As the NBA world waits with bated breath for the next piece of news about the Los Angeles Clippers scandal involving Kawhi Leonard, a no-show job, and cap circumvention, one relevant question keeps popping up around the edges.
“What’s going to happen to Kawhi?”
As more news comes to light, reports have consistently surfaced that Leonard’s representative, his uncle Dennis Robertson, was openly asking teams (the Raptors and Lakers) in free agency to provide Leonard with money outside the constraints of his CBA-limited contract.
If Leonard (through his representative) sought out such violative deals and benefited from the Aspiration deal, will he be held accountable by the league?
It’s clear that the Clippers are in the hottest water and stand to lose the most, up to and including but not limited to suspensions for owner Steve Ballmer or front office personnel, substantial fines, and the loss of whatever draft picks the Clippers still have in their very bare pantry.
But Leonard was at the very least complicit if this was a no-show job, agreed to the contract, and benefited from the money without ever doing anything for the company he was being paid to.
Is it possible the NBA could actually suspend the recalcitrant superstar, potentially costing the Clippers a serious chance at their first franchise NBA title?
It’s important to note the timing differentials in the alleged requests relative to the Aspiration scandal.
The requests reportedly made by Robertson were in 2019 when Leonard was a free agent. The Athletic reported that Robertson made requests to the Raptors and Lakers that included real estate and guaranteed off-court endorsements and income opportunities. Robertson even, allegedly, asked for ownership stakes in other franchises.
The Aspiration alleged violations didn’t occur until 2022 when Leonard signed a four-year, $28 million deal with the company.
But the NBA is investigating the violations, and the investigating firm has the purview to review previous events for potential violations.
As outlined by Mark Deeks from HoopsHype on BlueSky, any efforts by Robertson on behalf of Leonard towards circumventing the CBA are violative. From the CBA (both in its current iteration and the agreement in place in 2017):
"(b) In addition to the foregoing, it shall be a violation of this Section 2 for any Team (or Team Affiliate) or any player (or any person or entity controlled by, related to, or acting with authority on behalf of, such player) to attempt to enter into or to intentionally solicit any agreement, transaction, promise, undertaking, representation, commitment, Article XIII 247 inducement, assurance of intent or understanding that would be prohibited by Section 2(a) above."NBA
There are three reasons, though, why it’s unlikely that Leonard sees any punishment from the NBA.
1. The limited burden of proof
The NBA doesn’t require evidence “beyond a reasonable doubt” to punish the Clippers or Leonard for the Aspiration deal. The language in the CBA allows for circumstantial evidence or evidence that “cannot reasonably be explained.”
However, if we’re talking about the 2019 alleged infractions, none of these requests by Robertson — that we are aware of — were documented. Unless there are text messages, emails, or recordings where Robertson made those requests, Leonard and Robertson can plausibly deny that those requests were made.
Similarly, unless there is documentation that Leonard agreed to the Aspiration deal being a no-show job with evidence that he had no intention of fulfilling the listed duties in the contract, it will be difficult to prove Leonard’s complicity (through Robertson).
Keep in mind that the problem here is not just a justifiable and legally binding process for the league, but one that will hold up in arbitration if the NBPA challenges, which it will. (We’ll come back to that in a second.)
The league doesn’t want to pass down a suspension to an NBA champion and superstar only for it to be overturned embarrassingly by an arbitrator. For that, they would need fairly concrete proof of Leonard or Robertson’s complicity in circumventing the CBA.
2. Precedent
The closest comparison to this scandal is the 2000 scandal involving Joe Smith and the Minnesota Timberwolves.
When those violations came to light under legal discovery, the NBA suspended owner Glen Taylor and GM Kevin McHale, fined the team $3.5 million, and took away five draft picks (two were ultimately returned).
Joe Smith was not suspended or fined.
The league voided his current and prior contracts with the Wolves to remove his bird rights and stated that he could not re-sign with the Timberwolves. Smith signed with the Pistons for one year, then re-signed with the Wolves the following season for another big-money, long-term contract.
There’s no evidence that Smith ever had to give back any money; he just did not reap the benefits of the extension he signed initially.
Smith did not miss a game.
If Smith was not directly punished beyond restrictions on earning potential and a one-year ban from playing for Minnesota, with far more concrete evidence, why would Leonard face stronger punishment?
3. A superstar's league
There have been jokes made about how different this investigation and potential punishments would be if the former and late commissioner David Stern were still in charge.
Much of that has to do with the evolution of the league in the Superstar Empowerment (not Player Empowerment) Era. Superstars have more say, more influence, more power, and make more money than ever before.
In tandem with that evolution, the NBPA, the players’ union, has moved further and further to advance the power of those superstars. The current CBA still benefits superstars the most and has crushed the NBA middle class.
Some of this also reflects cultural attitudes. Fans love superstars, not just as players but as brands, identities, personalities. Leonard, who is a surly and withdrawn player that burned bridges in San Antonio and left Toronto after winning a title, is still beloved as “Board Man” and considered hilarious for his subtle personality.
The league is sensitive to this.
But the biggest reason Leonard will likely face no consequences is that the league will not want to pursue a drawn-out legal proceeding through arbitration against a face of the league.
Bear in mind that the league acts most often under Silver in pursuit of directives from the Board of Governors (as opposed to Stern who more often led the Board in shaping the league’s direction).
The owners don’t want to cross superstars and illicit ill will with that class of players. (They’re fine with bruising role players and restricted free agents, though, hence the new CBA, which punishes attempts to spend for a complete team.)
The owners hate this scandal, but they hate the Clippers for (allegedly) making it; they are livid with Ballmer for (allegedly) circumventing their attempts to limit his spending power and denying them the resultant luxury tax revenue share they are owed for payments to Leonard.
Punishing Leonard for making more money through a legal (though not-CBA-compliant) deal is not something the league or its owners will have an appetite for.
There’s little doubt when looking at the reliable reporting from all sources that Leonard and Robertson were compliant, if not advocates, of a deal that violated the CBA. Kawhi Leonard was not a victim in this instance.
But in today’s NBA, superstars like Leonard are not the ones who will face the consequences, unless Adam Silver takes a bold new direction in holding superstars accountable.