Lakers VS Slippers Discussion

ElginTheGreat · Aug 18, 2026 at 8:31 PM

sk2408 said: ↑

The Daktronics emails show Clippers employees asking Daktronics whether they'd spoken with Kawhi yet and if they knew when Uncle Dennis was planning to have him sign autographs. They're a corporate partner and Kawhi's employer is serving as a point of communication. There is nothing inherently wrong with that. A team can ask a sponsor for an update on what it's doing with a player, I'd like you to show me the section of the CBA where it says they can't. You're even allowed to build into a player's NBA contract that they will be compensated $X per appearance they make with a commercial sponsor if you want.

What you're not allowed to do is arrange for a sponsor to compensate a player for basketball services. That's violative of Sections 1(b) and 2 of Article XIII. But if you actually read them, its not clear that the Clippers violated either because Kawhi was on a max or near max (which is problematic for1(b)) and Aspiration and Daktronics may not constitute Team Affiliates (which is problematic for 2).

Aspiration and Daktronics are or were public companies. As a general rule, you disclose as little as you need to when you're a public company. Press releases are typically issued by public companies to cleanse material non-public information - if you've shared MNPI with a third party, you need to publicly disclose it within a certain timeframe. If you don't need to cleanse MNPI, the information in question does not trigger another SEC disclosure obligation, and you don't think it would strategically benefit your stock price, you don't disclose it. Because there is no advantage or legal obligation to doing so. I know this because I advise public companies every day.

Likewise, its not uncommon for sponsorship agreements to be structured to provide for a guaranteed base fee with options for the sponsor to require certain performance in exchange for additional compensation. What you're actually paying the base fee for is association with, and access to, the individual. If down the line you decide you don't want him to plant a tree or do a commercial, or he decides he doesn't want to do it, whatever. He just won't get more than the base fee. My understanding is that for celebrities, a guaranteed minimum fee with subsequent optionality is the market standard in sponsorship agreements. I'll note that the Kawhi/Aspiration contract isn't publicly available, Pablo just said he had it, it was for $28 million and required little to no actual promotional work. So I think it's pretty likely it was structured the way I said. A base amount is guaranteed and the total amount of the contract can go up to $28 million if Aspiration exercised its right to have Kawhi do certain things, which they probably didn't do.

Michael McCann, a prominent sports lawyer, published an article and went on Zach Lowe's show last September when this all started and basically said what I've been saying. Plenty of actual lawyers, like me, have read the CBA and think this is murky. Plenty of actual lawyers have done the same and disagree. Feel free to provide your analysis.
Click to expand...

While I've been in management for a while now, the law degree hanging on my wall and the bar exam passed many moons ago say I am at least somewhat familiar with the law and how to interpret it.

My comment was snarky. You're certainly welcome to your opinion. I will return to this tomorrow but a good bit more has been released since McCann spoke on this last year.

Log in or Sign up

Lakers VS Slippers Discussion

ElginTheGreat - Lakers Legend -

Share This Page