Warriors exploring S&T for Kuminga

[EvanZ]

Cool story, bro. Too bad the numbers don't back it up. Here is his TS% for his first 3 years:

.600
.597
.598

Here's the usage:
22.7
19.6
24.1

This year he was .535 on 27.4 usage. I think it was the injury, 3pt %, and early season struggles. You think it was driven by a 3% increase in usage. Agree to disagree.

Other players that got 25M/yr on similar efficiency/usage as 1 way offensive players? Randle and Naz are two players that the wolves signed, just this summer, to bigger contracts than JK is gonna get. No one is calling them defensive stalwarts or creative savants.

thanks for posting the numbers that prove my point bro.

So you do think his efficiency dropped because his usage went from 24 to 27? Seriously? I was being sarcastic but, more power to you. Why do you think his efficiency stayed high in his 3rd season when his usage climbed almost 5% but dropped in his 4th season as it climbed an additional 3%. Is there a particular ceiling (say 25%) that gets geometrically harder to maintain TS efficiency once it's breached? Not trying to be a dick, genuinely curious why you ignore one year while focusing on another.

How do you reconcile his usage/efficiency numbers with players like Naz, who's TS and usage have BOTH been declining for 3 years straight. Whom you would have jumped at the chance to pay 4/100, right?

I don't have to reconcile anything. You just presented a completely irrelevant talking point. As for Naz, we don't have $25M to sign him, and if we did, I'm not sure that's how I would use it. I like Naz, always have before everyone else did, but he's not my favorite archetype tbh.

So if that's a point you think you're winning, I'd say not so much.

[EvanZ]

He played 70/74/67 games in his first 3 seasons. The one season he did miss real time was due to a severe ankle sprain. I don't think the knee has been a problem and I wouldn't be surprised if the 'knee issues' were excuses for Kerr to bench him.

Last thing, I did look at JK's splits two years ago, based on your prompting. You know what I see? I see his TS% dropping almost in tandem with his 3pt%. As his 3pt shot disappears, his TS declines. I see a much greater correlation between those two numbers than I do with Usage %.

I don't know if he'll ever be a consistent shooter from 3. IF he does get to a fairly regular mid 30s %, his value would skyrocket and, as I've pointed it out, he has done it before, albeit on low volume.

JK's splits and fg% drop when he dribbles or holds the ball. That's been consistent throughout his career so far. He's a play finisher not a creator/scorer. The more he has to create offense for himself the lower his efficiency will be. That's not very valuable. That's essentially John Collins who is seen as massively overpaid at 26M.

The low volume on 3s is part of the issue. Whether or not he makes 7 more 3s this year to be a 35+% 3 point shooter isn't going to make a difference. Using his percentage on such a low volume of shots is basically useless. It's how you get some posters to think JTA was a good shooter when he made 40% 1 year.

Or Naz Reid. Also, most players shoot better the less they dribble; that's not unique to JK.

Do you think you're winning this argument by introducing Naz Reid as a counterexample? You're only making your point weaker and weaker. You're arguing that Naz Reid isn't worth $25M. Ok, that's great. Does that make Kuminga worth $25M? Absolutely not.

Telling us that some other player that you think is **** is getting paid more than JK who is objectively a worse player isn't a way to win anyone over.

[vvoland]

thanks for posting the numbers that prove my point bro.

So you do think his efficiency dropped because his usage went from 24 to 27? Seriously? I was being sarcastic but, more power to you. Why do you think his efficiency stayed high in his 3rd season when his usage climbed almost 5% but dropped in his 4th season as it climbed an additional 3%. Is there a particular ceiling (say 25%) that gets geometrically harder to maintain TS efficiency once it's breached? Not trying to be a dick, genuinely curious why you ignore one year while focusing on another.

How do you reconcile his usage/efficiency numbers with players like Naz, who's TS and usage have BOTH been declining for 3 years straight. Whom you would have jumped at the chance to pay 4/100, right?

