Warriors exploring S&T for Kuminga

[Twinkie defense]

Nobody is offering anything good for Kuminga.

So they would trade him for something good, hence will not trade him is meaningless

They said they won't trade him this summer because there aren't any good deals. You seem to be fixated on the first part and not the second.

Yeah I think that objection is a little pedantic. It's clear that what is meant is the Warriors aren't getting any good offers for Kuminga and will keep him before losing him in a bad deal. Everyone should be able to understand that.

[Twinkie defense]

I think at the deadline they probably won't trade JK either because his value then isn't going to change and they aren't going to get anything of real "value" so we'll just end up picking that 2nd year up. So we'll probably have JK for the next 2 years as it's unlikely any team is going to "value" jk the way Lacob "values" JK. The 1+1 is really just in case another team values an expiring contract more than they value JK.

Even if nobody wants to trade for Kuminga, a $23 mil per year contract with a team option for the second year (plus a bunch of first round picks) could be a valuable building block for a Giannis trade.

[Onus]

So they would trade him for something good, hence will not trade him is meaningless

They said they won't trade him this summer because there aren't any good deals. You seem to be fixated on the first part and not the second.

Yeah I think that objection is a little pedantic. It's clear that what is meant is the Warriors aren't getting any good offers for Kuminga and will keep him before losing him in a bad deal. Everyone should be able to understand that.

Sure the 1st part "will not trade him this summer" adds nothing of substance, which is why I found it funny. The 2nd part will trade him for value is what they've been discussing for the past month, which is not new. They've been recycling the same information for weeks. And yall want to act like this is some profound revelation that Lacob spouted off to TK. YAY we will only trade JK for value!! What a win for today's news cycle. You got them now Lacob!

[EvanZ]

So they would trade him for something good, hence will not trade him is meaningless

They said they won't trade him this summer because there aren't any good deals. You seem to be fixated on the first part and not the second.

So if the kings removed the protections on the 2030 pick they would trade him this summer, so the only pertinent information is that they will only trade JK for "value".

What I'm saying is that GS is saying they don't think this is going to happen. Think of it more as a prediction, not a philosophy. They are predicting no movement from SAC and hence no trade getting done. That is my read.

[Onus]

I think at the deadline they probably won't trade JK either because his value then isn't going to change and they aren't going to get anything of real "value" so we'll just end up picking that 2nd year up. So we'll probably have JK for the next 2 years as it's unlikely any team is going to "value" jk the way Lacob "values" JK. The 1+1 is really just in case another team values an expiring contract more than they value JK.

Even if nobody wants to trade for Kuminga, a $23 mil per year contract with a team option for the second year (plus a bunch of first round picks) could be a valuable building block for a Giannis trade.

Yea JK + Dray + all our 1sts for Giannis! Keep that dream alive Lacob!

It makes a ton more sense to just trade Butler for Giannis for team building purposes. Since they will overlap a ton.

[whatisacenter]

This was just another way of negotiating through the media…no reason to make any more of it.

[EvanZ]

It’s like breaking up with someone before they break up with you.

[vvoland]

At the end of the day, they are very likely to end up at a reasonable compromise (3/75 w/ a mutual option or 2/50) with JK.

No way Warriors are going to give Kuminga $25 mil per. For one thing, their current offer is the biggest 25/26 salary on offer to Kuminga, why would they outbid themselves? And why would they lock themselves into a contract that could cripple their cap or be hard to get off of? Makes no sense.

Also, you can't have a mutual option - either it's a team option or a player option.

Why 1+1? They are essentially saying to Kuminga, we'll do something for you if you do something for us - instead of making $7.9 mil this season you'll make ~$22.5 mil. $14.6 mil free money! And we'll still grant your wish of playing for another team, and even work you into the lineup more regularly so you can showcase your skills. It's that second year of the contract that allows the Warriors to get something in return for Kuminga - at the cost of $14.6 mil.

The 3/75, would likely, start at a number similar to what they offered (maybe a mil more). And I'm not married to the 3 or the 75, just an example of a middle ground they're likely to end up at.

I believe you're incorrect and a team and player option is possible, even in the new cba. They're rare but the option exists in spotrac, making me think it's a real thing:

https://www.spotrac.com/nba/option/_/year/2024/type/mutual-declined


Looks like Giannis has one in the NBA:
https://www.numberanalytics.com/blog/art-mutual-options-sports-contract-negotiation

[vvoland]

The only counter I'd offer here is that we don't know what the market looked like for Kuminga last year. It's hard to get a sense of his real market is now given all the context surrounding his FA, but teams aren't killing themselves to find a way to bring him in. It's very possible that nobody was looking to give up assets for him, especially knowing that he was looking to get paid.

If they were truly more concerned about BYC stuff and being able to trade him for a big fish in '24-'25, I don't think there was any contract they would have offered, other than something proportionally more than moody got (~4/60?). Small enough that his 4th year salary and his starting salary in the 1st year of the extension weren't too far apart. He would have NEVER taken that deal last summer.

This summer, it looks like they offered the 2/45 just the other week, when it was reported that the dubs were 'getting serious' about their offers to JK. That's 2/45, with a TO and no NT. xdrta mentioned dlo, a bunch of vet mins on MIL, and Hayes as folks that turned down the NTC but all but Hayes had a PO, not TO, in year two. Hayes just had the 1 year deal. So no one has accepted a 2nd non-guaranteed year that wasn't a Player option AND waived the inherent NTC. They dub's "serious" offer is trying to make JK the first to get reamed that way.

IF JK came out after that offer and said, we're done negotiating, it's the 3/82, the QO, or trade me, I'd be afraid that it's too toxic to move forward. All he's done is post an IG story saying 'I'd be on myself everyday.' Not exactly antonio brown on the dolphins. I wonder what their 'non-serious' offer was, an expired voucher to a vegas buffet after a 4 hour timeshare presentation?

I'm taking all the leaks about what the Dubs were/weren't looking for, doing, etc. with a grain of salt. It seems to me that Kuminga's agent went on the PR offensive a few weeks ago and my guess is that most of what we think we know is through that lens. I'm not saying you're not ultimately correct, just that there's a lot of conflicting logic when you start piecing it all together.

My read of it was they (turner, jk, and slater) realized just recently that the narrative on the internets is that JK turned down "5/150" last summer. That was my read of Turner's "twisted Slater words" to mean. The fact that slater didn't want to be the source of that narrative, if it was in fact, incorrect, also makes sense. That, to me, is almost a certainty.

Not sure who leaked the 2/45, not NTC, TO in year 2 to slater but it probably wasn't the dubs. Turner, I would imagine, also leaked the contract offers from Phx/Sac though it could have been GSW to say, 'look, we're offering him 'more' than anyone else.' I don't really think it matters much as the substance of that 2/45 offer is what really matters. As does the timing which, according to slater, just happend when the dubs 'got serious.' I don't think there's anything to conflict with those two items (the 5/150 and the 2/45).

The rest of it is window dressing and it doesn't really matter who leaked the trade details or whatever.

[CS707]

If they were truly more concerned about BYC stuff and being able to trade him for a big fish in '24-'25, I don't think there was any contract they would have offered, other than something proportionally more than moody got (~4/60?). Small enough that his 4th year salary and his starting salary in the 1st year of the extension weren't too far apart. He would have NEVER taken that deal last summer.

This summer, it looks like they offered the 2/45 just the other week, when it was reported that the dubs were 'getting serious' about their offers to JK. That's 2/45, with a TO and no NT. xdrta mentioned dlo, a bunch of vet mins on MIL, and Hayes as folks that turned down the NTC but all but Hayes had a PO, not TO, in year two. Hayes just had the 1 year deal. So no one has accepted a 2nd non-guaranteed year that wasn't a Player option AND waived the inherent NTC. They dub's "serious" offer is trying to make JK the first to get reamed that way.

IF JK came out after that offer and said, we're done negotiating, it's the 3/82, the QO, or trade me, I'd be afraid that it's too toxic to move forward. All he's done is post an IG story saying 'I'd be on myself everyday.' Not exactly antonio brown on the dolphins. I wonder what their 'non-serious' offer was, an expired voucher to a vegas buffet after a 4 hour timeshare presentation?

