Warriors exploring S&T for Kuminga

[vvoland]

Off seasons....phew. This has gotten pretty rough.

People defending sex with minors certainly wasn't on my bingo card

[vvoland]

Well it depends what is meant by "not that important". It doesn't mean there is no importance whatsoever. It means to the extent he has some market value left, then the importance is proportional to that value. That is what they are trying to extract. Any Warriors fan should hope they can squeeze as much juice as possible out of this lemon.

I think he's more valuable here vs the market value we're currently getting. We'll need 30+ starts, at minimum, when JB and Dray rest, and that's without injuries to either of them. 40+ games if you want to count Steph. Without JK (assuming we don't get a 6'8" player back), we only have Gui and Moody as backup 3/4s. If that's not bad enough, who plays the other 30+ minutes at those two spots when Moody and Gui start? Jackson Rowe? Maybe GP2, if he's back?

That's a huge achilles' heel and the hatred for JK seems to be enough for the board to ignore this red flag.

Couldn’t agree more. By the way, your comments on this thread have been a breath of fresh air. Thanks!

Thank you. It's nice to know there are more of us, in the shadows. I think that makes 5

[Larry Ellison]

It was more than that. It's been a while. I paid attention when it was happening. I am just going off my recollections. She was bragging on social media about hooking up with Josh. It was the inadvertent public disclosure of an inappropriate relationship that brought it to a screaching halt. She was 15 years old and didn't realize the potential consequences by posting on IG that she just f*ed Josh Giddey. I only know what I saw online so I could be wrong. My impression was they were a thing, not a one night stand, both were ok with it, and it was only her dumb social media post that ended it.

She posted on IG "I just f*ed Josh Giddey." That is a fact. The post was rapidly deleted. But I saw the screen capture myself at the time. Nothing is ever truly deleted on the Internet. She was bragging. She was immature. This was the catalyst for the entire investigation. Beyond that, I don't like to speculate about factual issues that I don't have personal knowledge of. My uninformed speculation is that things were going swimmingly and he would have continued the relationship with her if it had not been publicly exposed. But it was. I was expecting criminal prosecution and NBA discipline. It never happened. The girl refused to cooperate. I don't blame her parents for wanting to shut it down instead of create a spectacle with a trial. She was a wild child and a willing participant in the relationship. Josh was 19. He should have known better and found a different girl.

You have represented yourself as a lawyer. These are statements unbecoming of the profession. Quite frankly, they constitute victim shaming.

What do you know about my profession? I already said it was a strict liability offense and she is not capable of consent. What Josh did was a crime. I thought it would be prosecuted. I thought NBA would suspend him. I was just discussing the facts as I understand them. Facts matter in the legal world, Old Blue. "Unbecoming of the profession" is a strong statement. We take ethics seriously. You don't know me and I don't know you. I am not sure why you would come at me like that. Unless you are also a lawyer, I'm confident I know more than you about the profession. I can speak bluntly sometimes. But what you said was a personal attack. Other lawyers would show more restraint in how they articulate their opinions.

I'm going to give this Board the benefit of the doubt that your statements don't represent everyone. I can go back to never posting if my comments are not seen as a positive contribution to the dialogue.

[Old_Blue]

What do you know about my profession? I already said it was a strict liability offense and she is not capable of consent. What Josh did was a crime. I thought it would be prosecuted. I thought NBA would suspend him. I was just discussing the facts as I understand them. Facts matter in the legal world, Old Blue. "Unbecoming of the profession" is a strong statement. We take ethics seriously. You don't know me and I don't know you. I am not sure why you would come at me like that. Unless you are also a lawyer, I'm confident I know more than you about the profession. I can speak bluntly sometimes. But what you said was a personal attack. Other lawyers would show more restraint in how they articulate their opinions.

I'm going to give this Board the benefit of the doubt that your statements don't represent everyone. I can go back to never posting if my comments are not seen as a positive contribution to the dialogue.

30 years in the profession as of this year. And, when I go into legal mode, I choose my words precisely. I used the phrase I did with you for a reason. Read back what you wrote. I'm sure you will agree that you could have done much better in representing the profession.

