PDA

View Full Version : Ellis gets 30-game suspension without pay for accident



FinPacers
10-11-2008, 05:08 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3638098

Peck
10-11-2008, 05:12 PM
Ouch...

JayRedd
10-11-2008, 05:13 PM
Wow. This isn't gonna end well.

TMJ31
10-11-2008, 05:34 PM
Oh joy... he gets to return against... You guessed it, the Pacers!

ChicagoJ
10-11-2008, 05:34 PM
There is somethign to be said for the reasonableness of this. He's going to miss that amount of time anyway, and he got hurt because he was in violation of his player contract.

I wonder how the NBPA will attack this?

clownskull
10-11-2008, 05:44 PM
well, i am no lawyer but, i would guess there isn't a damn thing the nbpa can do about it.
contracts are pretty clear about what players can and can't do. and he clearly broke it. thus, they don't have to pay the dummy a dime for what he did. he should consider this a lesson learned- and a costly one at that too.

ChicagoJ
10-11-2008, 06:05 PM
contracts are pretty clear about what players can and can't do. and he clearly broke it.

That won't stop the NBPA's lawyers. It just means they will need to find a clever way to get creative with the language/ facts.

clownskull
10-11-2008, 06:11 PM
yeh, you are probably right in that they will try to do something. however, i just don't see them being able to do much about it. they are free to give it a go but, i see them losing this one- as well they should.

Hicks
10-11-2008, 06:22 PM
Wow.

ajbry
10-11-2008, 06:24 PM
He got lucky...

ChicagoJ
10-11-2008, 06:56 PM
I've read since that post that his agent was "in the know". The NBPA has a duty to protest all of these suspensions, but that doesn't mean they will try very hard if public opinion agrees with this move.

NuffSaid
10-11-2008, 07:06 PM
30-games is a long time, but since he'd probably be out rehabbing for that time period anyway, I guess it really doesn't matter. But wow!

Maybe Ellis should consult w/his teammate, Stephen Jackson. They can share notes on how to live through a 30+ game suspension w/o getting paid. :p

Kstat
10-11-2008, 07:09 PM
As you said, the amount of games is a non-issue.

The story here should read "golden state warriors fine Monta Ellis $4 million dollars for moped incident."

Roaming Gnome
10-11-2008, 07:20 PM
Sounds fair to me... especially if GS has to use that cash to sign someone to the PG rotation.

Mr. Sobchak
10-11-2008, 08:12 PM
The number of games don't really matter because he will still be recovering for most of the first two months of the season anyways.

JayRedd
10-11-2008, 08:32 PM
What could matter, however, is pissing off the impressionable, 23-year-old millionaire you just signed for the next six years.

I'm not saying GState isn't totally within its rights to go the "without pay" option based on the fact that Monta did something expressly forbidden by his contract and then lied about it...But I can guarantee Monta is in no way happy about not getting paid. And that fact may be more relevant to their future symbiotic relationship over the next few years than saving a few bucks and abiding by contract language to the letter.

rexnom
10-11-2008, 08:41 PM
What could matter, however, is pissing off the impressionable, 23-year-old millionaire you just signed for the next six years.

I'm not saying GState isn't totally within its rights to go the "without pay" option based on the fact that Monta did something expressly forbidden by his contract and then lied about it...But I can guarantee Monta is in no way happy about not getting paid. And that fact may be more relevant to their future symbiotic relationship over the next few years than saving a few bucks and abiding by contract language to the letter.
Jesus, yeah. Not a good way to start that relationship, is it? Monta may have broken the contract but he's 23 for chrissakes. This seems like an emotional overreaction on GS's part. They've got to be cooler. I think suspending him for 5 or 10 games would have admonished him just as much but wouldn't run the risk of pissing off their main guy for the future.

Anthem
10-11-2008, 08:57 PM
:jamaaltinsley:

:signit:

HC
10-11-2008, 08:59 PM
:jamaaltinsley:

:signit:

My thoughts exactly.

