# Do the Bulls start to think about cutting Jay?



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

If Jay's injuries are of a career threatening nature, do the Bulls think about cutting him? What if the injuries don't threaten his career but just his skills, speed, quickness? Do you what a slow,grounded 6'1 guard. 

I am might sound heartless but look at Orlando and NewYork with Hill and McDyess. Do the Bulls want a player that will never again reach his potential? 

The fact that Jay violated clause 12 in his NBA contract allows the Bulls a way out. Do they take it?


----------



## InPaxWeTrust (Sep 16, 2002)

I would lose an awful lot of respect for Paxson if he did that.


----------



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

Bags,

If Jay injured himself on the court, I would have a problem with Paxson cutting him. Since Jay went against the terms of his contract and injured himself doing something prohibited, I feel the issue has many shades of grey. 

Could the Bulls stand by their fallen player, with out being commited to paying 9 million over three years for a mangled point guard? Jay's value to the Bulls isn't his character but his ability to play basketball, sadly his ability to play basketball is in severe doubt.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

He's on a rookie contract, unlike the gaudy ones for Hill and McDyess. Give him a chance (albeit slim) to come back from injury.


----------



## InPaxWeTrust (Sep 16, 2002)

Agreed VD you wait out his rookie contract by then you will know if he will play again. It is not that much money there is no reason why we cant wait a couple years.


----------



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

What if Jays leg is shattered? We're not getting the whole story here. We've heard that he's broken his pelvis(how many places?), torn his ACL and broken his leg(how many places?)
I have a buddy that injured himself in a similar accident, he walks with crutches at age 25.


----------



## InPaxWeTrust (Sep 16, 2002)

I am sorry LOB I understand what you are saying but all I am saying is that Jay is also a human being and a 22 year old kid. He deserves at least a shot to try and come back. If in a couple years it becomes obvious he wont play yeah then you cut your ties with him.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

If you think Krause looked like the evil dictator as GM, then you know it would be an irreparable PR mistake to cut Jay. I'm not even sure if it would save a little salary, but no big ticket free agent would ever come until this was out of the collective memory (10 years plus). Even though it was Jay's fault and his fault alone. It doesn't matter. He's a relatively famous player due to his college days and his high draft status. We must treat this with kid gloves, because everyone's watching Pax now.

Even DeMarr Johnson wasn't cut, his contract was just not extended. That's a different story. Clearly we won't extend him if he can't play.

This is so sad.


----------



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

bas,

I feel for the kid and hope he makes it back. But I think everyone has become numb to the dollars envolved in professional contracts. Banking millions on a possibilty that Jay can come back 100% is foolish. Even if he can walk, what are the chances that he gets back his quickness and speed. He couldn't guard anyone last season using his natural talents, now are we to expect that he can do it with quille and determination? How does a broken pelvis affect lateral quickness? 

I 'll stop now before everyone thinks me to be an ogre.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>DMD</b>!
> If you think Krause looked like the evil dictator as GM, then you know it would be an irreparable PR mistake to cut Jay. I'm not even sure if it would save a little salary, but no big ticket free agent would ever come until this was out of the collective memory (10 years plus). Even though it was Jay's fault and his fault alone. It doesn't matter. He's a relatively famous player due to his college days and his high draft status. We must treat this with kid gloves, because everyone's watching Pax now.
> 
> Even DeMarr Johnson wasn't cut, his contract was just not extended. That's a different story. Clearly we won't extend him if he can't play.
> ...



I agree 100%.

Most importantly though, even if he was cut or retired immediately, Jay would still count against the cap next year and the year after anyway. So there's no monetary benefit in cutting him.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


There you go, LOB, it doesn't even help the cap situation to cut him. 

By the way, I think you did a good job discussing a sensitive topic without being too harsh. We all care about Jay, but we also care about the well-being of the Bulls franchise. It's a fair question.


----------



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

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Mikedc,

The Bulls could void his contract because Jay injured himself on a motorcycle. Clause 12 would allow the Bulls to cut him without having cap ramifications.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>L.O.B</b>!
> 
> 
> Mikedc,
> ...


Oh. Hmmm. If this is true, I still would not do it for the reason I listed above. We'd be blacklisted, AGAIN, by free agents and the media, I think. It's just not worth it.


----------



## InPaxWeTrust (Sep 16, 2002)

He is correct about that clause. Cutting him would not cost us anything. However in no way i cut him. And not even because of the bashing we would take in media and with other players. I would not do it because it is not the decent thing to do. Yeah Jay made a mistake but we owe him a chance to come back. If he is not able to once his rookie deal runs out you just dont extend him.


----------



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

Bas,

I lied, am going to become an ogre. 
It could be argued that an employee disobeying a contract that he signed, isn't the decent thing to do either. 

If Jay can't come back from this injury, could the Bulls offer him a job in another capacity and not pay millions to player that has become Mateen Cleves?


----------



## Dan Rosenbaum (Jun 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!I agree 100%.
> 
> Most importantly though, even if he was cut or retired immediately, Jay would still count against the cap next year and the year after anyway. So there's no monetary benefit in cutting him.


This is just a guess on my part, but if Williams' contract was voided (because he violated its terms), then I think it may not count as team salary for salary cap or luxury tax purposes. That is different than a retirement, injury, or even a death, since the contract would be voided.

If the Bulls were to pursue this option, I would expect them to wait several months and then after voiding the contract offer Williams a settlement as a "good will" gesture. I would offer the full amount of his second and third year salaries in his rookie contract, plus any benefits, such as health insurance, that he would have received.

Financially, Williams would be better off, because he would avoid paying escrow taxes (10 percent of his salary). The Bulls would be better off, because it would help them avoid luxury tax payments and lost luxury/escrow tax distributions. They may, however, lose any insurance payments they would have received due to Williams injury. That may negate most of the benefits of this deal for the Bulls.

If a couple of months from now it becomes clear that Williams career is over, this option might be good both for Williams and the Bulls. However, not a word about this should ever leave the mouths of anyone on the Bulls for at least a couple of months.

There is however, some question about what the League and the Players Association might think about this. I have my doubts about whether the arrangement that I describe above would be allowed by both parties. The benefits of this arrangement also would depend on exactly when Williams would stop counting in team salary calculations. My guess is that he would count for the entire 2004-05 season, but if that is not true, then this arrangement would probably not be worth it for the Bulls.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>L.O.B</b>!
> 
> 
> Mikedc,
> ...


You're right, I hadn't considered the possibility of them trying to void the contract entirely.

... but honestly, DMD and Basghetti are right. This would be some serious bad karma with other players, the media, and many fans. 

Also, I could see the players union stepping up and pitching a fit about it too. I seem to recall last year that the Celts made a bit of noise about trying to get rid of Vin Baker's contract on similar grounds (due to his apparent rampant alcoholism). I'd have to go look things up, but I think the players association made some responding noise to the effect that they would fight enforcement of that kind of clause tooth and nail. I'd imagine they'd do the same in this similar but slightly different case.