[Crazy-Canuck]

Women have been stalking and trapping athletes for decades. The only difference in the giddey situation was that he was caught.

She may be 15, but in no way is she the naive and innocent 15 yr old that many fathers hope their daughters would be. She lied about her age, that's a fact. She knew what she was doing. She wasnt tricked nor groomed by giddey.

Giddey is a pedophile, not because he slept with her that first time, but for continuing the relationship.

As far as basketball goes, it's all moot.

Dubs had no problems with lamb, so they'll have no problems with giddey, bridges, etc..

Personally, im good with none of them.

[statsman]

I thought that the Kuminga offseason and this thread couldn't get any worse, but then it morphed into Giddey. Oof.

[Crazy-Canuck]

I thought that the Kuminga offseason and this thread couldn't get any worse, but then it morphed into Giddey. Oof.

Wait till we're linked to miles bridges

[whatisacenter]

I thought that the Kuminga offseason and this thread couldn't get any worse, but then it morphed into Giddey. Oof.

Wait till we're linked to miles bridges

I will literally root against the Warriors if they brought in Bridges…

[Larry Ellison]

What do you know about my profession? I already said it was a strict liability offense and she is not capable of consent. What Josh did was a crime. I thought it would be prosecuted. I thought NBA would suspend him. I was just discussing the facts as I understand them. Facts matter in the legal world, Old Blue. "Unbecoming of the profession" is a strong statement. We take ethics seriously. You don't know me and I don't know you. I am not sure why you would come at me like that. Unless you are also a lawyer, I'm confident I know more than you about the profession. I can speak bluntly sometimes. But what you said was a personal attack. Other lawyers would show more restraint in how they articulate their opinions.

I'm going to give this Board the benefit of the doubt that your statements don't represent everyone. I can go back to never posting if my comments are not seen as a positive contribution to the dialogue.

30 years in the profession as of this year. And, when I go into legal mode, I choose my words precisely. I used the phrase I did with you for a reason. Read back what you wrote. I'm sure you will agree that you could have done much better in representing the profession.

Well, 26 years for me. I speak differently on an Internet message board than I would in court. I am not a spokesperson for the profession. I have helped many people over the years, made a difference in their lives, and done so in an ethical manner. I will give you credit for having done the same. I am always reevaluating how I choose my words. You could have voiced your own opinion better. I am not interested in fighting with you. I don't think our opinions are too different. Do you think the factual issues I raised were relevant to the DA in deciding whether to prosecute? You know they were. Every DA has to consider what a jury would think. The legal system is not perfect but it is our best attempt at justice. A non-cooperating witness in a consensual relationship presents challenges. I wanted them to prosecute Josh. I was disappointed they didn't.

I don't want friction with you, Old Blue, but it takes two to make that happen.

[Twinkie defense]

People talk about noel and Schroeder and, possibly, JK but the real bag fumble was Glenn Taylor. The blazers just sold for over 4B but he got 1.5 for the wolves? Ouch

That's crazy. Portland is a slightly larger city but not by a lot, they seem like they are similar markets. On the other hand, Portland doesn't have any NFL, NHL, MLB teams competing for dollars like the Wolves do, maybe that's a factor? Almost 3X the price though, jeez. Hope they aren't planning on moving the Blazers.

I think that while earlier team sales (like Sonics) were vanity projects, current multi-billion dollar team sales are business decisions, and Blazers will stay in Portland (where they are extremely popular).

[Old_Blue]

What do you know about my profession? I already said it was a strict liability offense and she is not capable of consent. What Josh did was a crime. I thought it would be prosecuted. I thought NBA would suspend him. I was just discussing the facts as I understand them. Facts matter in the legal world, Old Blue. "Unbecoming of the profession" is a strong statement. We take ethics seriously. You don't know me and I don't know you. I am not sure why you would come at me like that. Unless you are also a lawyer, I'm confident I know more than you about the profession. I can speak bluntly sometimes. But what you said was a personal attack. Other lawyers would show more restraint in how they articulate their opinions.

I'm going to give this Board the benefit of the doubt that your statements don't represent everyone. I can go back to never posting if my comments are not seen as a positive contribution to the dialogue.

