[Baxter] The investigation into Kawhi Leonard, the Clippers, and Aspiration Could Go Into Arbitration. “Where this is ultimately heading”
There will be an NBA board of governors meeting in mid September according to Baxter which will likely provide official clarity
Yeah looking back at it after posting tbh, seems like the wording might be a bit off or misinterpreted, he could just be saying IF the NBA tries to punish the clippers by using the improper player introduction thing as an argument, the clippers would take it to arbitration as they can easily fight it.
NBA basically needs harder evidence which definitely sounds crazy, especially to us, they seem guilty
This whole article is basically just the clippers themselves trying to put it out there that the NBA needs harder evidence and ESPN is being their mouthpiece for that.
By the actual standards of the CBA, the NBA has more than enough evidence and while the Clippers might threaten to take things to arbitration to drag things out, their chances of actually prevailing in arbitration are slim to none. They’ve yet to provide any alternative rational explanation for the endorsements other than cap circumvention, which they would have to provide if it went to arbitration.
Since the governors probably don’t want the possibility of this dragging out into next year, the Clippers saying they will take it to arbitration is significant leverage.
Leverage works both ways though. Taking it to arbitration basically kills the Kawhi deal due to uncertainty. Arbitration is also where the league can compel team and league employees to turn over phones, emails and other evidence…whereas the Wachtell investigation has so far relied on voluntary participation. I would guess from what we know that the Clippers want neither of these outcomes and therefore it’s possible the Baxter Holmes ESPN article was trying to push the league to settle before arbitration.
Ya Clippers want no part of turning stuff over. No way this is the limit on the sketch they are doing
Thing is there is a whole section just of news related to Kawhi only even though majority is on the clippers/ballmer. There are multiple ESPN credited for this one article tho
By the actual standards of the CBA, the NBA has more than enough evidence and while the Clippers might threaten to take things to arbitration to drag things out, their chances of actually prevailing in arbitration are slim to none.
Just sounds like personal conjecture trying to speak facts into existence. Pablo would be proud.
Copium is strong ain’t it?
We’re basically looking at the same as Man City in the EFL we’re the richest owners. Clearly broke the rules but without a criminal investigation, there’s no smoking gun and they can afford lawyers. Good enough to delay things forever. Well, gradually dissolve faith in the sport as well as encourage shadier parties joining the league to start their own schemes
The smoking gun talk is so dumb. Kawhi’s contract with Aspiration explicitly states he is not required to do any work for Aspiration and is only required to play for the Clippers. We’re already at the point of people trying to argue that you can’t prove the smoke near the gun means it was fired.
Even if you ignored all of the other evidence that overwhelmingly points to cap circumvention, Kawhi’s aspiration contract alone exceeds the burden of proof laid out in the CBA.
“may be proven by direct or circumstantial evidence, including, but not limited to, evidence that a Player Contract or any term or provision thereof cannot rationally be explained in the absence of conduct.”
The nba wants to avoid going to court, but it’s absolutely not because they don’t have enough evidence.
honest question from someone who has been paying little attention to this- how is it cap circumvention if Kawhi is a max player? I kinda get the Gary Trent Jr situation but where is the savings/advantage for the Clippers here?
It’s more an inducement for Kawhi to play for the clippers beyond the maximum allowable
If two teams can offer you a max but one team is a max plus xxx, how is it not cap circumvention and giving one team a competitive advantage? Why is this difficult to grasp?
Because the site is full of bots
it helps their ability to sign Kawhi but it doesn’t give them a more favorable cap situation because the hit is the same for every team.
It’s his hometown team and they’ve had his bird rights for a while so they can already pay him more on the books than anyone else. So what’s the point of doing all these side deals too?
I believe it was during right after kawhi won with the raptors. Clearly he could have more salary extending with the raptors, but he took a smaller deal [even if it was a max deal] to sign with the Clippers. The “theory” is that for Kawhi/uncle duo to agree with the paycut, Balmer had to make him whole for the difference. The supposed side deals would 1) further incentivize Kawhi to sign with the Clippers (he might not otherwise sign with them) 2) this money wouldn’t be on the books for Clippers salary cap.
They don’t need any hard evidence. The wording of the CBA rules say circumstantial evidence, of which we’ve seen plenty, is enough to infer cap circumvention and dole out penalties.
There’s even a line that says roughly “if it looks like cap circumvention, and there’s no rational explanation otherwise, then it may be deemed cap circumvention”
The bar is actually very low, and don’t believe all the paid shills trying to tell you they need hard evidence
if it looks like cap circumvention, and there’s no rational explanation otherwise, then it may be deemed cap circumvention
Well they certainly clear that bar
[deleted]
Proving something by law is much harder than proving it to the general public.
But those aren’t the standards outlined in the CBA.
”[Circumvention] may be proven by direct or circumstantial evidence, including, but not limited to, evidence that a Player Contract or any term or provision thereof cannot rationally be explained in the absence of conduct violative of Section 2(a) or 2(b).”
The burden isn’t on the NBA to prove their case, the Clippers need to rationally explain the situation to satisfy the NBA that no violation took place.
By the letter of the CBA, it’s not enough to defend money moving from Ballmer to Aspiration to Kawhi by saying, “show me the smoking gun,” they have to give Ballmer’s rationale for the money transfers.
