Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Jamaal Tinsley files suit against former agent, financial advisers, housekeeper

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 2
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 template Next
  • #1

    Jamaal Tinsley files suit against former agent, financial advisers, housekeeper

    https://www.ibj.com/articles/65080-e...rs-housekeeper


    Ex-Pacer files suit against former agent, financial advisers, housekeeper

    Jamaal Tinsley played for the Indiana Pacers from 2001 to 2009. (AP photo)
    Former Indiana Pacer Jamaal Tinsley has filed a lawsuit that accuses his former agent and attorney, housekeeper and financial managers of improperly enriching themselves at his expense during his time as a professional basketball player in Indianapolis and afterward.

    The civil suit, filed earlier this week in U.S. District Court in Indianapolis, names as defendants three companies, four individuals and 10 other individuals identified only as “John Does 1-10.”

    The named defendants are sports and entertainment agent and attorney Raymond Brothers and his California-based based company, IAM Sports & Entertainment Inc; JPMorgan Chase Bank and two of its Indianapolis employees, Erika Blume and William Kennedy; and Jennifer Burr of Indianapolis and her company, Elite Services.

    Tinsley, 39, played for the Pacers from July 2001 and July 2009, when the team bought out the last two years of his contract. Tinsley went on to play for the Memphis Grizzlies in 2009-2010 and the Utah Jazz from 2011-2013.

    Tinsley received almost $38 million in pay during his seven-season run with the Pacers. The buyout agreement paid him about $10.7 million of the $14.7 million remaining on the last two years of his contract.

    The point guard averaged 10.4 points and seven assists per game as a Pacer, and 8.5 points and 6.1 assists per game in his 11-season NBA career.

    Brothers, through his agency IAM, acted as the basketball player’s agent and attorney from 2001 and 2011, the suit says. From 2006 to 2011 alone, Brothers and/or his agency received more than $1.4 million for this work.

    The suit says this amount was padded with some payments to which Brothers was not entitled. It also says Brothers received more than $450,000 from money that Tinsley received from his Pacers buyout deal. But those payments, which Brothers took from September 2009 to August 2011, were considered damages, not a salary, so Brothers was not entitled to earn agent fees from it, the suit says.

    The suit also says that Brothers received $41,500 in unauthorized payments for items including Brothers’ cell phone bills and “repayment” of a loan that did not exist.

    A phone message left at IAM was not returned.

    Tinsley also lobs several allegations against Burr and Elite Services, whom the suit says had an agreement to do housecleaning for the player from 2004 to 2012.


    During this period, Burr and her company, Elite, hiked their rates and charged Tinsley for unauthorized items like trip payments, moving expenses and furniture, the suit says.

    Burr and/or her company were also paid more than $280,000 “after Tinsley no longer owned a home in Indiana for Burr and/or Elite to clean for Tinsley,” the suit says.

    IBJ was unable to reach Burr for comment on the suit.

    Chase is included in the suit because Tinsley had checking, savings and trust accounts at the bank from 2004 and 2014. Kennedy and Blume served as Tinsley’s trust officers, the suit says.

    Under Tinsley’s arrangement with the bank, the money Tinsley earned from his basketball career was directly deposited at Chase. Then Chase distributed that money to Tinsley’s trust account and made payments to Brothers/IAM and Burr/Elite. It also made an “allowance” payment to Tinsley.

    The suit accuses Chase, Kennedy, Blume and John Does 1-10 of breaching their fiduciary duty to Tinsley because the bank failed to question the invoices that Brothers/IAM and Burr/Elite submitted.

    Tinsley also says the bank engaged in investing and selling activities that boosted the fees he owed them, while at the same time “refusing to allow him to invest in opportunities that he wanted to invest in.”

    Chase told IBJ it does not comment on pending litigation. Contacted directly by IBJ, Kennedy declined to comment. Blume did not return a phone message.

    Court records do not yet name attorneys for any of the defendants and, as of Friday morning, none of the defendants had filed a legal response to the suit. Tinsley is represented by Indianapolis attorney Theodore J. Minch of Sovich Minch LLP.

