Subscribe Feed (RSS)The latest in the Darius Miles saga, that the Blazers themselves were reportedly attemping to claim Miles on waivers so they could keep him from playing any more games this season, is so incredible I’m having trouble believing it. This player, whom the Blazers have branded as a poison, whom they’ve said cannot physically play, they’d claim him — bring him back into their locker room — just to bench him for their own selfish reasons?
Man, that’s cold. Not to mention immoral and probably illegal. After all the wonderful things the Trail Blazer front office has done in the last few seasons, they’ve managed to top them all with this story. They’ve done the impossible:
They’ve turned Darius Miles into a sympathetic character.
And P.S. — For all you Blazer fans out there who think what your team did is just fine and dandy, let me ask you this: How would you feel if the Lakers did that?
Tags: Darius Miles, Dwight Jaynes, NBA, Portland Trail Blazers
I don’t care about this story one bit.
Didn’t care yesterday, didn’t care this morning, and won’t care tomorrow. The players don’t care and the fans don’t care. The only people who care are/were employed by organizations whose business model stems from generating controversy and its concomitant ad revenue or have aspirations to do so.
So, what’s the real story here? The Trail Blazer organization has improved its standing in the community to the extent that this is and probably will be the most “controversial” non-trade related news item coming from the Rose Garden for quite some time.
Wake me when something interesting is happening, like Outlaw going off for 30 points every game for a week, Oden not having any stupid fouls for a three games in a row, or Brandon, Lamarcus, and Nate have been locked with reasonable up long term contracts.
This one is hard to believe. I think the Blazers are better off just letting this story go away. Seems like they look worse everyday. I will say that the blazers are on the inside are we are not. There may be reasons for their actions that we will never know. On the surface, to most, things look bad. Maybe they deserve the benefit of the doubt? I just wish the story would go away so everybody can move on.
It’s irrelevant at this point if Portland makes itself look worse. This was a no win situation for them, so it was worth a shot. Sure it was sleazy but not much worse than what the rest of the league did by conspiring to sign Miles.
Suddenly, Portland is way out of bounds by trying to take advantage of the rules?? What about the rest of the league “playing by the rules” in trying to get Miles in the first place? When was the last time that a dozen teams were lining up to sign a guy who hasn’t played in two years and is coming off major surgery?? Yea, I’m sure it was for his defense.
Memphis will keep Miles for a ten day contract or two and then release him. After that, it’d be hard to imagine he’d get another job this season.
Wouldn’t care if the Lakers did it.
A lot of us find it funny that the league wont let us protect our cap space and luxury threshold but will willingly let other teams sign Darius when we all know they’re only doing it to screw us over.
This was a garbage move … I’ve lost a ton of respect for KP and the rest of management who’ve been doing tons of banging on the “doing it the right way” drum for the past three seasons.
I feel sick.
I have to agree with pitar. Since when is it okay to do Portland in for financial considerations, but not okay for Portland to defend itself for the same? Being within league rules doesn’t make it ethical. Stern ruled against the Portland waiver claim. He can also rule that medical retirements weren’t meant for one team to have advantage over another. You think Portland looks bad now, imagine how Memphis will look if pitar’s scenario in the last paragraph takes place.
bring him back into their locker room
They wouldn’t bring him back into the locker room. They’d banish him to East St. Louis. They’ve done that with players in the past. Told them they’ll pay them, just go away. Heck, last I checked, they’re doing it with Raef right now.
I wouldn’t care if any team did this, including the Blazers. Immoral? Unethical? Hardly! Compared to the alternatives of letting one franchise screw over another franchise to squeeze some luxury tax dollars out of them and removing more money from the free agent market for REAL players to get paid? To play a player who is ignoring multiple doctors’ warnings that his knees are grinding bone-on-bone? Believe me when I say that everybody wins when Darius Miles goes away!
To Chris’s comment: I thinks that’s now called the Starbury treatment.
dwight , sorry i dont see it the same way you do. In this case, not playing darius in spite of himself is the best thing that can happen to this man who refuses to listen to experts telling him it will end in desaster.
Chris — they would NEVER get away with claiming him on waivers and then immediately sending him home. NEVER. They’d be fined by the league, sued by Miles and Miles would immediately be allowed to join another team. Guys get sent home when they’re out for the season and can’t play. Miles says he CAN play and teams are willing to take him up on it. And hey — every year multiple players get signed at this time of year to 10-day contracts and then play just a few minutes while teams look them over. The Blazers have done it. As far as Miles’ physical condition goes, if this were any other player, fighting back to try to play in spite of doctors telling him was washed up, he’d be a hero.
– Dwight
how is this different that what NY is doing with Marbury?
Or what the Pacers have done with Jamaal Tinsley? Or every team that has ever had Steve Francis? Basically any team that eventually went on to buyout a player has done something exactly like what Chris suggested. Whether or not it’s at the beginning or end of that players tenure or at the end seems rather inconsequential.
