The NBA just handed the Los Angeles Clippers one of the harshest punishments in league history. The investigation ruled that the franchise violated salary-cap circumvention rules through a series of illegal endorsement arrangements involving Kawhi Leonard. This has reopened an age-old question about where the league draws the line between endorsement deals and salary-cap rules.

This time, the conversation has pulled Michael Jordan into the spotlight. There was a time when the Detroit Pistons crafted the “Jordan Rules” to stop him at all costs. Years later, the entire league wished the NBA had done something else off the court regarding what was perceived as blatantly unfair. An X post by Basketball Examined mentioned:

“MICHAEL JORDAN IS THE SALARY CAP CIRCUMVENTION KING: When Jordan first became a minority owner of the Bobcats, NBA personnel were already letting it be known that he had an unfair advantage due to his exclusive access to future NBA prospects in his Jordan Brand All-American high school game and Flight School camps. This goes back to 2007, btw.

“When Jordan then became the majority owner of the team in 2010, walls were put up by the NBA to make sure Nike was making its decisions for the JORDAN brand on its own for salary cap reasons and to ensure that Charlotte didn’t have a leg up on the competition, which would have created a competitive imbalance.

“This was, of course, a departure from its previous statements that suggested Jordan handpicked his endorsers.”

Jordan became a minority owner of the Bobcats in 2006 before taking over as majority owner in 2010. By then, his deep ties to Nike and Jordan Brand, and his exclusive access to some of the country’s top young basketball talent through events and camps, had created a potential conflict. Here’s how.

His Airness was in a prime position to influence an NBA team’s affairs while remaining closely associated with a major basketball shoe brand. So, if an owner steers players toward endorsement opportunities with a company connected to him, those deals could raise questions about whether players were effectively receiving more compensation (as a hidden part of their base salary) outside the NBA’s wage structure. Intent plays a big role…

The Basketball Examined post listed the Charlotte players associated with the brand. Stephen Jackson, Gerald Henderson, and Gerald Wallace in 2010. Michael Kidd-Gilchrist and Jeffery Taylor followed in 2012, while Cody Zeller joined in 2013.

ESPN reported at the time that Zeller became the fourth Bobcats player signed by Jordan Brand. The number stood out because the brand had only around 20 active NBA players under contract, making Charlotte’s concentration pool unusually high. And the pattern continued…

• Al Jefferson and Noah Vonleh joined the brand in 2014.
• Frank Kaminsky and Kemba Walker followed in 2015.
• Nicolas Batum and Dwayne Bacon were later added in 2017.

So, the tweet claims that Jordan’s dual roles should have been examined, but the NBA chose not to. However, there is no proof that Michael Jordan circumvented the salary cap. The NBA also did not announce that Jordan secretly directed Nike to sign Charlotte players. The league’s reported position was that restrictions prevented him from making those decisions (more on this later).

However, the pattern was brought up once again after the NBA fined the Clippers $30 million and stripped them of five future first-round picks for salary cap circumvention. It also suspended owner Steve Ballmer for one year. Meanwhile, Kawhi Leonard was only fined $700,000. But has the league always treated salary-cap concerns the same way?

Why the NBA had to eventually recognize the Michael Jordan issue

ESPN’s Darren Rovell reported in 2013 that the league had put something in place to separate Michael Jordan from Jordan Brand’s endorsement decisions. The timing was notable because Charlotte had just added its fourth player to the Jordan Brand roster. Here are the official words.

“Certain restrictions were put in place to ensure compliance with our rules,” NBA spokesman Mike Bass said in 2013.

Bass also explained that the league’s Board of Governors had recognized Jordan’s relationship with Nike and the fact that Jordan Brand had endorsement agreements with NBA players, especially after he became the Bobcats’ majority owner.

The final message was that Jordan could own the team, but he could not simply decide which Charlotte players received Jordan Brand deals. That is why the viral tweet above is tied to the Clippers investigation. It centered on outside business opportunities connected to Leonard, including endorsement arrangements involving Aspiration and three other sponsors. But for the Clippers, the league determined that the team had crossed the line…

The Jordan matter blew up in 2007 when Danny Ainge, the Celtics’ general manager, was fined $30,000 for speaking with Kevin Durant’s family during the Big 12 Conference games. It wasn’t just the fans, but even NBA executives felt there was a conflict of interest, connecting this to what happened the year prior.

Jordan had become the principal minority owner of the Bobcats and, according to Yahoo Sports, employed OJ Mayo and other top college prospects as counselors at his Flight School camps. Then, the following summer, the Jordan Brand All-American Classic brought together the Class of 2007’s top prep prospects, giving Jordan exclusive 24-hour-a-day access to future NBA stars for days.

“I would simply like to hear how the league explains that this is not a clear advantage for M.J.,” one Eastern Conference general manager said.

This was only one of many questions that came up internally after Ainge was fined a five-figure sum for engaging with Wanda Durant, but Jordan had access to scouting and talking with the best hoops talent before the rest of the league.

So, the old Charlotte story has become relevant because of the NBA’s latest ruling. The Basketball Examined post’s final line was “the nba’s rigged.”