Letter from Gund regarding Boozer

[Vafan]

Check out this letter from the owner regarding Boozer. I hope Boozer reads it and responds.

To: Cavaliers Fans

From: Gordon Gund

I know last week’s developments with respect to Carlos Boozer are a source of extreme disappointment for you. I want to assure you that I feel exactly the same way. Like you, I believed in Carlos.

Several days have now gone by. This has helped me to gain perspective. I hope this letter will do the same for you.

First, Jim Paxson has taken a tremendous amount of criticism in the media for what happened. As the team owner, I made the decision not to pick up the option on Carlos’ contract. Any criticism should be directed to me, not to Jim Paxson. I want to be very clear that any fault is mine.

Up until late last week when the trust was broken, I believed in Carlos Boozer, the player, and Carlos Boozer, the person. That is why I tried to do what he said he wanted. We tried to do right by him, by the team and by you in trusting in his repeated insistence that if we showed him respect, he would show respect to us.

Carlos and his agent first approached us in December of 2003, stating his desire for financial security as well as his desire to remain in Cleveland and be a key part of the future of this franchise. He and his agent made it very clear that if we respected them, and provided the security he was looking to gain, he would respect us. Given his record on the court, with the franchise, and in the community, we had every reason to believe his commitment.

Over the course of several months, we had multiple meetings that involved Carlos, his wife and his agent. In our most recent meeting on June 30, Jim Paxson and I told Carlos we had two options. He could play this year on his existing contract and test the market for free agency next year, or we could elect not to exercise the option if we had the understanding with him that as soon as legally possible he would negotiate a contract with us for the maximum we could pay him under league rules.

I told him that as we could not have an agreement at that time given the NBA's Collective Bargaining Agreement, we would have to trust one another’s intentions. I said I define trust as his intention to stay in Cleveland and enter into a long term contract with us as soon as possible under the league rules. In that meeting, we were clear with him that he could make more money in the open market a year from now than we could pay him by redoing his contract this year. I told him he needed to understand that and we did not want him to later think we had taken advantage of him. Jim told him, “There are at least seven teams that have cap space right now who will want to pay you more than we can now. We don’t want to lose you. Why would we not pick up the option?” Carlos said “Because we'd like long term security and we want to stay in Cleveland.” Carlos went on to say that he was happy to be a Cavalier and never indicated any concern with his role on the team or his relationship with Coach Silas.

Carlos, his wife and his agent – all of whom were in that room -- knew what our maximum ability would be to pay him. Both Carlos and his wife responded that they wanted financial security now and therefore were anxious to pursue the second option of entering into a long term contract with us as soon as possible and that they would live with any consequences from this decision.

Carlos’ agent then said he wanted to go to another room to talk with his client and his wife alone which they did. When they returned, his agent said he had again explained everything to them so that they understood everything involved and said that their thinking had not changed.

Jim Paxson then told him, “We'd like to begin, as soon as permissible, to negotiate an agreement that we can sign on July 14th.” Carlos responded, “That’s exactly what I want. I want to get this done as quickly as we can.”

Over time Carlos had told Jim and me repeatedly, “If you show respect for me, I will show respect for you.” So, in the June 30 meeting, I reminded him of that and said, “We are all counting on what you said in earlier meetings and again today.” He responded, “That’s right and you can trust me on that.” I asked if we could all trust each other? Carlos, his wife and agent each responded “Yes.” At that point, believing so strongly in Carlos, I said we would not pick up his option. Our intent, as soon as we could do so, was to re-do his contract. The quotes you saw in the media July 1 about his desire to remain here were entirely consistent with what he told us.

In the final analysis, I decided to trust Carlos and show him the respect he asked for. He did not show that trust and respect in return. That’s what happened. I wanted you to hear it directly from me. The decision was mine and I take full responsibility.

We currently have no intention of matching Utah's offer to Carlos. In order to match it, and within the restrictions of the NBA's Collective Bargaining Agreement, we would need to make player personnel moves of such a magnitude that it would have significant negative impact on our team moving forward. We are continuing to look at every possible option that will allow us to improve our team and continue to build on the tremendous momentum we have experienced in recent years. More than ever, we are committed to bringing a championship to this city. Thank you for your continued support of the Cleveland Cavaliers.

[SFHawk]

It comes down to a he said she said thing. Why didn't they just pick up his option and re-do or extend his contract while he is still under contract? Why the need for this "respect us and we'll respect you" risk? I think his option year contract is only $700. So what's the big deal if that is on the books for a couple of weeks?

[Diesel]

They could have extended his contract... However, Gund and Paxon were trying to help Boozer out by allowing him to make 6.0 Million this year instead of 300k... In order to do that, they had to release his option and allow him to be a restrictd FA.