30 years in the profession as of this year. And, when I go into legal mode, I choose my words precisely. I used the phrase I did with you for a reason. Read back what you wrote. I'm sure you will agree that you could have done much better in representing the profession.

Well, 26 years for me. I speak differently on an Internet message board than I would in court. I am not a spokesperson for the profession. I have helped many people over the years, made a difference in their lives, and done so in an ethical manner. I will give you credit for having done the same. I am always reevaluating how I choose my words. You could have voiced your own opinion better. I am not interested in fighting with you. I don't think our opinions are too different. Do you think the factual issues I raised were relevant to the DA in deciding whether to prosecute? You know they were. Every DA has to consider what a jury would think. The legal system is not perfect but it is our best attempt at justice. A non-cooperating witness in a consensual relationship presents challenges. I wanted them to prosecute Josh. I was disappointed they didn't.

I don't want friction with you, Old Blue, but it takes two to make that happen.

Read what I wrote on 11/29/23, when this case first came to the public's attention. The case proceeded exactly as I said it would. The facts necessary for a conviction were never in question. A digital trail was left behind, including photographs. I referenced the Orange County DA - Todd Spitzer - for a reason though. If you aren't aware of his history, Google him. Or, just peruse the following links. Then, decide for yourself why this case proceeded as it did. On that note, I must leave things. Dinner at a Chinese (not my favorite cuisine) bistro awaits.

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2025-06-05/orange-county-da-retaliated-female-prosecutor

https://www.aclusocal.org/en/press-releases/breaking-court-rules-ocda-todd-spitzer-unlawfully-concealed-prosecutorial-data-and

It's not that they (the victim's family) aren't interested in pursuing legal action. More than likely they are in contact with Giddey's representatives and lawyers and are attempting to negotiate settlement and non-disclosure agreements. If the facts are as they have been alleged, Giddey would presumably be more than amenable to making this all go away in the manner Kobe did back in the day. The difference here, however, is that the state of California has a vested interest in upholding the well being of its minors - regardless of what their parents want. Parents can and sometimes do act not in the best interest of their own children. At that point, the state has an obligation to intervene. If the state wants to, it can subpoena the electronic files of the minor (and her parents for that matter). The subpoena would go out to the service provider, with notice to the parents - who could try (but almost certainly fail) to quash it. Once those electronic files are obtained by prosecutors, there may well be enough to establish criminal conduct on Giddey's part. There's a lot on the line here - potential prosecution and incarceration followed by possible deportation, since Giddey is still a citizen of Australia. Behind the scenes, of course, is the wealth and power of the NBA. And, all of this is landing on the desk of this man:

https://orangecountyda.org/

Whose stated goal is the following:

The mission of the Office of the Orange County District Attorney is to enhance public safety and welfare and to protect and respect crime victims and to create security in the community through the vigorous enforcement of criminal and civil laws in a just, honest, efficient and ethical manner.

That said, without going into detail, Todd Spitzer might be just the DA the doctor ordered for both Giddey and the NBA.

[Onus]

Women have been stalking and trapping athletes for decades. The only difference in the giddey situation was that he was caught.

She may be 15, but in no way is she the naive and innocent 15 yr old that many fathers hope their daughters would be. She lied about her age, that's a fact. She knew what she was doing. She wasnt tricked nor groomed by giddey.

Giddey is a pedophile, not because he slept with her that first time, but for continuing the relationship.

As far as basketball goes, it's all moot.

Dubs had no problems with lamb, so they'll have no problems with giddey, bridges, etc..

Personally, im good with none of them.

I actually think what lamb did was worse than what giddey did.

[HiRez]

I thought that the Kuminga offseason and this thread couldn't get any worse, but then it morphed into Giddey. Oof.

Probably just the distraction of the week. A long time still to go, a lot more time to fill with sketchy rumors. Wish the Dubs would just throw in a pick and get Ellis or Avdija and be done with the whole sordid affair.

