Kristaps Porzingis was accused of raping a woman in February 2018. The woman reportedly claimed Porzingis agreed to pay her as a settlement then didn’t pay. In trading Porzingis to the Mavericks last January, the Knicks reportedly disclosed an “extortion” attempt, but not the alleged rape.
One person briefed on the trade call between the teams and who was not authorized to discuss it publicly expressed the belief on Monday that the N.B.A. would not have allowed the trade to go through if the case against Porzingis appeared to be strong.
Because this person is protected by anonymity, I can’t assess his or her agenda and credibility. Does he or she have reason to protect Porzingis? Does he or she actually have insight into how the NBA would have ruled?
But that Stein and Draper included this assessment is telling. I trust they would cite only someone positioned to know the NBA’s thinking. I’m still suspect of the source’s agenda, though
I’m also not sure why the NBA’s perception of the accuser’s claim should have mattered, anyway. Either way, Porzingis has a contract that runs through the end of the season. Why does it matter whether Dallas or New York possesses that contract?
The criminal accusations should be taken seriously and investigated. That’s what’s most important. In the meantime, it doesn’t matter much whether or not Porzingis is allowed to be traded.