At that point, Boozer screwed them.

When Boozer goes to Cleveland, there's going to be BOOS and Hurt fans. Really, he has shamed the whole sport with his lies and dishonesty.

[Gray Mule]

Diesel, sometimes you and I disagree. But, not this time.

You are 100% correct. Couldn't have said it better,

even if I tried really hard.

[Lascar78]

so how exactly do you know who is telling the truth between Gund and Boozer? I suppose it's the return of your psychic powers that predicted we would get the top draft pick?

no one knows what really happenned. Clearly Cleveland thought he would come back. Whether they made an agreement, or cleveland just liked the good things boozer had to say about the cavs, or maybe even they never thought he'd be worth that much to another team. No one knows what really happenned. All we know is Gund's spin on the story and Boozer's spin on the story

[TJ_Swann]

The NBA is a business, just ask Dominique, Adreian Dantley, Rick Carlise and Isaiah Thomas. And many others who have been on the wrong side of the deal. Cleveland tried to lock Boozer up for a modest price. They were giving him a raise, but the market value for him was higher.

[Wretch]

You HAVE to look at the facts here. And the one thing that sticks out...the one question is...why would Cleveland not pick up his option, his bird rights, and the the ability to match any offer sheet that he signed. It just doesn't add up. No matter what anyone says.

You mean to tell me that Cleveland had a rising star and just basically let him go?

I don't buy this whole looking to save money of the long term thing either. Look at the money being thrown around this offseason. And Cleveland just let Booz walk into that? To me, that right there says enough. Or am I to believe that Gund just winked at Booz and said, "I hope you don't take advantage of us! Because we're gonna turn you loose with no obligation to us whatsoever! We trust you'll come back."

What were they at risk for next season? A guy making less than a million dollars...that if he continues to hold his own, they pay him what he's worth...like every other player in the league?

What was so different about his situation? I'll tell you. Booz gave them the indication that he was going to stay, agreed to such with a handshake or oral agreement in private, then stabbed Gund in the heart. Were it not for the fact that it makes no other plausible sense for the Cavs to put him on the market, I would not be inclined to believe the Cav's side of the story.

[Wretch]

It is the business side of things that tells me they wouldn't have let him go. They let a good player go, basically for nothing and that will cost them far more in the long run that they could have saved by offering him a lowball deal. If that was in fact what they planned.

NBA business isn't usually conducted like that. NBA business is...

You have a good player, you keep the good player, you pay the good player. If things can't be worked out, you shop that player or you let him walk AFTER you have run out of options.

Cleveland had TOO many BUSINESS options for this thing to go down like this.

[SFHawk]

I just read through some of Larry Coon's section regarding the CBA on realgm.com. Assuming it's correct, extending or renegotiating the option year (had they exercised the option) is not allowed. I guess it is the intent of the CBA for a player to become a RFA at the end of the initial contract and options. Someone correct me if I'm wrong. Thus, Gund's claim that he was trying to get him his money sooner and lock Boozer up long term sounds plausible yet obviously risky.

However, isn't this an attempt at a similar Joe Smith deal? Joe Smith and the T-wolves reduced it to writing. Doesn't Gund's letter/article show an intent to circumvent the CBA and league rules with an under-the-table-deal?

[CBAreject]

Joe Smith was signed to a 1 yr deal with the understanding that Minnesota would sign him to a longer deal the following season, so it was fundamentally different.

Boozer was released from his contract to sign a bigger contract. Is this legal? I don't know, but it is different from Joe Smith's situation.

[SFHawk]

But they were both under the table deals with the intent (at least on Cleveland's side) to work outside of the CBA rules.

[Diesel]

Quote:

---

o how exactly do you know who is telling the truth between Gund and Boozer? I suppose it's the return of your psychic powers that predicted we would get the top draft pick?

---

No psychic ability whatsoever (by the way, we lose a top pick due to the fact that we didn't win a cointoss).

Anyway...

What would cause an agent to quit?

This is the question you must ask yourself.

What would cause Gund to lie and make himself look like a fool? Normally, when you lie, you try to make yourself look better. However, Gund said that Paxon not to blame.

But the proof is that Palienka quit!! No agent would quit after getting the big score UNLESS there was something wrong in how it was done. I am more inclined to believe Gund.

[Diesel]

Actually, if it were all about the business, Boozer would be playing for Cleveland right now at a set price of abut 500k or maybe less. And next year he could have expected Cleveland to match any price that he got on the market.

You say Cleveland was trying to lock him up at a modest price... Well, maybe, but a business man would say, let's get one more year out of him at 500k.

