ESPN caught up in explosion at the Clippers' bulls--t factory

A reporter on ESPN's ill-fated Steve Ballmer Innocent story finally speaks. It's a tough look.

Good morning. Let's basketball.

In the grand scheme of things, a sports media megalith carrying water for a billionaire who broke some cartel rules isn't that big a deal. There are grave injustices happening everywhere you look, and fears of societal fissure around our polycrisis are warranted. Unraveling what happened with ESPN's now-infamous story in mid-August declaring that the NBA didn't find any evidence of Steve Ballmer's reported malfeasance and wouldn't get seriously punished is small potatoes, and feels gratuitous.

By that's part of the job of this newsletter: gratuitous detail about arcane or largely irrelevant matters as it pertains to the National Basketball Association and the world it encompasses. We are merely playing our part.

In any case, we have two developments in unwinding what happened at ESPN. The first is a newsy conversation between Pablo Torre and TrueHoop's Henry Abbott, in which Torre reports that the ESPN story was borne out of settlement negotiations the NBA was trying to hold with the Clippers to little avail. In essence, the NBA approached the Clippers with findings, trying to negotiate a settlement, the Clippers balked and told ESPN what the NBA claimed it had found: no evidence of major wrongdoing. ESPN reported it. The NBA, mad that the Clippers wouldn't acknowledge responsibility, negotiated their deal with Kawhi Leonard and the Players' Association and dropped a hammer on Ballmer's head. So it goes. Abbott and Torre also noted in a real light-bulb moment that the other avenues of justice Ballmer continues to face – a civil suit by (fellow?) defrauded Aspiration investors against Ballmer, the Securities and Exchanges Commission inquiry into Daktronics' deal with the Clippers – might preclude the Clippers from taking any responsibility for what the NBA has determined happened lest it undercut their defense on those other serious legal battles.

The other development is from Puck News' John Ourand, an ace sports media journalist. He asked to speak to the reporters of that ESPN story and instead got an email response from Don Van Natta, one of the authors of the piece and one of the most respected investigative reporters in sports media. Van Natta's presence in the byline was immediately notable because he's not often on the NBA beat. Anyways, Ourand re-published Van Natta's email in full. I'm a little shocked the reporter (Van Natta) is digging in! In respect of Puck's paywall, here are some excerpts and my reactions. From Van Natta's email: