# Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles (merged)



## narek (Jul 29, 2005)

*Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*

http://www.suntimes.com/output/bulls/cst-spt-bull28.html - from the article:



> "Someone asked me for my opinion, and I gave it to them,'' Maron, who also investigated the 1993 cardiomyopathy death of the Boston Celtics' Reggie Lewis, told the Southtown. "I did not view Eddy as an NBA player who had a $60 million contract at stake. I understand there is a lot of money on the line for a lot of people here, but I cannot allow myself to be sucked in by those kinds of things. I was obligated to treat Eddy like any other patient, and that's what I did.''
> 
> The NBA players union has vowed to defend Curry's right not to take the test, which the Bulls have insisted on.
> 
> "This is a very complex matter,'' said Maron, who told the Southtown he has known the Los Angeles-based Cannom for years. "As a result, it is subject to a difference of opinion. I've also done [HMC research] for longer than Eddy Curry has been alive."



Sam Smith - Bulls/Curry charging toward split:

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune...mith,1,7096585.column?coll=cs-bulls-headlines

Hoiberg's view:

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune...bulls,1,3885318.story?coll=cs-bulls-headlines

A rehash of what has been in the Tribune, but with a bit from Antoine Walker who has played pickup games with Curry the past three weeks, and the end bit talks to Reggie Lewis's agent:



> ``I've seen this movie before,'' he said. ``Eddy Curry and his family and his agent do not believe he can drop dead and die. You know what? He can drop dead and die. It goes just like that.
> 
> ``If I'm the team, let the insurance be your guide,'' Stanley said. ``The insurance won't insure it, that should tell you something. They've got the biggest group of risk managers."


Added later:
And Dr. Maron talks to the Daily Southtown:

http://www.dailysouthtown.com/southtown/dssports/pro/281sd9.htm - 

From the article:



> For 35 years, Maron has done exhaustive research on the causes and demographics of sudden cardiac death in sports, athletes' heart syndrome and its distinction from heart disease.
> 
> As it concerns Curry, 22, the ability to differentiate between HCM and a normal athlete's heart may be crucial to his well-being. The condition accounts for more than half of all heart-related sudden deaths of those younger than 25.


And



> Maron served as an investigator in the case of Boston Celtics star Reggie Lewis, who died prematurely because of a heart disorder. He believes there are enough similarities between the Curry and Lewis cases to warrant a more detailed look.


----------



## jbulls (Aug 31, 2005)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*

As much as this stinks to read, how can anyone on this board really disagree w/ Dr. Maron? We're making amatuerish guesses at best. Dr. Cannom may disagree w/ Dr. Maron but these are both world renowned heart specialists. 

I think the acrimony caused by this situation is going to be really detrimental to the team if Eddy ends up leaving, as I think he's a really valuable piece to what we're doing. But If Maron is the basket in which Paxson is putting his eggs I guess the situation is what it is...argh...


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*

Sam Smith made me pull out my dictionary. Interesting stuff about the contract offers from the Bulls. Not sure I believe it 100% given the need for Smith to qualify with "believed" and "ostensibly"

Adv.	1.	ostensibly - from appearances alone;

It's pretty clear that ,false positive be damned, the Bulls would want Curry to retire if the DNA test was 'bad' given that the report says they would give him $20M even if he had to retire. They are even doing it such a way that he couldn't easily go to another team. 

As for Fred Hoiberg, the telling quote is this, ""If doctors told me there's a 1 percent chance something could happen, I wouldn't play" Well, what if it's 1/2% or .01 %. And couldn't EC feel differently about what he would do. Not sure why Pax and Hoiberg feel so comfortable and making this difficult decision for Curry.

Does pax have altenating nightmares of a.) Curry colapsing as a Bull and b.) Curry leading another team past the Bulls in a playoff series?


----------



## Hustle (Dec 17, 2003)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*

Considering he is not insured the deal Pax put on the table seems pretty good. The 20M covers Eddy's family in the worst case scenario, the 50M seems about right consdering no insurance, and the 70M Eddy might just be worth is in the most part would probably all be given to him if he stayed in shape and played out his contract(of course I don't know but if he ended up w/ let's say 60M, considering insurance covers 80% of a contract if a player can no longer play and we are looking at a contract that could put this teams future on the line it seems to be about as much as he could expect. It is obvious Eddy's not going to take the test for anyone, because for Pax to offer nearly what Eddy's camp asked for w/o insurance seems more than fair. The issue is the test not what Paxson thinks of Eddy, and it seems very obvious that he has already failed one otherwise the money he wants is right there in front of him. I don't think this is idealogical.

We've talked about all of this before but there are not a lot of teams with cap next year, and the ones that have money are not in need of a starting center and/or are not known to spend a lot of money, especially making risky contracts. If there is an exception it is Atlanta, but the signed Zaza this year and will probably have the ability to draft a decent big guy next year. On top of that ATL will probably not be good at all this year with one shooter who is supposably a point guard in disguise (he has nice handles but Johnson hasn't proved anything yet in terms of playing point.), without a solid inside presents or multiple shooters they will struggle (I like their young players but their talents are way to redundant) to win. Is ATL going to want to cap itself out on a risk like Eddy when they will still have huge gaps in the team? I doubt and Chicago is likely to be the team that will give him the most money next year also.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



Hustle said:


> The 20M covers Eddy's family in the worst case scenario, the 50M seems about right consdering no insurance, and the 70M


It's not $70M. It's nearly $70M. Not sure that I buy the $50M figure. Understanding the CBA, I don't see how you transform a $20M contract into a $50M contract - I guess maybe by making year 3 partially guarenteed and years 3-7 an option that would be picked up immeadiately. But do the Bulls really do this before he played a game? Smith is not definative.

*But for all of this, the main issue is that Pax wants to make Curry's medical decision for him. Why?*

p.s. I do feel somewhat better about Pax now. I just don't understand his hard stance.

p.p.s. Can these details clear up once and for all that Pax values Curry more than Crawford?


----------



## Hustle (Dec 17, 2003)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



johnston797 said:


> It's not $70M. It's nearly $70M. Not sure that I buy the $50M figure. Understanding the CBA, I don't see how you transform a $20M contract into a $50M contract - I guess maybe by making year 3 partially guarenteed and years 3-7 an option that would be picked up immeadiately. But do the Bulls really do this before he played a game? Smith is not definative.
> 
> *But for all of this, the main issue is that Pax wants to make Curry's medical decision for him. Why?*
> 
> ...


I don't know if the numbers a correct but if they are w/o insurance how could we give Eddy more or the same as Tyson, it looks as if he had a chance to make more, and if he didn't I feel like the insurance issue makes that fair.

I think Pax's hard stance is his fear Eddy has not passed the test, insurance will not cover him(I haven't heard why but I'm sure Pax knows), andthat he is a risk. It is Pax's job to put this team into the best situation possible.


----------



## giusd (Apr 17, 2003)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*

I hate to say this but we all know EC is in a very bad economic state. My understanding is he is in debt out the ying yang and has been taking out loans using his next contact to get these loans. Now he is looking at a lot less money then he was thinking.

The EC camp and his agent think they are going to get some 70 million dollar contact with not out for the employer if he cant play due to his heart condition. That is never going to happen. Owers are businessman and they are not going to make a 70 - 60 0r even 50 million dollar outlay if they may be paying it out while EC cant play. Period. EC could get a solid contact today all he has to agree to is if he doesnt play due to an exesting condition the team is off the hook. But we all know he and his agent want a no conditions in his contract BECAUSE he is fine, no heart condition. BUT the worlds expect (Maron) says he likely does and will not sign off on him playing with out the DNA test. 

That is it folks.

david


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



narek said:


> This bit . . .
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## bullsville (Jan 23, 2005)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



ScottMay said:


> narek said:
> 
> 
> > This bit . . .
> ...


