meloshouldgo wrote:

franco12 wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

StarksEwing1 wrote:I hate cuban BUT i dont think its right to make a verbal agreement then change your mind after other free agents have signed elsewhere

Its been done like 4 times now. Why cant a person make a decision then change his or her mind? That's part of life. I'm sure he had good intentions with Dallas but after thinking about it felt comfortable where he was? No one can blame him for it. While he gave a commitment it was not a signed contract--happens in college basketball all the time.

This isn't college and you are expected to show a certain degree of professional integrity. Especially when there are so many other moves being directly or indirectly impacted by it. When you make this much money you are held to a different standard. There's nothing wrong with that.

I don't understand why people make such a big deal about this.

I think the real story is the disconnect between Jordan and his agent, who evidently has close ties to Dallas.

I'm think his agent tried to talk him in to moving, maybe made it seem as though the Clippers didn't want him back, etc.

I would be crushed if this had happen to us, and I probably wouldn't be able to type these words the same way.

Dude's a grown man. Been in the NBA for a long time. He can't let his agent talk him into being stupid. Because right now be looks extremely stupid. Almost JR smith stupid.

Almost.

I agree with Ron.

The NBA is a disgrace but these days but that's nothing new

Rookie wrote:did Chris Paul high five Jordan? Beware the power of the high five yes you big baby, you are important, now lets go....gimme a high five. I guess 2 billion dollars speaks loudly.

I heard he actually went for a full hug and that sealed the deal. This stuff is unbelievable.

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/espn_macmahon/status/619139429077135360

H1AND1 wrote:What Jordan did was not "wrong" because non of the agreements made before 7-9 are binding in any legal way. It's all just a handshake deal until then. Now, one may morally and ethically disagree with what Jordan did (ie: break a handshake/gentlemen's agreement) but that does not make it "wrong" in any way beyond one's personal definition of what's appropriate in that situation and how much leeway should be given to someone who makes a handshake deal then retracts it due to a change of heart.

However, Jordan did nothing that is censurable or against any writ of NBA league rule or law. That's the bottom line. Anyone who criticized him is doing so in the context of their own personal moral code, nothing more.

I agree to a point. It is not the fact that Jordan changed his mind. It is the fact that he waited until the 11th hour to do so, and essentially screwed the Mavs entire off season. That is the real issue. And Griffin and other players sending out tweets is just rubbing the whole situation in the Mavs face, which is not good. I know Griffin and these other guys are young men who probably from their perspective do see the entire episode as funny. However, from the outside, the situation looks bad and making light of it is not the best thing to do for public relations. Jordan did not do anything against the rules, and as I said in another post, the moratorium should be eliminated to avoid this situation in the future, but the situation was not handled right. Jordan should have been man enough to return Cuban's calls and at least tell him personally that he changed his mind. The Mavs and Cuban were owed at least that much. And, the Clippers players should end all the tweets.

H1AND1 wrote:What Jordan did was not "wrong" because non of the agreements made before 7-9 are binding in any legal way. It's all just a handshake deal until then. Now, one may morally and ethically disagree with what Jordan did (ie: break a handshake/gentlemen's agreement) but that does not make it "wrong" in any way beyond one's personal definition of what's appropriate in that situation and how much leeway should be given to someone who makes a handshake deal then retracts it due to a change of heart.

However, Jordan did nothing that is censurable or against any writ of NBA league rule or law. That's the bottom line. Anyone who criticized him is doing so in the context of their own personal moral code, nothing more.

What he did was only wrong because it broke unwritten rules that teams operate by. Not only did he back out, but he put the Dallas franchise back many years by not allowing them to move onto other options. I don't fully blame him however. The NBA has created an environment where the star players are forced to rush their decisions because the rest of the dominos don't fall until then. Essentially teams and the rest of the free agents are always waiting for the top 3-5 free agents to make their decisions. If that player truly doesn't know where he wants to play, and wants to take more time, it creates problems. Jordan felt that pressure of making a decision within the first 2 or 3 days of free agency. I'm sure he was pushed to eliminate teams and allow them to move on. He should have told Dallas and LAC he honestly needed to take more time to think about it, and Dallas would have had to make a choice to wait or more on. That would have been on them. I mainly blame Jordan, but i know he is clearly impressionable and was put in a bad place to make a fast decision.

