NBA moved the goalpost for Sarver despite decades of repugnant behavior

Robert Sarver doesn’t belong in the NBA, so why are they keeping him around?

In the United States of America, multimillionaires get away with disgusting behavior all the time. If your bank account reaches a certain number of zeroes and you’ve got friends in the right places, it doesn’t take much to get out of hot water.

However, the NBA upholds a unique power over people in this calss. Owning a team is not only lucrative, but it’s an extremely fun commodity and rare symbol of status that’s reserved for only a select few people. They could easily use their influence over such individuals to set a precedent that conduct like this won’t be tolerated. Instead, by allowing Robert Sarver to get away with this behavior, the league is setting a dangerous precedent and robbing loyal Phoenix Suns.

Long before the exploitative escapades of Robert Sarver became public knowledge, the die-hard fanbase in Arizona has called for him to be removed from his position. He’s a problematic individual whose corner-cutting costs the team. He’s the main reason why the ‘Seven Seconds or Less’ era ended so abruptly because of his resistance to paying players when the bill comes due and trading away valuable draft assets to avoid the luxury tax. His stingy approach nearly ended in disaster this summer with former No. 1 pick Deandre Ayton just barely sticking with the Suns.

Commissioner Silver and the league’s Board of Governors could’ve put their foot down in this ruling with a lifetime ban that would force the Suns out of Sarver’s grasp. It would send a clear message that it stands with those who were impacted by his regime and set forth a path that more closely aligns with the values it projects.

We’re talking about the same league that encourages its players to protest racial injustice in meaningful ways. The NBA invests its resources into low-income communities and programs that ensure basketball is accessible to people from all walks of life. It’s largely been considered the most progressive of the United States’ four major professional sports leagues for the way it amplifies the voices and issues that are most important in our society.

That’s why it’s so difficult for many to wrap their heads around this decision. Is Sarver going to keep his teams because it’s too much of a headache to force him out of the league? Does the NBA fear the ire of right-wing activists who would surely bombard the league for being ‘too woke’ in their sensibilities? Or is this simply a decision based on the financial implications of removing someone with Sarver’s net worth from a position that he’d surely fight to keep?

Maybe it’s some combination of the three, or something else entirely, but the decision to allow Sarver to waltz back into his office after a vacation and some HR meetings doesn’t align with the NBA’s last decade of decisions.