Easy. This was a company he invested in completely separate from his NBA ownership interest and this was a company he was doing business with building his arena.
And multiple companies he invested in simultaneously invested in Kathi Leonard to do nothing. That’s harder to explain
At extraordinarily inflated valuations, and at around the same time Ballmer made extremely large contributions to each company (\(50 mil to Aspiration, and buying a \)100 mil scoreboard from Daktronics).
You all are in a crash out cycle. Pro athletes get endorsements. Yes there is definite smoke here but you all are wrong on the level of evidence the league can force through an arbitaror or the courts. These judges (and ex-judges) are almost always hesitant to order punishment against individuals when the other party is a large entity without very clear evidence of wrongdoing.
The NBA writes there own rules. Forcing a square peg into a round hole isnt acceptable and within the leagues control. The judge will most likely say the rules are ambiguous and the league should correct that going forward.
So why is Wong sending 2M to a company that is doing so badly they have to send a letter per SEC mandate saying “Dumb Fuck, you going to lose all your money, you sure you want to do this?”
And he is like “Sure Thing!!”
Oh, and a few days later, KL gets paid.
All while the company is actively going bankrupt and can’t make payroll, but we going to make sure KL gets paid. Even though he hasn’t done a thing for us.
Again, not gonna cut it for a savvy contract law arbitrator that has decades of experience in these types of contract disputes with big money involved.
There is what the league and fans think happened, what they can prove, but we’ve moved into the final phase which is what the rules state. Quite frankly this is moving towards a situation where the league didn’t anticipate this and doesn’t have clear enough rules surrounding.
The league is used to ruling a fiefdom and never had concerns their will or word wouldn’t be seen as law. Unfortunately they ran into the actual king and now that’s a problem.
A B2B company who has never had a sponsor in its 60 year history decides at the precise moment they have a $100m contract with the clippers where the prices are flexible enough for things to be hidden….that they need Kawhi to be their corporate sponsor, which they also never announce publicly. And this historic marketing move for them is so unimportant that the Clippers themselves - who are not part of this sponsorship, allegedly, and should have no reason to care - have to remind Daktronic for months and months to please, pretty please, oh god just have him sign stuff so this looks legal.
Thinking this is suspicious is a crash out cycle?
Yup, because actual business law/contract law people don’t give a shit about any of that. The standards will require hard and specific rules against this…. And the NBA simply don’t have those on the books.
This isn’t a legal issue lol this isn’t being decided in court. You are being intentionally stupid right now.
How is that true with the rule outlining the acceptable standard of proof quoted above?
Circumvention] may be proven by direct or circumstantial evidence, including, but not limited to, evidence that a Player Contract or any term or provision thereof cannot rationally be explained in the absence of conduct violative of Section 2(a) or 2(b).”
What about any of this is rationally explained? What is the rational explanation for the Clippers repeatedly following up to ensure a contract they are not a party to is fulfilled? It would seem trivial to prove that teams don’t ever do this, and it is irrational for them to care whether he fulfills his contract with Dak unless the Clippers need to ensure that on its face it looks like a legitimate deal so no one looks any deeper in some future investigation
Pro athletes get endorsements.
The endorsements aren’t the issue.
The issue is that neither Kawhi nor the companies involved did any ANNOUNCEMENT OR PROMOTION of the endorsement, lol you have to be intentionally stupid to think the endorsement was the problem.
You’d get laughed out of the room if that’s all you had. The person ruling will have basic questions.
The questions go on and on and on. NBA is full of lawyers they can do a much better job than me anticipating how arbitration would go. So if they are trying to avoid it there is a reason.
Is it illegal in the CBA to have an endorsement deal that didn’t produce any campaign
it doesn’t have to be illegal lol this is the part you keep ignoring. Its been pointed out to you in multiple replies, the standard is not “legal or illegal” the standard is “can be rationally explained or cannot be rationally explained”.
The judge would be Adam Silver in this case, correct?
No. A 3rd party arbitrator (which are almost always ex-judges or high experience litigation attorneys) or an actual judge if one party sues.
You all are really misinformed on what Silvers role is and how much power he has especially related to owners.
Beyond a reasonable doubt is only a thing in criminal court it’s more that Balmer is going to hire REALLY GOOD lawyers to fight the case which means w/o a smoking gun it will drag and no one really wants that.
They don’t have to do either of those things, they just have to convince an arbitrator
This isn’t going to court, this is up to the NBA and their own CBA.
Except Jeanie Buss is gonna show up and everyone will get side tracked trying to figure out why she is there.
They should all sue Pablo if nothing happens
Sue Pablo so he can get lawyers to do actual discovery on Ballmer?
The one thing Ballmer doesn’t want is this matter in courts because courts have legal power that his billions can’t trump.
This NBA investigation from Wachtell has no legal enforcement power to force discovery or cooperation.
they don’t even have to do that when they have shills like you defending baller for free
We as a society need to really call out people who have parasocial relationships with billionaires and sports organizations. That dude is giving off weird energy about “coming for the king” lol wtf is that
If you come for the king you better not miss. Pablo seems to have misfired his load
It’s probably more accurate to describe him as one of those old-time cowboys with a six-shooters making someone ‘dance’ by shooting at their feet.