However, instead, Dishonesty came into the picture. Had this been next year and Boozer walked I wouldn't have any problems with him. However, because it's obvious (based on the circumstances) that a verbal deal WAS agreed on by Boozer, this is to his shame. Business is Business, but dishonesty and deceit makes for a bad business man.

[Diesel]

The league wouldn't have objected if Booz would have resigned... especially if he was allowed out of his contract with a handshake deal. The CBA is in place to help the player and the owner...

Somebody said that Gund was trying to lock Boozer up for a modest price.

Well, Gund could have locked Boozer up at the low price of less than a million. Then he could have matched any deal thereafter. So the fact that Gund released Boozer shows that he was trying to help Boozer make more money now...

The deceit in this is that Boozer drug his wife out into the negotiations and seemingly used her along with his handshake deal as if to say: " Look, we need the money and we LUV Cleveland. We won't go anywhere."

[TheDude]

I definitely beleive the Cavalier side of things. The owner basically recounted phrase per phrase in their discussions on what went on to his best recollection. Doesn't sound general and uspecific. He also brings the criticism among himself rather than letting it his Paxson.

Not to mention what you guys have already said in that it makes not sense for the team to just let him go like that when he's an emerging power forward.

Not to sound too chauvinist but why the he.ll is his wife in all of this? I would say the same if Lisa Lelsie had her husband in her financial meetings. I understand that it does affect her but if she wants to sit in then that's fine, but it sounds like maybe she had a hand in all of this and was too much in the process of the wheelings and dealings.

Carlos said one thing but when presented with the suitcase of money, he didn't have the willpower to stay with his word. He was weak for the cash. He didn't plan on doing it but couldn't resist. He'll always have this scar on his career.

[Nicholasp27]

this whole thing was a bad situation from the start, as i said

i believe the cav's side but the reason they did it was to save money

they figured they'd give him the 5mil/year deal now, so it'd cost them 4.3 mil this year

but better than have to match a 10mil/year deal next year, costing them 30 mil over the 6 years

so they did it to save money, believing that boozer would keep his word

had boozer signed the deal, he woulda been short-changing himself from 30+ million dollars over the next 6-7 years

so either

a) boozer knew he'd go for utah/atlanta/denver's big money when he did the "deal"...thus was 100% dishonest and purposefully screwed the cavs

or

b) boozer meant to resign, but then got the offer from utah and was like..."[censored], i made a HUGE mistake that'll cost me 30+ mil...i gotta take this money and run now"

he shoulda thought about this before hand and just played out his 700k this year and then got his payday next year...u'd have to think a duke grad with an experienced agent woulda already thought about this...maybe he was just drooling over 5mil/year and thought he could resist the bigger bucks, as taking it now ensures he gets paid, whereas waiting a year, he could get injured, decline in stats, etc and then miss out on the money...

the cba really hurts here tho, as the cavs would match and also woulda offered more to begin with if the cba woulda allowed them...instead they lose boozer for nothing and boozer gets paid but loses his cred

[OGRat]

While I think the money was a key influence on Boozer's actions, I get the impression he was not happy with his role on the team.

My question to the CAVs organization is, "Did you not have an idea that Boozer was unhappy with his role, and did you factor that in when you made the decision to free him up?"

Boozer states that he had conversations with the organization/Silas about having an increased role and plays run for him, but was denied.

This does not excuse his breaking his word, but I think that he was trying to do what's best for him and his family. I really do not think it was a premeditated scheme though. He probably had every intention of going back to the CAVs, but UTAH gave him too much to consider.

It's a tough decision to make $5 million and a promise from an organization that does not view you the same way you view yourself (and keeping your word) vs. $68 million. Factor in the risk that you might never get any more than the $5 Million.

I think I would have to make the same decision.

[Lascar78]

well if you ignore all the spinning and talk of trust and such, Gund is basically saying that this is what was said:

Quote:

---

"I told him that as we could not have an agreement at that time given the NBA's Collective Bargaining Agreement, we would have to trust one another’s intentions. I said I define trust as his

intention to stay in Cleveland

and enter into a long term contract with us as soon as possible under the league rules."

"Carlos said ...

we'd like long term security and we want to stay in Cleveland.

”

“We'd like to begin, as soon as permissible, to negotiate an agreement that we can sign on July 14th.” Carlos responded, “That’s exactly what I want. I want to get this done as quickly as we can.”

---

So basically carlos said he'd rather get out, and that his INTENTION was to get a long term deal, and that his preference would be to stay in cleveland. They were not allowed to have an agreement for him to stay, and they agreed to begin negotiations about him staying.

