A More Ideal NBA CBA, Part III - Contract Termination Clauses (a/k/a Firing Players)

Contract Termination Clauses

Aside from hard caps and maximum salaries, contract termination terms due to player conduct is probably something that I'm very passionate about. We have two poster boys for why this is an issue:

1. Latrell Sprewell choked PJ Carlesimo, his head coach when he was with the Warriors in 1997 because he didn't like criticism the coach gave him. The team terminated his contract immediately and the NBA issued an 82 game suspension after an initial 10 game suspension. The union was successful in a wrongful termination claim, so he got his contract back, and his suspension was reduced from 82 games to 68 or the remainder of the 1997-1998 season. He was traded the next season to the Knicks, where he would help them to a Finals Appearance as a Cinderella team.

2. When he was with the Wizards, Gilbert Arenas brought guns to the locker room in 2009 in the Verizon Center and laid them on the chair in front of teammate Javaris Crittenton, and was issued what amounted to a 50 game suspension or the remainder of the 2009-2010 season. Arenas was charged with and convicted of felony handgun possession in DC, and served 1 month in a halfway house plus probation. Though his contract could have been terminated due to a "moral turpitude" clause in the current CBA, the team didn't do so because this clause was very vaguely worded, and the criminal sentence wasn't long enough to affect another NBA season. Arenas was traded last December to the Magic.

In both of these situations, we saw a player do something criminal and quite frankly something very stupid in the workplace. Should they do this at almost any other job, they're escorted out of the building immediately, not by their work supervisor, but the police and in cuffs. However, the NBA CBA allowed them to keep their jobs because of craftily worded phrases that made them impossible to fire. This also in turn gives the league a bad rep.

Therefore, the new CBA needs to put a hard line stance on things that will guarantee a player's termination from his contract, and even the league. I won't include PED's here, since I believe the league's stance there is appropriate. Sure we have a right to a job opportunity, but we don't have the right to work for any particular employer.

Here are rules that I would set as clauses for contract termination:

CONTRACT TERMINATION CLAUSES:
1. Players who are convicted of any felony worldwide that is not a sexual offense or homicide (US, Canada, or anywhere in the world really) will be subject to immediate contract termination effective the date of the conviction. The player’s remaining pro rated salary for that year and remaining years will not affect the cap space of the team that held the contract. The player must also serve a league mandated suspension of at least 82 games but can be longer, at the discretion of the commissioner. The suspension will start on the date of the conviction, or after the last day of incarceration (jail time), whichever is later. The player must then apply for reinstatement before playing another game in the NBA. Reinstatement is NOT guaranteed.

2. Players who are convicted of homicide, attempted homicide, or conspiracy to commit homicide will be suspended for life and CANNOT APPLY FOR REINSTATEMENT TO THE NBA, and it will be made effective on the date of conviction.

3. Players convicted of ANY sexual offense which requires registration as a sex offender will have his contract terminated immediately and will also serve a league suspension depending on the type of the offense:

• Players convicted of a non violent sexual offense that does not involve trafficking or sexual assault must serve a suspension in the NBA for no less than 164 games (2 full seasons) after the date of conviction or last day of incarceration (whichever is later) before applying for reinstatement. Examples of non-violent offenses include breaking in a house with intent to rape, voyeurism, peeping, soliciting prostitution as a client or provider (the prostitute), public exposure, and possession of child pornography.
  
• Players convicted of a violent sexual offense, attempted or executed, where the victim is above the age of consent in the jurisdiction where the offense took place, will serve a suspension for no less than 246 games (3 full seasons) after the date of conviction or last day of incarceration (whichever is later) before applying for reinstatement.
  Examples violent offenses include rape, sodomy, bestiality/zoophilia/crimes against nature as it relates with animals (if it is illegal), and forced object penetration.
  