Money has beaten journalism lol
In rock-paper-scissors terms we’re at the point where money>everything
C.R.E.A.M. - Cash Rules Everything Around Me
we’re at the point where money everything
We have been there for millenia lol
Arbitration has nothing to do with money or journalism. Journalism has presented a case that successfully swayed the court of public opinion but there’s going to be a higher bar to meet in arbitration where the facts are going to be scrutinized while both sides present their case. The consensus formed in public opinion without a lot of people understanding the details of the case and being relatively hostile to any discussion. The league’s problem is anything letting Ballmer or upper management off the hook is going to be very unpopular, but they may not be able to find the evidence to make that case in arbitration. DAs often use lesser charges to secure conviction, but here anything less than a severe rebuke of Ballmer and top brass will be seen as corruption, and nobody will care if it was the right decision based on what evidence they have and what defense that leaves. If the league goes to arbitration and loses nobody is going to say good try either, plus it causes the bad press to hang over the league all year. And that’s all just PR issues. Inside the league you have the raptors who would be getting screwed twice for the same alleged crime, owners who will likely be divided on the issue, and a players union who will be very strongly against punishing Kawhi or Ballmer. I’m sure silver would have ended this all much earlier if they had the evidence they needed, it would be so easy to dock draft picks suspend him for a year just to have it over with if they had him dead to rights. I think they just don’t have him and are grappling with how long to look or what lesser case they can be sure to prove. If they have a really strong case against Kawhi and mid level inappropriate communications against clippers, there not going to go over well.
Arbitration is a joke the league gets to choose the lawyers.. he should be kicked out of the league it’s obvious what happened they have way more than a preponderance of the evidence..
#capitalism
where money beats literally everything and anything.
If this ends in a “You got caught give back the money we know about” it will be hilarious. Every team should do it, what would be the downside once precedent is set?
Giannis how does a league minimum with 100mil in sponsorships a year sound?
Wemby we got some oil money for you. Sign at a discount and we will say you watched There Will be Blood as your sponsorship participation.
Wemby out there in some dudes face next year “I DRINK YOUR MIILKSHAKE”
sponsored by Shake Shack
Hey star player on small market team, come to LA in free agency and we’ll pay you triple
The funny thing is they don’t even have to report it, and frankly if the existence of these contracts under these circumstances doesn’t warrant punishment then even publicly announcing obviously shady deals should be fine.
It’s why I don’t understand Silver not genuinely trying to put a stop to this now. People claim this sort of stuff happens all the time but I really don’t think it does.
It would in the future though.
The funny thing is the Bucks directly benefited from this kind of cap circumvention only they didn’t have a paper trail, the Gary Trent deal is pretty much as clear cut as can be. The Kawhi situation is different as in his deals had no impact on cap space, he was still on a max contract.
Kawhi didn’t sign for a fucking discount. This would be a far bigger issue if he did and the league would likely be coming down far harsher on the clippers if that happened
The jump you’re making in the outcome of this is so fucking stupid
I mean Kawhi didn’t do this though. I don’t think players will go for this because they also see max contracts as a prestige point. I agree something has to be done about it but at the same time this isn’t even similar to the Joe Smith thing where the Wolves got a salary cap advantage.
If you’re worried about this, you can look at whether there’s something with Brunson or Wemby. There probably isn’t something but anything that gives a team building advantage will get scrutinized too no?
Don’t know why people keep saying this, that won’t be possible, you don’t think the league wouldn’t investigate it, it would be super suspicious and easy to punish, the reason Kawhi/Clippers almost got away with it is because it wasn’t obvious originally, Kawhi got the max in 2019, and only took like 5-6 mill paycut the next time around when he signed the extension, maybe it’s possible to do it with a very small paycut, but obvious amounts, just won’t be possible
100 mil a year is obviously hyperbole, but 20 mil a year? That is clearly possible; Kawhi did it and went unnoticed for years. If the outcome is “if a 3rd party catches you and makes a stink you will have to give it back” then why wouldn’t you as a billionaire owner.
The league clearly doesn’t care unless it becomes an optic thing. If Kawhi had planted a single tree this probably would all be hand waived away by the NBA.
This already happens and has been for a long time. There are reasons places like LA, GS, NYC, heck even Houston are desirable. Superstars always balance basketball with economic factors when making decisions. Then you have tax laws which also play a part in how much a player ultimately pockets and can be a big swing.
It went unnoticed cause kawhi was getting 98% of the total money allowed to be paid…
You have to think about it annually, not the whole contract, Kawhi only took a 5-6 million paycut per year, anything too crazy, it sends alarms, especially for star players, they will investigate, I’m sure they also kept a close eye on the Wemby paycut however I am sure his is legit, isn’t even a massive paycut, he just took his actual max, not the super max to help his team out
Who cares what they keep an eye on? Lmao you’re completely missing the point. It will happen way more now because in the event they get caught it’s just a slap on the wrist. There is literally zero incentive for teams to not follow suit. Dumbass Ballmer just opened up an insane can of worms
Going to be college NIL in the NBA. Except instead of 3M to a QB. You going to be paying 10-20M to a PG. Numbers are going to be a lot bigger. Owners will be complaining about it in a few years.
