All I know is this situation probably isn't endearing the 36ers to Creek which would make it all the more likely he doesn't come back to the club in future.

Weird comment in the articles, that the sixers want compensation "but won't stand in his way by refusing to release him"
Doesn't exactly give them a strong bargaining position?

I'm also puzzled by this continued assertion that he needs to be released? Seems to be some disagreement over that.

Even assuming he exercised his player option prior to the FA deadline, did they not grant him a release to play in Germany? Maybe not.

The very rough version I've heard over the months has been something like:

- club talks to Creek about returning and he's keen
- when some semblance of contract finally arrives, the numbers are lower
- Creek is "wait, what?"
- Euro opportunity comes up
- NBA opportunity comes up

I'm not sure what contract the club thinks is in place?

If he has a player option, does he need to have signed it? If he was expecting an extension, why would he sign? Unless it was with the understanding it would later be torn up and replaced?

Either Creek has a contract or he doesn't.

Seems the 36ers don't know that basic point. Sounds like Creek had a player option for 18/19 and therefore his 36ers and NBL contract finished at either at the end of the season or end of the financial year.

The 36ers cleared creek to go to Germany in any event so that ends his 36ers contract in any event. His rights would then be with the last club he played for which is the German club and hence why they were the ones to release him to the NBA , not the 36ers.

Its doesn't matter if the owner is "personal" friends with Creek nobody is that friendly when $100K is on the line!

If the contract had a rollover date for the next year if not opted out of or something similar to that then its a matter of negotiation.

Its hard to speculate but can't imagine anyone who thinks they are owed $100K just walking away from it because a guy might get to play in the NBA.

Player options must be exercised by a certain date, which coincides roughly with the start of the FA period.

It's entirely plausible that Creek exercised his option, and therefore subsequently would have needed to ask for a release. I have no idea, but that could have happened.

It's also possible that his German contract was an off-season contract, and therefore didn't require a release? Not exactly sure how those works, but lots of players play for multiple teams when contracted.

Sometimes players have buyout clauses. Beal was the last one I actually heard off, but it could be relatively common. It's simply designed such that if somebody like an NBA or Euro team makes a lucrative offer, the player or his new club can buy his way out.

Having said all that, it still seems weird. Why wouldn't he have an NBA-out clause?
And considering all he's been offered is a training camp, and maybe a shot at G-League, $100k seems unreasonable.

On one hand I can see no reason why Creek would have exercised his player option before summer league/NBA workouts etc.

On the other hand, I can also see a situation where he may have done so to get security for the upcoming year (As opposed to not exercising the option, not making the NBA and trying to come back into the NBL late when the $ or the spaces aren't available). And in exercising that option he may have well said 'if i do make an NBA team I'll just pay any buy-out out of my own pocket' (i.e. whats 100k on a $1m min).

If he took the option it might have been security in the event of injury or not getting a better NBA/Euro look after summer league.

If he'd accepted the option and the buy out is in fact a certain % of his contract value that makes perfect sense as at least it protects Adelaide so if they can't fill the roster spot with a player on Mitch's level (Doubtful) they have an extra $100K in the kick to lure a better import (hopefully)

NBA out clauses are only generally in contracts for guys who think they have a shot at the NBA, when mitch signed this current deal was the NBA a realistic chance? At the time it probably was seen as a key part of the deal however no he could be looking for a new manager if this can't be worked out!

this is truly embarrassing

No such thing as loan deals or off season contracts in the world of FIBA. NBL players have to be cleared to play in ABA / SEABL etc. Perhaps the 3/4 CEO's that have been through the 36ers in the last few years have lost the details of how these things work.

That is correct, that is what happens. These are typically gentleman agreements where all 3 parties know exactly what is going on. It wasn't uncommon for NBL pre-season games that cross over with SEABL needing multi transfers back and forth in the same week.

Remember Bradtke was released to go to Europe with the expectation he would comeback to Adelaide upon return, thats an example of what can go wrong for a club. Also CJ using his Euro out to go to NZ in another example of how a player can opt out of a contract.

Wasn't the Europe incident around his move to Brisbane from Sydney? He went to NZ after the Bullets folded.

What was the deal with Ferguson? Surely the contract he signed with us would have expired before the draft?

The version on Ferguson I heard was that the 36ers cleared him to OKC then asked for the transfer fee. OKC said yeah nah thanks we are good. That was the end of 400k to the 36ers that would have been paid had the money come through before the clearance.

LK likes this idea hence the next stars or whatever he plans to do with high school kids in the NBL.

This is a interesting reading from a few years back regarding transfer fee's for players transferring of being drafted in the NBA.

All about buyouts
Still, players with foreign contracts still get drafted. It can often be a nice value play. If the NBA team wants to bring the prospect over ASAP, and the player is amenable, then the sides will work on a buyout. The dollar figure of the buyout will often be written into the foreign contract, and it may be an NBA-exclusive clause.

NBA teams cannot pay this straight out. League rules govern the cap on the amount of cash a team can contribute to a foreign buyout. For 2014, that figure is $600,000. The player must pay the rest out of his salary. If it's a hefty buyout, that can cause problems unless a player is taken very high in the draft. Any portion of a buyout paid by the team does not count against the salary cap.

The intent of the cap on team-provided buyout funds is two-fold: it levels the playing field between cash-rich and low-revenue teams (much like the salary cap itself), and it deters international clubs from holding prospects "hostage" by making it illegal for NBA teams to pay exorbitant ransoms.

An expensive buyout is the issue most likely to give NBA teams heartburn about drafting an international prospect.


FULL LINK: https://www.sbnation.com/nba/2014/6/25/5820488/nba-draft-2014-international-prospects-dante-exum-dario-saric

Now way it would have been $400k.

Thats more than T-Ferg's whole contract with the Sixers.

' We're examining whether we could get something for Creek .
What page is page 15 on . ? '