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



giusd said:


> I hate to say this but we all know EC is in a very bad economic state. My understanding is he is in debt out the ying yang and has been taking out loans using his next contact to get these loans. Now he is looking at a lot less money then he was thinking.


How exactly do we all know this? Have we been sifting through his Quicken file?

Or listening to Sloth on bbb.net?



> The EC camp and his agent think they are going to get some 70 million dollar contact with not out for the employer if he cant play due to his heart condition. That is never going to happen.


Fortunately they've not asked for that based on the numerous articles I've read.



> Owers are businessman and they are not going to make a 70 - 60 0r even 50 million dollar outlay if they may be paying it out while EC cant play. Period. EC could get a solid contact today all he has to agree to is if he doesnt play due to an exesting condition the team is off the hook. But we all know he and his agent want a no conditions in his contract BECAUSE he is fine, no heart condition.


This is simply not true. The Trib, I'm quite sure, reported that the Bulls made a conditional offer and Curry made a conditional offer right back. The two sides might reasonably disagree with what's fair, but you're way out in left field.


----------



## narek (Jul 29, 2005)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



bullsville said:


> ScottMay said:
> 
> 
> > That's odd, but the same quote is in this article that nobody has posted here yet:
> ...


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



> Hoiberg said after he received his diagnosis, he called 10 cardiologists for more opinions. All agreed he needed the surgery. Hoiberg, waived by Minnesota in the summer, said doctors have cleared him for a comeback. By January he hopes to get the OK for physical contact.
> 
> "If doctors told me there's a 1 percent chance something could happen, I wouldn't play," he said.


Does anyone else find this funny and hypocritical? Now on one hand if his doctors tell him it is a 1% something could happen he wouldn't play but on the other hand it took 10 agreeing opinions before he decided to have the surgery.

Also, I am doubtful his doctors gave him the 100% gurantee nothing would happen to him.


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



johnston797 said:


> I do feel somewhat better about Pax now.


I feel slightly better about Pax now -- or at least I know where he got the idea that there are parallels between Lewis and Curry.

But I feel a lot worse about Maron. I simply have no idea where he's coming from, despite his bona fides.

I know the Bulls have attempted to paint Cannom as a back-alley quack, and that they've never mentioned Estes by name, but to place Maron's opinion on a pedestal above theirs is inappropriate, particularly when Maron's opinon conflicts with known and accepted medical procedure.

And if Maron is pinning his reservations on a perceived similarity between Curry and Reggie Lewis, well, then I'm even less convinced. Dr. Estes was a member of a team that correctly diagnosed Lewis as having cocaine-induced cardiomyopathy (despite Lewis's failure to disclose his prior cocaine use), told him that he'd have to quit playing and have a pacemaker/defibrillator implant, and to stop all physical activity, no matter how mild. It seems if anyone would have identified a link between the two, and known the disastrous consequences of prematurely clearing a professional athlete, it'd be Estes.

I actually wish Curry would let Maron discuss the specifics of his case. I would love to know where this is coming from.

P.S. The Hoiberg puff piece that Garcia offered up as an "I'm sorry" bouquet to the Bulls is absolutely hilarious.


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



narek said:


> bullsville said:
> 
> 
> > Bad cut and paste on my part - I took it from the Tuscaloosa news.
> ...


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



johnston797 said:


> Sam Smith made me pull out my dictionary. Interesting stuff about the contract offers from the Bulls. Not sure I believe it 100% given the need for Smith to qualify with "believed" and "ostensibly"
> 
> Adv. 1. ostensibly - from appearances alone;
> 
> ...


You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to johnston797 again.

This post pretty well sums up my thoughts. Based on the all the evidence I've accumulated, I just wouldn't accept such a deal if I were Curry.

Importantly, even if Curry passes the test, his 6 year, $50M amount guaranteed is well below that of Chandler and quite possibly less than he'd make as a UFA next year. Remember - in that scenario, he's passed the test so the health risk is ("ostensibly") gone! Since this is the likely course of events, and he's also got the unpleasent sensation of being leveraged by the Bulls into a lower amount, I don't see why he'd accept it.


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*

http://www.ronsuskind.com/newsite/articles/archives/000038.html



> By midday Friday, test results were coming in. The two doctors huddled in the office of Charles Munn, the Baptist's staff radiologist, to look at color printouts from a thalium stress test, which illuminates how blood moves through the heart muscle. Dr. Munn guided the others, but there wasn't much need: On the left ventricle of Mr. Lewis's heart were three black patches -- dead spots.
> 
> "This was something any third-year resident could have seen," Dr. Munn said. "This was not subtle. This was not esoteric."
> 
> ...





> While Equitable searched, Dr. Kessler, the deputy medical examiner, was searching as well: for a single, definitive cause of death. On Nov. 19, nearly four months after Mr. Lewis died, a death certificate was quietly filed in Waltham City Hall, not far from the Brandeis University basketball court where Mr. Lewis fell and died. It listed the cause of death as adenovirus 2 -- a common virus that causes the common cold -- that led to inflammation of Mr. Lewis's heart, widespread scarring of tissue and, ultimately, a fatal cardiac arrest.
> 
> The filing of a definitive cause of death -- rather than a more cautious statement that Mr. Lewis had a damaged heart of unknown cause -- meant any insurance investigation would now have to take on the office of the chief medical examiner of Massachusetts. Then there was the likely public backlash if the insurer revealed that it didn't want to pay the hero's widow. People at Equitable will say only that their investigation has been closed.
> 
> ...





> As tissue slides of athletes, both famous and anonymous, flashed on a screen, the doctors discussed the heightened risks for athletes who may, at one time, have used cocaine. A small tissue scar caused by such use, which may not cause problems in an average person, can enlarge in a large, muscular athlete's heart, upsetting the electrical responses of heart muscles and causing cardiac arrest. They spoke of the frustration of how the stilted dialogue concerning athletics and drugs, laden with public relations and financial interests, prevented the issue from being studied with scientific rigor.


I really don't see how any of this applies to Curry. What does Maron see that Estes does not?


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



ScottMay said:


> And if Maron is pinning his reservations on a perceived similarity between Curry and Reggie Lewis, well, then I'm even less convinced.


I was very disappointed that this portion of the Sun-Times article was not a direct quote. Given what we have, it's nearly impossible to truly see how similar Marion thinks the two case are.


----------



## bullsville (Jan 23, 2005)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



ScottMay said:


> http://www.ronsuskind.com/newsite/articles/archives/000038.html
> 
> 
> 
> I really don't see how any of this applies to Curry. What does Maron see that Estes does not?


Damn, I'm impressed- I have found some old articles on the internet, but one written over 10 years ago? Nice work!

As for Maron, from what I'm reading all I can figure is that he puts more stock in the DNA test than the other doctors. Doesn't he have more experience in working and experimenting with DNA than any of the other doctors? 

Maybe he figures his line of thinking is more advanced and therefore more accurate, even though it goes against the "standard, accepted medical practices and/or beliefs"? Hell, covering people in leeches was the "standard medical practice" at one time, as a really absurd example.

In any case, thanks for the great info, as usual.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



ScottMay said:


> I feel slightly better about Pax now -- or at least I know where he got the idea that there are parallels between Lewis and Curry.


Does this mean he's not "evil" like he was yesterday? It was never much of a stretch to think that the basis for Paxson's statements was Maron's expressed opinions and reasoning. 

Interesting that Maron feels there are at least enough similarities between Lewis and Curry to warrant the test, particularly since Maron was an investigator to Lewis' death (Yes, I did read your article. Thanks for posting it.).

At the very least, I hope this puts to rest all the vitriol regarding Paxson's statements. 

We can attempt to debate the merit of the respective opinions of Cannom and Maron all day long. 

We can continue to debate the legal foundation for the parties' respective cases to an arbitrator.

We can continue to debate the "replaceability" of Eddy Curry.