• Players convicted of human trafficking, a violent sexual offense attempted or executed, on a child under the age of consent of the jurisdiction where the offense occurred will be suspended for life and CANNOT APPLY FOR REINSTATEMENT TO THE NBA. Examples of these offenses including rape/sodomy of a child; producing/financing child pornography; statutory rape/carnal knowledge of a child. The age of consent does vary state to state in the US. In Virginia, the age of consent is 18, in Maryland it is 16.
  
• Players who are convicted of sexual offenses but protected by "Romeo and Juliet" laws in respective jurisdictions will be suspended by the league for 10 games after the date of conviction or last day of incarceration (whichever is later). For example, it is a misdemeanor in New York for a 16-20 year old to have sex with another person who is under the age of 17, which is the age of consent. A Romeo and Juliet law is a colloquial provision which mitigates statutory rape when a party is under the age of consent and the perpetrator is not much older or younger than the victim. In most cases, the sex is consensual. No reinstatement is required.
  
  
• Sex offenses, in particular child sex offenses are treated very seriously and NBA players are role models for many young boys and girls worldwide which is why a ban is needed for life. The Romeo and Juliet suspension, I agree, it's dumb that a teen's parents would press child molestation charges altogether if the participants are close in age, but the fact of the matter is that a law is still broken, and a player still got himself in an embarrassing situation, and this is a deterrent nevertheless. I could knock this down to 5 games, but I can't let this slide completely either.
  
• In America at least, we are fortunate to have the appeal system we have. However, an appeal will not stop the league mandated suspension from taking place after a sexual offense or a felony conviction is made. However if an appeal is successful, any suspension will cease immediately, and the player will not have to apply for reinstatement.
  

3. By firing players who are felons, it would take care of a Gilbert Arenas debacle easily since he could have had his contract terminated the day he pled guilty, though the team may have kept him if they decided that his playing abilities were just too much to just let go.

HARD KNOCKS, MISDEMEANOR MEN, AND CONTRACT TERMINATION

• Players who are habitually breaking team rules or perform acts that are detrimental to the team/organization that owns the team are also subject to contract termination. This allows a Latrell Sprewell incident to result in immediate termination. The CBA can outline which offenses would result in termination. Things such as breaking certain team rules three times in a two year span or four times in a year can result in contract termination. These rules will be listed explicitly for each team to limit "appeals" by fired players. Those rules can include choking the coach, insubordination to management (like gay slurs to teammates or commenting on the hot sale rep's ass in front of her when she doesn't want it)
  
• If a player is accused of sexual harassment by another player or other employee of the team/organization that owns the team (sales staff, management, dance team, etc.) a joint investigation will be conducted by the team, the NBA, and another random NBA team. The player is also subject to contract termination at the conclusion of the investigation, as well as criminal charges if they are warranted. For example a Spurs player can be subject to a sexual harassment claim by a player for the San Antonio Silver Stars because they are really the same organization which is Spurs Sports and Entertainment. Same with a Knicks player for saying something to a member of the Rangers or Liberty sales staff as they are really just a brand of the MSG Entertainment group. Wizards players can be in trouble if they sexually harass Capitals and/or Mystics players as they are brands of Monumental Sports and Entertainment.
  
• Players who are habitual offenders for misdemeanors are also subject to contract termination. For example, someone getting convicted of three misdemeanors (not including minor traffic tickets) within a 24 month period would be subject to termination. Players convicted of five misdemeanors within a 36 month period (not including minor traffic tickets) will be terminated.
  
• The league also reserves the right to suspend the player as appropriate if he is terminated by a team for being a hard knock or for continuously getting misdemeanor offenses. Should the player be suspended after a contract termination due to work misconduct, sexual harassment or break team rules or because of habitual misdemeanors, he still must apply for reinstatement. Again, it is not guaranteed.
  
• IN ALL CASES WHERE A PLAYER IS REINSTATED, SHOULD A PLAYER GET A SECOND CONTRACT TERMINATED, THE NBA WILLBE SUSPEND THE PLAYER FOR LIFE AND HE WILL NO LONGER BE ABLE TO PLAY FOR THE NBA.
  
