2025-26 Team Developments: Trades / Free Agents / News / Rumors / Ideas

Otherwise if we aren’t trying to prove real cap circumvention, than what are we doing here? Are we just angry that an insanely rich guy (Ballmer), used another really rich guy (Aspiration), to help his friend (Kawhi) who’s a rich guy, just get richer?

Thats why in my first ever post on this subject I said, we’d be naive to think this kind of stuff doesn’t happen more often. How often do owners push company’s to endorse their players, or set up investments for their players like GS so they benefit from the tech boom. Part of being a good partner is trying to lift everyone up around you. We set a precedent if this is punished strongly that a lot of these beneficial addons could and should be policed.

 

What's going against Ballmer:

1. Direct ties to Aspiration on a team deal
2. Funded the company multiple times
3. His minority owner/50 year friend also funded the company. The lone time he did, that payment went straight to Kawhi just nine days after Kawhi's uncle was complaining about not receiving a payment. I believe the amount sent to Kawhi was $1.7 million... Likely paid or missed a whole quarterly amount worth of payment which adds up to around the $7 million Kawhi is owed.
4. The minority owner's daughter worked for Aspiration during the time Dennis Wong made the payment.
5. Numerous employees were interviewed and stated that Aspiration was in trouble and the payments were structured to get Kawhi paid.
6. C-Suite executives are on record stating that paying Kawhi was bad for the company considering their cash-strained business
7. Uncle Dennis has been on record asking for illegal payments violating the CBA as confirmed by Toronto and the Lakers. Also confirmed by Ballmer indirectly.
8. Steve Ballmer was previously fined for trying to get a player additional funds from a third-party endorsement company (DeAndre Jordan with Lexus)
9. Aspiration chose to pay Kawhi Leonard instead of the Clippers despite the Clippers having a $300 million dollar deal with Aspiration
10. Kawhi Leonard provided, based on the lack of evidence from his end, ZERO marketing or promotional activities
11. He's a numbers guy but got duped because he didn't verify the numbers of a company he was investing $60 million in?
12. --------------------------People can add more here but that's all I can think of atm.

What's going for Ballmer:

1. I'm just worth $150 billion because I got duped like an idiot!

 

NBA doesn't need definitive proof.

We believe Ballmer did it with intent. You may or may not.

Whether the NBA can prove Ballmer did it with intent is different than whether they have decided he DID based on reasonable assurance.

Just cause they might not openly state that Ballmer and the Clippers violated the CBA, doesn't mean they won't equally punish them as if they did.

Let's see what the NBA does.

 

Lol..you didn't post anything of substance here brother. Innuendo, irrelevant facts and hearsay.

 

Damn!!! SLICK the number one Hyena hater on this board, somehow finds himself in the peculiar position, to be defending the scumbag, from a rush to judgment!! This s*** is twilight zone level ironic!!

 

Hey. Yes I do totally get what he said and why. Little to no appetite to penalize and said they'd be treated fairly and he'd be hesitant to anything on "mere appearance". Which was a truthful and smart thing to say to ALL the owners in that meeting. He's got a whole group of lawyers in this firm that this will be their 3rd rodeo and know exactly how to go about it. Not too mention all the major groundwork of what and where to be looking at having been done for them already by Pablo. Slick says "circumstantial evidence" and he's already TOLD us he's not going to do anything. B.S. I put his key additional comments right above and to me those sound even more earnest to me.

 

[/QUOTE]

Bull s***!! And FOH that I am interpreting you wrong here. Silver says he would be hesitant to do anything punitatively on "mere appearance". You, "he's already told us that". Ergo Silver has already told us he's not going to do anything. Before he even waits for the findings of likely a million(s) dollar in itself INVESTIGATION. In no universe is "mere appearance" semantically the same as what looks to be "a s*** load of circumstantial evidence".

And as one article said, paraphrasing, kind of puffing his chest up after that and saying how much latitude he had in his decision making and the bad things he could do to them if he had to.

 

You don't have to prove either of these two things to prove that the Clippers/Kawhi circumvented the cap.