But hopefully we don't need to debate the ethics/morality of the positions of Camp Curry and PaxDorf. It is obvious that both sides have a legitimate, reasonable basis for the positions they are taking.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



bullsville said:


> Damn, I'm impressed- I have found some old articles on the internet, but one written over 10 years ago? Nice work!
> 
> As for Maron, from what I'm reading all I can figure is that he puts more stock in the DNA test than the other doctors. Doesn't he have more experience in working and experimenting with DNA than any of the other doctors?
> 
> ...


The more I've read of Dr. Maron's approach, the more confident I feel in saying his approach is "more advanced", "less costly" and involves "less risk", but is actually less accurate, with potentially disasterous quality of life effects for people who take his advice. In truth, it's a very nasty tradeoff he makes.

Without going back and pulling up all the links again, here's the difference in a nutshell. The standard medical practice for someone deemed "at risk" is to have regular EKGs. Regular EKGs are expensive and its a pain in the butt to do one every month or so, but so long as the observed structure of the heart remains the same the patient is free to live as a normal person and engage in most any activity they want.

Maron's approach is, in many cases, to suggest a one-time DNA test, and then, if the patient is found to be predisposed to HCM, to treat them as if they actually have it. This means to recommend the patient avoid any sort of strenuous activity- basketball, other sports, running around with your kids, sex, keeping in shape- etc.

Comparing the two approaches, a one time DNA test is clearly cheaper than serial EKG testing. It also will lower your risk of actually dying of HCM if you follow the doctors' orders and cease doing many of the things that make life worth living. And because it's a matter of following doctors' orders, it provides a wonderful shield of liability for doctors and insurers that's not provided by a course of investigation that requires continual expert analysis of test results.

All of that makes Dr. Maron's course a really great thing. But remember that there's one other point. Accuracy. The fact that the DNA test is "more advanced" (meaning newer technologically) doesn't make it more accurate. In fact, the DNA test is wildly inaccurate in several senses. First, it generates false positive and false negative rates that would certainly give rise to liability were they simply matters of human skill in interpretation. Second, in use on an individual not presenting HCM already, it's not an indication that the individual actually has or will ever have the disease.

Despite this gross inaccuracy, Maron recommendation is basically a dramatic reduction in quality of life for people who don't actually have, and may never get the disease.

Basically, what Maron seems to be recommending (and for Curry) seems to me to be the equivalent - even a less warranted equivalent! of telling a 22 year old woman she should have an immediate double mastectomy if she had a non-cancerous, non-recurrant gland inflamation in her breast and a DNA test that suggested a predisposition to (but not the presense of!) breast cancer.

There are, I believe, some doctors out there who would say that, and some patients who would ask for it. But to most people that's a radically conservative approach that doesn't make a hell of a lot of sense.


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



Ron Cey said:


> Does this mean he's not "evil" like he was yesterday? It was never much of a stretch to think that the basis for Paxson's statements was Maron's expressed opinions and reasoning.
> 
> Interesting that Maron feels there are at least enough similarities between Lewis and Curry to warrant the test, particularly since Maron was an investigator to Lewis' death (Yes, I did read your article. Thanks for posting it.).
> 
> ...


I still consider it a scummy thing for Paxson to do, particularly in light of all the right-way nonsense and angry denunciations that all Paxdorf wants is to protect Eddy's health (it's funny how the debate has moved away from that focal point). No matter the source -- and we still have no idea on what basis Maron sees a similarity -- of Paxson's notion, it was Paxson who went to great pains to get the message out there and with high volume. Not a very classy or professional thing to do in my opinion.


----------



## lgtwins (May 18, 2004)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



ScottMay said:


> I still consider it a scummy thing for Paxson to do, particularly in light of all the right-way nonsense and angry denunciations that all Paxdorf wants is to protect Eddy's health (it's funny how the debate has moved away from that focal point). No matter the source -- and we still have no idea on what basis Maron sees a similarity -- of Paxson's notion, it was Paxson who went to great pains to get the message out there and with high volume. Not a very classy or professional thing to do in my opinion.


Since you started to call him Paxdorf, do I have to call you Scottdorf too?


----------



## bullsville (Jan 23, 2005)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



Mikedc said:


> The more I've read of Dr. Maron's approach, the more confident I feel in saying his approach is "more advanced", "less costly" and involves "less risk", but is actually less accurate, with potentially disasterous quality of life effects for people who take his advice. In truth, it's a very nasty tradeoff he makes.
> 
> Without going back and pulling up all the links again, here's the difference in a nutshell. The standard medical practice for someone deemed "at risk" is to have regular EKGs. Regular EKGs are expensive and its a pain in the butt to do one every month or so, but so long as the observed structure of the heart remains the same the patient is free to live as a normal person and engage in most any activity they want.
> 
> ...


That's all good info, thanks.

But the thing I am seeing is that Cannom and Maron don't agree on two very important "non-DNA" diagnoses:

First, Maron saw a problem on Eddy's echocardiogram that Cannom disputes: 

Regarding the abnormalities on Curry's echocardiogram that raised concerns for Maron, Cannom said: "We did not see them. They were very minor."

Second, Maron things Eddy's heart is too big, and Cannom disagrees:

"[Maron] is saying it's abnormally large for someone his size; we're saying it's acceptable given the patient's size," Cannom said.

While it certainly seems true that Maron is more conservative, it also looks very clear that Maron interpreted Eddy's test results differently than Cannom, which is what led him to ask for the DNA test. I'm assuming that if Maron agreed with Cannom that the EKG was fine and that Eddy's heart size is acceptable, he wouldn't have ordered the DNA test, right?


----------



## SecretAgentGuy (Jul 15, 2003)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*

Good points b-ville. It's obvious that there's much more going on than us armchair physicians can really understand. As it's been pointed out earlier, Paxdorf and Camp Curry have very legitimate reasons behind their stance and it boils down to Maron vs. Cannom. 

The question arises though - can Eddy ever get a more profitable contract than what he's already been offered? Many of us have been arguing endlessly that Pax is lowballing Eddy and trying to lock him into an unfair contract. Is that honestly the case? What GM in the league will guarantee money to Eddy given how he cannot be insured (something that I'm assuming will never change)? Assuming Smith is accurate with his figures (I know, it's a stretch), but $70 mil is a very nice contract. This isn't football where 6 years from now he's out of his prime and will be cut. Ideally he's hitting his stride in 6 years and will be in position to sign another big money deal. Am I missing something?


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



bullsville said:


> That's all good info, thanks.
> 
> But the thing I am seeing is that Cannom and Maron don't agree on two very important "non-DNA" diagnoses:


Despite this, the diagnosis is the same - No damage to the heart can be detected by convential test at this point in time.

Maron seems to fit the old adage: If the only tool in your tool box is a hammer, everthing looks like a nail.


----------



## mizenkay (Dec 29, 2003)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



bullsville said:


> While it certainly seems true that Maron is more conservative, it also looks very clear that Maron interpreted Eddy's test results differently than Cannom, which is what led him to ask for the DNA test. I'm assuming that if Maron agreed with Cannom that the EKG was fine and that Eddy's heart size is acceptable, he wouldn't have ordered the DNA test, right?


not to mention the fact that dr. maron actually conducted the tests in person before cannom was involved in the case. dr. maron has not examined eddy since then. 

dr. cannom merely reviewed the findings and declared eddy fit. and then the bulls flew eddy to los angeles to meet dr. cannom in person. has it been documented anywhere that dr. cannom conducted the same degree of testing on eddy? _i don't know, which is why i ask._

it is not my intent to smear dr. cannom, though some interpreted my comments yesterday as such. he just, IN MY PERSONAL OPINION, came dangerously close to sounding like a shill with the comment about how this "would haunt john paxson". i mean if that doesn't sound like something right out of the mouth of leon rose, i don't know what does. 

and as far as not understanding where dr. maron is coming from, he makes it very clear with this quote:

*
"I did not view Eddy as an NBA player who had a $60 million contract at stake," said Maron, who examined him on two occasions. "I understand there's a lot of money on the line for a lot of people here, but I cannot allow myself to be sucked in by those kinds of things. I was obligated to treat Eddy like any other patient, and that's what I did.

