Re: Baker

[Kim <kimmalo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks for the clarification. I'd just heard he was suspended indefinitely, and didn't bother to go look up the articles from the beginning of the season discussing the agreement.

Yup, 'fraid you're right about that last game, after this latest suspension *immediately* on top of the prior warning shot. Even if he is declared in compliance, as someone else pointed out a few days ago (Mark Berry, maybe?) how can they trust him or ask his teammates to trust/rely on him again. And I don't think this is a case where someone else will be looking to pick him up on the cheap as soon as we might let him go.

Hope for his sake he manages to beat the demons, whatever else happens. Sometimes it can take a while and a lot of failure to do so, but it can still be done.

And BTW, since we so rarely say anything positive here on the list, let me just add that it was nice of the Cs to get a home win for a change, ugly as it was and much closer than it should have been against the level of competition. There was one section of the game in what, the 3rd?, for both teams that looked as if it was comedy routine imitating a basketball game *shudder*
Kim

-----Original Message-----
From: David A Wickerham <aw623@xxxxxxx>
Sent: Jan 24, 2004 2:33 PM
To: kimmalo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: celtics@xxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Baker

I'm workng in the dark as much as everyone else, but it looks like there is a strike 4.  Vin is suspended for 10 games immediately.  If the doctors don't declare him in compliance after that, he can be dumped at that time.  If (when) he falls off the wagon after that, he can be dumped.

I have to believe that no matter what the circumstances are, Vin has played his last professional basketball game in the NBA.


n Sat, 24 Jan 2004 13:55:37 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Kim <kimmalo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Art, I think you're missing a piece - the separate individual after care agreement Vin signed before returning  this season. That's what the 3 strikes refers to, not the standard contract provisions about able to perform. It was done with the approval of the league and players association. Which is not to say they won't kick up a fuss, of course...
Kim

-----Original Message-----
From: Art Silva <vzd1s1hb@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Jan 24, 2004 1:41 PM
To: Celtics <celtics@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Baker

I imagine the Celtics will try and do just that but it won't be easy. The
team will argue that they had an agreement and that Baker is unable to
perform. The players association will certainly raise their objection. Their
argument will be that Baker can still perform even though he has relapsed.
While it is true that Baker can't perform at the level his contract merits
that's not the way it is written. They will say he can still play
basketball. It's in the unions best interest that nothing happens to Baker
because of alcohol. How it will eventually play out in the end I have no
idea. The only way the battle migh be side stepped is if Baker just up and
retires. Somehow I don't see that happening

Art Silva



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jaims Castillo" <jaimscastillo@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Celtics" <celtics@xxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2004 3:45 AM
Subject: Baker


> So what's gonna happen to Baker and his fat contract?  Isn't this his 3rd
> offense which means he can be kicked out of the organization along with
his
> contract?
>
>
> Jaims