 

Yeah man, maybe my brain is just cooked from litigating fraud and RICO for the last 15 years and I can't think in layman's terms any more, but nothing you're saying makes sense or sounds right to me. What labor law do you think was broken when Kawhi entered into this endorsement deal, assuming he did so to circumvent the cap and wasn't expected to really do anything besides stay on the Clippers? And how does this constitute income tax evasion?

 

Well it did happen though after the fact with regard to the setup with Aspiration. Another potential "circumstantial" log tossed on the fire of possible motive for Ballz through Aspiration to make him whole .... in advance actually.

AI Overview

Yes, in January 2024, Kawhi Leonard signed a three-year, $149.5 million contract extension with the Los Angeles Clippers for less than the possible maximum amount
.
Key details of Leonard's 2024 contract extension:

• Maximum eligibility: At the time he signed the deal, Leonard was eligible to receive a four-year, $223 million maximum extension.
• Sacrifice for the team: ESPN reported that Leonard hoped his decision to take less money would allow the Clippers to re-sign key players like Paul George and James Harden.

It is important to note that Leonard's 2024 extension is distinct from his previous contracts with the Clippers. He first signed a three-year deal in 2019, followed by a four-year, $176.3 million max contract in 2021.

 

[QUOTE="LTLakerFan, post: 578100,
Bull s***!! And FOH that I am interpreting you wrong here. Silver says he would be hesitant to do anything punitatively on "mere appearance". You, "he's already told us that". Ergo Silver has already told us he's not going to do anything. Before he even waits for the findings of likely a million(s) dollar in itself INVESTIGATION. In no universe is "mere appearance" semantically the same as what looks to be "a s*** load of circumstantial evidence.






Nah... you GTFOH..Once again you post what I said, and then turn around, and interpret it to how you see it.

I said that Silver already told us, that he's not going to jump to any conclusions, based on mere appearances. You have yet to define, the difference between mere appearances and circumstantial. I'm still waiting on you to provide an example of both, pertaining to this situation, not some hypothetical nonsense, but to this situation.

I have no idea how, the burden of proof is on the league, to find hard evidence of wrong doings. Is somehow to be construed to mean anything but exactly what he said. He further commented about people jumping to conclusions that turn out to be false. None of that registered with you, so you skip to something about his broad powers, weighing all the evidence. Etc..as an embellishment of your position.

You still haven't posted all this "s*** load of circumstantial evidence", that refuted any of the FACTS I posted. Where are they? Maybe I'm skipping over them..please directly post them again for me.

Lastly I've already explained my position, on folks rushing to judgment about something, because it looks a certain way, and every body believes it too. On this board!!!!! So that doesn't mean s*** to me.

I was falsely accused of rape as a teenager, locked up without bond, told by court appointed lawyers, and prosecutors, that the evidence against me was overwhelming, and everyone were in agreement with this fact. And that I should just accept a lesser plea, and do a short stint in prison. All based on circumstantial evidence and hearsay.

I hadn't done s***!!!! It took a paid attorney, less than 2 weeks, to totally exonerate me from that BS, once he actually conducted an investigation. You know what the Detectives, and prosecutors told me at court, when all charges were dismissed? Sorry man, it totally looked like you were guilty, based off of the witness statements and circumstantial evidence! Everyone involved felt the same way, but it looks like we all got it wrong. That was their idea of a f***ing apology!

So..forgive me for giving people the benefit of the doubt, when hearsay and circumstantial evidence, seems to be the crux of an accusation. Even if I personally hate their a**! I have real, and personal reasons for having that mindset.

 

Sorry for your experience and that explains a lot here. But appearance fronted by "mere" to me is lightweight not well researched information that can be dismissed without a whole lot of work by good attorneys. Like you had, maybe he/she wasn't even an ace. If the ACE lawyers in this investigation dig and interview and come up with detailed, by ALL appearances multiple circumstantial problems .... let alone More than that .... it's going to be ON for Silver to do something. He's seen as a toothless lousy commissioner and is walking a tightrope here.

