Today the Jason Kidd to Dallas trade became official, after a week-long saga that captivated the NBA headlines.
The trade was the stuff of a sports writer's dream, a top talent player to a desperate club, and a little known rule that almost destroyed the entire effort.
By now, the story of Devean George's invocation of his "Bird rights" threatened to implode the entire structure of the trade and sent the Mavericks scrambling to the drawing board for a solution.
The Mavericks pulled off the trade this afternoon, sending a whole host of players including Devin Harris and newly signed Keith Van Horn to New Jersey for the aging but brilliant Kidd. Kidd's return was trumpeted by the Dallas faithful as the shot in the arm this team needs to get over the trifecta of obstacles including San Antonio, Phoenix and L.A. (Of course in the Maverick's case the obstacles also include those pesky Golden State Warriors).
Lost in the fanfare accompanying Kidd's return is the story of Nick Fazekas, a rookie from Nevada who was cut so the team could sign Van Horn and make the trade work. While Van Horn (an already ridiculously wealthy person) gets a huge paycheck for basically signing a contract, Fazekas is now unemployed. That's only one of the ethical issues facing these trades, the other involves signing basically retired players just to get the numbers right.
According to NBA rules, teams over the salary cap have to balance the salaries in the trade within 25% of the swap. Because Van Horn had never filed his official retirement papers with the league and Dallas never renounced rights to him, he was eligible to be signed, even though he had not played since 2006. This same rule applied to Aaron McKie when the Lakers needed another one-year contract to balance the Pau Gasol deal. The League was uncomfortable with these deals and requires that both of these players had to have the intent to play for their new teams—even if everyone knows this is just a shell game.
While deals like this are technically legal by NBA standards the question the general public has is one of disgust, "are these trades ethical?" These trades are reminiscent of the corporate book-keeping scandals that plagued headlines at the early turn of the century. Basically, the Lakers and the Mavericks created assets to defraud the league and skirt the spirit of the rules if not the letter. Fans may appreciate the concentration of power in the West because of the exciting matchups, but what about the fans of the teams like the Nets and the Grizzlies, the forgotten victims of these trades. These two teams have basically conceded that this season is over and are merely going through the motions as they prepare for free agency. Is that fair to season ticket holders, corporate sponsors and the cities that host them?
In reality trades like these are controversial, but if there are teams desperate enough for a spark they will continue as long as the NBA rules permit them. It is up to the league to decide they will protect all interests involved and not just their top market teams.
comments (2) write a comment »
write a new comment
7 months ago
Look, there is so much money involved in profesional sports at this point that if the athlelete and the team want to be together, they will. This does not gaurantee sucess as defined by the player and the team who both want a championship. This is true in other countries, leagues, and sports. If you decide you don't want to watch, and many people join you, then maybe it will change.
7 months ago
How is this unethical? NBA teams are not publicly traded companies. The owners are risking their own money. It's their business. While the rules may be strange, it doesn't mean that they are unethical.
Protect whose interests? Who got hurt? New Jersey got rid of an expensive player that didn't want to be there and got a new young talented point guard in return plus a decent backup center, 2 first-round draft choices and cash.
Just because you buy season tickets doesn’t guarantee that the team will be any good. A good team can go bad quickly if they get injuries or players act like jerks. Neither is the fault of the team owner or management.
If Nick Fazekas is so good, then some other team will sign him. If not, I'll bet he can get signed to a European team or get signed during this summer. He could have been released at any time. You act like he can't get another job. He's young and just got out of college (just short of getting a degree…he should go back and finish it. It was his choice to leave early). Who said he is guaranteed a job in the NBA? And he made over $400 thousand for the short time he was with the Mavericks…I’m not worried about him.
Memphis had to make their one-sided trade because they get very little fan support in that city and are losing money. If the community is not supporting the team then why should the owner be worried about them. The team needs to take a step back, save some money this season and try to rebuild or move. Even the NBA is a business and sometimes businesses need to move and change. If it doesn;t work out in Memphis then maybe they just need to move to a larger city. there are no rules that say every city is guaranteed an NBA team. If you want a team in your city then go out and support it.
write a new comment