I'm taking all the leaks about what the Dubs were/weren't looking for, doing, etc. with a grain of salt. It seems to me that Kuminga's agent went on the PR offensive a few weeks ago and my guess is that most of what we think we know is through that lens. I'm not saying you're not ultimately correct, just that there's a lot of conflicting logic when you start piecing it all together.

My read of it was they (turner, jk, and slater) realized just recently that the narrative on the internets is that JK turned down "5/150" last summer. That was my read of Turner's "twisted Slater words" to mean. The fact that slater didn't want to be the source of that narrative, if it was in fact, incorrect, also makes sense. That, to me, is almost a certainty.

Not sure who leaked the 2/45, not NTC, TO in year 2 to slater but it probably wasn't the dubs. Turner, I would imagine, also leaked the contract offers from Phx/Sac though it could have been GSW to say, 'look, we're offering him 'more' than anyone else.' I don't really think it matters much as the substance of that 2/45 offer is what really matters. As does the timing which, according to slater, just happend when the dubs 'got serious.' I don't think there's anything to conflict with those two items (the 5/150 and the 2/45).

The rest of it is window dressing and it doesn't really matter who leaked the trade details or whatever.

Just a few weeks ago, it was reported that the Warriors had the best offer of any team, but Kuminga was determined to leave. Now, the narrative has shifted to the Warriors allegedly lowballing him as part of a year+ long running strategy to manipulate his restricted free agency and turn him into a trade asset. This, of course, contradicts earlier reports that framed Kuminga as untouchable. The truth is, we don’t know what’s actually being discussed in negotiations or how things reached this point. For me, the reports aren’t consistent or unbiased enough to put much faith in any of it. That’s the point I was trying to make.

[vvoland]

I'm taking all the leaks about what the Dubs were/weren't looking for, doing, etc. with a grain of salt. It seems to me that Kuminga's agent went on the PR offensive a few weeks ago and my guess is that most of what we think we know is through that lens. I'm not saying you're not ultimately correct, just that there's a lot of conflicting logic when you start piecing it all together.

My read of it was they (turner, jk, and slater) realized just recently that the narrative on the internets is that JK turned down "5/150" last summer. That was my read of Turner's "twisted Slater words" to mean. The fact that slater didn't want to be the source of that narrative, if it was in fact, incorrect, also makes sense. That, to me, is almost a certainty.

Not sure who leaked the 2/45, not NTC, TO in year 2 to slater but it probably wasn't the dubs. Turner, I would imagine, also leaked the contract offers from Phx/Sac though it could have been GSW to say, 'look, we're offering him 'more' than anyone else.' I don't really think it matters much as the substance of that 2/45 offer is what really matters. As does the timing which, according to slater, just happend when the dubs 'got serious.' I don't think there's anything to conflict with those two items (the 5/150 and the 2/45).

The rest of it is window dressing and it doesn't really matter who leaked the trade details or whatever.

Just a few weeks ago, it was reported that the Warriors had the best offer of any team, but Kuminga was determined to leave. Now, the narrative has shifted to the Warriors allegedly lowballing him as part of a year+ long running strategy to manipulate his restricted free agency and turn him into a trade asset. This, of course, contradicts earlier reports that framed Kuminga as untouchable. The truth is, we don’t know what’s actually being discussed in negotiations or how things reached this point. For me, the reports aren’t consistent or unbiased enough to put much faith in any of it. That’s the point I was trying to make.

I totally get that position. To me, it's about what rings true. The whole JK is untouchable bit was fiction from jump street. JK was involved in trade discussions and would have been moved if :
a. Siakam wanted to sign here long term
b. Uta was reasonable about the other assets they wanted
c. If Miami wanted him in the butler deal

The report a few weeks ago that the dubs had the best offer didn't seem believable then and certainly not now that PHX and Sac offers are public knowledge. In fact, the 2/45 offer, the only actual offer that was made that had any credible reporting around it, was a very recent development. The JK counter of 3/82 was also reported in detail. I have no reason to doubt either of those reports not just because of slater/shams/etc. but because those contract offers actually make the most sense, for both JK and the team. It also aligns with the team's prior contract negotiating stance with Dray/Iggy/Klay/etc.

