Could the NBA’s Probe into Kawhi Leonard and the Clippers Ignite a Controversy That Changes the Game Forever?

Here we go — a story that’s swirling around the NBA like a fast break: Kawhi Leonard and the LA Clippers might be wrapped up in something way messier than a double-double. Apparently, there’s talk of a secret handshake involving a shady side deal with Aspiration, a company that’s now kaput, rigged to dodge the salary cap when Kawhi inked his 2021 extension. The kicker? The company allegedly funneled $28 million to Leonard for playing absolutely zero minutes off the court. Looks like the league’s not taking this lightly, kicking off an investigation that’s got everyone wondering if this is a jaw-dropping bombshell or just another day in the wild world of pro hoops. And with Clippers’ owner Steve Ballmer’s involvement, the stakes couldn’t be higher — this could be a blockbuster or just smoke and mirrors. Buckle up; things are about to get interesting. LEARN MORE.

Is this an eye-popping revelation or a whoop-de-damn-doo?

The investigation from podcaster Pablo Torre and his team seems to unveil Clippers forward Kawhi Leonard getting a side deal with a now-bankrupt company called Aspiration, ostensibly to circumvent the NBA’s salary cap a few years ago when he re-signed with the franchise in 2021.

Advertisement

The investigation claims Aspiration received a sizable investment from Clippers owner Steve Ballmer, and Aspiration then decided to pay Leonard $28 million over the life of that contract … to do nothing.

Considering Leonard’s history with injury-induced and preventative truancy, it’s easy to surmise he would have no problem collecting several million dollars a year in addition to his max contract to chill.

No harm, no foul, right?

Not quite, since the NBA is launching an investigation, which was expected given the value of the alleged deal.

[Join or create a Yahoo Fantasy Football league for the 2025 NFL season]

NBA spokesman Mike Bass told Yahoo Sports, “We are aware of this morning’s media report involving the LA Clippers and are commencing an investigation.”

Advertisement

The Clippers issued this statement to Yahoo Sports: “Neither Mr. Ballmer nor the Clippers circumvented the salary cap or engaged in any misconduct related to Aspiration. Any contrary assertion is provably false. The team ended its relationship with Aspiration years ago, during the 2022–23 season, when Aspiration defaulted on its obligations. Neither the Clippers nor Mr. Ballmer was aware of any improper activity by Aspiration or its co-founder until after the government instituted its investigation. The team and Mr. Ballmer stand ready to assist law enforcement in any way they can.”

Circumventing the salary cap is illegal in the NBA. The Minnesota Timberwolves and Joe Smith tried to work around cap rules in an under-the-table move 25 years ago. Smith would sign three one-year deals at a lower-than-market rate so the Timberwolves would get his Bird Rights and then sign him to a massive deal on the back end.

In a lawsuit involving Smith’s agents, those details were unearthed — almost by accident. Smith’s contract was voided, the Timberwolves were fined $3.5 million and docked five first-round draft picks, essentially crippling the promising middle ground of Kevin Garnett’s career.

Advertisement

The fine meant something then, but it would be peanuts now. And that was David Stern’s NBA, where he ruled unflinchingly and gave the impression team owners worked for him, not the other way around.

This is a different NBA, where Adam Silver doesn’t use that type of flex with a new-age club owner. And in the Smith case, there was a clear smoking gun, a direct line. In this one, are Aspiration’s woes filling the bill the same way?

One can insinuate a bunch of things and draw reasonable conclusions from the report, but will the league view this as super hardcore, irrefutable evidence? And what’s more, does the NBA want to go to litigation war with the NBA’s richest franchise owner (Ballmer’s net worth is $152 billion), who also happens to be one of the league’s biggest ambassadors and, more importantly, one of Silver’s closest allies in the room? (The NBA’s owners are expected to meet next week to discuss usual business.)

“We gonna see who got the bigger war chest.” That was Avon Barksdale from the HBO classic series, “The Wire,” referencing a battle over territory between his organization and a rival upstart. Here, the NBA’s war chest is deep, of course. But who wants to push for this?

Advertisement

It’s seemingly hard to believe Ballmer invented such machinations involving team sponsors and deals with players. The NBA has numerous sponsors where players serve as spokesmen, and the teams have their own business relationships with sponsors as well.

Remember the long-gone NBA patch that used to exist on the left strip of every jersey? It disappeared midway through the last decade, giving way for team sponsors to put their logo there, an every-second reminder of “team X presented by company Y.” It’s long been a part of pro sports, even if it feels a bit smarmy. Who knows if this is common practice, kind of like what used to happen in college before NIL became publicly acceptable. If so, it doesn’t feel like something teams will be pushing for because Ballmer could open those other closet doors and let bones fall out.

This doesn’t feel good visually because it’s Leonard, and, according to the investigation, his uncle Dennis Robertson is somewhere near the center of it. Robertson is Leonard’s closest adviser but not an official agent. According to a report from The Athletic during Leonard’s 2019 free agency, Robertson asked the Los Angeles Lakers for extra benefits, including a private plane and house, part-ownership of the franchise and off-court endorsement money.

One can ask for the world even if it’s against the bylaws — doesn’t mean a team has to acquiesce, though.

Advertisement

Leonard spurned the Lakers, signed with the Clippers and thus this saga began. Will one look at the slightly below market deal Jalen Brunson took with the Knicks as evidence of something similar, even though his deal sets him up to receive the lucrative 10-year max at the end, where he can take up to a greater percentage of the cap?

Has Pandora’s box been opened, or is this business as usual, just in a different way?