"Eddy is a nice young man. I'm sorry that his condition has caused problems. But I cannot allow outside factors to cloud my judgment."*

seems pretty straight shootin' to me.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



sp00k said:


> Am I missing something?


Yes, Pax wants to control the decision whether Curry retires or not.


----------



## bullsville (Jan 23, 2005)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



johnston797 said:


> *Despite this, the diagnosis is the same - No damage to the heart can be detected by convential test at this point in time.*
> 
> Maron seems to fit the old adage: If the only tool in your tool box is a hammer, everthing looks like a nail.


I have to strongly disagree with that.

Cannom is saying that Eddy's heart isn't damaged- Maron sees echocardiogram abnormalities and an enlarged heart- aren't those "damages"?

Cannom doesn't see those things, so he sees no "damage".

Now that Cannom has made those two points abundantly clear, it seems obvious why Maron is asking for the DNA test- he has already in his mind detected that Eddy's heart is damaged, and Cannom disagrees.

The DNA test Maron wants could explain the REASON for the damage he sees, even with low certainty. The DNA test would do Cannom no good, since he sees no damage now.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*

All interesting articles.

I'd also like to see interviews with the three other doctors besides Cannom and Maron that have cleared Eddy to play.

Reading the four opinions that say Curry can play and comparing those with the one opinion that would like to see a DNA test would be useful.


----------



## fl_flash (Aug 19, 2002)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



johnston797 said:


> Yes, Pax wants to control the decision whether Curry retires or not.


No, he doesn't. 

This is all about liability. Everything else is window dressing. It's about potential lawsuits and covering ones posterior. It's about avenues that have been exhausted and remedies that haven't worked. It's about probabilities and possibilities. Mostly, it's about money. Not controlling whether Curry retires or not. Not even close.


----------



## settinUpShop (Jun 8, 2002)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



johnston797 said:


> Yes, Pax wants to control the decision whether Curry retires or not.


Yes, Pax wants to control the decision whether Curry plays *while under contract with the Bulls.
*

I think that reads as a more accurate statement.

How can the Bulls "force" Curry to retire?


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



fl_flash said:


> This is all about liability. Everything else is window dressing. It's about potential lawsuits and covering ones posterior. It's about avenues that have been exhausted and remedies that haven't worked. It's about probabilities and possibilities. Mostly, it's about money. Not controlling whether Curry retires or not. Not even close.


If it was all about liablity, Pax should release Curry from the QO. That's not it.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



johnston797 said:


> Yes, Pax wants to control the decision whether Curry retires or not.


Or, just maybe, whether Curry retires or not is collateral to what Paxson is actually trying to control: A decision that impacts the team and the organization. 

Paxson is following a course of conduct as GM of a basketball TEAM. While he has repeatedly expressed a concern with Curry's health, a concern I believe is very real with Paxson but that is actually working to the detriment of the TEAM, he has equally expressed that at this stage in the game he needs to look out for what is best and most reasonable risk-adverse for the organization.

Paxson is not trying to play God. If the result of the Bulls' actions is that Curry doesn't ever play again, it is a side-effect. It is not the goal. 

Not to mention the obvious, which is that Paxson can't control a retirement decision under any circumstances. Curry has 29 other GMs he can go to for employment after this season. So lets not get carried away.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



settinUpShop said:


> Yes, Pax wants to control the decision whether Curry plays *while under contract with the Bulls.
> *
> 
> I think that reads as a more accurate statement.
> ...


The Bulls want to sign him to a multi-year contract with a provision that he retires and gets $20M if the DNA test comes back "Bad". There is no other way to interpret Sam Smith's column.

Maybe Curry could come back in 4 years or in 6 years when the contract expired, but Bulls want to control him for multiple-years.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



Ron Cey said:


> Or, just maybe, whether Curry retires or not is *collateral* to what Paxson is actually trying to control.


That's how I would feel like I was being treated like if I was Curry. An Asset. It's cold, man.


----------



## bullsville (Jan 23, 2005)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



kukoc4ever said:


> All interesting articles.
> 
> I'd also like to see interviews with the three other doctors besides Cannom and Maron that have cleared Eddy to play.
> 
> Reading the four opinions that say Curry can play and comparing those with the one opinion that would like to see a DNA test would be useful.


While that would be great, I noticed that at one point in the interview Cannom said "*we*", so maybe he was de-facto speaking for the other doctors who disagreed with Maron (since they all agreed with Cannom)?

So maybe we already know the other doctors' opinions?


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



johnston797 said:


> The Bulls want to sign him to a multi-year contract with a provision that he retires and gets $20M if the DNA test comes back "Bad". There is no other way to interpret Sam Smith's column.


That's interesting. What language in the article are you referring to? (I'm not registered for the Trib on my work computer.)


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



johnston797 said:


> That's how I would feel like I was being treated like if I was Curry. An Asset. It's cold, man.


They ARE assets. It IS cold. Curry would be well within his rights to feel that way.


----------



## mizenkay (Dec 29, 2003)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



Ron Cey said:


> That's interesting. What language in the article are you referring to? (I'm not registered for the Trib on my work computer.)



*The Bulls are believed to have told Curry they'd sign him to a contract that could guarantee him as much as $20 million even if he cannot play because of health reasons. The condition is he take a DNA test along with his NBA physical to give further evidence he does not have a potentially fatal heart condition. If Curry passes the test, the contract ostensibly would be for considerably more, at least $50 million, with opportunities and incentives that could make it worth nearly the $70 million Curry is seeking. Curry declined.*


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



Ron Cey said:


> They ARE assets. It IS cold. Curry would be well within his rights to feel that way.


Can we at least agree at this point that Paxson does not want merely what's best for eddy? That this is a cold, hard business and Paxson is primarily interested in what is best for the Bulls, not what is best for Eddy.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



Ron Cey said:


> That's interesting. What language in the article are you referring to? (I'm not registered for the Trib on my work computer.)


http://chicagosports.chicagotribune...smith,1,1839821.column?coll=cs-home-headlines



> One resolution rejected
> 
> The Bulls are believed to have told Curry they'd sign him to a contract that could guarantee him as much as $20 million even if he cannot play because of health reasons. The condition is he take a DNA test along with his NBA physical to give further evidence he does not have a potentially fatal heart condition. If Curry passes the test, the contract ostensibly would be for considerably more, at least $50 million, with opportunities and incentives that could make it worth nearly the $70 million Curry is seeking. Curry declined.


----------



## bullsville (Jan 23, 2005)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



johnston797 said:


> If it was all about liablity, Pax should release Curry from the QO. That's not it.


Why should he release Eddy if it's all about liability? Isn't Pax still trying to sign Eddy to a contract where the Bulls don't shoulder the liability? 

He says he is, anyway. Eddy's agents shopped for their own insurance for him and found none.

Maybe Eddy has said he would sign a deal with the Bulls completely clearing them of any financial liability if he were to die (or decide to retire) from a heart problem, but I seriously doubt it. In other words, Eddy could choose to "self-insure" the Bulls against his death or early retirement, but I don't see that happening. As public as these negotiations have been I think it would have been mentioned somewhere by someone if Eddy had offered?

Now I'll agree that if Eddy were to take the DNA test and he was shown to be predisposed to developing HCM and Pax wouldn't let him play, then Pax should release him from the QO. It's Eddy's life, and if he is willing to walk away from $5 million to just sit and watch, Pax has done about all he can do "for Eddy's good" and to appease his own conscience.


----------



## fl_flash (Aug 19, 2002)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



johnston797 said:


> If it was all about liablity, Pax should release Curry from the QO. That's not it.


