Just Saying "No" Could Mean Collusion
The "Basketball for Thought" is a commentary by Kris Gardner.July 1998
The NBA lockout lingers.The players association believes the owners want the players to "protect them from themselves". They believe the owners should "Just say no" if they can't pay players exorbitant salary amounts. Meanwhile, Alief Elsik high school star Rashard Lewis was brought to tears by being selected in the second round of the 1998 NBA Draft instead of being a possible Lottery selection. Both situations have one possible link -- collusion.
Collusion is defined as "a secret agreement for some wrong or harmful purpose; a secret or crafty understanding for the purpose of trickery or fraud". Collusion is also very difficult to prove.
Coming into the Draft, Lewis was thought to be a definite 1st round selection; possibly going as high as 10. As a result, Lewis was invited to attend the Draft in Vancouver with other top choices. The general consensus was he would go no lower than 18th to his hometown Houston Rockets who had picks 14, 16 and 18. If you believed Lewis' agent, Carl Poston, "Rashard won't be around at 14." Well, the Rockets' picks came and went. Rashard waited. The first round came and went. Rashard waited. Lewis was drafted 32nd overall by the Seattle Sonics.
After the Draft, many people believed the league wanted to send a message to other high school players about declaring for the Draft and Rashard was used as an example to those thinking about turning pro. It was a hard lesson that Lewis learned first hand.
A hurt and upset Lewis claimed the Rockets lied to him saying they promised to select him if he was available. His claim seems very unlikely: not too many teams would make such a promise. However, if Lewis wasn't a first round pick why did the League invite him to Vancouver?
Proving teams colluded to send a message to high schoolers to "think again" is nearly impossible to prove. All a team has to say is: "we selected a player based on our perceived needs" or "Lewis didn't have a good work out for us" etc.
Instead of guaranteed money for at least 3 seasons totaling nearly $2M, Rashard has to fight to make Seattle's roster and earn about $270,000 whenever the season starts.
Which leads to the lockout.
NBA Commissioner David Stern disputes the claim, "the owners need protection from themselves". Of course, what else would you expect him to say: he does work for the owners? "We need a way to slow down its growth (the amount paid to the players) to bring it in line with our revenue growth so that there is some return on our investment."
However, the players do have a point when they claim: "if the owners can't pay it, why did they offer the huge salary in the first place?" No one forced Charlotte Hornets' owner George Shinn to offer Larry Johnson a 7-year, $84M contract extension. The Vancouver Grizzlies didn't have to offer Bryant Reeves a 6-year, $65M contract extension. On and on. the examples exist of players being offered huge salaries whether they've proved they're worthy of the amount or not.
The players say the owners should just say, "No." Celtics' owner Paul Gaston agrees (just ask Antoine Walker). However, if all the owners did say "No", they would be accused of collusion and taken to court.
Collusion, there's that word again.