Warriors
Avdija
Time Lord
Rupert (salary ballast)
(outgoing $36.4M)

Blazers
Kuminga (S&T starting at $25M)
Moody
TJD
First-round pick
Pick swap
(outgoing $29.8M)

Steph / Melton / Podz
Buddy / Podz / Melton / Rupert
Jimmy / GP2 / Avdija / Santos
Draymond / Avdija / GP2 / Santos
Horford / Time Lord / Post / Draymond

I dunno, that looks like a solid starting AND secondary lineup to me (can move a lot of those guys around too).

[Larry Ellison]

30 years in the profession as of this year. And, when I go into legal mode, I choose my words precisely. I used the phrase I did with you for a reason. Read back what you wrote. I'm sure you will agree that you could have done much better in representing the profession.

Well, 26 years for me. I speak differently on an Internet message board than I would in court. I am not a spokesperson for the profession. I have helped many people over the years, made a difference in their lives, and done so in an ethical manner. I will give you credit for having done the same. I am always reevaluating how I choose my words. You could have voiced your own opinion better. I am not interested in fighting with you. I don't think our opinions are too different. Do you think the factual issues I raised were relevant to the DA in deciding whether to prosecute? You know they were. Every DA has to consider what a jury would think. The legal system is not perfect but it is our best attempt at justice. A non-cooperating witness in a consensual relationship presents challenges. I wanted them to prosecute Josh. I was disappointed they didn't.

I don't want friction with you, Old Blue, but it takes two to make that happen.

Read what I wrote on 11/29/23, when this case first came to the public's attention. The case proceeded exactly as I said it would. The facts necessary for a conviction were never in question. A digital trail was left behind, including photographs. I referenced the Orange County DA - Todd Spitzer - for a reason though. If you aren't aware of his history, Google him. Or, just peruse the following links. Then, decide for yourself why this case proceeded as it did. On that note, I must leave things. Dinner at a Chinese (not my favorite cuisine) bistro awaits.

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2025-06-05/orange-county-da-retaliated-female-prosecutor

https://www.aclusocal.org/en/press-releases/breaking-court-rules-ocda-todd-spitzer-unlawfully-concealed-prosecutorial-data-and

It's not that they (the victim's family) aren't interested in pursuing legal action. More than likely they are in contact with Giddey's representatives and lawyers and are attempting to negotiate settlement and non-disclosure agreements. If the facts are as they have been alleged, Giddey would presumably be more than amenable to making this all go away in the manner Kobe did back in the day. The difference here, however, is that the state of California has a vested interest in upholding the well being of its minors - regardless of what their parents want. Parents can and sometimes do act not in the best interest of their own children. At that point, the state has an obligation to intervene. If the state wants to, it can subpoena the electronic files of the minor (and her parents for that matter). The subpoena would go out to the service provider, with notice to the parents - who could try (but almost certainly fail) to quash it. Once those electronic files are obtained by prosecutors, there may well be enough to establish criminal conduct on Giddey's part. There's a lot on the line here - potential prosecution and incarceration followed by possible deportation, since Giddey is still a citizen of Australia. Behind the scenes, of course, is the wealth and power of the NBA. And, all of this is landing on the desk of this man:

https://orangecountyda.org/

Whose stated goal is the following:

The mission of the Office of the Orange County District Attorney is to enhance public safety and welfare and to protect and respect crime victims and to create security in the community through the vigorous enforcement of criminal and civil laws in a just, honest, efficient and ethical manner.

That said, without going into detail, Todd Spitzer might be just the DA the doctor ordered for both Giddey and the NBA.

I only follow this board sporadically and never saw your comments from 2023. I agree with your assessment. The evidence was there to support a prosecution even if the girl was uncooperative. If they wanted badly enough to push it. Which they didn't. I have practiced primarily in the Bay Area but I have had cases in LA and Orange County. I am not familiar with Todd Spitzer. I think you are implying that his ethical lapses in other areas would make him more likely to look the other way in a case involving a celebrity like Josh Giddey. You could be right. It is hard to know for sure. The family hired Gloria Allred and that suggests a strategy of using clout to make a backroom deal.

I would bet a large amount of money there was a private confidential settlement between Giddey and the family. The girl had viable civil claims and Allred is not going to get involved without monetizing that.