I don't have to reconcile anything. You just presented a completely irrelevant talking point. As for Naz, we don't have $25M to sign him, and if we did, I'm not sure that's how I would use it. I like Naz, always have before everyone else did, but he's not my favorite archetype tbh.

So if that's a point you think you're winning, I'd say not so much.

Why do you think this is some type of competition where one side wins and the other loses? I assume it's the same reason you feel the need to point out how early you were on a player (ellis, naz, I'm sure there are many more examples).

We're, literally, talking sh!# about something, almost completely, unproveable.

Can you explain why my point is irrelevant when you brought up JK being an efficient player ONLY due to low usage (brining up chandler as the example of 70%/11usg)? I then show how his TS stayed high in his first 3 seasons while his usage varied from high to low back to high. You seem to ignore the data points that contradict your thesis while focusing only on the years that don't. I can entertain the idea that JK is highly efficient when his usage is low. I looked at the numbers and they don't seem to support that thesis. In response, you resort to, "I don't have to reconcile anything." and "you presented a completely irrelevant talking point."

[vvoland]

JK's splits and fg% drop when he dribbles or holds the ball. That's been consistent throughout his career so far. He's a play finisher not a creator/scorer. The more he has to create offense for himself the lower his efficiency will be. That's not very valuable. That's essentially John Collins who is seen as massively overpaid at 26M.

The low volume on 3s is part of the issue. Whether or not he makes 7 more 3s this year to be a 35+% 3 point shooter isn't going to make a difference. Using his percentage on such a low volume of shots is basically useless. It's how you get some posters to think JTA was a good shooter when he made 40% 1 year.

Or Naz Reid. Also, most players shoot better the less they dribble; that's not unique to JK.

Do you think you're winning this argument by introducing Naz Reid as a counterexample? You're only making your point weaker and weaker. You're arguing that Naz Reid isn't worth $25M. Ok, that's great. Does that make Kuminga worth $25M? Absolutely not.

Telling us that some other player that you think is **** is getting paid more than JK who is objectively a worse player isn't a way to win anyone over.

I think Naz's contract is almost the exact definition of market value. I think he's easily tradeable at that number and most teams would have given him that contract. I was never arguing that Naz wasn't worth 25. I was arguing that if Naz gets a 'value' contract at 25M, JK isn't crazy to ask for that. Is JK an 'objectively' worse player today? Maybe. I'd rather not get sidetracked with that debate. Who will be the better player over the next 3 or 4 years? I'd rather bet on JK but a team like GSW or Minny, doesn't have the luxury of time to take that bet. For Cha, Naz Reid would be a massive overpay/mistake. JK, at the same money, would ... probably.. make sense.

[Onus]

Or Naz Reid. Also, most players shoot better the less they dribble; that's not unique to JK.

Naz Reid is a shooter which JK is not. Completely different types of play finishing.

He is. That said, I think they're very similar offensive players - elite scorers in bench roles with little creation upside. That said, I think JK is far better as an on-ball defender and both are pretty bad off-ball. In tandem, they are pretty similar players with the biggest difference being age and Naz's 3 year history of declining TS AND declining USG. One got a 'value' contract at 4/100 and the other is 'crazy' for wanting 25/yr on a SHORTER deal.

Similar in a general sense sure. Naz Reid creates space for others from the 3 point line, which teams are looking for. JK does not. So yes they finish plays, but how they finish plays are completely different. JK finishes in the paint. Naz finishes from 3. Their offensive games are nothing alike.

[EvanZ]

So you do think his efficiency dropped because his usage went from 24 to 27? Seriously? I was being sarcastic but, more power to you. Why do you think his efficiency stayed high in his 3rd season when his usage climbed almost 5% but dropped in his 4th season as it climbed an additional 3%. Is there a particular ceiling (say 25%) that gets geometrically harder to maintain TS efficiency once it's breached? Not trying to be a dick, genuinely curious why you ignore one year while focusing on another.