I'm sure Carlos was being honest, and those were indeed his intentions, to stay in cleveland with LBJ. Then comes the open market.

Utah makes a huge offer. Boozer must now decide between the small 1 yr offer Cleveland will give him or the "you're set for life" offer from Utah. My guess is he never expected that he could get this kind of money in this first place. Even if he stayed in cleveland, I don't know that they'd have given him THAT MUCH next year. So despite his intention to stay in cleveland, he decides that this is too big to pass up. Cleveland can still match, so it's not like he's running out of town. If they respected him that much, they could have made a trade and kept him. Instead they decided to assasinate his character in the media, and THEN give him a 1 yr offer.

So what?? To me it seems that all he said was he intended to stay. So unless that was BS from the start, he didn't lie. I believe him. His intention probably was to stay, but that desire was overwhelmed by a desire for financial security. It would be one thing if he had promised to come back. Or if they had a secret illegal deal. According to gund, they didn't. The cavs knew he wanted to be a cav and thought that the lure of LBJ and not having to move would be enough to convince him to re-sign for one year and then pay him off next year. Guess they were wrong.

I think both parties had good intentions and the cavs just got the raw end of the deal. They knew they were taking a gamble when they let him go. They thought it was a small gamble and they could convince him to stay, they were wrrong.

[AHF]

You are naive Lascar or blinded by your love of Boozer. There is no way in the world he was honest with the Cavs. If he had any integrity he would have taken their offer for a $5,000,000 one year deal this year after which he could have negotiated an even bigger deal next year than he has now with Utah.

Cleveland had EVERY business reason to pick up his option:

(1) cheap player this season;

(2) bird rights to resign him above the cap next season;

and

(3) total security in retaining him for 2004-05 and to match any offer in 2005-06.

Instead they chose this course of action:

(1) pay him more this season IF he resigns and less in the longterm;

(2) have no bird rights to resign him meaning they can be outbid by at least 3 teams all of whom have dire needs in the front court (Atlanta, Utah and Denver);

and

(3) no security to retain him for 2004-05.

The only benefit they get out of it is a cheaper long-term deal than they would get under another scenario IF he resigns with them. That is the ONLY benefit.

So why would they do this? Because he said, "I'll listen to offers from everyone but I love Cleveland and intend to remaing a Cav if the money isn't too much elsewhere"? Heck no. It is because he made a promise to resign with Cleveland.

That is also why his agent resigned after this ordeal.

This was a total breach of trust, even though it was entirely legal.

This was not good faith in any way, shape or form on behalf of Boozer. He got that money because he lied.

[Wretch]

The only thing is, this isn't the way things go down in the NBA 99.9% of the time. I'm sure there are plenty of teams that would like to lock up blossming talent like that. It's too much of a risk though. For me, it's as simple as that. You don't take those kinds of risks in this business. It just doesn't happen.

The question is, what made Cleveland think that they were safe?

I certainly don't think these guys, all professionals with YEARS of experience playing and managing, just brain-farted on a deal this touchy. Conventional wisdom and the safer investment would have led them to do things the "normal" way. SOMETHING had to have been said, done, or emphatically implied to cause them to give up their option on him.

I think the root of the problem lies in here:

Quote:

---

Jim told him, “There are at least seven teams that have cap space right now who will want to pay you more than we can now. We don’t want to lose you. Why would we not pick up the option?”

Carlos said “Because we'd like long term security and we want to stay in Cleveland.” Carlos went on to say that he was happy to be a Cavalier and never indicated any concern with his role on the team or his relationship with Coach Silas.

Over time Carlos had told Jim and me repeatedly,

“If you show respect for me, I will show respect for you.”

So, in the June 30 meeting, I reminded him of that and said, “We are all counting on what you said in earlier meetings and again today.” He responded, “That’s right and you can trust me on that.” I asked if we could all trust each other? Carlos, his wife and agent each responded “Yes.”

---

I have to believe the first part of these two paragraphs. The Cavs KNEW there were teams that would pay him more money and they KNEW they didn't want to lose him. I just don't see any logic behind them doing this without some kind of assurance he'd be back in Cleveland. There is no way that they just put Booz on the market like that on the whim that MAYBE he'll sign somewhere or MAYBE he'll come back.

As far as saving money is concerned...that doesn't make sense either. They've got the hot ticket in LeBron, they've got all the national attention...they KNOW they've got to put a team together to keep interest in the club and to properly milk the LeBron cow for all it's worth.

The only thing that makes even a little bit of sense here is that Booz and his agent screwed the Cavs. True enough, the Cavs would be looking at saving money...but initially, this probably looked like a win-win situation for both parties.

Booz took the low road to financial security.