Here’s a detailed summary of the situation involving Adam Silver, Steve Ballmer, the Los Angeles Clippers and the alleged scheme tied to Kawhi Leonard.
Background
The company at the centre is Aspiration Fund Adviser, LLC (“Aspiration”), a sustainability/fintech firm. Its co‑founder, Joseph Sanberg, pled guilty in federal court in Los Angeles to wire‑fraud charges. Prosecutors say the company defrauded investors and lenders of $248 million.
The Clippers, led by owner Steve Ballmer, signed a partnership with Aspiration in September 2021 (reportedly ~$300 million) shortly after Kawhi Leonard signed a four‑year, ~$176 million extension with the Clippers.
The allegation: Leonard was paid via an endorsement or consulting deal with Aspiration (~$28 million) for services he apparently did not render (a “no‑show” job), and that this arrangement was designed to help the Clippers circumvent the NBA’s salary‑cap rules.
Meanwhile Ballmer reportedly invested about $50 million in Aspiration.
What Adam Silver Has Confirmed / Said
Silver acknowledged that the NBA is investigating the relationship between the Clippers, Leonard and Aspiration.
He noted that the federal investigation (via Aspiration’s fraud case) and the NBA’s internal review will play a significant role in any decision the league makes.
He emphasized the league will not rush judgment: “I’d say … we’re not a court of law … we will look at the totality of the evidence.”
Silver said he has “very broad powers” to discipline teams or owners (fines, voiding contracts, loss of draft picks).
He told the NBA Board of Governors to withhold judgment pending the investigation.
Why the $248 Million Figure Matters
The figure refers to the amount prosecutors say Aspiration defrauded investors/lenders.
That scale of fraud means the FBI/federal prosecutors’ findings may produce documentation (bank records, internal emails, investment disclosures) that the NBA can use to assess whether rules were violated.
Silver pointed out that while circumstantial evidence may suffice in some cases, “just appearance of impropriety” is not enough; you need a full understanding of what happened.
Key Issues Under Review
1. Endorsement Deal/No‑Show Job: Did Leonard’s contract with Aspiration involve genuine promotional work? Or was it a mechanism for extra compensation tied implicitly to his staying with the Clippers?
2. Owner Involvement: What was Ballmer’s role? Did the Clippers or Ballmer facilitate the deal to allow extra value to Leonard (which would violate the salary‑cap circumvent clause)? Or was Ballmer himself misled/fraudulently used? Ballmer has claimed he was personally defrauded.
3. Salary‑Cap Circumvention Clause: The NBA’s CBA states that a team (or affiliate) cannot enter into an agreement with a third‑party sponsor where compensation to a player is “substantially in excess” of fair market value for services rendered.
4. Independence & Fairness: Silver repeatedly emphasises fairness—if discipline is imposed it must be grounded in evidence, not just optics.
5. Timeline & Process: The leagues’ investigation is ongoing, outside law‑firm Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz has been retained. No definitive timeline given.
Implications for Ballmer and the Clippers
If the investigation finds that Ballmer/Clippers knowingly used the Aspiration deal to give Leonard value outside his official contract, the Clippers could face: heavy fines, forfeiture of draft picks, voiding of player contract(s).
Ballmer has stated publicly that he welcomes the investigation and claims he did not know the full structure of the deal.
The investigation isn’t only about punishment—it may lead to the league reviewing its rules around owner investments, third‑party endorsements, corporate partnerships. Silver hinted at that.
What’s Next
The NBA will wait for more evidence (federal/court filings from the Aspiration fraud case + internal league investigations) before making a decision. Silver said it will “take some time.”
The relationship with Aspiration (which has filed for bankruptcy) and the documents produced in that process will be central.
Final disciplinary decisions may come after the NBA’s investigation concludes; there’s no set deadline.
The outcome may set precedent for how endorsements, third‑party payments and owner investments are treated in the future.