How do you reconcile his usage/efficiency numbers with players like Naz, who's TS and usage have BOTH been declining for 3 years straight. Whom you would have jumped at the chance to pay 4/100, right?

I don't have to reconcile anything. You just presented a completely irrelevant talking point. As for Naz, we don't have $25M to sign him, and if we did, I'm not sure that's how I would use it. I like Naz, always have before everyone else did, but he's not my favorite archetype tbh.

So if that's a point you think you're winning, I'd say not so much.

Why do you think this is some type of competition where one side wins and the other loses? I assume it's the same reason you feel the need to point out how early you were on a player (ellis, naz, I'm sure there are many more examples).

We're, literally, talking sh!# about something, almost completely, unproveable.

Can you explain why my point is irrelevant when you brought up JK being an efficient player ONLY due to low usage (brining up chandler as the example of 70%/11usg)? I then show how his TS stayed high in his first 3 seasons while his usage varied from high to low back to high. You seem to ignore the data points that contradict your thesis while focusing only on the years that don't. I can entertain the idea that JK is highly efficient when his usage is low. I looked at the numbers and they don't seem to support that thesis. In response, you resort to, "I don't have to reconcile anything." and "you presented a completely irrelevant talking point."

You were actually presented with numerous data that exactly support the hypothesis. It is your idea that Naz Reid was somehow relevant to JK's situation. Not mine.

[vvoland]

I don't have to reconcile anything. You just presented a completely irrelevant talking point. As for Naz, we don't have $25M to sign him, and if we did, I'm not sure that's how I would use it. I like Naz, always have before everyone else did, but he's not my favorite archetype tbh.

So if that's a point you think you're winning, I'd say not so much.

Why do you think this is some type of competition where one side wins and the other loses? I assume it's the same reason you feel the need to point out how early you were on a player (ellis, naz, I'm sure there are many more examples).

We're, literally, talking sh!# about something, almost completely, unproveable.

Can you explain why my point is irrelevant when you brought up JK being an efficient player ONLY due to low usage (brining up chandler as the example of 70%/11usg)? I then show how his TS stayed high in his first 3 seasons while his usage varied from high to low back to high. You seem to ignore the data points that contradict your thesis while focusing only on the years that don't. I can entertain the idea that JK is highly efficient when his usage is low. I looked at the numbers and they don't seem to support that thesis. In response, you resort to, "I don't have to reconcile anything." and "you presented a completely irrelevant talking point."

You were actually presented with numerous data that exactly support the hypothesis. It is your idea that Naz Reid was somehow relevant to JK's situation. Not mine.

Buddy, you've been running away from direct questions for like 5 posts now and have provided 0 actual data. The only thing you said that could be considered data is some Tyson Chandler stats that, if I looked, I'd probably find you made those up.

If your goal here is to 'win' then keep thinking you're doing that. Your 'dunks' look like smailagic from the dotted line. If you'd like to engage in an actual discussion, feel free to join anytime.

[EvanZ]

Why do you think this is some type of competition where one side wins and the other loses? I assume it's the same reason you feel the need to point out how early you were on a player (ellis, naz, I'm sure there are many more examples).

We're, literally, talking sh!# about something, almost completely, unproveable.

Can you explain why my point is irrelevant when you brought up JK being an efficient player ONLY due to low usage (brining up chandler as the example of 70%/11usg)? I then show how his TS stayed high in his first 3 seasons while his usage varied from high to low back to high. You seem to ignore the data points that contradict your thesis while focusing only on the years that don't. I can entertain the idea that JK is highly efficient when his usage is low. I looked at the numbers and they don't seem to support that thesis. In response, you resort to, "I don't have to reconcile anything." and "you presented a completely irrelevant talking point."

You were actually presented with numerous data that exactly support the hypothesis. It is your idea that Naz Reid was somehow relevant to JK's situation. Not mine.

Buddy, you've been running away from direct questions for like 5 posts now and have provided 0 actual data. The only thing you said that could be considered data is some Tyson Chandler stats that, if I looked, I'd probably find you made those up.