Yes except the max Kawhi received was not as much as the Raptors could pay him because the Raptors still had his Bird rights.
If you recall it was deemed suspicious at the time and the league had conducted an investigation which didn’t turn up anything. Which shows you the effectiveness of NBA league led investigations.
Brother, it wasn’t the original contract. The wrong information people are parroting over this is nuts.
The second contract wasn’t even suspicious. He had suffered multiple injuries and was 33 years old and took $3M less per year than his max. Not suspicious at all
It’s all interrelated.
Point is that the Raptors could have paid him more over the course of his time with the Clippers.
The Clippers still found a way to circumvent the cap and funnel more money to him.
I’m not saying that Kawhi was gonna stay just for the extra $$.
It’s not really suspicious, that’s just how much they can pay, it was still the max, the team he leaves just has an advantage of paying more, but that isn’t suspicious at all, players do it all the time or at least have done so a lot in the past. What was suspicious was that the details of what they were asking for in negotiations got leaked, lakers and raptors went to the nba with this to give them a heads up, not the fact he got the max, that’s normal
Not true. The Raptors could have signed him for a five year max contract. Something the Clippers could not match:
Toronto’s Offer: A 5-year maximum contract estimated at $190 million to stay and defend the 2019 title.
Clippers’ Offer: A shorter initial deal (reported as 3 years, \(103.1 million or up to 4 years, \)141 million) after they also traded for Paul George.
Even on an AAV the Clippers offer is less. Hence the need for circumvention to make up the difference.
Kawhi was paid 194.5 million from the Clippers over the 5 years that the Toronto contract covered.
Edit: had it at 195, but after adding them up it’s 194.5. My bad
This. It’s amazing how people clearly just say shit and get upvoted to fit their narrative.
Most people probably just watched the 1st episode that Pablo did and have run with it like gospel. Pablo also pushed this angle (even though it was easy to check what Kawhis contracts were worth) so people are just parroting what he said.
And the Aspiration deal happened to be the difference between what the Raptors could offer and the Clippers. About 50m…..
This is technically true, but doesn’t reflect the reality of what happened.
The Raptors offer was 5⁄190.
Here is what Kawhi earned with the Clippers for that same period:
2019: 32.7 2020: 34.4 2021: 39.3 2022: 42.5 2023: 45.6
Which equals 5⁄194.5. So he made 4.5 million more by signing with the Clippers instead of the Raptors.
He could have signed a shorter deal for more with the Raptors and renewed at a higher level. You are comparing apples to oranges and then claiming equivalence.
The Raptors could have also paid him more over three years and extended based off that total. the Clippers HAD to circumvent the cap in order to get close to equivalence.
The difference is minuscule if he took the shorter contract with the Raptors. It’s the difference between 5% raises and 8%. So for the 2nd year he could have made 3% more on his raises. (He opted out after the 2nd year, so he could sign a 35% max with 10 years of service)
I don’t feel like doing the math for this, but it’s only going to be 1-2 million dollar difference. Max contracts are set by the cap, so the raptors couldn’t have given him more on his extension then he got from the Clippers.
Edit: I did the math. The 1st year 2019 was going to be the same for the Clippers or Raptors since it was a max contract. 2020 the difference is he got 34.4 with the Clippers but could have gotten 35.3 with the Raptors. 2021 would have been the same amount for both the Clippers and Raptors since it was a 35% max (Kawhi got 8% raises with thr Clippers, so there would no longer be a difference between the Raptors or Clippers moving forward) . So the difference is 34.4 vs 35.3. These are both rounded, so let’s just call it 1 million. That’s the amount more he would have made if he did the same deal structures with the Raptors instead of joining the clippers.
The difference in taxes between Toronto and LA would more then cover that 1 million difference.
Kawhi was leaving regardless, that was known from the moment he was traded. The Clippers deal in itself shouldn’t have raised any suspicion.
But he was known to be leaving in part because the Clippers were eyeing him before the trade to the Raptors.
That doesn’t change anything lol
He may have already spoke to the Clippers about how they would get him the same amount of money even if he couldn’t sign with them for that amount (i.e. cap circumvention).
He was conspiring to go to LA a whole season before he got traded…
The Lakers and Raptors both told the league Kawhi was trying to get additional compensation beyond what is allowed in 2019. It was a badly kept secret and the league tried to turn a blind eye to it until Pablo exposed the league
Who cares if the league investigates they are terrible at it. Maybe I am still bitter about the Terry trade but he was cleared by the nba. When people investigate themselves they find nothing wrong
If the collective agreement is the legal basis of the arbitration, and the conduct is assessed in contrast to the terms of the collective agreement. How possibly do they get out without paying a fine/forfeiting picks etc?
I think its they know the Clippers did it, but since there isn’t a piece of paper from Ballmer saying “we are doing cap circumvention for Kawhi”, Ballmer is saying that any punishment the league tries to put on him or the Clippers he’s gonna march an army of a billionaire’s lawyers into Silver’s office and drag this through arbitration to fight any punishment, which Silver is saying looks bad for the league and doesn’t want to do (even though it looks worse for teams to get away with cap circumvention).