Given that Jay doesn't make anything close to what Baker makes, I don't think it's worth bringing that kind of heat down on the team.


----------



## RetroDreams (Jun 9, 2002)

Cutting Williams would be the worst PR nightmare the franchise would ever encounter.

Now, on the flipside, I've said that I could see the Bulls leaving him unprotected in the expansion draft... that is the only thing I could stomach, and I even may have problems with that.

I think the classiest thing the Bulls could do is take care of him the way the NJ Nets took care of Jayson Williams. He is part of the Bulls family, you don't kick someone when they're down.


----------



## InPaxWeTrust (Sep 16, 2002)

> I think the classiest thing the Bulls could do is take care of him the way the NJ Nets took care of Jayson Williams.



Exactly that would the right thing to do. I happen to see Paxson as a very classy guy and would like to believe this is what he will do. I certainly would. Mistake or not Jay deserves it.


----------



## Qwerty123 (May 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> ... but honestly, DMD and Basghetti are right. This would be some serious bad karma with other players, the media, and many fans.


Not to mention our own players! They're a lot closer to this situation and Jay than any potential second-tier free agents we'll look at in the future. Don't you think they'd hold it against the organization if one of their teammates and friend wasn't taken care of by the Bulls?


----------



## Dan Rosenbaum (Jun 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>NCBullsFan</b>!
> This is just a guess on my part, but if Williams' contract was voided (because he violated its terms), then I think it may not count as team salary for salary cap or luxury tax purposes. That is different than a retirement, injury, or even a death, since the contract would be voided.
> 
> If the Bulls were to pursue this option, I would expect them to wait several months and then after voiding the contract offer Williams a settlement as a "good will" gesture. I would offer the full amount of his second and third year salaries in his rookie contract, plus any benefits, such as health insurance, that he would have received.
> ...


I would like to point out that the arrangement that I describe above is "taking care of Jay," since financially he is *better off* than he is under his current contract. This arrangement is just a luxury tax maneuver and should not result in any bad PR for the Bulls, since the Bulls would go forward with this arrangement only with Williams' blessing.

Heck, they could even sign Jay to a minimum salary contract if they wanted to keep him as part of the team.


----------



## RetroDreams (Jun 9, 2002)

Lets not forget that they haven't concluded his career is over. Sure, the likelihood is the fact that he is done for, but until a doctor confirms it, I'll just keep on with the hope.

Just remember the NFL Draft not too long ago... McGahee tore his ACL, MCL and PCL. He was still taken in the 1st round. 

Modern medicine is pretty damn incredible. The only part of Jay's injuries that have me truly worried is the broken leg they are talking about now (ESPN, this morning) - Doctor's can rebuild a knee to perfect, the pelvis (depending on the true severity) can be recovered from. I believe Chad Clifton of the Packers suffered a pelvis fracture or something when Warren Sapp blindsided him... it could be wrong?

Depending on if he just had a clean break or a shatter in the leg, that's my question mark.


----------



## Qwerty123 (May 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>NCBullsFan</b>!
> 
> 
> I would like to point out that the arrangement that I describe above is "taking care of Jay," since financially he is *better off* than he is under his current contract. This arrangement is just a luxury tax maneuver and should not result in any bad PR for the Bulls, since the Bulls would go forward with this arrangement only with Williams' blessing.
> ...


That's ok then. As long as everyone around the league understands that, though.


----------



## pjc845 (Jun 9, 2002)

*Why?*



> Originally posted by <b>basghetti80</b>!
> I would lose an awful lot of respect for Paxson if he did that.


The kid made a mistake. There is no reason the Bulls should have to pay for it.

I mean, I hope Jay heals and comes back one day. I really do. I do hope the best for him health wise. But, that doesn't mean I want or expect the Bulls to suffer as a result.

This is business. Jay Williams f*cked up. He put the Bulls in a very bad position. It was his choice to ignore the clauses in his contract to adhere to the agreements made in the collective bargaining agreement for players to avoid playing with motorcycles. This is breach of contract for which the Bulls certainly should not have to pay for.

It would be a totally different matter if Jay Williams busted his knee on the court, busting his *** for the Bulls. Here, the kid was irresponsible and the Bulls have every reason to make a business decision to secure the best outcome for the franchise.

Also, its not like we owe anything to Jay Williams.

I wonder if you'd say the same thing if it weren't Jay Williams that crashed his motorcycle, but Dalibor Bagaric instead.

I haven't done anything for a while as a mod... =) But please watch the language, even in censored form. Thanks. -Showtyme


----------



## Qwerty123 (May 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>RetroDreams</b>!
> Depending on if he just had a clean break or a shatter in the leg, that's my question mark.


Ron Gant messed up his femur really bad a while ago I think. Was that a motorcycle accident as well? If I recall, he has a metal rod in his leg. He came back from the injury, but wasn't the same player. He just popped into my mind as another example of an athlete coming back from a major injury. Anyone remember anything else about his situation?


----------



## InPaxWeTrust (Sep 16, 2002)

That was a truly sad post pjc845. To accuse me of feeling that way because it is Jay Williams is absurd. Not that your question deserves answering but yes I would feel the same way about Bagaric as I would for Baxter,Rose,Crawford or anyone on the Bulls roster still under contract for that matter. Truth be told you have an utter distain for Jay and had hoped we would trade him for just about anything. So I could ask you what if it was Crawford in this situation would you feel the same. But you know what I am the better person and wont do it.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

You know, some people may think this thread is insensitive, but i must admit, the thought has crossed my mind. This thread has been most helpful in correcting my thinking. Unless a doctor says he is done, I am for waiting and see what Jay does. The injury exception at about 1.85 mill could get us a decent back up point gaurd.


----------



## pjc845 (Jun 9, 2002)

*Oh please*



> Originally posted by <b>basghetti80</b>!
> That was a truly sad post pjc845. To accuse me of feeling that way because it is Jay Williams is absurd. Not that your question deserves answering but yes I would feel the same way about Bagaric as I would for Baxter,Rose,Crawford or anyone on the Bulls roster still under contract for that matter. Truth be told you have an utter distain for Jay and had hoped we would trade him for just about anything. So I could ask you what if it was Crawford in this situation would you feel the same. But you know what I am the better person and wont do it.


I'm not accusing you of anything. I asked the question whether you would feel differently. Apparently you don't, which is fine. Apparently though, you feel the need to accuse me of taking an angle because I have some sort of utter disdian for Jay.  

I do not have utter disdain for Jay. I wish the kid the best. But, I am angry with his irresponsibility and stupidity and don't think the Bulls hsould pay for it. In the end, I think the solution discussed above is to void his contract and if we need to "take care of him" then we take care of him. But, we shouldn't have him count against our cap and hurt us any more than he has already.

Having said all this, my best scenario is that this kid is going to somehow, miraculously beat the odds and come back from this injury. I hope he heals quickly and completley. But, I don't think its likely, and I don't think the Bulls should pay for his lack of professionalism and irresponsibility. That's the bottom line. As for your question, if it were Crawford, you're damn right I'd feel the same way about this. I'd feel the same way if it were Crawford, Curry, Chandler, or anyone else.