Bonn1997 wrote:

H1AND1 wrote:What Jordan did was not "wrong" because non of the agreements made before 7-9 are binding in any legal way. It's all just a handshake deal until then. Now, one may morally and ethically disagree with what Jordan did (ie: break a handshake/gentlemen's agreement) but that does not make it "wrong" in any way beyond one's personal definition of what's appropriate in that situation and how much leeway should be given to someone who makes a handshake deal then retracts it due to a change of heart.

However, Jordan did nothing that is censurable or against any writ of NBA league rule or law. That's the bottom line. Anyone who criticized him is doing so in the context of their own personal moral code, nothing more.

People are criticizing him because what he did harmed and was unfair to Dallas. We realize he did not commit a crime.

Well of course he isnt beyond criticism. I actually thought I was putting my response in the other thread based on another response. Anyway, i guess my ultimate point which I should've made more clear was that the NBA needs to change the rules to prevent this type flip flopping by a free agent from harming the franchise. The blame should be more that THIS CAN HAPPEN under the current rules.

H1AND1 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

H1AND1 wrote:What Jordan did was not "wrong" because non of the agreements made before 7-9 are binding in any legal way. It's all just a handshake deal until then. Now, one may morally and ethically disagree with what Jordan did (ie: break a handshake/gentlemen's agreement) but that does not make it "wrong" in any way beyond one's personal definition of what's appropriate in that situation and how much leeway should be given to someone who makes a handshake deal then retracts it due to a change of heart.

However, Jordan did nothing that is censurable or against any writ of NBA league rule or law. That's the bottom line. Anyone who criticized him is doing so in the context of their own personal moral code, nothing more.

People are criticizing him because what he did harmed and was unfair to Dallas. We realize he did not commit a crime.

Well of course he isnt beyond criticism. I actually thought I was putting my response in the other thread based on another response. Anyway, i guess my ultimate point which I should've made more clear was that the NBA needs to change the rules to prevent this type flip flopping by a free agent from harming the franchise. The blame should be more that THIS CAN HAPPEN under the current rules.

H1AND1 wrote:

WaltLongmire wrote:

H1AND1 wrote:What Jordan did was not "wrong" because non of the agreements made before 7-9 are binding in any legal way. It's all just a handshake deal until then. Now, one may morally and ethically disagree with what Jordan did (ie: break a handshake/gentlemen's agreement) but that does not make it "wrong" in any way beyond one's personal definition of what's appropriate in that situation and how much leeway should be given to someone who makes a handshake deal then retracts it due to a change of heart.

However, Jordan did nothing that is censurable or against any writ of NBA league rule or law. That's the bottom line. Anyone who criticized him is doing so in the context of their own personal moral code, nothing more.

Says a lot about Jordan, and much about you, too, I'm afraid.

At one time a man's word was a bond worth more than a written contract. I've done things I might not have wanted to do because I made an agreement, and somebody else depended on my word.

Am I to assume that your friends carry around a pad of shortened legal contracts for their dealings with you?

H1AND1: "I'll meet you at 8AM- I'm looking forward to seeing a game at Fenway"

WaltLongmire: "Sure, I'll see you at 8...None of us have a car, thank goodness yours can hold everyone. We have to leave early because we have to pick up a few people on the way, and it takes 5 hours to drive to Boston for the game. But first I'll have to ask you to sign this contract."

H1AND1: Why??

WaltLongmire: Can't have you backing out without legal recourse on our end- I spent a lot of money on the tickets, already gave you money to fill up your tank, and everyone has taken off from work just to go up to Boston. This contract gives us certain legal rights and remedies if you fail to show up and drive us.

