OT: Nats, Wiz, O's, Ravens, Terps, Navy, Gtown, Mystics, Golf, Fall 2020-Spring 2021

[g00n]

Please provide a source or we'll have to delete this.

James Harden Reportedly Wants Out Of Houston Due To Owner's Trump Support

Seems like it's a rumor from a podcast that's being pushed in the media. I don't know if Harden or any others have come out and made any statements.

 

[Corby78]

Why is it crazy? I am not going to get into the specific details about the politics or policies driven by that statement but why is not wanting to work for an employer whose views don't align with yours or whose views you think are dangerous and threatening crazy or out of control? Why is not wanting to line the pockets of someone you don't agree with an unreasonable position to take?

And it's not just the NBA. People are leaving very high paying jobs at Facebook left and right because they think MZ done a lot of damage to democracy and he refuses to take responsibility for the part FB plays in spreading misinformation. People are leaving Amazon in part because of the way front-line workers have been treated during the pandemic. People left companies like Goldman and JPM when they felt bad about the part the banks played in the financial crisis. There's no rule that says you have to shut up and deal with it just because someone is writing your paycheck.

Not directing this at you by any means but I find it funny and ironic (and pretty pathetic) that the self-proclaimed defenders of capitalism and free markets get all pissy when someone decides to bring their talents to market and find a new employer because they don't support the views of their current or former employer when a free labor market is one of the bedrock pillars of our economic structure.

There is nothing wrong with making your own decision on who you work for and won't work for. Now I think its pretty idiotic to do that based on a boss being a Dem or Rep, but that's me. Working in the military I can easily work side by side somebody who doesn't agree with me and get the job done. There is something to having thicker skin and moving past a difference of opinion vs throwing your hands up in the air and acting like a child (like some of these players are doing IMO).

But if a person seriously can't get over a political party or who somebody voted for, then they have that right. Except when they have signed an agreement to do so for a period of time. A person working in a office can't hold their employer as a hostage until they can moved to a rival and get paid the same. Harden doesn't have to play basketball, but if he still wants to he should honor his contract. And I feel this way about all sports athletes including how I felt about a certain LT we used to have here.

My comment about the NBA losing control of its players, is because they are the employer and the players are the employee. Right now the NBA is letting players dictate how things will be done. This is not a recipe for success. Its just not a Trump thing. Players are holding out for whatever they want. They can say and do whatever or even demand a coach be fired.

 

[g00n]

Why is it crazy? I am not going to get into the specific details about the politics or policies driven by that statement but why is not wanting to work for an employer whose views don't align with yours or whose views you think are dangerous and threatening crazy or out of control? Why is not wanting to line the pockets of someone you don't agree with an unreasonable position to take?

And it's not just the NBA. People are leaving very high paying jobs at Facebook left and right because they think MZ done a lot of damage to democracy and he refuses to take responsibility for the part FB plays in spreading misinformation. People are leaving Amazon in part because of the way front-line workers have been treated during the pandemic. People left companies like Goldman and JPM when they felt bad about the part the banks played in the financial crisis. There's no rule that says you have to shut up and deal with it just because someone is writing your paycheck.

Not directing this at you by any means but I find it funny and ironic (and pretty pathetic) that the self-proclaimed defenders of capitalism and free markets get all pissy when someone decides to bring their talents to market and find a new employer because they don't support the views of their current or former employer when a free labor market is one of the bedrock pillars of our economic structure.

Right. Particularly when the common retort is "if you don't like it go somewhere else". Ok then.

This is why I said earlier that it cuts both ways regarding character. Both sides in these deals should be considered equal partners. If the owner doesn't like the character or some other non-protected status of a player he/she is free to trade that player within the law. I see no reason why a player shouldn't have the same options, again so long as he/she isn't sabotaging the entire thing with undue public trash talking.

The catch 22 here is if you say nothing you invite the media to speculate and create a narrative. If you say something you're accused of polluting the business environment. Tough call. Tact required.

 

[g00n]

There is nothing wrong with making your own decision on who you work for and won't work for. Now I think its pretty idiotic to do that based on a boss being a Dem or Rep, but that's me. Working in the military I can easily work side by side somebody who doesn't agree with me and get the job done. There is something to having thicker skin and moving past a difference of opinion vs throwing your hands up in the air and acting like a child (like some of these players are doing IMO).

But if a person seriously can't get over a political party or who somebody voted for, then they have that right. Except when they have signed an agreement to do so for a period of time. A person working in a office can't hold their employer as a hostage until they can moved to a rival and get paid the same. Harden doesn't have to play basketball, but if he still wants to he should honor his contract. And I feel this way about all sports athletes including how I felt about a certain LT we used to have here.

