(01-31-2023, 01:57 PM)DanSchwartzgan Wrote: If anyone is wondering why Indy officials (GM and Coach) keep talking about keeping Turner, there is an interesting debate going on in the CBA Geek community (mainly between Coon and Pincus). There is some thought that even though Turner is technically allowed to be traded, that the NBA could step in and void the trade. The contention is such a renegotiate and trade violates the spirit of the restrictions the NBA intended for Extend and Trades. I’m not saying who is right, just that there is a debate.
The interesting thing about this (and possibly why Indy is being so open about NOT trading Turner now) is if the NBA were to no-go a Turner trade now, it would be six months before he could be traded. Six months would take him to the end of July, or past the most active part of the off-season. If sleeping dogs are allowed to lie, then Turner could be traded in June or July and it would be so far past the renegotiation that the NBA would have a harder time objecting. That would be even more true if all public statements say ‘our intention was to keep him’.
Coon's FAQ 59 says "A contract cannot be renegotiated in conjunction with a trade" but (a) not sure what part of CBA he bases that on, and (b) there's no mention of how long that supposed prohibition would last. Bobby Marks said he could be traded, and he is someone who knows the rules very well.
It's an interesting issue.
My own pov? I believe that whatever the CBA actually says is what matters, and not a spirit of the rules vagueness. I don't know how the CBA words it.
Long ago, the NBA tried to actively enforce the "spirit of the rules" where Stern decided what loopholes he would allow and when, but my observation is that idea was done away with (perhaps on advice of legal counsel), in favor of "the CBA is a legal document, so whatever it says, that's the deal." If they didn't like some accidental loophole, gotta live with it, then fix it with the next CBA. They have done lots of fixes over the years, but I can't recall the last time they stopped a team doing something that was legal but loophole-oriented. In fact, once one team does it, others have been free to do the same, until fixed in next CBA (or not).
One other part of the equation is that these are issues regarding a team who is under the cap. In Indy's case, still far under the cap, it's not likely to change any trade matching.