You are an idealist, I think. Frustrated when the judicial system does not vindicate the public interest. I might even call you a curmudgeon if I knew you would understand it is not a criticism, but a term of affection. The world is imperfect. So are the courts.

At least on my end, there is no issue between us. Enjoy your dinner.

[EvanZ]

If you think this is fake outrage, I assume you don't have daughters or sisters. Again, if this girl was my daughter, Giddey wouldn't have a bball career and not because of any legal trouble. At least, as long as guns are as readily available in this country as they currently are. Yes, I'm saying I'd shoot the piece of s#!t.

OK Dad, let's flip this around momentarily just for the sake of experiment (also for you, Blue). Your son is the 19 year who slept with a 15 year old and he says she lied to him about her age. Are you going to demand the "POS" (don't forget...your son!) be incarcerated immediately, or are you just going to shoot him?

ps. Not trying to attack you, just curious what your stance is from a different perspective.

That is a fair and difficult question. If my 19 yo son slept with a 15 year old, I would have a real tough time looking in the mirror as the son I raised, apparently, didn't have enough sense to not sleep with minors. And is associating with minors. And can't tell the difference between someone that's 21 and someone that's 15.

Obviously, for my kids, I would hire the best legal help and try to help them avoid jail. Because, you know, they're my kids and we all act differently towards our kids as perpetrators than we would as victims. For instance, I realize shooting JG for raping A 15yo is not the reasonable thing to do. IF it was MY 15 year old, I'd probably have an unreasonable reaction.

Would you call your son a pedophile or are you ready to back off that stance?

[vvoland]

OK Dad, let's flip this around momentarily just for the sake of experiment (also for you, Blue). Your son is the 19 year who slept with a 15 year old and he says she lied to him about her age. Are you going to demand the "POS" (don't forget...your son!) be incarcerated immediately, or are you just going to shoot him?

ps. Not trying to attack you, just curious what your stance is from a different perspective.

That is a fair and difficult question. If my 19 yo son slept with a 15 year old, I would have a real tough time looking in the mirror as the son I raised, apparently, didn't have enough sense to not sleep with minors. And is associating with minors. And can't tell the difference between someone that's 21 and someone that's 15.

Obviously, for my kids, I would hire the best legal help and try to help them avoid jail. Because, you know, they're my kids and we all act differently towards our kids as perpetrators than we would as victims. For instance, I realize shooting JG for raping A 15yo is not the reasonable thing to do. IF it was MY 15 year old, I'd probably have an unreasonable reaction.

Would you call your son a pedophile or are you ready to back off that stance?

I don't think I'd call him that but I would think it. Particularly, if he continued the relationship after finding out she was 15. In either case, I would require him to get professional help.

[vvoland]

OK Dad, let's flip this around momentarily just for the sake of experiment (also for you, Blue). Your son is the 19 year who slept with a 15 year old and he says she lied to him about her age. Are you going to demand the "POS" (don't forget...your son!) be incarcerated immediately, or are you just going to shoot him?

ps. Not trying to attack you, just curious what your stance is from a different perspective.

That is a fair and difficult question. If my 19 yo son slept with a 15 year old, I would have a real tough time looking in the mirror as the son I raised, apparently, didn't have enough sense to not sleep with minors. And is associating with minors. And can't tell the difference between someone that's 21 and someone that's 15.

Obviously, for my kids, I would hire the best legal help and try to help them avoid jail. Because, you know, they're my kids and we all act differently towards our kids as perpetrators than we would as victims. For instance, I realize shooting JG for raping A 15yo is not the reasonable thing to do. IF it was MY 15 year old, I'd probably have an unreasonable reaction.

Would you call your son a pedophile or are you ready to back off that stance?

Btw, I missed your response to my hypothetical earlier. Really? You would let your 15 yo daughter (in most cases, a second semester HS freshman) date a 19 yo (in most cases, a college freshman)? You wouldn't be concerned that a 19yo wants to date your child? Emphasis on child.