    Tinsley’s suit asks the court to award him damages in an unspecified amount and to order the defendants to disgorge the profits derived from the actions described in the suit.

    The suit also seeks damages and reimbursement of attorney's fees.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Jamaal Tinsley files suit against former agent, financial advisers, housekeeper

    I only read the article to see how the housekeepers were involved, lol.


    Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Jamaal Tinsley files suit against former agent, financial advisers, housekeeper

      Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
      I only read the article to see how the housekeepers were involved, lol.
      Isn't it obvious? the Housekeeper took his dustpan.
      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Jamaal Tinsley files suit against former agent, financial advisers, housekeeper

        Jokes aside, this is an interesting bit of data that I did not know.

        The suit says this amount was padded with some payments to which Brothers was not entitled. It also says Brothers received more than $450,000 from money that Tinsley received from his Pacers buyout deal. But those payments, which Brothers took from September 2009 to August 2011, were considered damages, not a salary, so Brothers was not entitled to earn agent fees from it, the suit says.
        How did I not know that? Was anyone else aware of this?
        This space for rent.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Jamaal Tinsley files suit against former agent, financial advisers, housekeeper

          Originally posted by Anthem View Post
          Jokes aside, this is an interesting bit of data that I did not know.



          How did I not know that? Was anyone else aware of this?
          Aware of what exactly?

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Jamaal Tinsley files suit against former agent, financial advisers, housekeeper

            I can only imagine how much $ his personal entourage he had tagging
            along bilked out of him.

            The captain doesn't run a tight ship, then gets all pissy when he finally
            realizes how leaky it's been.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Jamaal Tinsley files suit against former agent, financial advisers, housekeeper

              Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
              Aware of what exactly?
              I can't speak for him, but my take was that he was not aware that the buyout amount is considered damages rather than salary. I suppose that would be considered breach of contract and the negotiated settlement an award of damages related to said breach, but I am not a lawyer.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Jamaal Tinsley files suit against former agent, financial advisers, housekeeper

                Originally posted by RamBo_Lamar View Post
                I can only imagine how much $ his personal entourage he had tagging
                along bilked out of him.

                The captain doesn't run a tight ship, then gets all pissy when he finally
                realizes how leaky it's been.

                First, most of these players do not come from situations where they would have learned decent money management skills, so cut them some slack. Second, he did so something smart, he created a trust (Chase Bank) to manage his money for him. The problem it seems when he went back and did an audit the trust did a poor job of managing his money. So now he is trying to re-coup what the trust incorrectly paid out. This is inherently the problem with trusts, you are trusting the other person to manage the money correctly. If they do not a lot of money can go missing. The good thing is if the trust does not manage your money the way it is supposed to as outlined in the contract you can sue them for breach of contract to recover what was lost. This isn't about being pissy, it is about him paying for a service, and finding out that the service wronged him in some way. In this case it means they were paying out money that should not have been payed out.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Jamaal Tinsley files suit against former agent, financial advisers, housekeeper

                  Originally posted by Drew46229 View Post
                  I can't speak for him, but my take was that he was not aware that the buyout amount is considered damages rather than salary. I suppose that would be considered breach of contract and the negotiated settlement an award of damages related to said breach, but I am not a lawyer.
                  You are correct in your assessment. If a contract is ended per-maturely anything paid out to end the contract would be considered damages. The most obvious reason for this is the contract would describe this payment as damages and not salary, but also logically the salary timeline would have been described in the contract. Any payments that are not included in that timeline cannot be considered salary.

                  I'm not a lawyer either, but I've done contract work so I had to become familiar with the ins and outs of contracts.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Jamaal Tinsley files suit against former agent, financial advisers, housekeeper

                    Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                    You are correct in your assessment. If a contract is ended per-maturely anything paid out to end the contract would be considered damages. The most obvious reason for this is the contract would describe this payment as damages and not salary, but also logically the salary timeline would have been described in the contract. Any payments that are not included in that timeline cannot be considered salary.