Really?

I tend to think that Pax really does want Curry on this team. He's not going to release him for nothing. Even tho that might mitigate what's going on here, I can't seem him just giving Curry his walking papers. Judging from your adamant stance that Curry is irreplaceable I would think you'd want Pax to keep Curry. The only way that's going to happen now and that Curry actually plays in real games this comming season is if Curry takes this test. He's not going to. That seems pretty clear to me. So, how do you resolve Curry's stance of not taking the test (very much his right to do so) and the Bulls needing that test to show that they've covered all their bases in the hopefully unlikely event that Curry dies or otherwise must stop playing because of heart issues?

I have to believe that both sides have tried to come to some sort of middle-gound and it just didn't work. The Bulls "lowballing" Curry. Curry wanting $60 mil guaranteed or whatever. It's all academic at this point. The only way I can see Curry playing this season (for the Bulls) is for an arbitrator to decide on the DNA test. Frankly, I don't think the Bulls have a case (I'm no lawyer!). I also think that's just where they want to be.

Forcing him to retire makes no sense. It would be the same thing as releasing him. He could simply choose to come out of retirement and he's a FA. That just doesn't seem to jive with how much I think Pax values Curry - which is pretty highly.


----------



## bullsville (Jan 23, 2005)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*

I wonder if Pax has incentives in *his* contract? Is he paid middle-of-the-pack money for a GM with a $4 million bonus if the Bulls win a title that makes him highly paid for his position?


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



johnston797 said:


> http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/columnists/cs-050927smith,1,1839821.column?coll=cs-home-headlines


Actually after reading it again, it's pretty unclear to me that he has to retire. Typically what happens is that there's a pre-set buyout amount, right? The Bulls agree to pay Eddy X dollars over Y years and the contract ends.

Wouldn't Eddy then be free to go sign with another team the same way any other player whose deal gets bought out would.

That doesn't mean you're wrong, just that I can't tell for sure from what's written. Logic suggests to me you're right, because I find it very unlikely the Bulls would open themselves to a situation where they simply give Eddy a $20M check and then he walks out the door and signs with someone else the next day. Thus, I think the contract language would specify Curry doesn't play in order to get the $20M, and the Bulls won't let him play if he tests positive for the predisposition. 

Granted that's speculation on my part, but I wouldn't see the logic in the Bulls going to such great lengths to get him to not play, but then so freely giving him $20M to go play somewhere else. Just doesn't make sense.


----------



## settinUpShop (Jun 8, 2002)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



johnston797 said:


> It's cold, man.


Eh, that's life man. The real world of business contracts governed by business decisions. 

This is sucah a compelling story because of all the legal, ethical AND emotional elements at play. As a fan of the Bulls I can't help but feel that we're headed for a serious train wreck with all the acrimony that's developing between the two sides.

But who know's there was a lot of acrimony in the Skiles and Reinsdorf contract negotiations - although that really does pale in comparison to the current state of affairs btw the Curry Camp and Bulls management.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



kukoc4ever said:


> Can we at least agree at this point that Paxson does not want merely what's best for eddy? That this is a cold, hard business and Paxson is primarily interested in what is best for the Bulls, not what is best for Eddy.


First of all, I believe that Paxson thinks (right or wrong) that the test is what is best for Eddy Curry. But there is no question that the requirement of the test and the terms of the contracts reported are based primarily on what is best for the TEAM. No question about that and thats exactly how it should be.

In fact, its always been like that. The only beef I have is when posters have stated that $$ is the Bulls ONLY interest and that they have used this situation maliciously to drive down Curry's value. No poster, to my knowledge, has ever stated that the condition of Curry's heart wouldn't have an impact on his market value or the term of the contract he would sign.

The hotly debated issue was whether or not the Bulls have acted with deliberate bad faith to fraudulently force those less that perfect terms on poor little Eddy Curry.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



Mikedc said:


> Actually after reading it again, it's pretty unclear to me that he has to retire. Typically what happens is that there's a pre-set buyout amount, right? The Bulls agree to pay Eddy X dollars over Y years and the contract ends.
> 
> Wouldn't Eddy then be free to go sign with another team the same way any other player whose deal gets bought out would.
> 
> ...


Thanks for saving me the time. The article is vague at best. It doesn't say that Curry has to retire to ge the $20 million. That article is saying nothing more than was already reported: $20 million is guaranteed. 

To take it further is just more of the rampant speculation that has saturated this entire Eddy Curry issue for months.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*

But like I said earlier, this contract seems like a poor deal for Curry anyway. Assuming it's really 6/$50 if Curry passes the test - which Smith himself equivocates on, Curry - a healthy Curry who's passed the stupid test! would make $6.6M this year.

Looking around the league, let's take a peek at some other guys' salaries.

Rasho Nestorovic will get $6.7M
Kwame Brown will get $7.5M
Tyson Chandler will get $8.3M
Eric Dampier will get $7.87M
Marcus Camby will get $7.1M
Adonyl Foyle will get $7.3M
Lorenzon Wright will get $7.7M
Memo Okur will get $8.2M

That's not even getting into some of the really overpaid guys (like Raef LaFrentz or Keith Van Horn) or somewhat dissimilar guys (Kenyon Martin or Carlos Boozer) who will make significantly more than that. I'm just looking at what run of the mill starting NBA centers - typically several years older and often significantly less productive than Curry will make. What the Bulls are offering Curry even when he passes the test is less than all of these guys.

Couple that with the questions about the other clauses in the contract, and if I were Curry I'd accept the QO and not feel to badly at all about turning down that offer.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



Mikedc said:


> But like I said earlier, this contract seems like a poor deal for Curry anyway. Assuming it's really 6/$50 if Curry passes the test - which Smith himself equivocates on, Curry - a healthy Curry who's passed the stupid test! would make $6.6M this year.


First, I think the reported deal can go as high as $70 million with incentives. So, if he passes the "stupid" test its $50 mil guaranteed at a minimum.

Plus, you then take the first year salary only and compare it to what appears to be current salaries of other players without regard to what year their contract is in. If I'm misreading that, and you were going by first years for all those players then I'll retract that part.

If the deal is accurate, the bottom line is that if Curry would pass the test he'd make $8.33 million a year minimum over the course of the deal and approximately $11.66 million a year if he achieved incentives. Given his current options, that doesn't sound too bad to me. 

But, personally, I doubt the source of the figures so its all academic.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



Mikedc said:


> But like I said earlier, this contract seems like a poor deal for Curry anyway. Assuming it's really 6/$50 if Curry passes the test - which Smith himself equivocates on, Curry - a healthy Curry who's passed the stupid test! would make $6.6M this year.
> 
> Looking around the league, let's take a peek at some other guys' salaries.
> 
> ...


No mention of the incentives that might push the deal over 70 million per six years that Smith mentions in his article?


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



fl_flash said:


> Forcing him to retire makes no sense. It would be the same thing as releasing him. He could simply choose to come out of retirement and he's a FA.


It's definetely not the same thing. I am 100% certain of that . I am reasonably sure that the Bulls would still hold his rights if he retires. Therefore, Bulls would still hold his rights for multiple years. 

Someone could go read-up on retired players.


----------



## SecretAgentGuy (Jul 15, 2003)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*

To further speculate on the $20 million guaranteed, I'd imagine that the Bulls would own his rights for the first 3 years or so and that this all contingent upon whether or not Eddy can gain medical clearance to play. If the Bulls' doctors won't clear Eddy why would another team clear him? And why would the Bulls' doctors deny him clearance if the team is already guaranteed to pay him a wad of cash? <b>I can't see the incentive Paxson has to conspire with the team doctors and ensure that Eddy is unable to play again.</b>

Regarding the $50 million guaranteed and $70 million with incentives, I can't comment nor do I think others on this board can until these incentives are disclosed. It very well might be that these incentives will be the final sticking point on whether or not Eddy re-signs, but if Eddy is the calibur of center that most people on this board feel he is shouldn't reaching these incentives be a relative non-issue? To speculate once more, I'm sure a big portion of these incentives involve games and minutes played and perhaps rebounds and All Star appearances. I would think those incentives are fair given the unique position Eddy is in as well as obtainable for a player with his skillset.


