Nemanja Bjelica

[Handlogten's Heros]

No, I really dont think they can.

K well unless you are a lawyer I will stick with my own understanding

 

[Jack Strop]

Really?!?!? I’m not 100% sure on this.

So why wouldn’t a free agent agree on something and then keep shopping for a better offer... or why can’t a team do the same thing... like with Ersan, say the bucks see what someone else is willing to sign for and then changes their mind and signs them... Ersan can’t sue for some financial damages?

I just don’t know how you enforce it on the team side.

Another example... a lot of guys wait to sign because if you do things in the right order you create cap space. Like joe Harris hasn’t signed yet because they are using space first and he has a low cap hold... what if they say never mind Joe... there aren’t teams with space left so he might not get an offer that gets close to what he verbally agreed to.

I’m glad it happened to the Sixers... eff those tanking, arrogant, burner account turds.

Teams can do the same. Until a contract is signed, they can decide to rescind an offer. It's happened in the past. And they can pull a QO off the table. Of course, it's a gentleman's agreement like we had with Ingles. Jazz purposely delayed signing his deal - with Joe's permission - so they could use cap room for two of Udoh, Jerebko and Thabo and then only have to use part of the MLE for the last one.

Teams and FA's generally won't do that, though...as someone else mentioned, it's just bad for business.

What I want to know is why the deal wasn't signed as soon as the moratorium ended and he agreed. Obviously, there was a problem somewhere. Sixers maybe told him they were looking to complete other deals (like a Kawhi trade) and kept him out in the cold. Perhaps when they failed to commit, Bjelica said he wasn't waiting any longer because he needed a contract. Teams are running out of space. Bjelica was bearing all the risk.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

Teams can do the same. Until a contract is signed, they can decide to rescind an offer. It's happened in the past. And they can pull a QO off the table. Of course, it's a gentleman's agreement like we had with Ingles. Jazz purposely delayed signing his deal - with Joe's permission - so they could use cap room for two of Udoh, Jerebko and Thabo and then only have to use part of the MLE for the last one.

Teams and FA's generally won't do that, though...as someone else mentioned, it's just bad for business.

QO is completely different... it’s an offer... not an agreement. If He player accepts said offer it cannot be pulled.

It’s a hypothetical so I’m not arguing it anymore, but a verbal agreement is an enforceable agreement in many businesses and if relied on to the detriment of the player I think they could sue for economic damages if there were any... can’t intentionally deceive someone have them rely on it and then hurt them economically... maybe they’d get off on a technicality...

There is the business side of course... but I think if the team did it to a player there would be some recourse.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

Verbal agreements are binding. The NBA does do somethings different than the business world in general. In general verbal contracts can be hard to enforce but in the NBA there seems to be a lot of witnesses and the terms are pretty broadly announced. So it seems easy to enforce than most cases.

I am sure if the 76ers or whoever sued they would probably win the case. But teams dont really want a player that has no interest in playing for them and it seems teams dont really push this. It just burns a bridge

Exactly my point... the specific performance on the player side is tough to enforce... if he had a lesser known agent the team might make a stink and prevent him from signing with another team.

If the team did this to a player they may not have to sign them but they could sue for the difference in the contract amounts.

 

[Jack Strop]

QO is completely different... it’s an offer... not an agreement. If He player accepts said offer it cannot be pulled.

It’s a hypothetical so I’m not arguing it anymore, but a verbal agreement is an enforceable agreement in many businesses and if relied on to the detriment of the player I think they could sue for economic damages if there were any... can’t intentionally deceive someone have them rely on it and then hurt them economically... maybe they’d get off on a technicality...

There is the business side of course... but I think if the team did it to a player there would be some recourse.

We'd have to research this a little more to see if it applies to the NBA. I think until a player and agent see the structure of a contract and agree to it, it's likely not enforceable. It may be viewed as more of a quote. The other day I agreed with an insurance agent that I was going to switch to State Farm for $500/6 months. But once I saw the structure of the contract, I told them I was changing my mind and signing with someone else.

The fact that no one has sued a team and vice versa probably means these aren't enforceable contracts until ink is put to paper.

 

[Ineptimusprime]

We'd have to research this a little more to see if it applies to the NBA. I think until a player and agent see the structure of a contract and agree to it, it's likely not enforceable. It may be viewed as more of a quote. The other day I agreed with an insurance agent that I was going to switch to State Farm for $500/6 months. But once I saw the structure of the contract, I told them I was changing my mind and signing with someone else.

The fact that no one has sued a team and vice versa probably means these aren't enforceable contracts until ink is put to paper.

I am a lawyer — oral contracts generally are binding unless they fall into categories that are covered by the statute of frauds (sale of land, goods over $500, etc.). Obviously, it can be difficult to prove an oral contract though if one side doesn’t want it enforced.

That being said, there may be something in the CBA that restricts the enforceability of oral contracts between teams and free agents. I am not at all an expert on that. It might operate like verbal commitments in the NCAA that are not enforceable by player or school.

EDIT: one form of agreement that must be in writing under most (if not all) state statutes of frauds is any agreement that cannot be performed within a year; thus, oral NBA contracts for even a one year deal would not be enforceable even if there weren’t anything in the CBA restricting enforceability.

SECOND EDIT: looked at the CBA provision governing the moratorium period (which is applicable to Bjelly’s “deal” with Philly, because it was first reported on July 5, no?) it expressly states no binding contracts (oral or written) can be entered into during the moratorium (with certain exceptions). Instead, teams and players are limited to “negotiations.”

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

We'd have to research this a little more to see if it applies to the NBA. I think until a player and agent see the structure of a contract and agree to it, it's likely not enforceable. It may be viewed as more of a quote. The other day I agreed with an insurance agent that I was going to switch to State Farm for $500/6 months. But once I saw the structure of the contract, I told them I was changing my mind and signing with someone else.

The fact that no one has sued a team and vice versa probably means these aren't enforceable contracts until ink is put to paper.

I can’t think of any examples where players and team agreed and then the team said “nah” unless there was a failed physical.

Just cuz something hasn’t been litigated doesn’t mean it isn’t illegal. In business I’ve had plenty of opportunity and good legal reason to litigate and passed for one reason or another.