• Again, if the player's contract is terminated, all remaining cap space including a pro rated amount for the current season is returned to the team which held that contract.
  

I know players have a code of conduct and most players conduct themselves in a manner consistent with that code. However, there should be serious consequences given to them when a player commits serious crimes and/or breaks serious workplace rules that would get any of us fired.

Teams that do this should have no fear in firing even their star players, because the rules for contract termination are the same for every team. Players that are fired from a team will not be just re-signed easily by other teams, because they have to apply for reinstatement in many if not most cases. Also, the player only gets one more chance, and should he screw up again, his contract gets terminated again and he won't be an NBA player ever again. If the players wanna bitch about this or say that some of the offenses here are those where prison sentences are likely going to go past anyone's playing years, well here's my take on it. I want the window closed period if a player commits certain offenses. They need to act maturely, and just avoid these situations, and I don't wanna hear a comeback story about a player who murdered someone. Besides, most players do act maturely, so this should be something the union should accept pretty easily.

I think it's dumb how players get their full salary if they're released. Whether it's someone like Arenas or someone like Curry. Curry was making a shit ton of money and all he did was sit on the bench. If the knicks cut him, they would have still had to pay him the rest of his salary. Teams should only have to pay a percentage of the players contract if they are shit players after signing a big deal. If they get in trouble with the law or w/e, teams shouldn't have to pay that player any of that money.

I disagree. pay the players.

I rep 301 wrote:

I disagree. pay the players.

example

So if John wall was getting 20 million a year for the next 6 years and he was just like, "fuck it... I'm gonna get the money anyway" and got all lazy and shit.. you would just want him to stick around making money while screwing the wizards over by putting them in a huge whole?

I rep 301 wrote:

I disagree. pay the players.

So if JaVale Mcgee was convicted of a felony god forbid, he should still get paid his salary? That's what the current CBA pretty much allows.

Bulls N' Bears wrote:

Curry was making a shit ton of money and all he did was sit on the bench. If the knicks cut him, they would have still had to pay him the rest of his salary.

The big issue with Eddy Curry is his conditioning issues, which may not be completely his fault. If a player doesn't follow any regimen whatsoever, he should be subject to getting fired. However, if he's trying to get in shape and his body just doesn't allow it, then he should still receive his guaranteed money. There was some report somewhere that he may have a heart condition too, so there is a case for him if my Nanny state rules are in effect.

With Arenas, in terms of gungate, with this clause in the CBA, he'd likely be fired, and he wouldn't be able to contest it if that's what the Wizards did. In terms of Gilbert's injuries, again, like with Curry he shouldn't get fired just because he's injured. However, if he got injured or aggravated an injury from gross negligence which would probably also be breaking vital team rules, then yes, he should be fired. The parachute training in the summer of 2007 wasn't something that was particularly condoned by management and that was the first offseason he had since the 1st surgery.

Bulls N' Bears wrote:

I rep 301 wrote:

I disagree. pay the players.

example

So if John wall was getting 20 million a year for the next 6 years and he was just like, "fuck it... I'm gonna get the money anyway" and got all lazy and shit.. you would just want him to stick around making money while screwing the wizards over by putting them in a huge whole?

If that happened, I'd be so pissed that I'd want to ship him out like I want with Albert. With the current CBA, the worst thing that could happen to Wall here would be a suspension, but the cap hit remains the same so the team is still screwed since we can't get a replacement player for him.

I guess everyone agrees with me that felons, sex offenders, and Albert Haynesworths on NBA teams should be fired. I think I should make the CBA as a matter of fact.

wallshingtonwizard wrote:

Bulls N' Bears wrote:

Curry was making a shit ton of money and all he did was sit on the bench. If the knicks cut him, they would have still had to pay him the rest of his salary.