[vvoland]

It was more than that. It's been a while. I paid attention when it was happening. I am just going off my recollections. She was bragging on social media about hooking up with Josh. It was the inadvertent public disclosure of an inappropriate relationship that brought it to a screaching halt. She was 15 years old and didn't realize the potential consequences by posting on IG that she just f*ed Josh Giddey. I only know what I saw online so I could be wrong. My impression was they were a thing, not a one night stand, both were ok with it, and it was only her dumb social media post that ended it.

She posted on IG "I just f*ed Josh Giddey." That is a fact. The post was rapidly deleted. But I saw the screen capture myself at the time. Nothing is ever truly deleted on the Internet. She was bragging. She was immature. This was the catalyst for the entire investigation. Beyond that, I don't like to speculate about factual issues that I don't have personal knowledge of. My uninformed speculation is that things were going swimmingly and he would have continued the relationship with her if it had not been publicly exposed. But it was. I was expecting criminal prosecution and NBA discipline. It never happened. The girl refused to cooperate. I don't blame her parents for wanting to shut it down instead of create a spectacle with a trial. She was a wild child and a willing participant in the relationship. Josh was 19. He should have known better and found a different girl.

You have represented yourself as a lawyer. These are statements unbecoming of the profession. Quite frankly, they constitute victim shaming.

What do you know about my profession? I already said it was a strict liability offense and she is not capable of consent. What Josh did was a crime. I thought it would be prosecuted. I thought NBA would suspend him. I was just discussing the facts as I understand them. Facts matter in the legal world, Old Blue. "Unbecoming of the profession" is a strong statement. We take ethics seriously. You don't know me and I don't know you. I am not sure why you would come at me like that. Unless you are also a lawyer, I'm confident I know more than you about the profession. I can speak bluntly sometimes. But what you said was a personal attack. Other lawyers would show more restraint in how they articulate their opinions.

I'm going to give this Board the benefit of the doubt that your statements don't represent everyone. I can go back to never posting if my comments are not seen as a positive contribution to the dialogue.[/quote]
Please don't. We would all welcome the reasoned and well informed responses you've added to this discussion and look forward to more of them.

[Larry Ellison]

vvoland, thank you. I think me and Old Blue are good. Just a couple of old lawyers doing our thing. But I appreciate your message.

[vvoland]

It was more than that. It's been a while. I paid attention when it was happening. I am just going off my recollections. She was bragging on social media about hooking up with Josh. It was the inadvertent public disclosure of an inappropriate relationship that brought it to a screaching halt. She was 15 years old and didn't realize the potential consequences by posting on IG that she just f*ed Josh Giddey. I only know what I saw online so I could be wrong. My impression was they were a thing, not a one night stand, both were ok with it, and it was only her dumb social media post that ended it.

She posted on IG "I just f*ed Josh Giddey." That is a fact. The post was rapidly deleted. But I saw the screen capture myself at the time. Nothing is ever truly deleted on the Internet. She was bragging. She was immature. This was the catalyst for the entire investigation. Beyond that, I don't like to speculate about factual issues that I don't have personal knowledge of. My uninformed speculation is that things were going swimmingly and he would have continued the relationship with her if it had not been publicly exposed. But it was. I was expecting criminal prosecution and NBA discipline. It never happened. The girl refused to cooperate. I don't blame her parents for wanting to shut it down instead of create a spectacle with a trial. She was a wild child and a willing participant in the relationship. Josh was 19. He should have known better and found a different girl.

You have represented yourself as a lawyer. These are statements unbecoming of the profession. Quite frankly, they constitute victim shaming. I'd like to also point out that your recollection of the matter is faulty. Giddey was 21 - not 19 - at the time of the "relationship" in question.

https://www.foxla.com/news/nba-star-josh-giddey-investigation-newport-beach-pd-alleged-relationship-minor

It gets worse with every post. He was 21, not 19. It wasn't just a club night meetup, it was a months long relationship that ended when it became public. At least the conversation exposed folks for what they are. The Internet is a wild place that allows people to express their true feelings without the fear of repercussions. I doubt Evan is defending Giddey, pedophilia, or sex with minors in a face to face conversation, in a public space, or with friends and family. The anonymity of the internet certainly provides a place for it, though.