Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Valanciunas' Buyout To Be Raised To At Least $3M

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Apollo wrote: View Post
    I'm pretty sure his contract is very long. There is no point in pulling out. He needs to just proceed and get it done. The team who holds his contract is apparently in desperate need of money based on what I read. I'm thinking they bend a little on the buyout. He's more valuable to a team like that if he's gone than if he stays.
    It's 3 more years, IIRC. The bit about pulling out, according to earlier reports, Valanciunas was only considering staying in the draft if he gets picked high enough. If the buyout situation doesn't get worked out favorably -- and his club, if they're smart, really should do everything they can to ensure Valanciunas gets picked as high as possible -- he might not be confident in being picked in the range he wants. He doesn't seem opposed to returning for another year or two.

    Comment


    • #17
      I read his team was working out the details of a "reasonable buyout" number so that all the details are out there for any team interested in drafting him to increase his chances of getting drafted high.

      Comment


      • #18
        Apollo wrote: View Post
        I read his team was working out the details of a "reasonable buyout" number so that all the details are out there for any team interested in drafting him to increase his chances of getting drafted high.
        I read the same, from Givony, but who knows. Let's get it done, Lietuvos Rytas! Get Valanciunas drafted at #4!

        Comment


        • #19
          DraftExpress wrote:
          Valanciunas report from Lithuania is inaccurate. There is no set buyout amount yet. Negotiations ongoing. Both parties still holding firm.
          about 6 hours ago via Seesmic Desktop
          Twitter / Jonathan Givony: Valanciunas report from Li ...

          Comment


          • #20
            He's getting drafted by the t-wolves. Just wait.
            @sweatpantsjer

            Comment


            • #21
              And a point guard
              @sweatpantsjer

              Comment


              • #22
                Possibly two.
                @sweatpantsjer

                Comment


                • #23
                  It still boggles my mind how horrible business law is in Europe , especially when dealing with contracts who's base agreements are a pittance. The sum should be in direct correlation to the money invested in the athlete. Seeking 50X the the value of the entire contract itself, just to breech it, is insane. (I understand that draft express is reporting this sum as an incorrect rumour, but it still bothersome that such rumour could be so easily believed due to the eurolegues history of using such tactics.)


                  Rules like these are put into place so that the club is not cheated or exploited by a player. I understand their importance. However in this case, these rules are being used for the exact opposite purpose, to extort and cheat the player of his future earnings.

                  When the contract itself starts being used as a money making bonanza for the club, I think the spirit of the law is broken.


                  Imagine if you wanted to get out of your contract with a cell phone carrier. They give the price as 50 TIMES your monthly bill, paid up front for the next 3 years (term of the contract). You look at the rep and say, "Excuse me? To cancel the contract I need to pay you 50 times the value of the entire contract? Just to cancel and rid you of your obligation to service me?"


                  Anyway, I still can't understand how such contracts can be taken seriously in any courtroom.
                  Last edited by MyMomLovesMe; Wed Jun 1, 2011, 12:15 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    I still don't understand why he would sign this contract with the club if he knew he wanted to play in the NBA. It makes no sense.
                    Never, under any circumstances, take a sleeping pill and a laxative on the same night.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      It happens all the time. Picture this: You're a kid. You're not sure you want to go to the NBA or you're not sure you would get drafted. Some team offers you $10M over five years, what do you do? [I sign the deal]. Fast forward two seasons. No you've changed your mind, you want to play in the NBA or alternatively, people are telling you you're going to be good enough to get drafted after all. But wait, now you still have three years left on this contract.

                      Splitter took a long time coming here because of such a situation. Fran Vasquez can't come here right now because of it. Hitting close to home, Roko Ukic took like three years to get here after being drafted because of it.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        I don't think the cell phone carrier analogy is applicable, not to mention, a fee that big to break a contract with a cell phone carrier wouldn't really be practical. Why? Because there would never be an instance where breaking the contract would save money over retaining it. But even that isn't very different from when you have a month left on your contract and you want to switch carriers. You can pay the $250 early termination fee or just get a new plan and let the old one expire on its own.

                        But the reason I don't think the analogy is applicable is because this is an employment contract. My knowledge in this area is a little fuzzy -- well, very fuzzy -- but I would think of it more as this: a person with unique talents (called "Jonas") signs a 5-year employment contract with an American employer (called "Rytas"), and another American employer (called "NBA") comes to poach Jonas two years into his contract. Rytas then sues NBA for tortious interference, because NBA caused Jonas to breach his employment contract with Rytas. In the U.S., a successful tortious interference case would either result in damages equal to Rytas' economic loss (in this case likely the cost of replacing such a unique talent), or a negative injunction preventing NBA from benefiting from their interference. That is, NBA would be prevented from employing Jonas.

                        In our case, the NBA and/or the team that drafts Valanciunas is in effect causing him to breach his existing contractual duties with Rytas. I don't know how it would work with an international breach, but the above would apply had this been an American employer. $3 mil is not insane if Valanciunas is truly as uniquely talented as the NBA makes him out to be (being slated in the lottery and all). The amount that Rytas signed him for is irrelevant; it's the cost of finding someone with the same ability and same age (same future ahead of him) that matters. If Valanciunas had been groomed into the next Michael Jordan, the buyout would understandably be even higher (as is the case with Rubio). Also, I'm pretty sure the buyout only covers the situation of being poached by another team/league. I doubt Valanciunas would be forced to pay the buyout if he just wanted to retire and work at a bookstore (but of course, the buyout would apply if he were to suddenly unretire and play for another team).