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



ScottMay said:


> http://www.ronsuskind.com/newsite/articles/archives/000038.html
> 
> 
> 
> ...


First off, big props here. I am needing to spread reputation around before giving to ScottMay again. This totally confirms the RealGM poster that was speaking to Reggie's drug use. It also makes me much more suspicious of Maron's evaluations.

Secondly, I think that Stanley's statement of trusting the insurance agencies is right on. They are the TRUE third-party neutral types. They are playing this game to make money for themselves. They gain nothing in anyone's corner by not insuring Curry, unless he's simply just a risk that they cannot manage appropriately in their insurance portfolio.

Thirdly, I don't see the NBAPA's concerns addressed about how the test only gives a predispositional indication and not a signal as to the presence of a sickness. The DNA test privacy issues, etc., still stand.


----------



## theyoungsrm (May 23, 2003)

*ESPN Radio 1000 reported that Paxson offered Curry a new deal based on DNA test.*

something like....20 million guaranteed even if he cannot play because of health and it rises with performances bonuses up to over 50....but its hinges on him taking a DNA


..that was the radio so i dont have a link....reported at 12 right at the end of Silvy Carmen


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

*Re: ESPN Radio 1000 reported that Paxson offered Curry a deal based on DNA test.*

6 years, $20M sounds about right.


----------



## mizenkay (Dec 29, 2003)

*Re: ESPN Radio 1000 reported that Paxson offered Curry a new deal based on DNA test.*



theyoungsrm said:


> something like....20 million guaranteed even if he cannot play because of health and it rises with performances bonuses up to over 50....but its hinges on him taking a DNA
> 
> 
> ..that was the radio so i dont have a link....reported at 12 right at the end of Silvy Carmen


i was listening right at the end of the show too. 

they were speaking of the sam smith article in the tribune today, so that's where they got the info.

i am going to merge this thread into the one where the link is posted to the article.


----------



## theyoungsrm (May 23, 2003)

*Re: ESPN Radio 1000 reported that Paxson offered Curry a new deal based on DNA test.*



mizenkay said:


> i was listening right at the end of the show too.
> 
> they were speaking of the sam smith article in the tribune today, so that's where they got the info.
> 
> i am going to merge this thread into the one where the link is posted to the article.



thanks....


is this a new deal?


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



Darius Miles Davis said:


> No mention of the incentives that might push the deal over 70 million per six years that Smith mentions in his article?


There's no mention of the incentives in those other guys deals either, though I remember that they exist in several of them (Camby, Tyson, Kwame, I think Foyle too). If you assume Eddy's going to meet his, then for fairness sake one ought to assume everyone else is gonna meet theirs too. Since we know nothing about and have little to go on, it doesn't make a lot of sense to assume they'd be easily reachable. If they were, there'd be little point in making them incentives.

Also, what little we have to go on with regard to the nature of the incentives themselves - the reports that the Bulls were trying to tie major elements of Skiles' salary to stuff like win totals and playoff rounds - doesn't make me too confident in them. Such incentives really don't count for much, since they're well outside the control of anyone at all (E.G., Skiles is coaches like Red Auerbach and Phil Jackson's love child, but has little control over how the Bulls do if Kirk tears his Achillies).

So no, no mention of them. I've yet to hear of an incentive package for a basketball player that I thought made much sense, and as far as I can tell they appear to be unlikely to be filled window dressings added on to contracts for ego purposes.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



Mikedc said:


> But like I said earlier, this contract seems like a poor deal for Curry anyway. Assuming it's really 6/$50 if Curry passes the test - which Smith himself equivocates on, Curry - a healthy Curry who's passed the stupid test! would make $6.6M this year.
> 
> Looking around the league, let's take a peek at some other guys' salaries.
> 
> ...


Yeah, but Eddy's $50M would still be uninsured, right? Toss in the incentives to help compensate for this, and it seems right on par with what he should be getting.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



yodurk said:


> Yeah, but Eddy's $50M would still be uninsured, right? Toss in the incentives to help compensate for this, and it seems right on par with what he should be getting.


The sausage (thanks sausage king!) may be good, but you don't want to know how it's made.

Except in this case, we saw how it was made, so did Curry.

It's not likely about money anymore.


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



DaBullz said:


> The sausage (thanks sausage king!) may be good, but you don't want to know how it's made.
> 
> Except in this case, we saw how it was made, so did Curry.
> 
> It's not likely about money anymore.


And how, just exactly, was it made?


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



yodurk said:


> Yeah, but Eddy's $50M would still be uninsured, right? Toss in the incentives to help compensate for this, and it seems right on par with what he should be getting.


Not quite. He'd still be insured against typical injuries - say hurting his knee - just not the heart condition. Of course, if he were to pass the DNA test even that may be insured, or at least it might be considered more negligible since he passed the stupid test.

Another factor to consider is that, I think (can anyone verify this) the insurance clause is written when the contract is made, so I don't think he could go back and get insurance later if he's still under that contract.

From that perspective, it'd be smarter for Curry to take and pass the test, play under a short deal, then try again. 

Again, the incentives are really pretty dodgy. Throwing them in as meaningful anything, I think, is a mistake. It's also prone to lead us to compare Curry's contract with incentives to, say, Chandler's contract without incentives, which is a pretty apples and oranges comparison.

And finally, if it's a matter of $50M and playing for people who tried to strong arm you into making medical decisions you didn't agree with or $50M playing for people who didn't... well, you might start to be willing to give up a few million there.


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



Mikedc said:


> And finally, if it's a matter of $50M and playing for people who tried to strong arm you into making medical decisions you didn't agree with or $50M playing for people who didn't... well, you might start to be willing to give up a few million there.


Now, this is a foolish rationale for a decision, although possibly one someone might choose.

Who's to say Atlanta, or anybody else wouldn't have requested something similar. 

The key is, as it always has been, whether Eddy is going to acknowledge Pax's stance as something that was made out of a genuine concern, or whether he believes that this is all money driven. Edit: I'm not implying that Pax doesn't need to make concessions to help Eddy see the concern as genuine. Regardless, it's going to come down to Eddy's perception of what happened, and why (and ...how much money he can get).


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



Good Hope said:


> And how, just exactly, was it made?


Everything that could possibly be done to give Curry the warm and fuzzies was done, right?


----------



## SecretAgentGuy (Jul 15, 2003)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*

I don't agree that we can throw out the incentives. Eddy's situation is unique, and besides, if incentives are far fetched then why are they often included? Without any more information we need to at least acknowledge the incentive laden contract in order to view this objectively. Seeing how we're all Bulls' fans I would think objective analysis is what we're shooting for.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



Ron Cey said:


> To take it further is just more of the rampant speculation that has saturated this entire Eddy Curry issue for months.


Rampant speculation that has scooped the papers. Scottmay and others were on top of this from the get-go.

Fine with me if you want to wait until it's all in black and white.

Just don't expect the rest of us to do the same.


----------



## spongyfungy (Oct 22, 2003)

> If Curry wins the arbitration, he could play for the Bulls this season at the approximately $5 million salary. Imagine the internal feelings if that occurs *as Curry has been telling friends he believes the Bulls are taking this hard-line tact to reduce his value.*


:eek8: First indication (at least to me) that Curry thinks the Bulls are intentionally driving down his value.



> If Curry were to lose and the test is ordered, his lawyer said he'd refuse it. That would lead to suspension, and uncharted waters. Curry couldn't play in the NBA again unless the Bulls gave him his release.


Would the Bulls release him. I think so.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



> *Rampant speculation that has scooped the papers.* Scottmay and others were on top of this from the get-go.