Prediction from me unfortunately is small punishment, and they make it clear in wording that they will be more strict with it, keep a closer eye, and it will be a major focus in the next CBA, they will try to use words to scare players and teams, who knows if that works, but I think we all know they won’t be using “action” as an example to scare away others from doing this, it will be “words”.
Nobody gives a shit if they claim they’ll be more strict with it because the precedent will have already been set. Any owner getting caught will just point to Ballmer and say they’re aren’t accepting anything more than the Clippers got. This only changes if they negotiate something when it’s time to discuss the new CBA
The issue is the league will have to determine the players value for these endorsements. Also, the company signing the player to an endorsement will have to have some level of separation from the owner. Let’s just say nothing wrong was done in this situation, the money given to the company was completely legit and the endorsement for Kawahi was legit. How would they ever police that effectively?
The league would have to middleman these endorsements to actually stomp out the problem.
Presumably they’ll try to put more of an onus on agency’s and players around third party deals.
There HAS to be some punishment, no way they get out without anything happening, I still firmly believe losing a pick or two is a severe punishment, especially in today’s NBA where the league is, we all know just how POWERFUL first round picks are as trade assets in the nba, especially now for the next few years cause of the new lotto rules
You gotta read the CBA bro there’s no avenue to strip multiple firsts. Joe Smith got that because it was a different scheme (bird rights). Max (with evidence, which they said they don’t have) is one first
You’re completely talking out of your ass lmao
Read sec 13 of the CBA
I assume you mean Article 13 but AI might have hallucinated on you. And I have read it. The relevant excerpt is here…
Upon a finding of a violation of Section 2 above by the System Arbitrator, but only following the conclusion of any appeal to the Appeals Panel, the Commissioner shall be authorized to: (i) impose a fine of up to $7,500,000 on any Team found to have committed such violation (fifty percent (50%) of which shall be payable to the NBA, and fifty percent (50%) of which shall be payable to the NBPA-Selected Charitable Organization); (ii) direct the forfeiture of draft picks
Also, as a bonus for all the people that continually cite circumstantial evidence not being enough (even though a “smoking gun” is often …circumstantial evidence):
(d) A violation of Section 2(a) or 2(b) above may be proven by direct or circumstantial evidence, including, but not limited to, evidence that a Player Contract or any term or provision thereof cannot rationally be explained in the absence of conduct violative of Section 2(a) or 2(b).
Section 2 that you’re quoting refers to players taking lesser contracts to accumulate bird rights and then sign a more expensive deal. What Kawhi is accused of would be section 1, right before the excerpt you quoted. The parameters and punishments are different, including specifying one first round pick as the max penalty
But Kawhi did take a lesser contract. He didn’t take the max he could sign for.
(ii) the Compensation in the Player Contract between the player and the Team is substantially below the fair market value of such Contract.
Substantial?
I thought he was on a max contract?
From 2019-2025 he was. The extension he signed in 2024 had 2025-2027 as 32% and 31% cap hits. The max would be 35%. So he did take a little less than he could’ve at the end.
But I don’t think a big enough discount that it could be substantially below the fair market value which is what that mavs fan is saying. At the time, our fans were pissed we even signed him to a deal like that because at that point he had been injured for 4 straight seasons and was turning 33.
Other user is spreading wrong info but just to correct you, we’re no longer looking at a Section 2 violation. The report that this is being looked at as an improper sponsorship means it’s covered by Section 1 and its related penalties. Those penalties only permit the forefeiture of 1 first round draft pick however it is per violation which means if there are multiple violations you can potentially strip multiple draft picks.
Because it’s hard to prove quid pro quo without a direct payment which they have not found. Now they have to find evidence that both clippers and the 3rd party company were conspiring. It’s going to be a lot easier to prove Kawhi was improperly leveraging no show endorsements than it is to prove high level clippers brass or Ballmer were both aware of and orchestrated the deals. If there was a direct money trail it would be easy but they reportedly don’t. Tier 3 violator are going limit the punishment if they can’t show that they need a witness saying an exec or Ballmer directed them to do this or they need a paper trail like the Josh Smith deal to get the punishment everyone wants. No point in levying a punishment that gets delayed a year and overturned in arbitration. My guess is the investigation shows inappropriate communication from a middle manager where it’s more of a request or a suggestion, but they have a very strong case against Kawhi, and they’re not excited about how that will play so they’re still looking age hoping to find something better.
How else do you explain no show jobs? Lol. Seriously this is why Rico laws exist you could absolutely connect these things in a court of law even if the burden of proof was criminal conviction you could do it. In arbitration you just need a preponderance of the evidence they absolutely could prove it
If Balmer gets off with little or no punishment (as is being alluded to), then the NBA has just effectively opened the floodgates to cap circumvention . All of the reporting by PBTO has laid out a blueprint on how to pay players outside the cap
Are you assuming that players don’t have outside business deals outside of their nba contract? You do understand that an nba player is allowed to have a sponsorship deal and there is nothing wrong with that unless the team is funneling money to the player thru the deal which the investigation just said they don’t have proof of. Pablo is assuming there is wrongdoing. The clippers admitted they made an introduction to the sponsors but are saying they didn’t funnel money thru the sponsorship
It’s obvious the team was funneling money to Kawhi. What other incentive would a company have to pay him millions for literally nothing. wtf are you talking about? Now this will become common practice and it’s will advantage the richest owners. I’m fine with it as a Lakers fan if the league is just going to sit on its ass. Makes it even easier to get free agents for the Lakers now
Thanks Balmer!!