----------



## InPaxWeTrust (Sep 16, 2002)

> But, we shouldn't have him count against our cap and hurt us any more than he has already.



Now how in the hell do you explain how he has hurt us already? As far as his rookie contract if that little 3.75 million dollars impacts us that much to where we have to cut him like that then we have bigger problems than we know. I am sorry I just have more compassion for my fellow human beings. This kid is lucky to be alive and you are discussing how we should just kick him to the curve. I am ashamed to be a fellow poster of someone who would feel that way.


----------



## pjc845 (Jun 9, 2002)

*Please*



> Originally posted by <b>basghetti80</b>!
> 
> Now how in the hell do you explain how he has hurt us already? As far as his rookie contract if that little 3.75 million dollars impacts us that much to where we have to cut him like that then we have bigger problems than we know. I am sorry I just have more compassion for my fellow human beings. This kid is lucky to be alive and you are discussing how we should just kick him to the curve. I am ashamed to be a fellow poster of someone who would feel that way.


I am not heartless. I have already said I wish the best for this kid and that the most important thing is that he heals quickly and completely.

Having said this, its hard to sit idly by while people make stupid comments about how much the Bulls should stand by this kid at the expense of the franchise.

The fact is, the Bulls are weaker today than we were before Jay's accident. And the single person who bears full responsibility for this accident and the fact that we are weaker today is Jay Williams. He shouldn't have gotten on that bike. He had signed a contract promising not to ride motorcycles. And yet, we're expected to stand by him after he failed to hold up his end of the bargain? Sorry no. Again, I wish the kid the best. I wish him no malice. But, do I feel like the Bulls owe him anything? Hell no. If we want to take care of him fine. We do that on the side, because that's the decent thing to do. But, we should not avoid taking any opportunity to make this team as competitive as it can be. And if 3.75 milllion is the difference between being able to sign a quality freeagent of our choosing or making a particular trade go down, than we need to use it.

Again, I think we can void his contract, take care of him financially, so that Jay financially is set while avoiding hurting the Bulls. I don't see why you are getting so upset by this. Seems fairly clear cut to me. Again, this is all assuming that his injuries are so severe that the likelihood of his coming back are miniscule -- virtually all indications are that this is the case.


----------



## InPaxWeTrust (Sep 16, 2002)

> Having said this, its hard to sit idly by while people make stupid comments about how much the Bulls should stand by this kid at the expense of the franchise.



See this is absurd. You make it sound like if we dont cut Jay then our franchise will not succeed. How do you know that? As far as the money we already we get half of his 3.75 million dollar deal which will in turn we used to sign a vet backup PG like Lindsey Hunter. So I dont see the problem.If Jay was on a max contract I could see your point. But I am sorry that little bit of money for a couple years does not make a difference in the grand scheme of things and certainly does not strap us financially as you would like us to believe.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>basghetti80</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> See this is absurd. You make it sound like if we dont cut Jay then our franchise will not succeed. How do you know that? As far as the money we already we get half of his 3.75 million dollar deal which will in turn we used to sign a vet backup PG like Lindsey Hunter. So I dont see the problem.If Jay was on a max contract I could see your point. But I am sorry that little bit of money for a couple years does not make a difference in the grand scheme of things and certainly does not strap us financially as you would like us to believe.


Especially when Jay has a by all accounts an exceptional work ethic. Some injuries are beyond repair, but if there is some possibility Jay may return, he may surprise everyone and return better than expected. 

I believe Jay has the type of determination to rehab and "earn" a medical miracle.


----------



## Qwerty123 (May 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>DMD</b>!
> 
> 
> Especially when Jay has a by all accounts an exceptional work ethic. Some injuries are beyond repair, but if the there is some possibility Jay may return, he may surprise everyone and return better than expected.
> ...


Well said.


----------



## Dan Rosenbaum (Jun 3, 2002)

Hey guys, it is perfectly understandable to feel angry that a guy who has been given opportunities that we all can only dream of took the chance of throwing it all away by putting his fanny on the back of a motorcycle. And to think that this guy's contract will pay him more over the next two years than most of us will earn in our entire lifetimes just adds insult into injury, especially since this contract will put the Bulls perilously close to the luxury tax threshold. Of course, the Bulls don't owe this guy anything. Choices result in consequences, and Williams made his choice.

On the other hand, it is perfectly understandable to feel that Williams has more than paid the price for a bad choice and cutting him or not paying him is just a classless way of piling on. What kind of human being could be so mean to another person? Williams is part of the Bulls' family, and "throwing him to the curve" is just not the way to treat family. Have some compassion.

Well, most of us are the kind of human beings that feel _both_ of these emotions, so there probably is not a lot to gain by getting upset when someone expresses one or the other of these feelings, especially given how emotional we all are about Williams' accident.


----------



## Aesop (Jun 1, 2003)

I agree with bcj 100%. 

Also, PR wouldn't be as nightmarish as some seem to indicate. Heaven forbid management sending a message to everyone that violating a contract has consequences! :sarcasm:

Salary cap management is such an important component of running an NBA team. You can't waste opportunities to improve your situation.

People have short memories. Sure some would be outraged initially, but in a year or two when that money comes in handy when signing a player, everyone will be happy.


----------



## ChiBullsFan (May 30, 2002)

Just to mention a couple issues that I think were passed over in this discussion...

First off, there is virtualy no incentive for the Bulls to terminate Jay's contract because all their player's salaries are insured. The Bulls will probably take little to no financial hit for Jay's future salaries, just lost marketing revenue.

Secondly, is anyone sure about Jay violating his contract? I was informed initially that rookie contracts did not include any "danger clauses" and hadn't heard anything to the contrary until reading this thread. Is this Clause 12 definitely a part of the rookie contract (or at least the Bulls version of that contract?) If that's the case, it truly surprises me that (a) Jay would violate that, and (b) that since he wasn't hiding his motorcycle use, no one had warned him or forbid him to ride it.


----------



## pjc845 (Jun 9, 2002)

*Here's what I dont' get*

Why is this a "Jay's getting kicked to the curb" concept?

What I advocate is taking care of Jay financially, but doing it in a way that won't tie us down. You say that 1.4 mm isn't important because of the injury exception. I say that 1.4 mm is plenty of cash that could get a player BETTER than Lindsay Hunter. Its a few times the league minimum. Why not use it if we can?

IF (and this is a big if) the injuries are so severe that all reason would have Jay coming back unrealistic hopeful thinking at best, then I don't see what other business choice Paxson can make. We don't hamper the team because of the irresponsibility of Jay Williams, especially if he isn't being kicked to curb as some folks seem to think this choice is about.

Cripes, you'd think Jay Williams won us 6 titles or something the way we're talking. We owe him nothing. And taking care of him outside of the contract is sufficient from a decency perspective and a PR control perspective. We do not need to hold a roster spot for him, nor do we need to slice our cap by 1.4 million -- if he does come back, hopefully he'll remember how fairly he was treated by the Bulls (remember we take care of him financially on the side) and give us the first shot at him. I hope he does come back and proves me wrong. In case he does, I don't see why he wouldn't come back and give us a shot first if we take care of him.


