The National Basketball Players Association — what the rest of us call the players union — will file to dismiss the lawsuit brought by the NBA this week, reports Ken Berger at CBS Sports.
The NBA’s lawsuit was a pre-emptive strike against possible union decertification. A group of player agents had pushed union executive director Billy Hunter to consider decertification then have some players sue the league on anti-trust grounds — the tactic the NFL players union used — but the NBA’s union has resisted going down that road. So far.
The decision is hardly stunning, considering (union) attorney Jeffrey Kessler’s strident rejection of the basis for the league’s suit, which seeks declaratory judgment from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York that the lockout is legal. Also, the NBA is seeking protection on antitrust grounds from a possible decertification by the players (or disclaimer of interest to represent them by the union) and has proclaimed its intention to void all existing contracts if the NBPA dissolves.
Kessler told CBSSports.com Tuesday the lawsuit has “no merit,” and that he intends to use it as evidence of the league’s bad-faith bargaining in a separate charge pending before the National Labor Relations Board.
This is standard operating procedure. With just about every lawsuit filed, the first move by the other side is to file to get the judge to just dismiss it immediately. Unless both sides really want to go into discovery. Neither side in the NBA battle really wants to go too far down this legal rabbit hole — you really think the owners want every NBA contract out there invalidated? You think Heat owner Micky Arison wants it? Clay Bennett in Oklahoma City? No, they don’t.
Two things I do take from this move by the league. One, they wanted to pick the venue where the legal fights would take place, and they picked the Second District in New York because they had won rulings there in the past.
Second, union decertification scares the league.
NBA: Kenneth Faried got away with foul on decisive basket in Nuggets’ win over Bulls
The Bulls’ biggest loss Friday was Jimmy Butlerto injury. His absence certainly contributed to a loss to the Timberwolves the following night.
But Chicago also lost to the Nuggets on Friday, and perhaps that wouldn’t have happened if the game were called correctly down the stretch.
With Denver up two points and 21.1 seconds remaining, Kenneth Faried offensively rebounded a free throw and scored. The Bulls then intentionally fouled down the stretch, and Faried and Danilo Gallinari added a few free throws in the Nuggets’ 115-110 win.
Faried (DEN) extends his arm into Gibson (CHI) and dislodges him, affecting his ability to retrieve the rebound.
This was a huge swing. Instead of Taj Gibson – a 69% career free-throw shooter – going to the line for two attempts with Chicago down two points, Faried put the Nuggets up four. Even if Gibson split at the line, the Bulls would have been in significantly better shape.
As usual, we can’t know what would’ve happened if this call were made correctly. But it significantly set back Chicago.
NBA considering if jump-on-back foul should be flagrant foul
The NBA was quick to let people know that this is just something under consideration — there has been no change in the rules. This may well be where the league is headed, but it’s not there yet.
The NBA defines a flagrant foul as “unnecessary contact committed by a player against an opponent.” To me, leaping on a player’s back like that qualifies. (A flagrant two foul is “unnecessary and excessive contact” and leads to an ejection; this is not that.)
Jared Dudley — one of the more vocal players on union issues — added a good point.
Since we're in the subject! I think it's crazy that the @NBA can make a rule without even discussing it with the players. No input at all
Smith (CLE) makes incidental contact with Turner’s (BOS) body as he attempts the layup.
If this were officiated correctly, the Cavs would’ve had the ball and a two-point lead with 5.9 seconds left. That’s not a lock to win – they’d still have to inbound the ball and make their free throws – but it’s close.
Cleveland is definitely entitled to feel the refs wronged them out of a victory.
Report: Kevin Durant has “done his due diligence on the Bay Area”
Kevin Durant has not made up his mind about what he will do as a free agent this summer. Until his playoff run ends, whenever that may be for the Thunder, his focus will be on bringing a title to Oklahoma City.
But even he admits he can’t help but think about free agency a little.
The Warriors play in front of an intimidating Oracle Arena crowd and are expected to debut a new San Francisco arena in 2019. Durant has quietly done his due diligence on the Bay Area, too, sources told Yahoo Sports.
His people — specifically agent Rich Kleiman and personal manager Charlie Bell — would be stupid not to have done some research on not only Golden State but on every other team he might consider: Houston, Miami, Washington, both teams in Los Angeles, the Knicks, and on down the line. Golden State, playing with Stephen Curry, certainly would have its attractions.
I’m still in the camp that Durant signs a 1+1 deal to stay in Oklahoma City (meaning he can opt out after one more season, in 2017), and it’s all about the cash. While he could get 30 percent of a $90 million cap this summer (about $27 million a season to start), with one more year of service in 2017 Durant could get 35 percent of $108 million ($37.8 million to start). That’s a lot of cash. Plus he gets one more chance at a ring with Russell Westbrook and Serge Ibaka, who both are 2017 free agents.
But you can be sure whatever Durant decides, it will be well researched and thought out. And he’s not going to announce it in a live special on ESPN.