Brooks commits a flagrant foul on Curry and the NBA rewards him
Dillon Brooks hit Stephen Curry with a nasty foul to the ribs late in Phoenix's narrow win over Golden State, and the NBA's response was to rescind a technical foul he'd received earlier in the game. That's right—Brooks committed multiple questionable plays, including what should've been a flagrant on the league's biggest star, and the league decided he'd been punished too harshly. He now has eight technical fouls this season, still leading the NBA, but he should have nine. The optics are terrible.
Steve Kerr is absolutely livid, and he has every right to be. Brooks ended the Lakers game with an altercation involving LeBron James, then came into the Warriors matchup and immediately got a technical in the second quarter for verbal abuse toward either a Warriors player or a referee after finishing a play on the ground. Then he went after Curry's ribs late. The officials didn't eject him. The league didn't suspend him. And now they've actually given him a break by taking away one of his techs. That's not officiating—that's enabling.
Kerr brought receipts and the league ignored him
Steve Kerr didn't hold back after the game: "How can I not be angry? This is a guy who broke Gary [Payton II]'s elbow during the playoffs with a clothesline, one of the dirtiest plays I've ever seen. It's not like there's no history. It's right there in front of them. All they have to do is look. I don't see the point of video replay if you don't eject someone who literally hit someone else."
Kerr's referencing the 2022 Western Conference Semifinals when Brooks clotheslined Gary Payton II, fracturing his elbow and ending his playoff run. That wasn't incidental contact—it was a dangerous, reckless play that injured a player who couldn't defend himself in the air. Brooks got a flagrant-2 and was ejected, but the damage was done. Payton missed the rest of the series. That's the kind of history Kerr's talking about, and the NBA is pretending it doesn't exist.
The double standard with Draymond Green is inexcusable
Draymond Green was suspended for the Warriors-Suns rematch after accumulating technical fouls. Meanwhile, Brooks committed a dangerous foul on Curry in the previous game, finished that game without ejection, and was allowed to play the next night. Kerr pointed out this absurdity: Golden State complained to the league about Brooks's foul on Curry, and the response was nothing. No fine. No suspension. Not even a review that led to supplemental discipline.
Draymond has his own history of crossing the line, but at least the league holds him accountable. He gets suspended. He gets fined. The officials watch him closely. Brooks gets the same scrutiny from refs during games—he picked up that second-quarter technical quickly—but when it comes to actual punishment that affects his availability, the league goes soft. That's a double standard that rewards dirty play as long as you're not named Draymond Green.
Brooks leads the league in techs for a reason
Even after the NBA rescinded one technical, Dillon Brooks still has eight this season, leading the entire league. That's not coincidence. It's not bad luck. It's a pattern of behavior that the league refuses to address meaningfully. Brooks plays physical, chippy basketball that crosses into dangerous territory regularly. The technical fouls are symptoms of a larger problem: he doesn't respect the line between competitive intensity and reckless play.
The foul on Curry wasn't a basketball play. Hitting someone in the ribs after the whistle or during a dead-ball situation serves no competitive purpose. It's retaliation or intimidation, and it has no place in professional basketball. The fact that Brooks wasn't ejected for it—and that the league then gave him a break by rescinding an earlier tech—sends a message that this behavior is tolerated as long as you don't hurt someone badly enough to force the league's hand.
Phoenix won on the wire and Brooks almost cost them
Phoenix beat Golden State narrowly, and Brooks's late foul on Curry could've easily swung the game if the officials had called it correctly as a flagrant-2 and ejected him. The Suns would've lost a rotation player for crucial minutes, and Curry would've shot free throws with a chance to cut into the lead or tie the game. Instead, Brooks stayed on the floor, Phoenix held on, and the officials let a dangerous play slide because they didn't want to influence the outcome.
That's cowardice. Officiating is about enforcing the rules regardless of score or situation. If a play is flagrant in the first quarter, it's flagrant in the fourth. If a player deserves ejection, you eject them. The officials failed to protect Curry, and the league failed to correct that mistake after the fact. Brooks got away with it because the game was close and the refs didn't want to be the story. That's exactly backwards.
The Gary Payton II incident proves this is who Brooks is
Kerr's right to bring up the Payton elbow. That play defined who Dillon Brooks is as a player: someone who plays on the edge and occasionally crosses it with no regard for opponent safety. Brooks clotheslined Payton mid-air during a crucial playoff game, fracturing his elbow and ending his postseason. The injury required surgery and months of recovery. Brooks apologized, got suspended for Game 3, and moved on. Payton's elbow still has hardware in it.
That's not ancient history—it's relevant context for evaluating Brooks's current behavior. When a player has shown willingness to injure opponents with reckless plays, you hold them to a higher standard, not a lower one. The NBA is doing the opposite. They're giving Brooks the benefit of the doubt despite overwhelming evidence that he doesn't deserve it. That's not just bad officiating—it's negligence.
What the league should actually do
The NBA should've suspended Brooks for the foul on Curry. At minimum, they should've upgraded it to a flagrant-2 upon review and fined him. Instead, they rescinded a technical he'd earned earlier in the same game, effectively rewarding him for dangerous play. That's backwards. If the league cares about player safety—and they claim to—they need to punish repeat offenders who endanger opponents, regardless of their reputation or team's success.
Brooks should be on a short leash. One more flagrant foul, one more dangerous play, and he sits. That's how you protect players like Curry from getting hurt by someone with a documented history of reckless behavior. But the NBA won't do that because they don't want to be accused of targeting players or influencing games with suspensions. So instead, they let Brooks keep playing, keep racking up techs, and keep putting opponents at risk. Steve Kerr's anger is completely justified. The only question is why more coaches and players aren't speaking up.