I don't see the narrative of, "the warriors year + long running strategy to manipulate his RFA and turn him into a trade asset." I totally get the dubs not wanting to sign JK to a deal that would hamstring them in trade talks due to BYC constraints last summer. That was the smart move with the 'downside' being JK plays like an all-star and you now have to sign him for way more money. Obviously, that did not happen. Even if it did, RFA minimized that downside to damn near 0. Obviously, they want JK to be an asset and not a negative contract. I don't think they sabotaged his minutes or didn't give him an offer last summer to that end.

This year, I understand offering him 2/45 will FULL team control. MDJ should try to get the most team-friendly deal possible. I don't get making that offer in late July and letting this all drag out. I guarantee Turner would have leaked that trash offer (can't believe I'm calling 45M trash, but it's all relative) if it was made in June. They could have fought for the 2/45, compromised in the middle, and had a normal off-season. I bet there's someone in the org that just has to win the contract negotiation. The giants and niners both have a guy like that and we've seen how that goes. I'd be shocked if the dubs are the exception.

[Twinkie defense]

Looks like Giannis has one in the NBA:
https://www.numberanalytics.com/blog/art-mutual-options-sports-contract-negotiation

That contract was signed under the old CBA and according to Spotrac, the final year (27/28) is a player option.

[ChuckDurn]

So, a comment and couple of questions that are mainly for the cap experts.

I think a deal that brings back Monk is dead, as Sam Amick pointed out, they REALLY don’t want to have to deal either Buddy or Moody. So I’m going to assume it’s dead, due to multiple issues.

Let’s say Sacramento comes around, and makes the offer Kuminga (signed and traded) Ellis + Saric (total of $7.73M salary next year) + a heavily-protected #1 pick….. protected enough that it’s more likely a second-round pick.

So the questions.

1. Would you do that deal?
2. What is the most the Kings could offer Kuminga, and make the deal work financially for Sacramento? (E.g. if they start at $20M, can they do the deal?)
3. “As is”, I assume this allows the Warriors to offer the full TPMLE to Horford, and vet minimum contracts to fill out the rest of the roster, right?
4. Let’s say the Warriors offer to buy out Saric’s contract for 50% of its value (total value of $5.4M, buyout of $2.7M), allowing him to immediately re-enter the free agent market or consider playing in Europe. Would this change anything about what the Warriors could spend to fill out the rest of the roster?

[Twinkie defense]

I'm sure all sides would like to have this resolved already, but preseason doesn't start for two months so there's really no urgency right now except for fans' impatience.

[Onus]

So, a comment and couple of questions that are mainly for the cap experts.

I think a deal that brings back Monk is dead, as Sam Amick pointed out, they REALLY don’t want to have to deal either Buddy or Moody. So I’m going to assume it’s dead, due to multiple issues.

Let’s say Sacramento comes around, and makes the offer Kuminga (signed and traded) Ellis + Saric (total of $7.73M salary next year) + a heavily-protected #1 pick….. protected enough that it’s more likely a second-round pick.

So the questions.

1. Would you do that deal?
2. What is the most the Kings could offer Kuminga, and make the deal work financially for Sacramento? (E.g. if they start at $20M, can they do the deal?)
3. “As is”, I assume this allows the Warriors to offer the full TPMLE to Horford, and vet minimum contracts to fill out the rest of the roster, right?
4. Let’s say the Warriors offer to buy out Saric’s contract for 50% of its value (total value of $5.4M, buyout of $2.7M), allowing him to immediately re-enter the free agent market or consider playing in Europe. Would this change anything about what the Warriors could spend to fill out the rest of the roster?

Saric can no longer be traded until December. If they added Ellis they wouldn't also be sending out a protected 1st or 2nds.