Like what? What speculation has "scooped" the papers? None. Absolutely none.

Note: ScottMay was way ahead of the papers on the medicine and educated us all. But that wasn't speculation. He was providing us with valuable links to medical literature.



> Fine with me if you want to wait until it's all in black and white.
> 
> Just don't expect the rest of us to do the same.


Well, I'm glad you are giving me the okay to wait for the facts before I call someone "evil" or ask with indignant wonder why a GM is demanding to make a "retirement decision" for a player. I realize mine seems a novel approach to you.

I don't "expect" much. But that doesn't mean I have to sit quietly by while base speculation is masqueraded as fact.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



Good Hope said:


> Now, this is a foolish rationale for a decision, although possibly one someone might choose.
> 
> Who's to say Atlanta, or anybody else wouldn't have requested something similar.
> 
> The key is, as it always has been, whether Eddy is going to acknowledge Pax's stance as something that was made out of a genuine concern, or whether he believes that this is all money driven. Edit: I'm not implying that Pax doesn't need to make concessions to help Eddy see the concern as genuine. Regardless, it's going to come down to Eddy's perception of what happened, and why (and ...how much money he can get).


A couple points. First, Eddy doesn't need to attribute the Bulls' stance to be either one or the other of the options you list above. Even a partial conflation of the two might legitimately be cause for Curry to want another employer. For example, he might conclude that sure, the Bulls need to cover themselves, but they went too far and too ardently in doing so with all their talk of negligence and Reggie Lewis.

Second, it's a bit of a different situation, but I read this the other day, and since it deals with insurance and economics and this whole issue of non-monetary issues potentially trumping monetary ones, I thought I'd pass it along.

(Bryan Caplan, the author here, is one of my favorite professors and a really interesting guy to listen to)

http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2005/09/dont_call_me_st.html


> By way of analogy, consider these two scenarios:
> 1. You lose $1000 in some unforeseen way.
> 
> 2. You lose $1000 _in a way your spouse specifically warned you might happen_.


----------



## spongyfungy (Oct 22, 2003)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



Ron Cey said:


> Like what? What speculation has "scooped" the papers? None. Absolutely none.
> 
> Note: ScottMay was way ahead of the papers on the medicine and educated us all. But that wasn't speculation. He was providing us with valuable links to medical literature.
> 
> ...


 what about Smith asking :



> So shouldn't Curry have taken the DNA test already on his own, just to get more information on what the Bulls believe is a potentially fatal condition? Wouldn't you?
> 
> There is no evidence he did and his representatives deny he took it. If Curry did take the test and passed, would he submit to the test for the Bulls or would he still hold out on the philosophy of an invasion of privacy?


It is a natural question to ask but Smith is a little slow on this. I remember this question being asked a long time ago.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



Ron Cey said:


> Well, I'm glad you are giving me the okay to wait for the facts before I call someone "evil" or ask with indignant wonder why a GM is demanding to make a "retirement decision" for a player. I realize mine seems a novel approach to you.
> 
> I don't "expect" much. But that doesn't mean I have to sit quietly by while base speculation is masqueraded as fact.


I don't "expect" much either given you didn't even read the article and wanted to be spoon-fed. LOL.

But surprise me - when it says that _"The Bulls are believed to have told Curry they'd sign him to a contract that could guarantee him as much as $20 million even if he cannot play because of health reasons. The condition is he take a DNA test ... to give further evidence he does not have a potentially fatal heart condition."_ , how else can it be intrepreted other than Pax is defining the conditions under which Curry retires? Bad DNA Test = Retirement = Get Paid $20m.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



spongyfungy said:


> what about Smith asking :
> 
> 
> 
> It is a natural question to ask but Smith is a little slow on this. I remember this question being asked a long time ago.


Yes. Asked and debated as admitted speculation. Speculation can't scoop speculation. At least thats not how I meant it, anyway. To me, a "scoop" is reporting a fact before someone else does.


----------



## settinUpShop (Jun 8, 2002)

*Re: Dr. Maron stands by his recommendation, and other morning articles*



spongyfungy said:


> what about Smith asking :
> 
> 
> 
> It is a natural question to ask but Smith is a little slow on this. I remember this question being asked a long time ago.


I think it's a good point. Maybe the Bulls should request Eddy to take the test "privately" and then negotiate with him - just because IF it does come back negative, Eddy can suddenly move forward with this contract dispute. If it comes back positive, he doesn't release the information, and he must then decide for himself what direction he wishes to take. This puts him in the drivers seat while also giving us a potential happy resolution if the test comes back the way we all hope it would.


----------



## theyoungsrm (May 23, 2003)

*Re: ESPN Radio 1000 reported that Paxson offered Curry a new deal based on DNA test.*



mizenkay said:


> i was listening right at the end of the show too.
> 
> they were speaking of the sam smith article in the tribune today, so that's where they got the info.
> 
> i am going to merge this thread into the one where the link is posted to the article.



thanks....


is this a new deal?


----------



## mgolding (Jul 20, 2002)

*Re: ESPN Radio 1000 reported that Paxson offered Curry a new deal based on DNA test.*

A DNA test is not something that would be a strenuous thing for Eddy to get done.
4 Scenarios
1. Eddy has privately had the test, it has come out badly and he wants to play anyway. In other words he’s an idiot and doesn’t care about his life, but only about money.
2. Eddy had privately had the test, it has come out badly and he doesn’t want to play, but want the 70 millions dollar contract before he “shockingly” finds out he can’t play.
3. Eddy has privately had the test, it has come out well, a result that could net him a good contract, but he is standing up for his rights by not letting the Bulls take one. Might I suggest that this is a highly unlikely scenario for a man who has been talking about a max contract from before he averaged 10 point per game.
4. He hasn’t had the test done privately. He likes the idea of gambling with his life and thinks it would be an interesting spectacle to drop dead on an NBA court.

My point being; if he hasn’t had the test done, I don’t think there is a justifiable reason why he wouldn’t get it done. Surely you would want to know. If he has had the test done, all of the scenarios lead to thinking that there would either be no reason for him not to let the Bulls take one, or he is hiding something. Hell, if it only took a few hours and cost a reasonable amount (and money is no object to JR or Eddy) I wouldn’t mind finding out what diseases I could be predisposed to.


----------



## Salvaged Ship (Jul 10, 2002)

How things are debated on this board, even small matters, are truly amazing. I can't believe there is another board in existance with devoted followers like this one. Well done to all!

I think it comes down to this:

Paxson and the Bulls have had the man considered the leading specialist in the field tell them there could be a more serious problem, and he believes a DNA test would provide a clearer picture. The doctor is advising the DNA test take place. I truly believe Paxson cares about this kid greatly. Yes, there is financial implications and Pax needs to do his job to ensure the success of this team. You cannot just give this kid 60 mil because you feel sorry for him. But I do believe Paxson's main motive in all of this is to not get this kid killed. If there was no heart issue I am sure Curry would be getting the big bucks. But there is an issue, The guy can't get insured for the condition, and the leading specialist in the nation is saying the DNA test would greatly help clear the picture.

If Curry is in serious financial difficulty, you really need to give his brain a DNA test. He was making over 3 mil a year. He must have large assets which are worth something, even if the cash reserve is low. Was he burning the money, spending it on Wonka bars? Giving it away? Even if he has to retire, I am sure he could make six figures a year in endoresements, radio gigs, appearances, starting his own reality show, whatever. And he can sign that QO and get another 5 mil, money most of us could only dream of. I won't feel too sorry for his financial state. Think of slave labor in China who make a nickel an hour.

I think Pax is concerned foremost with the health of Curry and does not want to authorize this kids death certificate. We could discuss this forever, and some could say Pax is wrong. But if this kid drops dead in a few months, how would you feel if you were Paxson and let him on the court without exhausting all possible avenues? 