DJ, you are so right about this. And to send around that bonehead e-mail after getting snuffed by the league on this maneuver? Classic Paul Allen.
Related question for the local MSM: Why is this story being broken by a reporter in New Jersey?
You can mention Tinsley, Francis, Marberry — all the players you want… but did their team go out and pick them up against their will for the express purpose of keeping them from playing a game in the NBA? That’s what the Blazers would have been doing by picking up Miles on waivers.
That may be the case, but as so many have pointed out, good luck trying to prove intent. How can one team’s motives be so cut and dry and another’s unprovable? If half of the other teams in the NBA have been so throughly moved my the miracle of Darius Miles, why can’t the Blazers? If he clears waivers after all 29 teams had a crack at him, then why shouldn’t that be an option? Players bring in warm bodies all the time to take abuse in practice. Would it be acceptable to bring Darius in as a “practice player?” Is the argument that playing a guy for two games then cutting him simply to add money to another team’s ledger is somehow more altruistic that signing a guy not to play? These seem like very thin distinctions.
Actually, League-nominated doctors said he could not play. And I suppose if the doctors WERE right, he somehow gets re-injured and requires grisly knee replacement surgery during this miracle comeback, you’re going to condemn the Grizzlies, correct? Because I think THAT would be immoral, and would make me sympathetic-not
Darius Miles being paid $18 million to NOT play NBA basketball for his own safety after wasting chance after chance at fulfilling the massive potential he once had.
As far as I am concerned serves Blazers right if he plays two more games
Recall the principal move here was dump Darius, and that was good, the salary cap thing was a bonus. I do not think Blazers deserved it.
what if portland had decided that resigning miles was in their best interest. play him ourselves for two games or more. resulting in the cap space and salary being readded to the blazers. they end up with the same result but have the expiring contract to dump next season. miles gets to play and blazers dont get the loss of his contract. why would this be construed by the league as a ploy by blazer to get around the cba? seems to me this senerio has as much validity as any other a team would come up with in court
To the question of whether or not being a Blazer fan causes bias in my opinion on this situation, I’d hope not, but I can’t guarantee it. I don’t think I would mind if it were the Lakers, but let me explain why.
For me, the crux of the matter is what happened last spring. The Blazers had been waiting for quite some time for Darius to recover from his knee surgery. They had been paying him that whole time with no production. It was in their best interest for him to come back as a player to either contribute to the team or be someone they could trade.
Darius says that he is trying to make a comeback, but there are hints that he may be unable to play again and widespread belief that he really doesn’t want to work hard.
http://blog.oregonlive.com/johncanzano/2008/02/darius_miles_meet_the_giant_el.html
What happens then? Why do they end up at the doctor getting his knee examined? Does it happen against his will? And at the end of the process does it have to sign off on the retirement?
Those are the details I can’t sort out to figure out if I believe the Blazers are in the wrong or not.
In the same way in which people are trying to judge the intent of the teams that are signing Darius, I find myself trying to judge the intent of the Blazers last spring.
Did they really think Darius would never play again? Did they think the knee was too far injured? Did Darius show any signs of being able to play?
Or did they decide this was an expedient way to get rid of a malcontent and clear cap space.
If it was the latter, then they are getting everything they deserve. But if it is the former, then I find it hard to judge against them regardless of whether or not they tried to take Darius off waivers.
One narrative to this story has Darius as a sympathetic character who was forced into retirement by the Blazers and is valiantly trying to make a comeback.
Another potential narrative is a sympathetic team that waited on a player for two years, worked with the player when it appeared he would never play again to get a medical retirement, only to find out later that for some reason (medical diagnosis mistake, lack of rehab work ethic on the part of Darius, etc), suddenly find that they are going to pay a huge penalty.
So whether it is the Blazers or the Lakers, it would really depend on the intent. If the intent was to cheat via medical retirement on someone who could still play, then the Blazers deserve it. If not, then both the Blazers and Darius are victims here.
Oh, one quick follow up.
I think the Blazers have done a horrible job of public relations on this matter.
After the memo was released, and they saw the reaction, they should have had the Miller press conference earlier in the day.
They should have acknowledged that while they were trying to get people’s attention about the severity of the matter, that based on the reaction, they obviously could have written the memo better.
They could have then explained how they waited for two years for Darius to recover. How they worked with him to get a medical retirement. And how frustrating it is to hear that other team executives might sign Darius not because they think he can contribute, but to gain money from themselves because Portland will go over the salary cap.
Finally, that they don’t want to prevent Darius to play again, but they do want something that is both fair to Darius and the team.
Or something like that. They have a good argument they could made, but they failed to do so effectively. In fact, it is this poor performance and Kevin Pritchard’s body language which makes me question their intent last spring.
O.K. Dwight, I agree, the Blazers did bumble their way through this issue. Their motive was clear from the start, and that was to save Mr. Allen 18+ million bucks. So if that makes them out to be dirt bags, so be it. But my question to you is, what was the Memphis motive?