How’s it obvious?’l
It’s obvious says who - says Pablo. There are many incentives to do ballmer favors - that’s very ignorant to say otherwise. Btw I agree they were funneling money to him but you still need more proof than “it’s obvious” and my source is an anonymous whistleblower
This is a ridiculous burden of proof to put on the league to prove cap circumvention. We don’t require direct evidence to support a criminal conviction where the burden is proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Why would we hold the league to a higher standard to prove cap circumvention?
I’m not convinced beyond a reasonable doubt based on anything I’ve seen.
There’s plenty of speculation and assumption - but I’m failing to find anything even remotely concrete.
Then explain the Aspiration deal. Actually tell us what you’re seeing. Because to anyone else, it looks exactly like cap circumvention for a player to have an endorsement deal where they literally don’t have to do the bare minimum to endorse a product and the deal is tied to him being on the Clippers.
I’m honestly asking for a reasonable explanation besides cap circumvention.
This might be a common practice too, I mean with teams introducing to local sponsors.
Yes for instance Steph curry has a deal with rakutan the team sponsor. Was he introduced by the team to get that deal, of course.
The issue isn’t the sponsor. It’s that Kawhi did absolutely nothing to earn that money. And on top of that the company went under and lots of people lost money but Kawhi still got paid for what?
There doesn’t seem to be the smoking gun but I think a logical person can see that the Clippers had some hand in getting Kawhi those deals without any expectation he does anything to earn the money.
It’s also really stupid because had he put in any effort for those deals even a few hours of work this isn’t a thing at all.
My biggest thing is Clippers seem to be the one getting the blame where imo Kawhi and his business partners are the ones who were pushing for these outside deals and more negativity should be pushed their way
You make many good points and I agree - also agree kawhi has blame and probably has many loose ends whether the league will do anything and fight him and the players association is another question
Dirk also got a sweet documentary deal from cuban after his retirement. This is probably why the league and other owners are scared. There is potentially a giant can of worms being opened with all of this.
But did Dirk actually do the things he said he was going to do for that money? That’s the issue, it looks like Kawhi was just given free handouts and did nothing to earn it
Yeah I get that but the implications are still the same and I think this why it’s so hard to prove without s smoking gun. The problem now is that every team that wants to win has a playbook on how to evade the cap.
Reddit armchair lawyers have already decided the clippers/Ballmer are guilty because they watched some YouTube videos from someone else that isn’t a lawyer.
it is of note, and worth reflecting on, that in a criminal court it is often a jury of citizens who determine guilt
This isn’t a criminal court. The law has nothing to do with this at all. You’re just proving my point that most of you have no idea what you’re talking about
As crazy as it sounds, we are basically entering a world where NBA owners can invest in business partners that then turn around and give money to their team’s players as long as there is no direct link between the investment by the owner and the player’s sponsorship deals.
This is hugely advantageous to the richest ones with billions in outside equity/net worth outside of their teams.
These Kawhi sponsorship deals are among the most bizarre I’ve ever seen.
I’ve seen (from drafting pov) sponsorship deals for famous people (i.e. for appearances on behalf of businesses), and you’d be surprised at how many people look at and sign off on them, and how thoroughly they detail what the famous person has to do on behalf of the business and what is or isn’t allowed and all the specific perks that the famous person gets.
The idea that a business would give somebody tens of millions without anything in return just sounds mind-boggling on the face of it.
This is the Clippers telling the NBA to go ahead and try (I’m assuming Holmes is getting info from the Clippers rather than the NBA after yesterday). Not a good sign for the NBA.
Seems like the NBA is negotiating with themselves here. It was a terrible move by Silver to come out and say the investigation will be done before the season. Clippers have him over a barrel. Especially with the lack of evidence limiting the downside for the Clippers. Clippers got nothing to lose by waiting to deal, NBA has lots to lose by waiting.
I think the only fitting punishment would be to give the Knicks a second NBA championship
Everton 10 point deduction
“5 second penalty for Ocon”
would have to reference the full segment, but interesting Holmes raises arbitration as the likely end result
Pablo also focused on Baxter writing that the “negotiations have been spirited” between the league and Ballmer.
arbitration would definitely not be the league’s first choice. but if Ballmer wont settle for anything less than a full clear, would see why the league has to respond.
to your point on Joe Smith, we know from the ESPN piece the league actually tried introducing negotiations starting with the Timberwolves punishment as a framework. so we know where the league might be inclined.
To me this reads like NBA wants some token/slap on wrist punishment and Ballmer is even balking at that and wants nothing. He just might get it, between NBA not wanting this to drag out and the uncertainty of the evidence
That is not what I got. NBA starting point is the Wolves punishment and look to be negotiating from there
Literally not possible. Different rule violations. Twolves got in trouble for signing minimum deals to build up bird rights then eventually pay a larger deal. That’s CBA Section 13.2, the Kawhi situation would be CBA 13.1, which at most outlines 1 first as punishment
It’s 1 first per violation. There are three potential improper sponsorships the league is looking at.