----------



## ChiBullsFan (May 30, 2002)

pjc, I would hate to have you handling my investments!

I think that's how you have to treat Jay right now, as an investment that has currently tanked, but still has future potential.

It's stupid to sell and take the loss before the economy has rebounded. All you'd do with that money you get from selling is be able to buy another bottom dweller, but with less potential.

I mean, you seem to be indicating that this 1.4 mm would actually be valuable to this team over the POTENTIAL of a #2 pick. So you would take a Corie Blount NOW, on a team that is not going to compete for a title, over the chance of having a very good NBA PG with trade value two years from now? If we're lucky, maybe even 1 year from now?

Again, that's not how I'd want my investments handled. Sometimes you take the hit now, ride it out, and take your chance at paydirt later.


----------



## pjc845 (Jun 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ChiBullsFan</b>!
> Just to mention a couple issues that I think were passed over in this discussion...
> 
> First off, there is virtualy no incentive for the Bulls to terminate Jay's contract because all their player's salaries are insured. The Bulls will probably take little to no financial hit for Jay's future salaries, just lost marketing revenue.
> ...


What do you mean they're insured? In case players are injured, the insurance company pays? Or if some unforseen non-bball related accident occurs? I would think though that any insurance clause would say things like -- putting a gun to one's head doesn't result in payoff or getting on a motorcycle.

Secondly, I think that what's been reported is that avoiding motorcycles was part of the overall collective bargaining agreement. I have no idea, quite frankly, but I'll say if I were drafting a contract involving millions of dollars, you'll be damned sure that I'd include a rep or warranty about something like this.

Thirdly, Jay WAS warned not to ride the bike. I think Fizer was quite clear about it.


----------



## pjc845 (Jun 9, 2002)

*How ironic*



> Originally posted by <b>ChiBullsFan</b>!
> pjc, I would hate to have you handling my investments!
> 
> I think that's how you have to treat Jay right now, as an investment that has currently tanked, but still has future potential.
> ...



Seeing as how I ply my trade a financial advisor to multi-million dollar deals. You make at least two mistakes:

1) you seem to believe that there is any hope that Jay Williams is going to rebound. This is not a cyclical economy analogy. This is the reality of a monstrous injury that has little realistic hope of coming back from.

2) you seem to value Jay's potential as a #2 pick. The cold hard fact is that Jay's potential is that of a former #2 pick who disappointed as a rookie and by the way has a broken pelvis, a shattered leg, and a destroeyd knee.

The question is for that 1.75 million is it better to invest in this former #2 pick with a broken pelvis and shattered leg, or is it better to apply as part of a salary of a veteran who for an extra 1 or 2 million would be willing to come to Chicago? Or how about a role player who for 1.75 million would actually be far more likely to contribute to the Bulls than a kid who tragically has to go through mulitple surgeries, years of rehabilitation before probably walking much less stepping on a basketball court.

Think of it this way. If any other team in this league had 1.75 million to spend, do you think they'd sign Jay Williams right now? Or take Corrie Blount?


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

*Re: How ironic*



> Originally posted by <b>pjc845</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I agree with you in principle pjc, I think that there is very little chance that JWill is ever going to be succesful again as an NBA player. Still, I do think for the miniscule (comparatively speaking of course) salary Jay Will garners that the Bulls would certainly be better off right now taking a "wait and see" approach. You never know, JWill COULD come back and if he does I certainly don't think the Bulls want to lose their interest in him over a measly 1.85mil. 

That being said, maybe next season would be a good time to revisit this issue and see where JWill is at, see how much he has recovered, and then reassess what needs to be done from a contractual point of view. I certainly see no reason for the Bulls to keep him as a cap hit for the next 4 years if he won't be able to play ball. They hired him as a ballplayer and if he can't play ball he can't play ball. Sure, it would definitley be a good idea to work out a settlemnt buy out, maybe even give him a scouting or front office job, the kid is pretty smart (except when it comes to riding motorcycles). But I see no reason to let him continue hurting the cap. Your a financial advisor to multi-million dollar deals, I work similarly to negotiate certain financial transactions (although of a different sort) if tomorrow both of us turned into vegetables and had no brain function, I hardly think they would let us come sit at our desks and druel all day long and get paid for it. The same standards, IMO, should apply to JWill. Is that a little cruel, well yeah, is the world cruel....what do you think?


----------



## Sicky Dimpkins (May 28, 2002)

Why not trade the contract?


----------



## badfish (Feb 4, 2003)

I'm just a lurker and an occasional poster so perhaps my opinion won't carry much weight with some of you. 

However, pjc is right on. Don't get me wrong, I love JWill. I have been pining for this guy since his sophomore year with Duke. And I was against (or at least extremely leery of) trading this guy. So, don't pin me as a Jay hater and Crawford lover as some are wont to do.

I think some solid points have been made on both sides. The Bulls management needs to weigh all these factors and make a decision thats best for the BULLS ORGANIZATION. Perhaps that decision is to avoid the PR disaster and take care of "one of their own". This is certainly the "feel-good" approach and one that appears more humane. But it is not inhumane to consider the alternative.

JWill was NOT acting in the best interests of the Bulls that fateful Thursday night. He blatantly disregarded a business contract and the warnings of his fellow teammates in pursuit of a thrill. He acted like an irresponsible adult frankly. And, as an adult, he has to be prepared to accept those consequences. Nobody but JWill put himself in this tragic situation. The Bulls owe him nothing.

Personally, I really hope that JWill can return and be a productive player for the Bulls. I'm afraid that the chance of this is slim. If he is unable to come back, then I wish the best for him financially and more importantly I wish him happiness in life. 

A piece of our dream died Thursday afternoon, but we have to move on.   :upset: :sigh:


----------



## pjc845 (Jun 9, 2002)

*Oh, I totally agree with you*

And that's my point. I don't understand this outpouring of interest in committing to Jay Wililams. Its not like he got hurt in the line of duty. He got hurt doing something stupid and irresponsible and explicitly forbidden in his contract (if reports are correct).

Let me also state that what I advocate is conditional on the confirmation that the injuries are indeed as severe as has been reported. I mean if it is likely that he is out only one season (as at least one report has said is possible) all bets are off.

What I don't understand is why folks seem to think we owe this kid anything. We owe him nothing. He didn't give us any rings. This is a kid that *****ed about the Bulls organization when he had a chance. I am all for trying to set something up financially for him, more to take care of PR issues than because we have some sort of obligation. But, there's no question in my mind that we don't burden ourselves because of this mistake by Williams if we can avoid it.

Again, I'm disappointed that the Bulls lose either a talented young guard (if some people will have it) or valuable trade bait as a means to better this team.