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Whatever, i just dont see him being drafted by the raps though it sucks cus kanter will be surely gone by the time we pick if we end up staying at #5.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            I don't think the NBA would do anything, if in the middle of of a deal, a said player was to breech a contract and go play in the Euro league. I think this has been done in the NHL with Russian players before without consequences.


                            International courts have more serious matters and such a case would not be worthy for such a body. Arbitration and moderation would be the next course.


                            If the contract was fair to begin with, than the monetary compensation saved would offset a loss to the team. In Contract law, there are examples of contracts being taken to court and renegotiated due gross imbalances. The compensation for braking the contract should be fair, and REFLECT the INVESTMENT the team has made into a player. This is not slavery, and in my opinion, a buyout clause that is 50X the value of the LIFE of the contract is highly predatory.

                            (its organized crime terms - and on that side of the ocean organized crime and pro sports often meet)
                            Last edited by MyMomLovesMe; Sun Jun 5, 2011, 02:11 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              MyMomLovesMe wrote: View Post
                              I don't think the NBA would do anything, if in the middle of of a deal, a said player was to breech a contract and go play in the Euro league. I think this has been done in the NHL with Russian players before without consequences.
                              It would obviously depend on the terms of the contract. I don't think either of us can really say what the full contract terms are in the event of an NBA player deciding to switch leagues before their contract is up. The NHL has no relevance here since they probably have different contract terms.

                              MyMomLovesMe wrote: View Post
                              If the contract was fair to begin with, than the monetary compensation saved would offset a loss to the team. In Contract law, there are examples of contracts being taken to court and renegotiated due gross imbalances. The compensation for braking the contract should be fair, and REFLECT the INVESTMENT the team has made into a player. This is not slavery, and in my opinion, a buyout clause that is 50X the value of the LIFE of the contract is highly predatory.
                              1. Yes, contracts can be declared unfair, but the courts do not look as much at the terms as they do the bargaining power of each party. If you look through all the precedent contract cases, you'll see the court tends to take the view of "you should have known better" absent duress. A highly educated individual/an attorney who knows the law/the spouse that wields the power receives little to no leniency compared to the lower class/the uneducated/the spouse who has nothing to go back to. It's not up to the court to re-evaluate and fix the terms of every single contract. And you're right that this isn't slavery; Valanciunas probably received a pretty good life compared to his country-mates.

                              2. It doesn't matter what the investment is. Here's an example: an individual can invest almost nothing in inventing velcro, playdough, etc., but if someone steals the idea via breach of contract, the inventor is likely to recover for full economic loss (i.e. expected economic gain had the contract not been breached) that is UNCAPPED by their investment. Capping the recovery would create a chilling effect on invention, just as it would create a chilling effect on the willingness of sports clubs to invest time and money in developing a project.

                              3. Clearly we disagree on the actual economic loss to the club by allowing another league to poach their players. Considering some NBA teams feel him worthy of as high as the #3 overall pick as well as believe him able to become a center-piece for years to come, it wouldn't be ridiculous should they indeed set the buyout to $3 mil. The question is how much would it cost for the club to go out and sign someone to the club for the next three years who not only plays at the same level as Valanciunas but has the same upside. The NBA has clearly established the market rate for you to see by being willing to offer Valanciunas 120% of the rookie scale suggestion for a #3-10 pick. How do you suppose it would cost Rytas less than $3 mil to fully replace Valanciunas' services if there's a league willing to offer way more than that? Look at how much the Euroleague had to offer Childress and other mediocre players like him, and you'll see they're not exactly dealing with chicken scratch.

                              TL;DR: When U.S. courts deal with contract breach, it's always in terms of putting the breached against party back in the position they would have been in had the breaching party not breached. Just look at the very basics of contract law. If you don't know how the market rate relates to Rytas' economic position, we're going to have to agree to disagree.
                              Last edited by Quixotic; Sun Jun 5, 2011, 06:08 PM.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                The problem I have with the euroleague is that they regularly do this. They will sign kids that are 15-16 years old. The NBA has rules against this.


                                People are not patents. You don't own someone because you gave them a contract to work for you. The only reason why the NBA is not poaching Euroleague talent is because there is gentlemen agreement in place. Otherwise a bunch of low life sports league would be signing players to life contracts from 3rd world countries for peanuts to potentially make money from them down the line. Anytime you deal with an international, you will have to grease some cigar smoking low life.


                                Lots of these crappy contracts exists already, but the NBA ignores them. The Euroleague contracts are respected for diplomatic reasons, but even these contracts reak of impropriety (to me), and abuse of power. The sports league should be making money of playing sports, not saddling players into contracts that make them their property for sale to other clubs.


                                The reason the NBA, or the NHL, would not do anything about a case that was the reverse of this, is because we pay our players FAIRLY. If a player is lost to the European league, the team does not have to pay out the rest of the contract. They are not Mickey Mouse like the clubs in Europe.


                                The victim in this case is the player. You can tell me the club is a victim, but I don't buy that side of it at all - the club is an exploiter. Not only do they want to exploit, JV, they want to exploit the team that picks him. NONE of this is in the interest of Basketball or Valanciunas.


                                If the NBA, was not diplomatic. He could easily come and play here. They can take it to court and hold their breath for 10 years, and get laughed out of the courts on this side of the world.
                                Last edited by MyMomLovesMe; Sun Jun 5, 2011, 06:19 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X