Teams make million dollar decisions based on these agreements. Other players make decisions based on these agreements.

The system might be flawed, but the flaw is only made manifest because people think like you and Jordan do.

The agreements are not legally binding, but morally, unless one side or another hid something during the negotiations, they are binding, and this is where both you and Jordan come out looking bad.

Well, personally I think what he did was "wrong" in the sense that he gave his word then re-neg'ed. Personally, I would never give my word on something then back out. However, as I said before IN THIS SITUATION, Jordan could do this and screw over the Mavs because the rules set in place by the league allow it to happen without any negative consequences codified in the league rules. There should be a simple solution, something like players cant sign the actual papers from the 1st to the 9th however a player can show intent and once they do that the forthcoming signature is binding. A rider or something. Im not a lawyer (clearly!).

But anyway Longmire, as I said your scenario is pretty funny but I am in the camp that Jordan did something very f'ed up. I just personally blame the NBA for allowing it to happen as this isnt the first time a franshise has been screwed over by a player and a handshake.

Don't hate the playah, hate the game.

What you said about the NBA maybe true. But all humans have to make choices based on ethics and morals. You cannot legislate morality.

WaltLongmire wrote:

H1AND1 wrote:

WaltLongmire wrote:

H1AND1 wrote:What Jordan did was not "wrong" because non of the agreements made before 7-9 are binding in any legal way. It's all just a handshake deal until then. Now, one may morally and ethically disagree with what Jordan did (ie: break a handshake/gentlemen's agreement) but that does not make it "wrong" in any way beyond one's personal definition of what's appropriate in that situation and how much leeway should be given to someone who makes a handshake deal then retracts it due to a change of heart.

However, Jordan did nothing that is censurable or against any writ of NBA league rule or law. That's the bottom line. Anyone who criticized him is doing so in the context of their own personal moral code, nothing more.

Says a lot about Jordan, and much about you, too, I'm afraid.

At one time a man's word was a bond worth more than a written contract. I've done things I might not have wanted to do because I made an agreement, and somebody else depended on my word.

Am I to assume that your friends carry around a pad of shortened legal contracts for their dealings with you?

H1AND1: "I'll meet you at 8AM- I'm looking forward to seeing a game at Fenway"

WaltLongmire: "Sure, I'll see you at 8...None of us have a car, thank goodness yours can hold everyone. We have to leave early because we have to pick up a few people on the way, and it takes 5 hours to drive to Boston for the game. But first I'll have to ask you to sign this contract."

H1AND1: Why??

WaltLongmire: Can't have you backing out without legal recourse on our end- I spent a lot of money on the tickets, already gave you money to fill up your tank, and everyone has taken off from work just to go up to Boston. This contract gives us certain legal rights and remedies if you fail to show up and drive us.

Teams make million dollar decisions based on these agreements. Other players make decisions based on these agreements.

The system might be flawed, but the flaw is only made manifest because people think like you and Jordan do.

The agreements are not legally binding, but morally, unless one side or another hid something during the negotiations, they are binding, and this is where both you and Jordan come out looking bad.

Well, personally I think what he did was "wrong" in the sense that he gave his word then re-neg'ed. Personally, I would never give my word on something then back out. However, as I said before IN THIS SITUATION, Jordan could do this and screw over the Mavs because the rules set in place by the league allow it to happen without any negative consequences codified in the league rules. There should be a simple solution, something like players cant sign the actual papers from the 1st to the 9th however a player can show intent and once they do that the forthcoming signature is binding. A rider or something. Im not a lawyer (clearly!).

But anyway Longmire, as I said your scenario is pretty funny but I am in the camp that Jordan did something very f'ed up. I just personally blame the NBA for allowing it to happen as this isnt the first time a franshise has been screwed over by a player and a handshake.

Good to know that your friends don't make you sign a contract in lieu of a handshake or verbal agreement.

Scott Van Pelt also touched on something I was thinking in this Tweet:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/notthefakeSVP/status/619146239486107649