Having said this, this is the businessman in me talking. And its the stance that Paxson has to take as a GM. The human in me says I pray and hope Williams recovers from his injuries, completely and as quickly as possible. Will I feel very sorry for him? Not really -- not that he deserved this (unlike a few, I don't think anyone deserves this fate), but he is going to be set financially one way or another and has (or will have) a Duke degree to fall back on. I certainly don't feel sorry enough for him to support dropping a few million a year for the next 4 years on him if it means impacting our salary cap situation. Sorry, but this kid's story is tragic, but its not like we owe him a damned thing. If it were MJ or Pippen or someone whose contributions have been clearer, it might be a different story in my book.

Again, just my humble opinion.


----------



## Darius Miles Davis (Aug 2, 2002)

*Re: How ironic*

PJC,

I still don't think you've responded to the PR concerns. Are you concerned with the potentially irrational backlash from the media/league?


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

*Re: Re: How ironic*



> Originally posted by <b>ace20004u</b>!I certainly see no reason for the Bulls to keep him as a cap hit for the next 4 years if he won't be able to play ball.


Assuming the contract is not voided, he is only guarenteed to be paid this upcomming year and next year (04-05).

Rookie contracts have a 4th year team option. Then the RFA status in the 5th year if the player is not extended the prior summer.


----------



## fredsmooth21 (Nov 16, 2002)

Everyone brings up valid points in this thread. My opinion of this whole thing will have to me more like pjc845. Its jay williams own fault this all happened. Nobody elses. Although its very sad and I wouldnt wish it upon anyone, i think the bulls should give him the first year AT LEAST to recover and see how he progresses. If it looks like he will never be the same, which can very well happen then you cut him. Because this way the bulls look good to the meadia, fans, and rest of the league.


----------



## pjc845 (Jun 9, 2002)

*Not at all*



> Originally posted by <b>DMD</b>!
> PJC,
> 
> I still don't think you've responded to the PR concerns. Are you concerned with the potentially irrational backlash from the media/league?


I've addressed the PR concerns. We set this kid up financially. But we void the contract so it doesn't impact our cap and frees up a roster spot. Or rather, this is a good idea that came up earlier and not one I could claim to be mine originally.

I think this also resolves the issue of what happens if miraculously Jay Wililams can come back from this. Well, if we set him up financially, Jay ought to feel gratitude -- enough that he comes to us and says he wants to try to make it back on the team meaning OUR team. Again, I think this kid is smart enough to realize that he f*cked up. And that any thing the Bulls give him financially is legally not required and is out of the goodness of the team's hearts.

Holding a roster spot and taking a cap hit for him (again IF the injuries are as bad as reported) is stupid and business wise irresponsible.


----------



## badfish (Feb 4, 2003)

I suspect other league GMs would like to see the Bulls take hardline approach. Not because they're evil, but because contracts and clauses that forbid dangerous activity must carry some weight. Otherwise, what's the point of the clause in the first place if there is no incentive to abide by it.

It's all about protecting the teams' investments, and who can blame them.


----------



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

I am just a caveman so I don't know legal mumbo jumbo but by waiting a year for recovery, could you still void his deal? 

The point of my post wasn't weither cutting Jay would give the Bulls salary cap room, cutting him would count against the cap, but weither they would just void the deal due to breach of contract. I wonder if waiting on the decision will take away the Bulls option of voiding his deal?


----------



## Sicky Dimpkins (May 28, 2002)

pjc845: I was going to suggest that the Bull could trade the contract of J. *IF the team his contract got traded to cut him*; the owners of the Bull as -individuals- could help J financially. Since: a. there wasn't any prior agreement with the other team & b. it was individuals doing it as opposed to the corporation; there wouldn't be circumvention charges. In theory it's correct I think. 

I think both a. & b. are a little too "cute" to fly in the real world however. The reason is that the CBA hasa catch all anti-circumvention clause. 

Even though it is about trades, I suspect it's broad enough to be applied to cutting J too, *if the Bull then helped him financially*. If they didn't help him after cutting him it should be OK however.

Creative thinking to evade the cap is punished not rewarded. Guilty unless proven innocent seems to be the rule. Other owners would squash this tactic. I would worry about being penalized like Minnesota was.

I still think a trade of the contract is worth considering.


----------



## InPaxWeTrust (Sep 16, 2002)

I am in shock over how many of you actually support the idea of doing this. Truly saddens me as a Bulls fan. A 22-year old kid made a mistake that nearly cost him his life and for that he gets kicked out of town. We have a team full of young kids who at various times have made big mistakes( obviously not as big as this but still) and we continue to be patient and let them go through their growing pains. We should at least give Jay the opportunity to see if he can make it back from this however slight of chance that might be.


----------



## Sicky Dimpkins (May 28, 2002)

The loyalty of the Bull should be to the fans.


----------



## Kismet (Mar 1, 2003)

I didn't have time to read all the posts in this thread, but clearly a decision to terminate Williams' contract would have to pass through Reinsdorf. Knowing that, there's no doubt in my mind that Jay will be paid for this coming season and the following season after that.

And if you still have doubts, didn't Pax describe Williams as a member of the Bulls family?

Jay will get his money for the next two seasons, at least.


----------



## badfish (Feb 4, 2003)

Bas, this discussion really is premature as we don't know the extent of the injury nor do we know the exact wording of Jay's contract. I don't think anybody wants to write Jay off just yet so I don't know why you are saddened.

We are just discussing all of our options. In the end, we are just fans with no control over this situation. 

I feel horrible about the tragedy as I wanted to :hurl: when I heard the news. But, I have to admit, I also feel a little disturbed that Jay would take such chances. After all, the guy was on a jock rocket without a license (let alone without a helmet, which has not been confirmed). I guess I'm disappointed since I thought he had a good head on his shoulders.


----------



## pjc845 (Jun 9, 2002)

*The issue isn't whether he gets his money or not*

Although again, I stress there should be no obligation for the Bulls to do so.

The question is whether we hold a roster spot for Jay Williams or void his contract.

We can ensure that he gets two years salary in the scheme NCBullsfan describes on page 2. But, void the contract in order to open up a roster spot for a body that can actually help us, meanwhile freeing up 1.4 million in cap space a year (in addition to the injury exception).

Meanwhile, if Williams miraculously comes back from his injury, we can always resign him. I doubt he'd be ready to play even the year after next, and we ought to resign him to a new contract anyways after two years -- his market value would unquestionably be lower than what he's making now.


----------



## InPaxWeTrust (Sep 16, 2002)

> Meanwhile, if Williams miraculously comes back from his injury, we can always resign him



If you think Williams would just come back you would be in for a rude awakening. He would sign anywhere but here and then stick it to us every chance he could get. At least that is what I would do in his situation if we cut him after something like this.


----------



## Mongoose (Jun 24, 2003)

From a business standpoint, Jay doesn't seem able to do his duties, so to save the money we would void his contract. However, from an overall standpoint I see few benefits from dropping him:

*1) Will we take a PR hit?* Definitely. Fans may be 50-50, but players will all perceive us as willing to dump them to the curb if anything happens to go wrong. Which is standard business practice, but not good for worker morale. It will most likely anger our own players, too. Paxson may have a more difficult time selling our team for free agents.