My comment about the NBA losing control of its players, is because they are the employer and the players are the employee. Right now the NBA is letting players dictate how things will be done. This is not a recipe for success. Its just not a Trump thing. Players are holding out for whatever they want. They can say and do whatever or even demand a coach be fired.

They have signed contracts, not signed letters of indentured service. Employers are not owners of the players. They own the franchise, not the people.

It seems you believe labor has no leverage or value and is unequal in a contractual arrangement. Did I misread that?

 

[Corby78]

They have signed contracts, not signed letters of indentured service. Employers are not owners of the players. They own the franchise, not the people.

It seems you believe labor has no leverage or value and is unequal in a contractual arrangement. Did I misread that?

First I agree with your above statement, tact is required. I would fully support a players right to say "I don't agree with my owners stance on …….." And if the owner and player sat down and agreed that they move on, that's fine too. But I disagree they are on equal terms. One is the employee, one is the employer. Unless the employer is mistreating, is abusive, creating an unhealthy work environment, etc... then I don't see ground where the employee can dictate his contract is no longer valid.

And yes its a contract, not indentured service as you said. But that contract says, I will play NBA basketball for Team A for the next X number of years. He can opt not top play, but then not get paid. JMO, but I believe the NBA has give too much power to players. They on a whim can completely dictate what a coach/GM/owner will do because they have the leverage. And this is now (sounding like but not confirmed) including "because he voted how I don't like." And this goes both ways, what if an owner said he wasn't going to honor a contract because a player voted how he didn't like? People would be up in arms. People just need to man up and start solving differences like adults.

 

[Ridley Simon]

Why is it crazy? I am not going to get into the specific details about the politics or policies driven by that statement but why is not wanting to work for an employer whose views don't align with yours or whose views you think are dangerous and threatening crazy or out of control? Why is not wanting to line the pockets of someone you don't agree with an unreasonable position to take?

And it's not just the NBA. People are leaving very high paying jobs at Facebook left and right because they think MZ done a lot of damage to democracy and he refuses to take responsibility for the part FB plays in spreading misinformation. People are leaving Amazon in part because of the way front-line workers have been treated during the pandemic. People left companies like Goldman and JPM when they felt bad about the part the banks played in the financial crisis. There's no rule that says you have to shut up and deal with it just because someone is writing your paycheck.

Not directing this at you by any means but I find it funny and ironic (and pretty pathetic) that the self-proclaimed defenders of capitalism and free markets get all pissy when someone decides to bring their talents to market and find a new employer because they don't support the views of their current or former employer when a free labor market is one of the bedrock pillars of our economic structure.

I agree with all of what you said .... unless you have a contract. That’s binding. You signed it. You need to live with it.

If the contract has outs or you want to hold out (and not get paid and force the issue), then by all means have it. That’s ok too.

but contracts are binding to me, and in pro sports the leagues carry the weight. They need to pay you, you need to work for them. Unless it’s changed mutually.

Once contract is up OR it’s breached? Whole different hill of beans.

anyway. That’s my rant on this.

Edit — looks like I’m late to the Corby party.

Anyway, if a player wants out, state your case. If you are under contact and it doesn’t happen? Go and play as hard as you would for any other team. Be a professional, and set that example as well. If you cant stomach it? Sit out and don’t get paid until it resolves itself.

 

[g00n]

First I agree with your above statement, tact is required. I would fully support a players right to say "I don't agree with my owners stance on …….." And if the owner and player sat down and agreed that they move on, that's fine too. But I disagree they are on equal terms. One is the employee, one is the employer. Unless the employer is mistreating, is abusive, creating an unhealthy work environment, etc... then I don't see ground where the employee can dictate his contract is no longer valid.

And yes its a contract, not indentured service as you said. But that contract says, I will play NBA basketball for Team A for the next X number of years. He can opt not top play, but then not get paid. JMO, but I believe the NBA has give too much power to players. They on a whim can completely dictate what a coach/GM/owner will do because they have the leverage. And this is now (sounding like but not confirmed) including "because he voted how I don't like." And this goes both ways, what if an owner said he wasn't going to honor a contract because a player voted how he didn't like? People would be up in arms. People just need to man up and start solving differences like adults.

It's not about voting so we don't need to consider that. It's about far more than voting if there's a lot of financial or other support going on.

Political affiliation is not a protected class in workplace discrimination suits, at least in most states. It's also not federally protected. But if your political beliefs overlap with protected status issues it can become a problem.