Hicks
10-11-2008, 09:25 PM
Personally, if I'm GS I could give two ****s about Ellis being upset right now. He's the one who put himself in this situation by being a dope. I'm not going to coddle him now. He messed up, he's paying for it, and if he's a man, he'll understand and move on.

Roaming Gnome
10-11-2008, 09:35 PM
Jesus, yeah. Not a good way to start that relationship, is it? Monta may have broken the contract but he's 23 for chrissakes. This seems like an emotional overreaction on GS's part. They've got to be cooler. I think suspending him for 5 or 10 games would have admonished him just as much but wouldn't run the risk of pissing off their main guy for the future.

It's this "kinder, gentler" approach that makes our kids and younger generation a nation of candy *** punks. Where is the accountability in letting him off like you suppose. That would be in the same vein as letting Spreewell off the hook after putting his hands around Carlisimo's neck.

I'm sorry if my reaction is harsh, but I'm having a hard time with your opinion.

JayRedd
10-11-2008, 09:43 PM
There's ideology and then there's reality.

GState drawing a line in sand against this the candy *** punk society may certainly be commendable -- and even possibly beneficial for its own franchise if Monta takes the message correctly and admirably -- but there remains the possibility that it may also lead to a significant potential devaluation of a $66 million, er, $62 million asset.

It may not be right. And it might have no affect on a "man." But, like it or not, the reality is that it is more likely than not to affect the performance, desire and work ethic of a 23-year-old, coddled NBA star.

My only real point was that by upsetting the kid, you risk the possibility of turning the guy you invested in as if he will be the next Calvin Murphy into the next Tim Thomas. You can say "Screw the guy then if that's how he reacts to a perfectly reasonable punishment based on a contract he breached"...but it's also pretty easy to take that view when it's not your money...and not your cap that will be destroyed.

rexnom
10-11-2008, 09:59 PM
It's this "kinder, gentler" approach that makes our kids and younger generation a nation of candy *** punks. Where is the accountability in letting him off like you suppose. That would be in the same vein as letting Spreewell off the hook after putting his hands around Carlisimo's neck.

I'm sorry if my reaction is harsh, but I'm having a hard time with your opinion.


There's ideology and then there's reality.

GState drawing a line in sand against this the candy *** punk society may certainly be commendable -- and even possibly beneficial for its own franchise if Monta takes the message correctly and admirably -- but there remains the possibility that it may also lead to a significant potential devaluation of a $66 million, er, $62 million asset.

It may not be right. And it might have no affect on a "man." But, like it or not, the reality is that it is more likely than not to affect the performance, desire and work ethic of a 23-year-old, coddled NBA star.

My only real point was that by upsetting the kid, you risk the possibility of turning the guy you invested in as if he will be the next Calvin Murphy into the next Tim Thomas. You can say "Screw the guy then if that's how he reacts to a perfectly reasonable punishment based on a contract he breached"...but it's also pretty easy to take that view when it's not your money...and not your cap that will be destroyed.
JayRedd said it well enough but just to re-emphasize my point, they could have come up with other ways of admonishing Monta - say a 5 or 10 game suspension - that would not have affected a 23 year-old in a negative way. To me, this is like cutting someone's hand off when slapping it would have sufficed.

If he does this again, then you can slap him with the 4-million dollar fine.

McKeyFan
10-11-2008, 10:26 PM
Calvin Murphy . . .

Methinks you must be over 40.

rexnom
10-11-2008, 10:28 PM
Methinks you must be over 40.
No, he just has no life and sits at home during weekends and watches NBATV/ESPN Classic while fantasizing about <strike>Eva Longoria</strike> Tony Parker.

idioteque
10-11-2008, 10:37 PM
It's this "kinder, gentler" approach that makes our kids and younger generation a nation of candy *** punks. Where is the accountability in letting him off like you suppose. That would be in the same vein as letting Spreewell off the hook after putting his hands around Carlisimo's neck.