*2) Will we save a lot of cap space for free agency?* Williams is on a rookie scale, so he will make an average of 3.5 million over the next two years. That's a lot of money by normal standards, but by NBA standards that's not too big. Plus, we are already over the cap, and with Rose, Marshall, and so on getting their raises, cutting Jay will not give us more cap space than the mid-level exception without some trades. Dropping him right now (which we won't do, of course) also means we would lose our injury exception (which counts against the cap but will give us more free agent power this year).

*3) Will Williams push us into luxury tax area?* Not unless Crawford gets a helluva lot of money. Williams's contract expires the same time Chandler and Curry are up for their extensions assuming they get picked up for the 4th year option. So, he should be coming off the books before we really push the cap.

There's no chance the Bulls will drop him this year, and an extra year won't make much difference in my eyes unless he's traded away to another team for cap relief. So, I'd say at this point, let Jay run out his contract, don't pick up his option if he's not capable, and that, unfortunately, is that.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mongoose</b>!
> From a business standpoint, Jay doesn't seem able to do his duties, so to save the money we would void his contract. However, from an overall standpoint I see few benefits from dropping him:
> 
> *1) Will we take a PR hit?* Definitely. Fans may be 50-50, but players will all perceive us as willing to dump them to the curb if anything happens to go wrong. Which is standard business practice, but not good for worker morale. It will most likely anger our own players, too. Paxson may have a more difficult time selling our team for free agents.
> ...


Ding Ding Ding, we have a winner!

(Welcome aboard, Mongoose, how ya been?)

<HR>

OK, I tried posting on this about 4 hours ago, but the net went down at work :upset:

If we were to make some sort of move to get Jay off the cap, it would have to be structured in a way that didn't take money out of his pocket. That may not be the strict letter of the contract he signed, but that's the only way it would realistically be done. And it would have to be something Jay was agreeable to. 

So if he agreed to it and the Bulls agreed to it, I don't see where we'd have any room to complain.

The only part I someone disagree with NC on is that I don't see how keeping Jay on the books this year and next will push us into the luxury tax range. We won't have to start worrying about that until Curry and Chandler's extensions kick in, right? And that should coincide with JWill coming off the books.


----------



## badfish (Feb 4, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>basghetti80</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> If you think Williams would just come back you would be in for a rude awakening. He would sign anywhere but here and then stick it to us every chance he could get. At least that is what I would do in his situation if we cut him after something like this.


Are you saying that you would not accept responsibilty for your actions and instead choose to blame the organization that gave you an opportunity for wealth and fame?

I hope not.

He may not choose to resign with us in this scenario but to forever "stick it to us" is a major cop-out IMHO. Many professional athletes feel they are entitled to this profession and all the trappings that go along with it. Sad but true.

I'm willing to give Jay more credit than this.


----------



## Mongoose (Jun 24, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> 
> 
> Ding Ding Ding, we have a winner!
> ...


Hey Mike, worldcrossing's been on the fritz lately, so I've been looking for more places to play... :basket:


----------



## Dan Rosenbaum (Jun 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> Ding Ding Ding, we have a winner!
> 
> (Welcome aboard, Mongoose, how ya been?)
> ...


Welcome from me as well, Mongoose.

MikeDC and Mongoose, you guys are mistaken. We are brushing up against the luxury tax *this year*. Assuming we pick up Hassell's option, we are at $46.3 million, not counting Blount, Hoiberg, Brunson, any second rounders, or any free agent pick-ups.

If the projected luxury tax threshold for 2003-04 was at something like $53 million, then we would not be able to use our full MLE and injury exception without being perilously close to paying the luxury tax. And my estimate is that the first $2 million over the luxury tax threshold will carry with it an effective tax rate (counting luxury tax payments and lost luxury/escrow tax distributions) of 440 percent. Thus, being just $500,000 over would cost the Bulls about $2.7 million in profits. Being $2 million over would cost the Bulls about $10.8 million in profits.

In 2004-05, we almost certainly will be in luxury tax territory if we re-sign Crawford and Fizer (or trade Fizer for someone with equal salary) and sign anyone this year to more than a one-year contract. Remember Crawford's leverage increased a lot on Thursday night.

http://www.basketballboards.net/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=36560&forumid=27 

In this post, I made pretty conservative assumptions, and we still end up paying some luxury tax next year.

Also, in case anyone is interested, I have finished with all 29 teams in my Complete Free Agent Analsysis thread. I still need to discuss what will happen to the players and list my assumptions, but I am getting close to finishing.

http://www.basketballboards.net/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=34527&forumid=111


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

Monroniti indicates that a player can only be fined or suspended for riding a motorcyle. The Bulls may not be able to end his contract if they wanted.

http://www.suntimes.com/output/mariotti/cst-spt-jay24.html



> It's hard to believe he didn't know a little something about exhibit A, paragraph 12 of the league's collective bargaining agreement, which bars a player from "endangering his health or safety'' by participating in "professional boxing or wrestling, motorcycling, moped-riding, auto racing, sky diving and hang gliding, or any exhibition of basketball, football, baseball, hockey, lacrosse or other athletic sport.'' According to the bylaw, a player can be fined and/or suspended by his team and/or NBA commissioner David Stern


I love the next part.....



> Obviously, the Bulls are thrilled Williams is alive and aren't thinking about the legal fine print. Terminating his contract would break new ground as a heartless corporate act.


:grinning: Fot anyone arguring that Jay should be kicked to the curb, you are being called heartless by JAY MARIOTTI SUN-TIMES COLUMNIST.

That's like being called corrupt by Key Lay of Enron or called overweight by Jerry Krause. 

That can't feel good.:laugh:


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

This is true, but I've been assuming up till now that we actually wouldn't use our MLE this year. Maybe I need to re-think that now that JWill is gone, but I think I'd still be willing to take the #7 pick, use our injury exception for JWill to pick up a decent backup PG (Best, Ollie, etc?).

If we get Wade or Pietrus, both of whom, most seem to think, will come in ready to play, I don't see the need to use the MLE. 

Next year, things will get trickier. I've advocated for a while now that we try turn Fizer into a future (cheaper) pick. That would seem to get us most of the way towards being out of the tax zone next year with only minimal damage to our competitive position.

The year after that, I don't see how we do it (even with JWill off then books then) unless by that point we've traded ERob or Rose for a shorter contract.


----------



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

*If Jay's prognosis is Dire*

I guess in the up coming weeks, we'll have more information as to the nature of Jay's injuries as well as the make up of the team. 

I am a fan of Jay Williams but we're still talking about millions of dollars. *If* it seems unrealistic that Jay can come back, why pay him 7 million dollars? I bet the Bulls owners would notice a 7 million dollar loss. Absorbing a 7 million dollar loss would make the Bulls owners saints.