A violation also requires the player to take a significant discount on their contract with the team
It says no such thing. It only says that a violation may be inferred when those two elements are present. It’s not a limiting provision at all. If it was meant to be that then it would say something totally different.
It does make their case more difficult to make:
Such an agreement with a sponsor or business partner or third party may be inferred where: (i) such compensation from the sponsor or business partner or third party is substantially in excess of the fair market value of any services to be rendered by the player for such sponsor or business partner or third party; and (ii) the Compensation in the Player Contract between the player and the Team is substantially below the fair market value of such Contract.
It doesn’t mean that at all. You are reading it wrong. It is writing out where the league is permitted to make the inference. It does not say that is what is required to prove that a Section 1 violation occurred. Otherwise it would say something to the effect of “A violation may only be found where…”
Right. So if they are unable to make that inference, making the case for circumvention requires stronger evidence of the scheme with the sponsor.
Remember: Gary Trent Jr is represented by Klutch. He went from minimum to maximum after a terrible season.
This league is a mismanaged joke.
Cant wait to land our next major free agent with a bunch of money done in a back room deal through a sponsor.
Thanks Balmer!
You already landed Lebron James.
Yeah but now that we can cheat maybe we can land Anthony Edwards next!
If you can outspend Balmer, I suppose.
Aspiration. Arbitration. Abomination.
Let’s just pretend no cap circumvention is charged. I would ask Silver, what is the point of having language in the CBA that speaks to circumstantial evidence being enough and a contract that cannot be reasonably explained, etc. if all of the reporting that we have plus whatever the internal investigation brought forth isn’t enough to charge cap circumvention? Isn’t the implication then that it is practically legal to circumvent the cap so long as there are documents or objective evidence that specifies cap circumvention is taking place?
The key thing is, which most here have been unwilling to accept, is that there is zero proof of Ballmer funneling money into these companies that gets re-routed to Kawhi. Yes I know Pablo spent time outlining how payments “matched” with investments but he ultimately disproved his whole 50 mil in/50 mil out premise. Reality was that Ballmer/clippers put 118 mil into aspiration, Aspiration agreed to pay the clippers 300 mil, and only 3.5 mil of the 28 mil separately promised to Kawhi ever got to him and there’s no clean line showing that 3.5 mil came directly from Ballmer.
It still seems like cap circumvention, but not in the way the initial premise was presented. Instead, with Daktronics, it seems more like it was a situation where there was some quid pro quo where the Clippers encouraged them to sign Kawhi and they did so believing it would make their big client happy.
Hence all the focus on introductions. They want to see if there’s proof that Ballmer pressured them into signing Kawhi to an unreasonable contract. And even if everyone with a brain can see, yeah obviously that was not normal and there’s no way they would have signed Kawhi without Ballmer’s pressure, the trouble is that they can’t just punish Ballmer and have it stick. The system is build so that it would drag out into arbitration and appeals. Lack of any hard evidence is a problem whether or not people here want to admit it.
The thing that has yet to be explained is the size of the contracts and the lack of work performed for the contracts. Both of those things do not fit the bill for the current standard market rate for a sponsorship deal. The NBA doesn’t need a smoking gun in the criminal law sense. It needs sufficient evidence, under the evidentiary standard applicable to the league, to conclude that a violation occurred. How is the size of payment alone not enough to conclude that a violation occurred?
zero proof of Ballmer funneling money into these companies that gets re-routed to Kawhi there’s no clean line showing that 3.5 mil came directly from Ballmer.
zero proof of Ballmer funneling money into these companies that gets re-routed to Kawhi
there’s no clean line showing that 3.5 mil came directly from Ballmer.
You’re just circling back to the dumbass idea that there needs to be a signed check from Ballmer stating “let’s circumvent the cap”!
Zero interest in hearing from people like you
No I mean quite literally he didn’t put money into those companies that went to Kawhi. There’s just no evidence whatsoever that happened because it didn’t happen.
But it does seem like these companies paid Kawhi because they wanted to maintain a positive relationship with Ballmer.
It’s actually so depressing if their is no punishment. You literally could not get more evidence than what is there unless you were investigating the most incompetent of criminals.
But it’s expected because Silver just does what the owners want and none of the owners want to get on Ballmers bad side when he is so much more useful to them as a friend. And not much of a threat on the basketball court.
He said “if” the NBA’s case rests on introductions….
This qualifier was not included in yesterday’s story.
Yeah mentioned that in the last paragraph and in a comment, quickly realized it could be that as well
“Leonard and the Raptors are both operating as though the trade will be completed and reunite him with Toronto, according to team sources.”
Kind of feels like they should just complete the fucking trade then.
I don’t get why Raptors fans want the trade to go through before the investigation is complete. It’s entirely in the Raptors’ hands whether the trade goes through or not. They would be stupid to complete it before being 100% certain.
Both Kawhi and the Raptors are treating it like the trade is going through since the Raptors can choose for it to go through at anytime, and the only thing that would make the Raptors choose to not complete the trade is if there is a harsh punishment on Kawhi such as his contract being voided.