I'm sorry if my reaction is harsh, but I'm having a hard time with your opinion.


My thoughts exactly.

If Monta is mature enough to legally bind himself to such a lucrative contract, he should be mature enough to follow it, simple as that. If he *****es too ****ing bad. He's still making, what, like 95% of the money he signed for and he made a BIG mistake. If he moans and complains then the Warriors made a mistake by every signing him to that kind of deal. Someone who is that talented and is going to **** and moan that much deserves a 2 year, 16 million deal, and not the long term security he was given so kindly by Golden State.

Roaming Gnome
10-11-2008, 10:37 PM
JayRedd said it well enough but just to re-emphasize my point, they could have come up with other ways of admonishing Monta - say a 5 or 10 game suspension - that would not have affected a 23 year-old in a negative way. To me, this is like cutting someone's hand off when slapping it would have sufficed.

If he does this again, then you can slap him with the 4-million dollar fine.

Well, If we are SOOOOOOOOooooooo worried about hurting the "feelings" of this 23 year old. Why even punish him at all?

Li'l Monta, you know you aren't suppose to ride that scooter. :tsk:

Hicks
10-11-2008, 11:25 PM
I agree. If it's all about changing his diapers, why not just tell him he did the right thing?

ajbry
10-11-2008, 11:41 PM
He participated in a prohibited activity, got seriously injured, and failed to disclose the truth to the organization that just paid him a ton of money afterwards.

Monta is lucky, trust me. There is a distinct possibility that he will not be the same player after this, and thus not worth anything near $62,000,000.

grace
10-12-2008, 02:20 AM
:jamaaltinsley:

:signit:

Sure trade one dingbat for another one.

Here's hoping that not being paid for 3 months will pry Monta's head out of his rectum long enough for him to realize what he did was not only stupid to begin with, but turned insanely stupid when he lied about it.

Sure he's only 23. That's about the same age Jay Williams was when he wrecked his motorcycle tearing three knee ligaments, breaking his pelvis, sustaining nerve damage and severing the artery to his leg. Doctors worried the leg would have to be amputated. He had seven surgeries, was hospitalized six weeks and bedridden for three months. He made it back as far the Nets training camp two years later.

Monte can spend the next three months rehabbing, eating off of Wendy's dollar menu and thanking God he is luckier than Jay Williams.

imawhat
10-12-2008, 02:24 AM
He's very, very lucky. I haven't read the NBA player contract all the way through, but I'm assuming a breach could've voided his contract...and still might in the possibility that he never returns.

Los Angeles
10-12-2008, 04:47 AM
I'm fuzzy on the timeline. Did he sign the fat contract before or after the moped incident?

travmil
10-12-2008, 06:52 AM
You guys that are saying GS over-reacted don't think there might have been a teeny bit of pressure from the other NBA franchises to make an example out of Ellis? Someone has got to make these guys stand up and understand that a duty and responsibility comes with that much money. A duty to the franchise, it's fans, and the NBA. He's only 23? So what, try to float that one over in Iraq where 18 year olds are dying every day so that idiot can **** in the face of the employer that just gave him $66 million.

idioteque
10-12-2008, 10:37 AM
I'm fuzzy on the timeline. Did he sign the fat contract before or after the moped incident?

Wikipedia says: "On August 26, 2008, it was revealed that Ellis had torn a ligament in his left ankle. Ellis underwent successful surgery on August 27 to repair a torn deltoid ligament (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medial_ligament_of_talocrural_joint) in his left ankle,<SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-11>[12] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monta_Ellis#cite_note-11)</SUP> after he informed the club that he had injured himself working out."


http://www.nba.com/warriors/news/warriors_resign_monta_ellis.html?rss=true

And the link above, dated July 24th, announces that the contract was signed. So the deal was signed before the accident so he was clearly violating his contract.