Paying guys millions that can't contribute won't improve the Bulls. Add the 3 million+ to what ERobbed steals and you have a 10 million dollars that don't help the Bulls what so ever. I for one expect more for a 10 million investment. I am sure a few of the owners do as well. 

I am not suggesting that the Bulls void Williams deal but if the Doctor's prognosis is dire, you have to look at how spending 7 million dollars on a nice disabled kid helps you win an NBA championship. 

The Bulls will take care of Jay. The Bulls have a history of taking care of their own. I just don't think honoring a contract that the player didn't honor is the way to do it. If Jay can't play, get him a job in the orginization ala Bob Love.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

If Jay's career is over, he will absolutely be cut. Or if the Bulls can find a team willing to take Jay as a gamble, they might trade him.

A basketball team is a business, not a charity.

If Jay were healthy, he'd absolutely demand a max contract if/when his time came. If the Bulls went to him and asked him to take less so they could pay/keep someone else, I doubt he'd agree. Why should it be different that the shoe is on the other foot?

If there is a chance Jay can come back after rehabbing for a season, the Bulls will keep him.

Jay's rookie contract has already paid him more money than most people make in a lifetime. And he's a college graduate.


----------



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

> Originally posted by <b>johnston797</b>!
> Monroniti indicates that a player can only be fined or suspended for riding a motorcyle. The Bulls may not be able to end his contract if they wanted.
> 
> http://www.suntimes.com/output/mariotti/cst-spt-jay24.html
> ...


Unlike Jay Marriotti, I am just writing what I am thinking not what is his idea of "great journalism" If Jay's prognosis is good, you gotto let him try to make it back and once again earn his salary.

I can guarantee you that if the Bulls are paying Jay 2 years from now for him to hobble around the Berto Center, Mariotti's tune will be different. Jay Mariotti's opinions mean nothing to me becuase they mean nothing to him. He changes positions to suit his needs, not his beliefs. I haven't read Mariotti in years and I am not missing anything.


----------



## JOHNNY_BRAVisimO (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>fredsmooth21</b>!
> Everyone brings up valid points in this thread. My opinion of this whole thing will have to me more like pjc845. Its jay williams own fault this all happened. Nobody elses. Although its very sad and I wouldnt wish it upon anyone, *i think the bulls should give him the first year AT LEAST to recover and see how he progresses. *If it looks like he will never be the same, which can very well happen then you cut him. Because this way the bulls look good to the meadia, fans, and rest of the league.


I agree, id give jay AT LEAST a year before considering any real action. Lets see how he heals up, how hard he works and then in a year Pax can decide whether he feels its worth the cap hit to wait on Jay another 3 seasons. Thats the least we can do. If by that time he's still another year or so away from coming back 100% then like Retro said.... id consider putting him in the expansion draft for the Charlotte Bobcats to chance on. I wouldnt cut Jay, id rather handle the situation in a way that gives him another chance on another team.(trade or expansion draft)


----------



## whiterhino (Jun 15, 2003)

I don't know the details of his leg break, as I havn't heard if they have been released yet but I have to tell you if he has a rod inserted in his leg, he WILL NOT play at any high level again. My best friend broke his leg in an ATV accident over 2 years ago. He was in excellent shape at the time, had always been a quick healer, and was very athletic. They had to put a pin in his knee & hip with a rod from one to the other. After a YEAR he had the pin in the knee removed (you can't have much mobility with them still in there). Then almost another YEAR later he had the pin in the hip and the rod removed. He has gone to rehab etc.... He still has a limp, can't even kick a soccer ball without pain and can't run worth a darn. I know he's not an NBA athlete, but I think Jay Williams' career is over if they had to put any rod in his leg.


----------



## JOHNNY_BRAVisimO (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>whiterhino</b>!
> I don't know the details of his leg break, as I havn't heard if they have been released yet but I have to tell you if he has a rod inserted in his leg, he WILL NOT play at any high level again. My best friend broke his leg in an ATV accident over 2 years ago. He was in excellent shape at the time, had always been a quick healer, and was very athletic. They had to put a pin in his knee & hip with a rod from one to the other. After a YEAR he had the pin in the knee removed (you can't have much mobility with them still in there). Then almost another YEAR later he had the pin in the hip and the rod removed. He has gone to rehab etc.... He still has a limp, can't even kick a soccer ball without pain and can't run worth a darn. I know he's not an NBA athlete, but I think Jay Williams' career is over if they had to put any rod in his leg.


the thing is that jay is a multimillionnaire, he has the money to pay for THE best doctors in the world. Im sure he's getting the best medical treatment money can buy.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>L.O.B</b>!
> Unlike Jay Marriotti, I am just writing what I am thinking not what is his idea of "great journalism" If Jay's prognosis is good, you gotto let him try to make it back and once again earn his salary.
> 
> I can guarantee you that if the Bulls are paying Jay 2 years from now for him to hobble around the Berto Center, Mariotti's tune will be different. Jay Mariotti's opinions mean nothing to me becuase they mean nothing to him. He changes positions to suit his needs, not his beliefs. .


What does great journalism have to do with it? You indicated that the Bulls should void Jay's contract. Marriotti said that voiding Jay's contract would ' break new ground as a heartless corporate act.' It's the Bulls morality and obligation we are debating rather than journalism



> Originally posted by <b>L.O.B</b>!
> I haven't read Mariotti in years and I am not missing anything.


Well, he nailed this story. He actually must have read the CBA. Mariotti said, "According to the bylaw, [for violating clause 12 by riding a motorcycle] a player can be fined and/or suspended by his team and/or NBA commissioner David Stern." I have a copy of the CBA and this is 100% accurate.

If theBulls try to void JWill's contract, they would have a heck of a fight on their hands with the Players Association. Looks like he may be on the books for the next 2 years.


----------



## Dan Rosenbaum (Jun 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>johnston797</b>!
> What does great journalism have to do with it? You indicated that the Bulls should void Jay's contract. Marriotti said that voiding Jay's contract would ' break new ground as a heartless corporate act.' It's the Bulls morality and obligation we are debating rather than journalism
> 
> Well, he nailed this story. He actually must have read the CBA. Mariotti said, "According to the bylaw, [for violating clause 12 by riding a motorcycle] a player can be fined and/or suspended by his team and/or NBA commissioner David Stern." I have a copy of the CBA and this is 100% accurate.
> ...


Well, while you have your CBA out, you might want to read Clause 7(b).

"If the Player, in the judgment of the Team’s physician, is not in good physical condition at the date of his first scheduled game for the Team, or *if, at the beginning of or during any Season, he fails to remain in good physical condition* (unless such condition results directly from an injury sustained by the Player as a direct result of participating in any basketball practice or game played for the Team during such Season), *so as to render the Player, in the judgment of the Team’s physician, unfit to play skilled basketball, the Team shall have the right to suspend such Player until such time as, in the judgment of the Team’s physician, the Player is in sufficiently good physical condition to play skilled basketball. In the event of such suspension, the Compensation* (excluding any signing bonus or Incentive Compensation) *payable to the Player for any Season during such suspension shall be reduced in the same proportion as the length of the period during which, in the judgment of the Team’s physician, the Player is unfit to play skilled basketball, bears to the length of such Season.*"

So yes, his contract could not be voided, but it looks like he could be suspended for the entire season and not be paid. However, this probably would make it nearly impossible to do the arrangement that I discussed near the beginning of this thread.

