Phx-Suns.Net

I'm not a lawyer (tho I play one on TV) so I don't know what counts as a "smoking gun" vs circumstantial evidence. I would think there would need to be some kind of communication found between Ballmer or one of his people and whomever was setting this up and receiving the funds to give to Kawhi. It seems like right now Ballmer can just throw someone else under the bus and say "I had no idea my money was going to this" and Kawhi can say "My manager and accountant handle my finances, I just spend the money that's in my account". There's a lot of smoke here and Silver and his people aren't stupid so even if there's no smoking gun they may still try and punish the org for some kind of improper conduct?

I think I read that the NBA can use circumstantial evidence to decide a case like this. It isn't a court of law and isn't held to the same evidentiary standard. Another way to phrase it is, unless Ballmer, Kawhi, et al can provide a plausible alternative explanation that is somewhat supported by some evidence, they may be unable to dissuade the NBA from the notion that the most likely outcome is that they did it.

Yea I know Silver said he has latitude on punishment but also said he won't hand down a stiff punishment if there isn't hard evidence.

ShelC wrote: ↑

Sun Sep 14, 2025 11:17 am

Yea I know Silver said he has latitude on punishment but also said he won't hand down a stiff punishment if there isn't hard evidence.

Cumtown 2025

Shel do you really play a lawyer on TV?

Howard Beck went on a couple of podcasts and stated that during the governors meeting Silver made it very clear that the duty is on the league to prove that the Clippers acted inappropriately. So there’s that.

Lol no I just joking.

The Clippers have definitely aroused suspicion so we have to wait and see how deep Silver goes with the investigation or if he directs the league to finish early so this isn't hanging over the start of the season.

It feels like Silver is buddies with Balmer and want to sweep the whole thing under a rug.

I also find it interesting that the talking heads think that the 5 firsts in the Joe Smith punishment is the ceiling.

It's about preventing other owners/players from cutting these deal as much as it is punishing the Clippers IMO. Even a $500m fine won't hurt Ballmer, but other owners can't take that kind of a hit. Draft picks hurt the team (tho Silver may not want to hurt a team like that in a major market). And suspending Kawhi for a season will make the players take notice too. If if ends up as some $250K fine, two 2nds and a 15 game suspension for Kawhi, all the players and owners will take that punishment if it means an owner getting a major FA and that player making an extra $30mil off the books.

pickle wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 15, 2025 12:07 am

I also find it interesting that the talking heads think that the 5 firsts in the Joe Smith punishment is the ceiling.

That was under David Stern, and in many cases Adam Silver has shown a gentler touch than Stern. But we'll see. I don't think Silver is a pushover, and the other owners may pressure him to give a stiff penalty for this.

The Joe Smith thing was so stupid, too. Taking that kind of risk for Joe Smith? Really? He was ok, but definitely not worth giving him a promised big contract in year 4.

The Timberwolves FO was not exactly run by rocket scientists back then.

Remember the NBA punishing Denver over the 1999 McDyess signing? Neither do I.

Our friend Baxter Holmes adding more fuel to the Kawhi saga.

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/462 ... a-clippers

I wonder if Cubes is going to write 3,000 words defending Kawhi on this.

It seems blatantly obvious they did it…I also just kinda think it’s probably being done by many…Cuban probably did it and I wouldn’t be surprised in the least if Ishbia did…probably why Tyus Jones signed for the minimum.

Well, let's not just start making blind accusations.

I wonder if teams are (or should be?) obligated to report these kinds of requests by a player during FA, to the league. If Kawhi's reps are asking for things that are in clear violation of the CBA during FA negotiations, shouldn't the league be notified so it can step in and tell those reps to knock it off?

Again, there's a huge gray area with this sort of stuff that the league knows about but doesn't take action against because it's not against any CBA rules or it's seen as just how business/relationships are. You can probably point to any team over the last 10-15 years that's helped a player make money off the court. That doesn't necessarily mean they're in violation of "cap circumvention" or affecting, by definition, BRI. It's just business.

Superbone wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 17, 2025 12:22 pm

Well, let's not just start making blind accusations.

Not an accusation, just saying I wouldn’t be surprised