This is why I very specifically talked about "character" issues factoring in to workplace decisions, in both directions. Because that's what this really boils down to.

We can wish for people to "man up" all we want but the world is beyond our control. It is what it is. And that includes conflict.

And like it or not a contract is between two parties providing value of some kind. You seem to think there's an employer/employee dynamic that's one-sided and I don't agree with that. Contracts are simply legal agreements between parties, in this case business partners. The player provides certain services and the franchise provides compensation for those services, along with other perks.

The fact that money is going one way doesn't make the dynamic inherently and necessarily one-sided. It may be PERCEIVED to be that way by people who are loathe to negotiate or who have grown up thinking boss/employee relationships are all the same. But when you have professional contractors who are hired with negotiated terms there is much more equal footing than some kid slinging fries at the local fast food place...especially if there are others who are willing to pay for the contractor's services.

 

[Ridley Simon]

Except the contracts for Contractors in the NBA (like all pro sports) are exclusive to one partner in that league.

So you are bound. Yes the teams have more leverage as they can trade people whenever they want — *unless* the player makes it part of their contract that the team cannot do so.

call me what you will, but it I think it’s bunk to demand a contract to be exchanged or re-written. You signed it. You own it. And then the next time, do it differently.

 

[Ovechkins Wodka]

Please provide a source or we'll have to delete this.

It was on TMZ twitter yesterday. Not the best source but it was a blue checkmark source

 

[g00n]

Except the contracts for Contractors in the NBA (like all pro sports) are exclusive to one partner in that league.

So you are bound. Yes the teams have more leverage as they can trade people whenever they want — *unless* the player makes it part of their contract that the team cannot do so.

call me what you will, but it I think it’s bunk to demand a contract to be exchanged or re-written. You signed it. You own it. And then the next time, do it differently.

People sign contracts and then beg out of them all the time. This has been a huge problem in the music industry for decades, because record labels would routinely take advantage of naive young kids.

I'm not saying that's happening here but this is a high stakes business where there are very skilled, in-demand "contractors" with high-powered agents negotiating complex contract we can't read. So who knows that language is in there that might be leveraged to get out of that contract.

We may never know, and only see the publicly disclosed "resolution" that's made to look like some kind of simple compromise. It wouldn't be in ownership's best interest to broadcast potential loopholes, and it wouldn't be in the players interest (or the interest of the union) to reduce its own power with too much disclosure.

Point being we want it to be simple and straight forward (you sign a contract, you honor it 100% and play) but it may not be so simple, on either side. So again, as long as we're not talking about some bullshit, salt the earth on your way out nonsense claims that poison he entire process, I see no problem with going back and trying to renegotiate a contract or seek a trade.

Nobody has to be prisoner to a signature, and there may be a win-win somewhere.

 

[Ridley Simon]

People sign contracts and then beg out of them all the time. This has been a huge problem in the music industry for decades, because record labels would routinely take advantage of naive young kids.

I'm not saying that's happening here but this is a high stakes business where there are very skilled, in-demand "contractors" with high-powered agents negotiating complex contract we can't read. So who knows that language is in there that might be leveraged to get out of that contract.

We may never know, and only see the publicly disclosed "resolution" that's made to look like some kind of simple compromise. It wouldn't be in ownership's best interest to broadcast potential loopholes, and it wouldn't be in the players interest (or the interest of the union) to reduce its own power with too much disclosure.

Point being we want it to be simple and straight forward (you sign a contract, you honor it 100% and play) but it may not be so simple, on either side. So again, as long as we're not talking about some bullshit, salt the earth on your way out nonsense claims that poison he entire process, I see no problem with going back and trying to renegotiate a contract or seek a trade.

Nobody has to be prisoner to a signature, and there may be a win-win somewhere.

I’m fine w trying those things. I am. But if they don’t happen, won’t be a petulant Diva of it doesn’t. Harden seems the petulant type, as it’s being reported that he’s not returning his employers phone calls due to how dissatisfaction with the situation.

mind you that this is the same Harden who engineered Paul’s departure to being in Westbrook (again, as is being reported), and now he wants out.

Harden isn’t the issue, to me. The issue is that Harden’s behaviour is becoming more and more common place, and there is no negative ramifications to it.

we don’t see this “way of handling things” on the other 3 major sports with near the regularity we do in the NBA. I think may be @Corby78 main context, but I don’t want to put words in his (or hers, just in case as I’ve made that error before) mouth

 

[g00n]

The NBA is unique because the roster is smaller and you have 5 guys who will dominate playing time on any team. Usually there are 1-6 legit stars and the rest of the guys are in support. The superstars can legitimately carry some teams. So those stars may have more leverage than your average MLB, NFL, or NHL player.