If your goal here is to 'win' then keep thinking you're doing that. Your 'dunks' look like smailagic from the dotted line. If you'd like to engage in an actual discussion, feel free to join anytime.

Can you do simple thought experiments? Just a question. Go look up Tyson's chandler TS% and USG% and tell me I'm wrong. Please. Just go do it right now. Do the same thing for Andris Biedrins. Please. And go do it for Monta Ellis. Just go learn something bro. You were presented with data from multiple people in this thread and seem content to not do any of the work yourself.

[vvoland]

Naz Reid is a shooter which JK is not. Completely different types of play finishing.

He is. That said, I think they're very similar offensive players - elite scorers in bench roles with little creation upside. That said, I think JK is far better as an on-ball defender and both are pretty bad off-ball. In tandem, they are pretty similar players with the biggest difference being age and Naz's 3 year history of declining TS AND declining USG. One got a 'value' contract at 4/100 and the other is 'crazy' for wanting 25/yr on a SHORTER deal.

Similar in a general sense sure. Naz Reid creates space for others from the 3 point line, which teams are looking for. JK does not. So yes they finish plays, but how they finish plays are completely different. JK finishes in the paint. Naz finishes from 3. Their offensive games are nothing alike.

I don't disagree with that. I also agree that 3pt shooting is more valuable in today's NBA than rim finishing. But JK is also a far better defender, at least, on ball, so I don't think the shooting discrepancy is the only difference. Again, I'm not saying they're the same player, but are comparable, and, probably, will get paid similar amounts over their next contract. My only point was about Naz's contract being called 'good value' and while I'm seeing half the board think that $25M/yr for JK is asinine. That's before you get to age, which, for most teams, is a big plus.

[vvoland]

You were actually presented with numerous data that exactly support the hypothesis. It is your idea that Naz Reid was somehow relevant to JK's situation. Not mine.

Buddy, you've been running away from direct questions for like 5 posts now and have provided 0 actual data. The only thing you said that could be considered data is some Tyson Chandler stats that, if I looked, I'd probably find you made those up.

If your goal here is to 'win' then keep thinking you're doing that. Your 'dunks' look like smailagic from the dotted line. If you'd like to engage in an actual discussion, feel free to join anytime.

Can you do simple thought experiments? Just a question. Go look up Tyson's chandler TS% and USG% and tell me I'm wrong. Please. Just go do it right now. Do the same thing for Andris Biedrins. Please. And go do it for Monta Ellis. Just go learn something bro. You were presented with data from multiple people in this thread and seem content to not do any of the work yourself.

Just learn something, bro? Your posts scream teenage incel.

You still haven't explained why JK shot 60% TS on USG of 24+. Or why 27 USG is sooo much more than 24. I guess it's because you can't admit you were wrong. It's ok, son. You'll mature and realize that 'dunking' on the internet is just mental masturbation. You may even find a lady one day that will be desperate enough to let you touch it. Don't worry.

p.s. I did look up chandler's TS/USG. At his peak, he hit 70% but was 62% on average. His usage never eclipsed 14 and was 13 for his career. So almost half of JK's usage. So, again, you seem to completely miss the point. Par for the course, but still worth pointing out. Next time, do better.

[EvanZ]

Buddy, you've been running away from direct questions for like 5 posts now and have provided 0 actual data. The only thing you said that could be considered data is some Tyson Chandler stats that, if I looked, I'd probably find you made those up.

If your goal here is to 'win' then keep thinking you're doing that. Your 'dunks' look like smailagic from the dotted line. If you'd like to engage in an actual discussion, feel free to join anytime.

Can you do simple thought experiments? Just a question. Go look up Tyson's chandler TS% and USG% and tell me I'm wrong. Please. Just go do it right now. Do the same thing for Andris Biedrins. Please. And go do it for Monta Ellis. Just go learn something bro. You were presented with data from multiple people in this thread and seem content to not do any of the work yourself.

Just learn something, bro? Your posts scream teenage incel.