Forget the money Edwardo. You will still get plenty compared to all of us regadrless of test results. Do everything you can to rule out the possibility of dropping dead. If there is one doctor (who happens to be considered the number one guy in the field) who thinks you should take the test then take it. 

Hard to spend sixty million from a wooden box six feet underground.


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

Salvaged Ship said:


> How things are debated on this board, even small matters, are truly amazing. I can't believe there is another board in existance with devoted followers like this one. Well done to all!
> 
> I think it comes down to this:
> 
> ...


This is a good summation of the arguments being tossed around the board. However...

1. The DNA test is predispositional, not conclusive. No one from the Bulls organization has yet commented on why they would insist so strongly on a test that would only result in another "inconclusive" result. He might be doing it because he really cares about the kid, but why not give him shoulder pads and a helmet when he plays basketball? Why not hire a nutritionist and a personal trainer to follow Eddy around everywhere? Why not give him an entourage of policemen everywhere he goes to make sure he doesn't get injured in the offseason?

Those things are unnecessary. They might be well-intentioned, but they don't accomplish a whole lot and they aren't even close to being needed.

2. People with high incomes are often times in greater financial trouble than many people. Think about it: if the average American making 35,000 is in $6,000 of debt, imagine what that translates into for a guy making $3 million. That's more than half a mil every year; after four years, that's more than $2 million in debt. You might say that the raw numbers don't translate, but the human ability to adapt is uncanny. I don't think there's many of us on this board that could live with millions and still live as if we had 5-figure salaries.

I'm not saying it's good and right and justified, I'm just saying it's not altogether unbelievable. Something can be understandable and still unacceptable.

And 3. In response to this comment:



mgolding said:


> A DNA test is not something that would be a strenuous thing for Eddy to get done.
> 
> 4. He hasn’t had the test done privately. He likes the idea of gambling with his life and thinks it would be an interesting spectacle to drop dead on an NBA court.
> 
> My point being; if he hasn’t had the test done, I don’t think there is a justifiable reason why he wouldn’t get it done. Surely you would want to know.


In your other scenarios, you are essentially saying that Eddy if Eddy DID get the test done, it would be insane not to come out with the results if they were favorable, but that he'd have a valid reason not come out with them if they aren't. That's exactly correct, but that's a very good reason for Eddy not to have the test taken, even privately.

If he gets the test taken, can he deny that he's ever taken it? Probably not. It's therefore likely that word will leak out that he did have the test taken privately, and whether he discloses the results or not would completely give away the results themselves. This is a great reason not to ever take the test, so that Eddy himself can prevent the situation where silence becomes an indication for anything.

So those thicken the plot substantially, I think.


----------



## giusd (Apr 17, 2003)

If he gets the test taken, can he deny that he's ever taken it? Probably not.

This is incorrect. Someones medical tests and results are private and no one, and i mean no one, can give those out. There are rules and no lab or doc would give them out. Furthermore, the system has methods to have tests done where only the doc knows the results by using differing names or more like a sample with just a number on it coded by only ED physicians. 

So this the results would get out is INCORRECT. What you think EC is the only person to take a test where it is neccessary to protect the person. These things are done all the time. If EC wanted to know the resutls he could take the genetic test and know one but he and his agent would ever know.

david


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

$3M
minus 15% to agent ($450,000)
minus 33% to taxes ($1M)
Leaves him about $100K/month
His mortgage might be $50K/month ($6M home, $3M down payment)
and then property taxes on a multimillion$ home are pretty steep.
He surely has an actual payroll to pay (gardener, maids, poll guys, whatever)

It's not hard to see how the money could disappear pretty quick.

Not that I know exactly what he spends his money on.


----------



## L.O.B (Jun 13, 2002)

Was this posted already http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2174877



> That's what scares Jerome Stanley, Lewis' agent. He recalled the ride through Boston with Lewis' family in a limousine on the way to the funeral as one of the toughest things he ever had to do. Stanley said Tuesday he wishes now that DNA testing had been an option.
> 
> I've seen this movie before," he said. "Eddy Curry and his family and his agent do not believe he can drop dead and die. You know what? He can drop dead and die. It goes just like that.
> 
> "If I'm the team, let the insurance be your guide," Stanley said. "The insurance won't insure it, that should tell you something. They've got the biggest group of risk managers. "Now maybe they're wrong," he added. "But if you lose the bet, you don't just lose the player. The player dies."


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

DaBullz said:


> $3M
> minus 15% to agent ($450,000)
> minus 33% to taxes ($1M)
> Leaves him about $100K/month
> ...


The CBA limits agents' fees on NBA salary to 4%, IIRC (don't know if that's pre or post-tax).

There's no limit on endorsements, music/movie deals, etc., though, and agents can take a big chunk of that as a way to make up for it.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

ScottMay said:


> The CBA limits agents' fees on NBA salary to 4%, IIRC (don't know if that's pre or post-tax).
> 
> There's no limit on endorsements, music/movie deals, etc., though, and agents can take a big chunk of that as a way to make up for it.


I think you get the picture anyway. And it does matter pre or post tax.


----------



## ScottMay (Jun 15, 2002)

L.O.B said:


> Was this posted already http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2174877


It was posted already, and I'll comment again that Mr. Stanley's words, while no doubt sincere, lack a little punch given the wide disparities between Curry's situation and Lewis's.

Lewis was told by dozens -- literally -- of doctors that his career was over and that he should not resume even mild physical activity without a drug regimen and a pacemaker/defibrillator implant. Contrary to the myths that have grown out of the Lewis death, Dr. Gilbert Mudge never cleared Lewis to work out and had told Lewis that his career was over well before that fateful day at Brandeis.

This is pretty obviously not the case with Curry. At least four doctors have given him the green light to resume workouts and games with no physical restrictions, and so far as we know, the one who hasn't (Maron) has not told him he'll need to retire, or even that he should cease physical activity pending the results of the DNA test.

I'm sure Stanley feels bad that he didn't do more to prevent Lewis from working out, and I appreciate his concern for Eddy, but it's pretty much an apples and oranges comparison in every respect.


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

giusd said:


> If he gets the test taken, can he deny that he's ever taken it? Probably not.
> 
> This is incorrect. Someones medical tests and results are private and no one, and i mean no one, can give those out. There are rules and no lab or doc would give them out. Furthermore, the system has methods to have tests done where only the doc knows the results by using differing names or more like a sample with just a number on it coded by only ED physicians.
> 
> ...


Obviously there's HIPAA requirements and there would be ultra-super-confidentiality applied to his test results on the hospital end. That doesn't mean that Eddy and his family might not leak it.

More importantly, that's not at all what I'm saying. If he GETS the test taken at all, then his silence becomes an answer in itself. What rationale could Eddy POSSIBLY have in keeping those test results private? I don't think Eddy is standing up for freedom of privacy in the workplace and etc. If the test worked in his favor, I have no doubt that he would disclose the results.

So if he took the test, and said nothing, do you really think that he's not sending a message that the results weren't favorable? Even if that's NOT his intention, that's the perception. He can't risk that.

I'm not saying that the results of the test would leak. I'm saying that the fact that he ever took the test at all could certainly leak out.


----------



## settinUpShop (Jun 8, 2002)

Showtyme said:


> So if he took the test, and said nothing, do you really think that he's not sending a message that the results weren't favorable? Even if that's NOT his intention, that's the perception. He can't risk that.
> 
> I'm not saying that the results of the test would leak. I'm saying that the fact that he ever took the test at all could certainly leak out.


This is a very good point, and maybe one we should all consider. The BEST position for Eddy is to have taken the test, but not have anyone but himself and his agent know that he took the test. 

This way you don't have parent's or friends asking what the test results where, you don't need to share that information AND your only source for leaks would be Curry and his agent.

Now considering this... maybe the fact that we're all asking why Curry hasn't taken the test is the best argument for why he already has.

Interesting.


----------

