The NBA Players Association will reportedly file a grievance against the Pacers on behalf of banished point guard Jamaal Tinsley.
Indiana exiled Tinsley in October, telling him to stay away until they traded him. Tinsley initially agreed, but with the trade deadline nearing and no deal on the horizon, he isn't happy.
"We're not bringing him back," Pacers president Larry Bird said. "Our owner made that clear. We're doing everything we can to move him and I really hope we can, not just for us but for Jamaal too. He's a basketball player -- a pretty good basketball player -- and he needs to be playing."
Tinsley has two years and $14.7 million left on his contract.
The Pacers are arguably handling this even worse than Stephon Marbury's situation in New York; at least they're trying to come to an agreement on a buyout. If they're actually sincere about trading him then I think Larry Bird has hit the nail on the head, he needs to be playing. Otherwise, he's a tough sell to other teams. Why should they take on his contract when his own team has exiled him and despite their struggles, has no interest in playing him?