 53, is a respected, behind-the-scenes executive who received a strong recommendation from Walsh. If the Knicks ultimately look outside the organization to bolster the front office, among those they are expected to consider are former Hornets GM Jeff Bower and Pritchard.
Pritchard, who was briefly a teammate of Bird's with the Celtics in the early '90s, goes home to the Pacers -- up the road from his Bloomington, Ind., birthplace -- at an exciting time for the organization. Indiana acquired guard George Hill from the Spurs on draft night, and the Pacers have a talented, young roster built around Danny Granger, Darren Collison and Roy Hibbert with only $37 million in committed salary for next season.
It was never clear why Pritchard, the driving force behind the Blazers' current run of success, was fired in the first place. His replacement, former Thunder executive Rich Cho, also has since been fired and landed on his feet with the Bobcats.
http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/11838893/30522747