I also think that leads to players trying to move around to find better chemistry on teams that can rise to the top. Most owners are going to look at the bottom line and not really care about that since the league tends to favor dynasties due to the star domination, and the best they can hope for is making the playoffs and maybe having a shot at some revenue or a miracle run.

So I think that contributes to players looking to form their own "big 3" situations when they perceive their team is stagnating or going the wrong direction. They also form friendships and want to play on the same teams. Some may be divas but I think that word gets thrown around way too much to describe anyone who's disgruntled in a way we simply don't like.

 

[Ridley Simon]

The NBA is unique because the roster is smaller and you have 5 guys who will dominate playing time on any team. Usually there are 1-6 legit stars and the rest of the guys are in support. The superstars can legitimately carry some teams. So those stars may have more leverage than your average MLB, NFL, or NHL player.

I also think that leads to players trying to move around to find better chemistry on teams that can rise to the top. Most owners are going to look at the bottom line and not really care about that since the league tends to favor dynasties due to the star domination, and the best they can hope for is making the playoffs and maybe having a shot at some revenue or a miracle run.

So I think that contributes to players looking to form their own "big 3" situations when they perceive their team is stagnating or going the wrong direction. They also form friendships and want to play on the same teams. Some may be divas but I think that word gets thrown around way too much to describe anyone who's disgruntled in a way we simply don't like.

Perhaps. But Harden fits it.

the rest I agree with

 

[g00n]

Perhaps. But Harden fits it.

the rest I agree with

He might be a diva. I dunno. But the reports so far are something like "full revolt" within the org so maybe it's not just him or his attitude that's behind all this.

 

[Ovechkins Wodka]

I would probably trade Wall + anything (not Beal) for Harden

Harden and Beal would be like the eastern Splash brothers

 

[g00n]

Also, I think we should be very skeptical of this reporting. It's one guy from bleacher report saying he heard a rumor that the politics is "one of the factors" contributing to the trade speculation. But per this article the owner had publicly supported the players in their political stances in the past:

Report: James Harden, Russell Westbrook want out of Houston due to owner's Trump support

So something might be a little smelly here, especially given how much political disinformation is flying around.

 

[Ridley Simon]

He might be a diva. I dunno. But the reports so far are something like "full revolt" within the org so maybe it's not just him or his attitude that's behind all this.

You could be right.

I tead an article what it was Westbrook (of all people) that was trying to change/improve the culture. One that was set up for/by Harden.

Reports like Harden won’t board team bus and travels by himself, never eats w teammates, etc. Also is never accountable for mistakes during games etc. Westbrook called him out (along with everyone else, including himself) after a bad loss this past season and the Beard wouldn’t hear any of it. Lots of locker room discord. Which Westbrook has NOT been known for. Among all he IS known for. LOL

 

[Ridley Simon]

I would probably trade Wall + anything (not Beal) for Harden

Harden and Beal would be like the eastern Splash brothers

That would never happen. Wizards would need to add a LOT to get Harden, and in the same vein also lose Wall. Zero chance. It would need to be every young asset they have plus 3+ firsts. And maybe that wouldn’t be good enough

 

[CapitalsCupReality]

Please provide a source or we'll have to delete this.

Report: James Harden, Russell Westbrook want out of Houston due to owner's Trump support

not like it’s a secret this was floated....Jesus.

 

[AlexBrovechkin8]

Report: James Harden, Russell Westbrook want out of Houston due to owner's Trump support

not like it’s a secret this was floated....Jesus.

You posted a rumor that was political in nature with no link or source attached so I asked for the source. Not a big deal.

 

[AlexBrovechkin8]

Okoro gone to the Cavs at 5 but the Bulls taking Williams at 4 means the Wiz will be in line to get someone good.

 

[AlexBrovechkin8]

And shit, the Hawks took Okongwu at 6. Wonder if the Wiz trade back now.

 

[AlexBrovechkin8]

Wonder if they take Avdija if they don't trade back. Would be solid.

 

[Ridley Simon]

Toppin would be awesome. If he goes here, then trade back and accumulate picks (Boston)

 

[Ridley Simon]

Ok. Disappointed in my top 3 being gone. Okongwu, Okoro, Toppin. Damn it.

I’m ok w Avdija, it no one else. Don’t need anymore guards. So if they don’t like Avdija, then they need to trade back ASAP