The Kawhi Leonard-Aspiration saga continues to roil the NBA world, with new developments highlighting the complexity of the secret $28 million endorsement deal. Pablo Torre, the journalist and podcaster who initially broke the story, is again at the center of reporting, revealing fresh insights from former Aspiration executives.

The latest incident came after internal disputes over the deal resurfaced. Torre’s reporting challenges the narrative of the company’s co-founder, Andrei Cherny, who emphasizes procedural irregularities and strategic misalignment.

In his first post on X, Torre shared the joint statement of Aspiration’s former CFO, COO/CLO, and CTO. “The Leonard Deal was presented to the company as a completed arrangement and executed by Mr. Cherny despite significant objections from members of this senior management team,” the statement reads. It adds that the deal “did not reflect any strategy previously communicated to us, nor was it reviewed through Aspiration’s Investment Committee process.”

They also noted that “while subsequent marketing efforts were undertaken, they were ultimately discontinued and should not be interpreted as support for the deal itself,” concluding, “In our judgment, the Leonard Deal was not in the company’s best interest. It was strategically difficult to justify then, and it remains so today.”

Cherny responded on X, stating that he “suspect[s] that social media is not the best place to hash this all out” and that he does not remember the Investment Committee, while insisting that “nothing in this statement conflicts with what I wrote yesterday.” His post framed the deal as compliant and defensible, downplaying the procedural concerns raised.

Torre followed up with a second post, emphasizing the discrepancies between Cherny’s recollection and the federal court record. “Good evening. You don’t ‘remember’ a lot about what happened at Aspiration, it seems. But I strongly recommend the opinion of the Hon. Lewis J. Liman, in the Southern District of New York, in the federal case that was explicitly cited in the statement I posted,” Torre wrote. He highlighted that court documents show the Kawhi Leonard deal bypassed normal approval channels and was executed without standard oversight.

The former executives maintained that the contract bypassed the Investment Committee and did not reflect any previously communicated strategy. They noted that subsequent marketing efforts tied to Leonard were eventually discontinued and should not be interpreted as support for the deal. In essence, they judged the Leonard Deal to be misaligned with Aspiration’s business priorities and internal controls, which made it strategically difficult to justify at the time.

Andrei Cherny Defends Kawhi Leonard Deal as ‘Legit’ as Mark Cuban Points to the True Driver

Aspiration co-founder Andrei Cherny has defended the $28 million endorsement deal with Kawhi Leonard, pushing back against claims it was a “no-show” contract. He explained previously on X, “The contract contained three pages of extensive obligations that Leonard had to perform. And the contract clearly said that if Leonard did not meet those obligations, Aspiration could terminate the contract. The ‘beliefs’ provision is not unusual in celebrity endorsements…It doesn’t mean you can have a ‘belief’ of not talking to a camera.”

Cherny added that he was unaware of broader discussions about the NBA salary cap and could not comment on actions taken after his resignation. He also noted that the company’s financial collapse stemmed from the criminal acts of co-founder Joe Sanberg.

Mavericks’ minority owner Mark Cuban weighed in on the situation. Cuban, who has been vocal about his belief in Ballmer’s innocence, pointed to Aspiration co-founder Joe Sanberg’s central role in making the Leonard deal happen. “NO ONE wanted it, except for the obvious exception of Sanberg, who…said he was giving his own, personal stock to KL. That to me is confirmation that he is the guy who made KL happen,” Cuban wrote. He emphasized that while executives were aware of Leonard’s payments, they were unaware of the wider financial fraud orchestrated by Sanberg.