Los Angeles
10-12-2008, 01:00 PM
Wikipedia says: "On August 26, 2008, it was revealed that Ellis had torn a ligament in his left ankle. Ellis underwent successful surgery on August 27 to repair a torn deltoid ligament (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medial_ligament_of_talocrural_joint) in his left ankle,<SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-11>[12] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monta_Ellis#cite_note-11)</SUP> after he informed the club that he had injured himself working out."


http://www.nba.com/warriors/news/warriors_resign_monta_ellis.html?rss=true

And the link above, dated July 24th, announces that the contract was signed. So the deal was signed before the accident so he was clearly violating his contract.

Actually, it's better for him that he signed before the accident.

What many people don't understand about contracts is that they are mere agreements between two parties and the language inside them is not just a trigger to render the contract void. In fact, many contracts come with "violation" language but also contain penalty language as well. "If you engage in ___ you will suffer ___ consequence."

I asked the question above to see if Ellis actually engaged in fraud. If he was deceiving the Warriors at the same time that he was in contract negotiations, then you can instantly involve the courts at get the contract voided (and even throw in a few extra damages to boot).

So the timeline tells us that Ellis did not engage in fraud when signing the contract, but did violate his duties as described in the contract when he got on a two-wheel motorized vehicle.

If the penalty isn't included in the contract language, the only power you have when someone violates a lesser provision in a contract is to cancel the whole thing. Golden State would be idiots to do that.

What they've done instead is kept Ellis away from the team for several months during a season that has a tremendous amount of upheaval already. Ellis needs to observe practice from the sidelines, sit on the bench during games. Not for his sake, but as a reminder to the team that yet another change is coming soon.

I don't care who's fault it is, I don't care about the financial fine, I just don't think dividing the team up like this is a smart move when you are already searching for a new identity.

rexnom
10-12-2008, 01:05 PM
Why didn't they just fine him?

JayRedd
10-12-2008, 01:14 PM
Because Monta fibbing about falling off a moped is clearly twice as morally wrong as it was for JO to punch a fan in the face...and GState needed to send that message throughout its locker room and **** off every one of its players.

rexnom
10-12-2008, 01:16 PM
Because Monta fibbing about falling off a moped is clearly twice as morally wrong as it was for JO to punch a fan in the face...and GState needed to send that message throughout its locker room and **** off every one of its players.
Good thing GS has a sterling reputation for taking care of its players. I mean, this is clearly a franchise that cares more about players than money. Oh wait.

d_c
10-12-2008, 03:47 PM
http://www.examiner.com/x-441-Golden-State-Warriors-Examiner~y2008m10d11-Warriors-president-Robert-Rowell-said-nothing-to-suggest-Chris-Mullin-will-return (http://www.examiner.com/x-441-Golden-State-Warriors-Examiner%7Ey2008m10d11-Warriors-president-Robert-Rowell-said-nothing-to-suggest-Chris-Mullin-will-return)

Chris Mullin is basically out as VP/GM at the end of the season. His contract will run out and he won't be extended and at this point I doubt Mullin wants to come back. Wouldn't surprise me to see him hook up with Donnie again in NY (he's a Brooklyn native).

Mullin doesn't see eye to eye with the team president. The team president is basically the guy who shot down the Baron extension (which Mullin had already worked out) and he's the one who pushed for the Monta suspension (which Mullin/Nellie opposed) instead of just a small fine. The fact that he's overruling Mullin for this stuff probably means Mullin doesn't see the point of working for the Warriors.

The team president is also just a YES MAN for our incompetent owner. If Warrior fans weren't among the most loyal in the league, the owner would be running the equivalent of the Atlanta Hawks. I doubt he appreciates it, though.

With Mullin gone, I don't see much reason for Nellie to come back next year in any capacity, either. We'll be counting on our incompetent owner/team president to hire their next YES MEN for coach/GM.