BREAKING: LAC Kawhi Leonard Found to Circumvent Cap

[F Gump]

I'm not getting your logic.

If I put capital into a company and have them pay my player under the table...payments that avoid the LT, avoid apron penalties and provide a way for my team to have an advantage in signing and retaining said player, I have absolutely circumvented the cap.  

This is so much worse than Joe Smith.  The only way this isn't a big deal is if so many teams are doing similar things that a majority of owners want this squashed.

"The only way this isn't a big deal is if so many teams are doing similar things ..." --- I don't agree with that. I think it's a big deal IF Ballmer indeed crossed certain lines (which we don't yet know for sure that he did) and it's NOT a big deal if he didn't. The devil is in the details (of what happened), not in the rule, imo. And now that it's in the public domain - VERY PUBLIC - there's no way for the NBA to pretend it does not exist. They will hire an investigator to determine what the facts are, and then  decide.

The rule is this:

It shall constitute a violation of Section 1(a) above [a prohibition against actions taken to circumvent the cap limits] for a Team (or Team Affiliate) to enter into an agreement or understanding with any sponsor or business partner or third party under which such sponsor, business partner, or third party pays or agrees to pay compensation for basketball services (even if such compensation is ostensibly designated as being for non-basketball services) to a player under Contract to the Team. Such an agreement with a sponsor or business partner or third party may be inferred where: (i) such compensation from the sponsor or business partner or third party is substantially in excess of the fair market value of any services to be rendered by the player for such sponsor or business partner or third party; and (ii) the Compensation in the Player Contract between the player and the Team is substantially below the fair market value of such Contract. © It shall constitute a violation of Section 1(a) above for a Team (or Team Affiliate) to have a financial arrangement with or offer a financial inducement to any player (not including retired players) not signed to a current Player Contract, except as permitted by this Agreement. 

The question will be what KL did to justify the $28M he was being given, along with whether the money from Ballmer to the business was otherwise justified and reasonable (ie, can it be explained as something Ballmer would have done without KL getting $28M). That is the hinge, and we don't yet know enough to be sure imo.

The problem in saying "Ballmer definitely went over the line" is that endorsement deals that give loads of extra money to a player are not against the CBA rules. This company has every right to give KL money, if they wish, KL has every right to take it, and LAC doesn't have to care. It's only where Ballmer/LAC can be shown to be using the outside company as a conduit to channel their money to KL, that's where it crosses a line.

My guess is that Ballmer would have worked to do this in a way that didn't cross any lines (since such endorsement deals are generally permissible) but the devil is in the details. We'll see where it goes.

BTW, if the investigation finds a line was crossed, the penalties are given in the CBA. It can include any or all of: fine by Silver up to 4.5M, loss of 1 FRP, and void KL contract, and if it is appealed to Arbitration the potential penalties go up. The idea that Ballmer can and would sue the league to prevent enforcement is fairly absurd, as he is a party to the agreement that says these are the penalties for doing x-y-z. He might not like it, if it were to be so ruled, but that's the world he joined.