But this is the contradiction I’m pointing to. If they’re acting as if it will go through because they’re confident Kawhi won’t face punishment, they should just call up the Clippers and the league and say “hey, let’s make the trade official.” You said you don’t understand why Raptors fans want the trade to go through before the investigation is complete. I don’t necessarily want that, i’m just pointing to a contradiction in reporting vs actions taken. In other words, I think the reporting itself is not actually correct.
Plus, we will eventually reach a point in the calendar where the Raptors will have to make a tough decision as to whether to make the trade official. We’re like a month away from training camp starting. If the investigation isn’t wrapped up by then, then they probably will have to actually take a chance and make the trade if they really want Kawhi on the team.
Having Kawhi pay back the money makes zero sense.
That would only make sense if we all agree he received that money to circumvent the cap. In that case the punishment should be much more severe.
The collective agreement will probably need tweaking to prevent this in future. If the NBA doesn’t do anything about this then other teams will just do the same thing going forward. Right now I think Silver feels pressured to do something but is limited. If he does something, it could get dragged out for years by a billionaire. If he does nothing then other teams will copy the Clippers. Not an easy situation.
“We want to void his contract”
“No”
“Here’s a suspension”
“Cool, I’ll be taking an extended offseason. See you in Toronto in 20 games”
Ballmer must think we’re f-ing idiots. You got caught. You’re wrong. Deal with it.
That was a whole lotta nothing
The NBA at this point doesn’t care if you circumvent the salary cap so why even have all these rules anymore ? Apparently they are pointless . Just let everyone be paid whatever because rules are pointless according to them .
why is the NBA letting a starcraft1 unit decide this
edit: maybe it’s the halo 2 guy
We feel your presence
There are only 2 things that can possibly explain what’s happened so far:
The Clippers are actually innocent and nothing was found. (Less likely)
Most or all teams do this, and the owners don’t want to open themselves up to the same scrutiny. (More likely)
What about 3rd option: the clippers are guilty of cap circumvention.
That is certainly where the evidence and reporting leads one to…
#2 assumes the Clippers are guilty. Reading comprehension is key here.
#2 implies everybody does this therefore we shouldn’t care.
What evidence is there that other teams do this? Beyond small scale stuff (like Jordan) which is still against the rules and we shouldn’t just scoff at.
The evidence is the league not punishing the Clippers. I think they’re guilty and the only reason they wouldn’t punish them is because it sets a precedent. I can’t really think of anything else.
If any team player has a deal with a company the team works with, then it’s open to the same scrutiny, like how Rakuten is a team sponsor for the Warriors but also has deals with Steph.
First, we don’t know what the league will do. The reports yesterday were refuted by the NBA and we don’t know whether it’s because it’s flat out wrong and just spin from the clippers or if the league wants to control the message and timeline. So regardless of what happens, drawing the conclusion that the league isn’t punished the clippers at this point in the timeline is just illogical.
Second, there are plenty of reasons the league wouldn’t punish the clippers despite being guilty that isn’t just, “well everybody does it.” For one, the teams and the league likely don’t want responsibility for supervising sponsorships because the if something is uncovered whoever was supposed to have oversight is screwed. In a simplistic sense it’s a reason social media platforms really don’t want to have to moderate what’s said on the platform more than what they are legally forced to do. Or, Silver doesn’t want the legal battle of fighting Ballmer who is a psychopath and can and likely would drag it to court even if he knows it happened if he thinks he can bully his way to relatively exonerate himself. Or, maybe they don’t want to test the boundaries of the CBA’s loose “circumstantial evidence” bar and is looking for the easiest and pain free way to do something.
That’s just three options and two or even all three could be simultaneously in Silver’s head with the decision. So describing the situation the way you do is a false dichotomy.
Also, Steph is one of the most marketable basketball players in league history and has an open contract with a team sponsor. It’s frankly silly to compare that to the Kawhi situation.
Team sponsorhsips and player sponsorships overlapping are quite normal. What isn’t normal are those sponsorships being so much larger than the standard market rate and the sponsored party performing zero obligations.
Just want this drama to be over with
Yeah, let’s get back to pretending the league isn’t crooked!
Rather talk about the refs and gambling than this bs.
I don’t think the rest of the league owners care because Kawhi’s real choice at the time was between the Clippers and the Lakers, with the Raptors out of the picture.
Had the NBA had an airtight CBA that prohibited what the Clippers did, Kawhi would have simply wound up being a Laker. At least the way things went, Kawhi helped open a new arena for the Clippers, in effect finally making the other owners more money, now the Clippers are firmly rooted in Los Angeles.
Intuit Dome as a project was greenlit in 2017 and broke ground in 2021. Kawhi Leonard joined the Clippers in 2019, lol what the fuck is this revisionist bullshit.
Uh, they obviously needed a marque player for the opening of their new arena. Which they got.
oh hey the goalposts shifted
I mean part of the reason the aprons were put in place was to prevent Ballmer and Lacob from spending ungodly amounts of money that most other owners couldn’t. And funny enough rules were put in place because of Kawhi/Uncle Dennis and the 2019 fee agency and asking for impermissible benefits.
So yeah, if the rest of the owners don’t care about those two these STILL being ignored and the richest owner in sports performing cap circumvention only to (hypothetically) not get significantly punished which basically is an open invitation to ignore the salary cap if you want…then I agree.