“We only brought this proceeding because we felt this would be the right result,’’ Klempner told The Post. “We’re really pleased. This was the spirit of the rule.’’

The union argued players claimed on waivers should keep their Bird rights just as players who are traded. The battle hinged on the word “trade’’ in the 2005 CBA agreement. In the 1995 agreement, players claimed kept their Bird rights, but the 2005 language was fuzzier

The union’s winning argument, according to the decision, was if the NBA intended to have claimed players lose its Bird rights, it would have used language to specify it.

Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/knicks/early_bird_eS4VrDDnIcd2O0aXVNH1kM#ixzz1ydX4jhz8

nixluva wrote:I really am not worried. For one thing the NBA left the language somewhat vague and it wasn't clear that the Union had actually understood that this change was there. If you remember there was a lot of disagreement even by Larry Coon back when this subject 1st came up. No one really knew what the rule was cuz everyone was basing it off the previous CBA's. The ruling this arbitrator made was based off precedent of previous CBA's and that's why I think it will stick.

“We only brought this proceeding because we felt this would be the right result,’’ Klempner told The Post. “We’re really pleased. This was the spirit of the rule.’’

The union argued players claimed on waivers should keep their Bird rights just as players who are traded. The battle hinged on the word “trade’’ in the 2005 CBA agreement. In the 1995 agreement, players claimed kept their Bird rights, but the 2005 language was fuzzier

The union’s winning argument, according to the decision, was if the NBA intended to have claimed players lose its Bird rights, it would have used language to specify it.

Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/knicks/early_bird_eS4VrDDnIcd2O0aXVNH1kM#ixzz1ydX4jhz8

this just doesn't make any sense if its going to take as long as they say it would....

Bonn1997 wrote:

smackeddog wrote:Chris Sheridan said that one options for the Knicks is to seek a temporary injunction to halt free agency until the dispute is resolved, if it looks like dragging on past either the 1st or 11th June. That sounds fair to me.

Why would they want to hault free agency? Now that the early bird rights have been granted, wouldn't it make more sense to sign FAs ASAP?

The arbotrators decision last week is frozen until the appeal is decided. So as of 7/1 Lin and Novak DO NOT have thier bird rights. So halting free agency in this case would be great because we wouldn't have our hands tied until a decision came through in the appeal process.

So how come an appeal that stern has file has to hold lin and novak hostage, why can't the knicks quickly sign lin a novak before a verdict base on the current verdict?

knicks1248 wrote:Here's what i don't understand..If a guy gets convicted of a crime and he was never out on bail, and his attrny appeals the verdict, the guy stays in jail until the appeal goest to court, same think with a person who was not convicted, he's a free person.

So how come an appeal that stern has file has to hold lin and novak hostage, why can't the knicks quickly sign lin a novak before a verdict base on the current verdict?

Yeah I don't get that either.

JohnStarksFan wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

MSG3 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

smackeddog wrote:Chris Sheridan said that one options for the Knicks is to seek a temporary injunction to halt free agency until the dispute is resolved, if it looks like dragging on past either the 1st or 11th June. That sounds fair to me.

Why would they want to hault free agency? Now that the early bird rights have been granted, wouldn't it make more sense to sign FAs ASAP?

The arbotrators decision last week is frozen until the appeal is decided. So as of 7/1 Lin and Novak DO NOT have thier bird rights. So halting free agency in this case would be great because we wouldn't have our hands tied until a decision came through in the appeal process.

I didn't realize that. That sucks.

Worst case scenario as I see it...
No halt of free agency.
Knicks have to wait for appeal process.
Knicks lose out on a few potential free agent pick ups.
JR walks due to unknown nature of team and desire for long term deal.
Lin and Novak wait for appeals process before making their decisions.
NBA is granted the appeal, no EBRs for guys claimed off waivers.
Lin takes the whole MLE.
Novak walks for bigger pay check.
Resign Fields.
Use vet min on a few vets.
Sign our second rounder.
Sign a few undrafted guys.
Keep it moving.

It sucks, but we can live with it. At least this way we won't get hit with a hard cap and can makes some moves during the season, pick up guys off waivers and put together a solid club still.
Either way I'm gonna be content. I'm really glad that the club at least had the sense to fight this battle. It shows a lot of heart. Let's go Knicks!