 

Sure, but the league won’t punish them properly unless they prove one of those two points. Otherwise you’ll get a Mickey Mouse ruling and a slap on the wrist.

To be frank, I’d like it if they were made an example of… Kawhi should be banned from the NBA for 2 years, the Clippers should have Kawhi’s contract sit on the cap even though he is voided, and Ballmer should pay the maximum fine and be banned from attending games for 2 years. But it’s not going to happen.

 

Meh..I'm done with this saga, whatever is going to happen, is going to happen. I suspect that the commissioner, is going into this thing with an open mind tho. Let the chips fall where they may.

I referred back to my life story, because that will forever be a part of my psyche, until the day I leave this earth. You will probably see me ,stubbornly going against the grain, on something similar again around here. It is what it is.

We cool..go Lakers!!

 

we're back to my first response to you, too, which is basically--fine, but do you think this is on the up and up and is good for the league?

so we largely agree. they definitely cheated. doing a trollface can you prove it annoys me (not saying you are, but ballmer is).

lol fatality.

me exactly. ok, fine, we all say it's great. let's exploit it then. but don't talk to me about rules again. they don't exist.

not in exactly the same way, but boy do i know that feel, bro. deep. i know what it's like to be accused of stuff you didn't do and just have to eat it. and to have people say you came out on top so you should be happy. but i'm not a billionaire playing a game. i'm just a guy trying to live.

 

A no show contract is not a federal crime? Maybe I'm just a layman, but I thought when it involved fraud, it was, perhaps I got that wrong, because this whole thing is considered fraud isn't it? The company paying the money was actually engaged in a fraud, not legitimate business.

I might be confusing income tax invasion, with money laundering here. But again I'm not a lawyer. I was thinking taking 21M, without an actual legal contract and falsely reporting that income as coming from one, is illegal. It would be technically a gift? which is taxed differently correct? Or just money laundering, I defer to your expertise here, perhaps I'm getting it confused and wrong.

 

The contract is definitely part and parcel of a fraud that is being perpetrated against the league, but that doesn't mean the contract itself is illegal, or that it violates any labor laws. You are correct that this all tilts towards money laundering, not tax evasion (that would all depend on how Kawhi declares his income on his tax return), but it's probably not actual money laundering from a legal sense. The fact is that, setting aside the CBA and the salary cap, you could otherwise pay someone $28 million to continue playing for the Clippers and to endorse a company but put a provision in there that more or less obligates you to do little else (i.e. this supposed provision that says he doesn't have to do anything that could harm his brand).

tl;dr: the contract between Kawhi and the Tree People is probably legal and enforceable, but all of Kawhi's/Tree People's/Clippers dealings together could constitute a criminal fraud against the NBA, and a violation of the CBA. But as many have noted, and I agree, this will probably not result in draconian penalties against the Clipps, and there is a next to zero chance of a criminal prosecution.

 

Let’s focus on key facts and not minor stuff.

1: So?
2: Yeah, it makes sense they’d feel that way. But at the same time it looks like the CEO was trying to curry favour with Ballmer and got 60m in investment from him after the first two of Kawhi’s payments.
3: Uncle Dennis is a cancer and needs to be made an example of.
4: From what I get, he was asking them to give a car to Jordan. It’s not excusable, but it’s also not in the same stratosphere.
5: Kawhi should be in trouble for this too,

Another part going for Ballmer is he reported the fraud to the SEC. That’s not insignificant.

 

Now this is fascinating to me. I was thinking along the lines, of dodging a specific tax rate, is a form of income tax evasion.

So damn, you can legally draw up an endorsement deal, that doesn't require the player to ever actually do anything?

The part I'm still confused about is this...if Ballmer invested 50M, how can that be directly tied, to a specific act, to cover an endorsement deal for 28M, that occurred 7 months after the investment? There has to be some directive attached to that investment saying so right?

I mean technically, he could been defrauded out of 60M, but still be guilty of circumventing the salary cap for 28M? This is the part that is losing me.