Thus, the Bulls probably could not avoid a PR hit if they suspended Jay for the entire season, since they probably would not be able to "take care of him." And remembering what happened to Minnesota with the Joe Smith situation, Chicago would not want to get too creative here with payments to Jay in the future, in lieu of payments over the next two years, unless all of this was cleared with David Stern first.

Given the choice of a PR hit (with fans, free agents, and our own players) or paying Jay's contract, I would choose paying Jay's contract (through 2004-05).

I thought there was a way we could do this so that both the Bulls and Jay were better off, but I am starting to doubt that is the case.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

Mongoose! Good to see you here.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

personally i wouldn't look to cut williams but if the bulls have a chance to sign someone but it will take more than the vet exception but williams injury exception would get the job done ,I would do it in a heartbeat ,Say what you will about being heartless but the nba has cap restraints and the bulls are over the cap if they need the extra 800K or so to get a player they need to do it and take whatever heat comes their way of which I believe there would be a lot less than people think there would be if it were dne a month from now when williams is out of the hospital and never truly had his life in danger 

things look they could be bad now because williams is in a hospital bed recovering but he's not always going to be there 

no one thinks brunson is the answer at backup pg so I would have to assume if the bulls get the exception and use it pretty soon thereafter fans would understand and maybe even embrace it ,because no one wants to lose and everyone wants their team doing as much as possible to win and cutting a player to add a player who can and will actually play does seem like a good idea vs. just keeping one who cant play for whatever reason


----------



## MichaelOFAZ (Jul 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>L.O.B</b>!
> Bags,
> 
> If Jay injured himself on the court, I would have a problem with Paxson cutting him. Since Jay went against the terms of his contract and injured himself doing something prohibited, I feel the issue has many shades of grey.
> ...


I know I'm a little late in the discussion, but Williams did not violate the terms and conditions of the contract as I had originally thought. Appearantly, the term "motorcycling" as refer to in the CBA, refers to motorcycle racing or jumping, not causal riding. 

Also, there is only 2 more years and $7M or so in play (i.e. gauranteed) with Jay's contact. Financially, the Bulls are insurance for 80% of his contract (or $5.6M). From a public relations standpoint, the Bulls would be foolish to terminate Jay's contract based on "breach" for $1.4M or so. 

The real issue for the Bulls is how this situation effects the salary cap. If the salary cap would not include "terminated contacts due to breach", then the Bulls must consider terminating Jay's contract if in fact it was a breach (which it sounds like there wasn't).


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=ap-jimlitke&prov=ap&type=lgns

Exactly how much loyalty a contract should buy is a hot issue right now in Chicago, where the Bulls receive updates on the condition of Jay Williams. The former Duke star, injured in a recent motorcycle crash, was taken second in last year's draft and his face still peers out hopefully from billboards around town. 

Until the accident, Williams and the word ``reckless'' would not have turned up often in the same sentence. Now, even before any realistic judgment on his playing future can be made, another round of surgery will be necessary. Wisely, the Bulls concern themselves only with questions about Williams' health these days and refuse to discuss whether he had permission to <B>ride the motorcycle, something prohibited by the standard NBA contract. </B>

But it's a safe bet the one thing management never counted on the day they signed off on Williams' deal was the kind of <B>buyer's remorse</B> staring thembetween the eyes at the moment.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

I like Jay Williams and obviously I hope he recovers and becomes the player we think he is all capable of. Still, I am somewhat shocked by all of the folks who think it would be heartless to void Jay's contract if he can't ever play again. HELLO, This is basketball! If you can't play...you don't get paid! Why would anyone want to pay a player who can't do anything to help the team? Thats not heartless IMO, thats just plain common sense! 

That being said, obviously there may be some financial and contractual reasons that the Bulls can't void his contract or negotiate a settlement. And the Bulls should, quite obviously I might add, wait a year before even considering voiding his contract. Who knows? Maybe this will just affect Jay Will to the point where instead of being a max playing all star one day he is content to be a $4mil per year back up to Crawford and play that Bobby Jackson role? Right now I will be surprised if he ever plays again but stranger things have hapened.


----------



## Zeos (Jun 4, 2003)

Wow, I am surprised by the range of views expressed.

To me, it's pretty simple. Basketball is a business, and this is a business decision. The future of Jay Williams is, quite frankly, _unknown_. We don't know that his career is over. We don't know if he'll come back, and at what capacity if he does. We don't know. The doctors don't know. No one knows with certainty what the future holds.

They may have estimates or guesses. Fine, those are estimates and guesses. But nothing is known.

What's the downside to cutting Jay? He could rehab and come back 100%, be an unrestricted FA, and sign for some other team. That would really suck!

What's the downside if you pay him for a season and see what develops? Nothing that I can think of. There won't be any cap releaf, in fact, without the contract they may not even get the injury exception. So really no or negative impact on FAs. We're not paying the luxury tax, so that doesn't matter The only cost is a couple million dollars, which in the big picture, isn't much at all (see ERob exhibit.)

If it becomes _known_ at some point in the future that Jay's career is over, fine, then the situation becomes different, and I'm guessing the two parties would work something out. I'm also guessing that it won't be known for a good long time, and Jay will exhaust all possibilities before giving up (which takes a lot of time). At that point, Jay's contract may be valuable because it's a sizeable expiring contract. So it's likely (IMO) he'll get paid through his whole rookie contract.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>ace20004u</b>!
> I like Jay Williams and obviously I hope he recovers and becomes the player we think he is all capable of. Still, I am somewhat shocked by all of the folks who think it would be heartless to void Jay's contract if he can't ever play again. HELLO, This is basketball! If you can't play...you don't get paid! Why would anyone want to pay a player who can't do anything to help the team? Thats not heartless IMO, thats just plain common sense!
> 
> That being said, obviously there may be some financial and contractual reasons that the Bulls can't void his contract or negotiate a settlement. And the Bulls should, quite obviously I might add, wait a year before even considering voiding his contract. Who knows? Maybe this will just affect Jay Will to the point where instead of being a max playing all star one day he is content to be a $4mil per year back up to Crawford and play that Bobby Jackson role? Right now I will be surprised if he ever plays again but stranger things have hapened.


You partially addressed this in the 2nd paragraph, but the issue is not whether the Bulls should give Jay $$$.

The issue is whether the Bulls should try to use a contractualy loophole to avoid paying a guarenteed contract. To complicate matters, to my knowledge, a team has never used this loophole to void a contact and thus the Bulls would certainly face a fight from the Players Association. So no matter what, the Bulls will look heartless in an attempt to save a few million bucks without knowing if they will be successful. I suspect that Reinsdorf might just pay $10-15M bucks in lux tax to avoid the whole messy situation.


----------