[Twinkie defense]

Kawakami compromise plan:

It's probably not yet time for the grand compromise. But it will be time, eventually. When it happens, it likely should involve the Warriors upping the guarantee in the second year of their offer — from $0 to perhaps $14 million, so the total guarantee would be above $30 million over two years. (And by giving him a second-year guarantee, the Warriors would wipe out Kuminga's right to block a trade next season.)

This would give the Warriors more credence when they argue that they've got the highest offer on the table and would likely still be a very tradeable contract in February or next July. This also would give Kuminga more security than what the Warriors are offering right now and significantly more than taking the qualifying offer.

[ILOVEIT]

I think at the deadline they probably won't trade JK either because his value then isn't going to change and they aren't going to get anything of real "value" so we'll just end up picking that 2nd year up. So we'll probably have JK for the next 2 years as it's unlikely any team is going to "value" jk the way Lacob "values" JK. The 1+1 is really just in case another team values an expiring contract more than they value JK.

Even if nobody wants to trade for Kuminga, a $23 mil per year contract with a team option for the second year (plus a bunch of first round picks) could be a valuable building block for a Giannis trade.

Yea JK + Dray + all our 1sts for Giannis! Keep that dream alive Lacob!

It makes a ton more sense to just trade Butler for Giannis for team building purposes. Since they will overlap a ton.

This is my hope....that Warriors and Giannis (Giannis and Curry) are trying to make something work and the Kings are just playing the deception role.

There is no way Giannis wants to spend another season in that mess. Curry is his buddy.
Bucks getting a Giannis "light" Kuminga, Draymond (to be moved on to a contender for another pick), and three or four first rounders....that's a very nice offer IF Giannis says "Warriors or bust".

Anyway, Warriors should "keep their powder dry" if something like this has ANY chance of happening.

[Crazy-Canuck]

Even if nobody wants to trade for Kuminga, a $23 mil per year contract with a team option for the second year (plus a bunch of first round picks) could be a valuable building block for a Giannis trade.

Yea JK + Dray + all our 1sts for Giannis! Keep that dream alive Lacob!

It makes a ton more sense to just trade Butler for Giannis for team building purposes. Since they will overlap a ton.

This is my hope....that Warriors and Giannis (Giannis and Curry) are trying to make something work and the Kings are just playing the deception role.

There is no way Giannis wants to spend another season in that mess. Curry is his buddy.
Bucks getting a Giannis "light" Kuminga, Draymond (to be moved on to a contender for another pick), and three or four first rounders....that's a very nice offer IF Giannis says "Warriors or bust".

Anyway, Warriors should "keep their powder dry" if something like this has ANY chance of happening.

If jimmy gets a whiff that's he getting moved to Milwaukee, he's going to make what he did in Miami childs play.

[vvoland]

Yea JK + Dray + all our 1sts for Giannis! Keep that dream alive Lacob!

It makes a ton more sense to just trade Butler for Giannis for team building purposes. Since they will overlap a ton.

This is my hope....that Warriors and Giannis (Giannis and Curry) are trying to make something work and the Kings are just playing the deception role.

There is no way Giannis wants to spend another season in that mess. Curry is his buddy.
Bucks getting a Giannis "light" Kuminga, Draymond (to be moved on to a contender for another pick), and three or four first rounders....that's a very nice offer IF Giannis says "Warriors or bust".

Anyway, Warriors should "keep their powder dry" if something like this has ANY chance of happening.

If jimmy gets a whiff that's he getting moved to Milwaukee, he's going to make what he did in Miami childs play.

I would imagine in any giannis trade, it would be JK and dray that make up the bulk of the contract matching. Now, what Dray would do if he found out he may be getting shipped to wisconsin may be the stuff of nightmares.

[vvoland]

Looks like Giannis has one in the NBA:
https://www.numberanalytics.com/blog/art-mutual-options-sports-contract-negotiation

That contract was signed under the old CBA and according to Spotrac, the final year (27/28) is a player option.

You may be right. I've heard enough knowledgeable people talk about the mutual option being a possibility that I think it's a real thing. That said, not being able to find one makes it harder to think that. I'll defer to xdrta and the other cap experts here.