Sprewell Wins, Loses Contract Returned, Suspension Cut, But He Loses $6.4 Million

Choking the coach turned out to be a $6.4 million crime for Latrell Sprewell.

An arbitrator gave him back his contract, spared him another $17.3 million in lost salary and cut five months off his suspension Wednesday. Anything more, he ruled, would be unfair.

“I find that a penalty of 68 games (and $6.4 million in lost salary) is commensurate with the severity of the misconduct, addresses the wrong done to the head coach, and conveys a message that violence in the NBA will be dealt with severely but always with due regard to principles of fairness,” arbitrator John Feerick wrote.

Sprewell remains a member of the Golden State Warriors, who will be obligated to pay him for the next two seasons unless they trade him.

The decision was a big defeat for the Warriors and a lesser setback for the league office, which issued the longest non-drug-related penalty in NBA history.

“We were shocked at this decision,” Warriors owner Chris Cohan said.

“The arbitrator is a very charitable man, and he made a charitable decision in respects to Mr. Sprewell in this decision,” NBA commissioner David Stern said.

It wasn’t a total victory for Sprewell, however, because he was hoping to return to the league this season.

Now, the choice of where to play is out of his hands and his future won’t be known until the Warriors trade him - which they are expected to do this summer.

“The reinstatement is probably going to make two parties unhappy - Mr. Sprewell and Golden State,” Stern said. “In fact, we have reason to believe Sprewell was looking forward to free agency.”

Sprewell’s attack on coach P.J. Carlesimo at practice Dec. 1 ignited a debate over issues of authority, sportsmanship, out-of-control athletes and fair punishment.

His one-year suspension was more than six times longer than the previous harshest non-drug penalty, and the termination of his contract by the Warriors also was unprecedented.

The arbitrator upheld many of the NBA’s arguments, but the bottom line was that he felt the punishment was excessive.

“The evidence indicates that there is no history of both the league and a team imposing discipline for the same violent conduct, on or off the court,” Feerick wrote. “This speaks to the issue of fairness, as I see it.”

He said the loss of 68 games and $6.4 million exceeds the total of all suspensions for physical altercations during the 1995-96 and 1996-97 seasons combined - or the 1992-93, 1993-94 and 1994-95 seasons combined.

Stern reacted with biting comments toward the arbitrator.

“I think the fundamental point is whether you can strike your boss and still hold your job. The answer is that you cannot strike your boss and still hold your job - unless you play in the NBA and are subject to arbitrator Feerick’s decision,” Stern said.

Feerick “missed the opportunity to send a message of what sports leagues stand for. On that basis, we’re a little disappointed,” Stern said.

Sprewell, who was in Oakland, Calif., on Wednesday, was informed of the decision by lawyers from the players’ union, but made no public comment.

“We are happy Latrell has his contract back,” said his agent, Arn Tellem. “As playing basketball is one of the great joys in Latrell’s life, we are disappointed that he will not be able to resume his NBA career until July 1.”

His return is subject to the NBA receiving assurances from Sprewell and the union that he will control and manage his temper.

Stern cited the “premeditated” nature of the attack when he issued the one-year suspension, but the arbitrator rejected that characterization and said Sprewell’s two separate attacks, which took place 10-20 minutes apart, should be treated as one incident.

Still, the arbitrator upheld Stern’s right to impose a considerable penalty when a player’s behavior warrants it.

“The stakes have been considerably raised in terms of what the commissioner will be able to do,” Stern said. “The next one is going to be a lot more than $6 million, there’s no question about that.”

The Warriors argued they had the right to terminate Sprewell’s contract under Section 16 of the uniform player contract, which says players must “conform to standards of good citizenship and good moral character” and prohibits “engaging in acts of moral turpitude.”

Feerick said the two attacks, when treated as one single altercation, did not constitute an act of moral turpitude.

Stern said that part of the ruling was “incomprehensible.”

The reinstatement of Sprewell’s contract means he will be paid over the final two years of his contract, although he still will lose $6.4 million in 1997-98 salary.

By being reinstated July 1, he will have the right to use team facilities over the summer and go to training camp next fall.

The Warriors are free to trade him, if they so choose, at the end of the season. By having his contract count against the salary cap, the Warriors lost the opportunity to use that money to sign a free agent next summer.