You still haven't explained why JK shot 60% TS on USG of 24+. Or why 27 USG is sooo much more than 24. I guess it's because you can't admit you were wrong. It's ok, son. You'll mature and realize that 'dunking' on the internet is just mental masturbation. You may even find a lady one day that will be desperate enough to let you touch it. Don't worry.

p.s. I did look up chandler's TS/USG. At his peak, he hit 70% but was 62% on average. His usage never eclipsed 14 and was 13 for his career. So almost half of JK's usage. So, again, you seem to completely miss the point. Par for the course, but still worth pointing out. Next time, do better.

How old are you?

[vvoland]

Can you do simple thought experiments? Just a question. Go look up Tyson's chandler TS% and USG% and tell me I'm wrong. Please. Just go do it right now. Do the same thing for Andris Biedrins. Please. And go do it for Monta Ellis. Just go learn something bro. You were presented with data from multiple people in this thread and seem content to not do any of the work yourself.

Just learn something, bro? Your posts scream teenage incel.

You still haven't explained why JK shot 60% TS on USG of 24+. Or why 27 USG is sooo much more than 24. I guess it's because you can't admit you were wrong. It's ok, son. You'll mature and realize that 'dunking' on the internet is just mental masturbation. You may even find a lady one day that will be desperate enough to let you touch it. Don't worry.

p.s. I did look up chandler's TS/USG. At his peak, he hit 70% but was 62% on average. His usage never eclipsed 14 and was 13 for his career. So almost half of JK's usage. So, again, you seem to completely miss the point. Par for the course, but still worth pointing out. Next time, do better.

How old are you?

Old enough to be your father. Lucky enough not to be.

[EvanZ]

Just learn something, bro? Your posts scream teenage incel.

You still haven't explained why JK shot 60% TS on USG of 24+. Or why 27 USG is sooo much more than 24. I guess it's because you can't admit you were wrong. It's ok, son. You'll mature and realize that 'dunking' on the internet is just mental masturbation. You may even find a lady one day that will be desperate enough to let you touch it. Don't worry.

p.s. I did look up chandler's TS/USG. At his peak, he hit 70% but was 62% on average. His usage never eclipsed 14 and was 13 for his career. So almost half of JK's usage. So, again, you seem to completely miss the point. Par for the course, but still worth pointing out. Next time, do better.

How old are you?

Old enough to be your father. Lucky enough not to be.

How old are you?

[vvoland]

How old are you?

Old enough to be your father. Lucky enough not to be.

How old are you?

would you also like my address and ssn?

[EvanZ]

Old enough to be your father. Lucky enough not to be.

How old are you?

would you also like my address and ssn?

How old are you?

[vvoland]

How old are you?

would you also like my address and ssn?

How old are you?

How about I'll answer this question after you tell me why JK and Tyson Chandler belong in the same conversation about TS and USG? How does a center with a usage near 10 compare to a forward with a usage in the mid 20s?

[statsman]

What happens if there is a S&T for Kuminga after the start of the season? Does the first year get pro-rated, both in terms of actual salary *and* how that pro-rated season is applied to the two aprons? Just asking because we could end up with that scenario (I doubt the Bulls will go there with Giddey).

[EvanZ]

would you also like my address and ssn?

How old are you?

How about I'll answer this question after you tell me why JK and Tyson Chandler belong in the same conversation about TS and USG? How does a center with a usage near 10 compare to a forward with a usage in the mid 20s?

My dad just turned 82. Are you old enough to be my father? I'm still waiting for an answer. Son.

[Old_Blue]

How old are you?

would you also like my address and ssn?

vvoland, don't give him your address and ssn. It could be a scam.

[EvanZ]

What happens if there is a S&T for Kuminga after the start of the season? Does the first year get pro-rated, both in terms of actual salary *and* how that pro-rated season is applied to the two aprons? Just asking because we could end up with that scenario (I doubt the Bulls will go there with Giddey).

How can that happen? He'd have to take the QO first. 10/1 deadline.