The big issue with Eddy Curry is his conditioning issues, which may not be completely his fault. If a player doesn't follow any regimen whatsoever, he should be subject to getting fired. However, if he's trying to get in shape and his body just doesn't allow it, then he should still receive his guaranteed money. There was some report somewhere that he may have a heart condition too, so there is a case for him if my Nanny state rules are in effect.

With Arenas, in terms of gungate, with this clause in the CBA, he'd likely be fired, and he wouldn't be able to contest it if that's what the Wizards did. In terms of Gilbert's injuries, again, like with Curry he shouldn't get fired just because he's injured. However, if he got injured or aggravated an injury from negligence, then yes, he should be fired. The parachute training in the summer of 2007 wasn't something that was particularly condoned by management and that was the first offseason he had since the 1st surgery.

okay.. what about Stephon Marbury? dude got 20 million a couple of years ago and he didn't do shit. he didn't even show up to some games.

I know him and Zeke had problems, but marbury had a lot to do with it.. so he just didn't play and still got his money

Bulls N' Bears wrote:

okay.. what about Stephon Marbury? dude got 20 million a couple of years ago and he didn't do shit. he didn't even show up to some games.

I know him and Zeke had problems, but marbury had a lot to do with it.. so he just didn't play and still got his money

Marbury would have been fired by the Knicks if these rules were in effect. The fact that he didn't show up to games at all and constant attitude issues over a long period of time is what made him a hard knock. Not all players on a team will be buddy buddy with each other. It rarely happens. But teammates should be cooperative and professional with each other in practice, on trips, and during games.

I think the NBA needs to protect itself from players who inflate in the contract year then deflate after singing that long extension. It kills rosters. Tim Thomas was making max money to be a 6th man, and this carried over for how many seasons after he left the team. I don't think all the money in the NBA should be guaranteed, only parts of it, especially if a player doesn't preform or is overweight like Eddy Curry.

The NBA is a job. But I agree with some of those things you posted, got to conduct yourself proper with any job.

Quality wrote:

I think the NBA needs to protect itself from players who inflate in the contract year then deflate after singing that long extension. It kills rosters. Tim Thomas was making max money to be a 6th man, and this carried over for how many seasons after he left the team. I don't think all the money in the NBA should be guaranteed, only parts of it, especially if a player doesn't preform or is overweight like Eddy Curry.

The NBA is a job. But I agree with some of those things you posted, got to conduct yourself proper with any job.

Yup I agree with that. I haven't hit on performance incentives or partially guaranteeing contracts. The latter does happen in the NBA, but it is something to be considered...

http://www.nbpa.org/sites/default/files/Article%20VI.pdf

Well I also am reading parts of the current CBA. There is a section on suspensions of players of violent felonies, where a player must serve at least a 10 game suspension. I appreciate that the players agree that punishment is warranted, but again, I don't think it's enough. Again, most players are not going to be felons. But you shouldn't just be given your job back after committing such a crime.

I'm okay as long as only specifically defined reasons are laid out before the contract is signed. I don't like the idea that a player can be cut because of unsatisfactory performance. That's something I hate about the NFL. After guaranteed money has already been paid, contracts mean nothing. If you're going hand out millions of dollars you should be smart about it. Don't give management a cop out for handing out bad contracts.

Yo Adrien! wrote:

I'm okay as long as only specifically defined reasons are laid out before the contract is signed. I don't like the idea that a player can be cut because of unsatisfactory performance. That's something I hate about the NFL. After guaranteed money has already been paid, contracts mean nothing. If you're going hand out millions of dollars you should be smart about it. Don't give management a cop out for handing out bad contracts.

I agree with you. Players shouldn't be fired/cut just because their stats are going down. Players get older, and they're going to be less effective on the court eventually.

I think the reasons why a player will get fired are detailed pretty well however when it relates to criminal activity, and blatant work misconduct.