                    I'm not a lawyer either, but I've done contract work so I had to become familiar with the ins and outs of contracts.
                    Interestingly, it seems like this would be a great way to f**k over your agent - accept a buyout on a contract supposed to last 2 or 3 more years and deprive him of his share.
                    BillS

                    A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                    Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Jamaal Tinsley files suit against former agent, financial advisers, housekeeper

                      Originally posted by BillS View Post
                      Interestingly, it seems like this would be a great way to f**k over your agent - accept a buyout on a contract supposed to last 2 or 3 more years and deprive him of his share.
                      I'm thinking the agent would have a pretty good case to go after his cut. I would assume the agent was even involved in the buyout discussions.
                      Plus, the buyout was totally the player's prerogative so why should the agent have to forfeit his legal percentage of even the full contract (let alone the smaller renegotiated buyout) because the player decided to accept a buyout offer?
                      Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                      ------

                      "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                      -John Wooden

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Jamaal Tinsley files suit against former agent, financial advisers, housekeeper

                        *Note I am not an expert, I have a good understanding, but not a perfect one. So if you meet an actual lawyer who tells you different, and can show you cases that prove as much believe that lawyer over me.


                        You two are conflating two different contracts into a single contract. The player has a contract with the team, and a contract with the agent. The agent only has a contract with the player, and is not included on the contract with the team. The way the agent can claim a right to any money is based on a contract he has with the player. This contract is based on a certain percentage of money paid to the player in a contract he negotiated, it is not based on a certain percentage of the total value of the contract. The agent only has a legal claim on the amount paid to the player, and no legal claim to any money unpaid. I would assume the player-agent contract also has a base pay, and a signing bonus when the player signs a contract with a team.

                        As far as a buyout situation goes, that depends on the contract between the player and the agent. Depending on the language of the contract the player could either owe or not owe money on damages. By default though, no the agent would not have any legal claim to that money. This is because the buyout money is not actually part of the contract. The original contract only outlines that a buyout is an option, and the procedure for negotiating a buyout. The buyout itself is actually a separate contract. So unless the same agent negotiated the deal, or had a clause in their player-agent contract giving them a portion of the buyout, they don't have a claim to that money.

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Jamaal Tinsley files suit against former agent, financial advisers, housekeeper

                          Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                          *Note I am not an expert, I have a good understanding, but not a perfect one. So if you meet an actual lawyer who tells you different, and can show you cases that prove as much believe that lawyer over me.


                          You two are conflating two different contracts into a single contract. .
                          No, I'm saying the agent likely has protections in his agreement with the player that would not allow the player to take a buyout and leave the agent in the dark on the original contract he negotiated in good faith for his client. The agent might not have any claim on the money in the buyout per se, but I could certainly see a damages claim on any monies the agent expected from the original contract he negotiated for the player. Especially with NBA contracts being guaranteed. In fact, I'd expect this to be fairly cut and dried.
                          So Tinsley's argument could in fact be correct and he not owe a percentage to the agent on the buyout (depending on his agreement with the agent), but if he tries to shaft him on that buyout money, it very well could be he opens himself up to larger damages based on what the agent would've been paid on the original contract and lost out on (plus whatever costs and penalties can be piled on).

                          In my mind, he owes the agent one way or another.
                          Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                          ------

                          "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                          -John Wooden

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Jamaal Tinsley files suit against former agent, financial advisers, housekeeper

                            Originally posted by BillS View Post
                            Interestingly, it seems like this would be a great way to f**k over your agent - accept a buyout on a contract supposed to last 2 or 3 more years and deprive him of his share.
                            Right, that's what I was thinking. What percentage do agents usually get?
                            This space for rent.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Jamaal Tinsley files suit against former agent, financial advisers, housekeeper

                              Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                              Isn't it obvious? the Housekeeper took his dustpan.
                              Damn you for beating me to this. It's like 90% of the reason I even clicked on the link.


                              Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X