Tyson Chandler on new CBA - "it would basically prohibit me from coming back"

by ap3604 on Nov 4, 2011 5:42 PM CDT

http://espn.go.com/dallas/nba/story/_/id/7190000/tyson-chandler-says-owners-proposal-keep-re-signing-dallas-mavericks

"With the collective bargaining agreement and some of the things that they're trying to enforce, it would basically prohibit me from coming back," Chandler told the "Ben and Skin Show" on 103.3 FM in Dallas. "It would take it out of my hands -- and the organization's -- because it would almost be pretty much impossible for me to re-sign. I just think that can be the worst thing that can happen."

Yuck.

That is all...

p.s. I am happy the Mavs at least have Haywood locked up.

Reader Submitted

Tweet Comment 14 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Not coming back?

What!!!

Don't forget to turn your swag on today.

by Swag11 on Nov 4, 2011 7:43 PM CDT reply actions

Um if we didn't have haywood locked up we could have gotten Chandler

Sean Lissemore = The next Bruce Smith

by Lissyyyyy on Nov 4, 2011 8:23 PM CDT reply actions

We won't be able to unload Haywood either

with his massive contract that goes until he’s 35. Between him and Marion we’ve got two old guys on the decline taking up more than 25% of the payroll (if the cap stays around $60 mil) for each of the next 3 years. Only hope to get rid of one of them is an amnesty clause as mentioned below.

"I'm a unitard!" - Ralph Wiggum

by stupidsexyflanders on Nov 6, 2011 5:18 PM CST up reply actions

I think that's the bit that stings the most.

Don't put your CBA there...

by elbowgreaterthanCBA on Nov 17, 2011 8:10 PM CST up reply actions

If the Larry Bird Exception/Bird rights is abolished in the new CBA

then indeed it is impossible. #ithink

"The idea is not to block every shot. The idea is to make your opponent believe that you might block every shot."

- Bill Russell

by Marjun Raposon on Nov 4, 2011 8:42 PM CDT reply actions

not "impossible"

If there is an amnesty clause with the new CBA, Dallas may be able to jettison enough salary(a la Finley) to sign Chandler. I think there’s a pretty good chance there will be such a provision reintroduced, Bird Rights or not.

by Alan Smithee on Nov 5, 2011 4:10 PM CDT up reply actions

I'm really hoping for something like that.

Over the offseason I realized that I wanted the Mavs to repeat even if I previously said that I am contented with that one championship. Chandler is definitely a big key to repeating.

"The idea is not to block every shot. The idea is to make your opponent believe that you might block every shot."

- Bill Russell

by Marjun Raposon on Nov 6, 2011 12:27 AM CDT up reply actions

So what do we dump?

We don’t have many players actually on contract as is and unless we still have D-Steve everything we have we should keep IMO.

by elbow greater than face on Nov 30, 2011 8:19 PM CST up reply actions

posturing

Intended to prod the owners into softening their position, and/or the Mavs into understanding that he’s not going to take less to accommodate their salary restrictions.

It’s an unpleasant thought but I’m not too worried. I don’t really think Chandler is in a position to predict with great accuracy what will be prohibited by the next CBA, and especially what Cuban specifically will or won’t do.

I’ve never understood why Bird Rights are under threat, to be honest. That seems to be something that benefits both owners and players. Players gain a bargaining chip in the free agent process, and owners get to keep their guys.

by Alan Smithee on Nov 5, 2011 4:06 PM CDT reply actions

Ignore this.

Tyson’s trying to light a fire, but all the wood is soaked. There’s very little chance the new CBA won’t include some mechanism that will allow teams to retain their own players, and even if there’s not, the Mavs still have options to bring him back.

Also, one of the underreported aspects of Chandler’s free agency is the stunning lack of teams that have…

A) A center need.
B) Money to burn on a defensive/rebounding specialist.
C) A willingness to spend that money this offseason.

Chandler is the guy that everybody would love to have, but no one would want to break the bank for. There’s a less than zero chance he doesn’t come back as a Mav, whenever the season gets started.

by Big D Bam Bam on Nov 8, 2011 3:52 PM CST reply actions

I dunno

I think a lot of folks think Chandler is the magic piece that got Dallas a title and they think he can do the same for him. Management sees certain players and overestimates their usefulness at times, think the Thunder and Kendrick Perkins. They thought just having him would give them Celtic-like defense just by being there. I bet a lot of teams really think Chandler is this magic player who can bring them a title.

Don't put your CBA there...

by elbowgreaterthanCBA on Nov 18, 2011 12:16 PM CST up reply actions

You're quite a bit deluded. With the rules that have been reported, there isn't much of a chance he's coming back

There’s enough of a market to where he’ll attract much better offers from several teams. These smaller teams, especially, can’t afford (more like attract) to go get a star, they’ll settle overpaying a very good role player. Besides Dwight, there aren’t many centers in this league that are better than Chandler, even if he’s offensively limited.

There’s a very good chance that he doesn’t return a Maverick, any analyst would most likely say the same. The only new factor in the CBA that helps teams afford to sign players is the amnesty clause, and many believe the Mavericks won’t even use it. Even with it, it doesn’t help the Mavericks much (Reports were they wouldn’t use it on Haywood).

by Why on Nov 26, 2011 1:48 AM CST up reply actions

i'm with you on this.

any team Chandler end up to except the mavs shall suffer magically. And there’s a big chance he might not be able to help the Mavs the way he did last year. He’s no dirk. He’s a big factor though.

HOPE is the worst of all evils because it prolongs the torments of men.

by simpleton cxi on Nov 19, 2011 8:48 PM CST reply actions