Thu Sep 15 11:45am EDT
In 2009, Garcia broke his right arm in a freak accident sustained while he was lifting two dumbbells while balancing himself on a large, rubber, "stabilizing" ball.
In 2010, the Sacramento Kings sued the makers of the stabilizing bar.
In 2011, Garcia is suing the makers of the ball, claiming that he lost income because of the injury. Wait, what?
Garcia and the Kings (who have yet to settle their case with the various suppliers and corporations that helped manufacture and put the ball in the Kings' workout room) are well within their rights to sue the company, which now warns buyers on their website not to use the ball in strenuous workouts. But for Garcia to sue for "lost income," as Reuters puts it? That's not entirely the most legitimate route.
Because of his contract extension, Garcia was already guaranteed money during the 2009-10 season that saw him miss 57 games due to the broken forearm. The injury didn't exactly cost him in the seasons that followed, either, unless Garcia believes (or can convince a judge) that the exploding exercise ball is the reason the Kings won't pick up his $6 million team option for the 2013-14 season.
The Kings, suing the makers to recoup some of the money possibly lost due to the insurance they had to pay to keep Garcia's paychecks coming? That makes sense, but outside of some mental anguish it's hard to see what the makers of this defective product really owe Garcia, under the terms he's suing for.
The Kings paid for all his bills, and his rehabilitation. He made just as much money with his arm in a sling as he did running up and down the court for the Kings, and it's a really tough sell that any future earnings (be they that 2013-14 team option, or any other future contracts) were affected by the incident.
If the suit serves to stop kids from goofing around with these sorts of "stabilizers" in high school locker rooms, then we can see some merit. But we're having a hard time wrapping our arms around Garcia's lawsuit.
(HT: Nate Jones' Twitter feed.)