Warriors exploring S&T for Kuminga

[Larry Ellison]

Agree to disagree. The racial disparities in the criminal justice system are stark, to say the least, particularly in the South. Though I'm not sure if this girl is from OK, I think it was a SoCal case so she must be an LA resident. Regardless, when the 15 year old girl is white and the 21 year old is black, I don't think the money would matter as much as you think.

I've already provided this link twice before. It's worth reading if you want some background on Todd Spitzer - the District Attorney who handled the Giddey case. Some of the OCDA's problems appear to have preceded Spitzer's time in office:

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

In a rebuke to Orange County District Attorney Todd Spitzer, an OC Superior Court judge ruled today that Spitzer unlawfully withheld crucial records related to the California Racial Justice Act (RJA)—a groundbreaking law designed to prevent racial bias in the criminal legal system.

The ruling comes after a 2022 lawsuit filed by Chicanxs Unidxs de Orange County, the ACLU Foundations of Northern and Southern California and the Peace and Justice Law Center challenged Spitzer’s refusal to release prosecutorial data, policies and training materials as a violation of the Public Records Act.

“Todd Spitzer dismissed this lawsuit as ‘frivolous’ and ‘completely divorced from reality,’ but the court has now made it clear—the only thing frivolous were his excuses for hiding the truth,” said Sean Garcia-Leys, executive director of the Peace and Justice Law Center and attorney for Chicanxs Unidxs. “Spitzer fought to keep this data from public view, but today’s ruling confirms what many in our community have long known: he is more interested in covering up racial injustice than correcting it.”
...

“The judge’s order exposes what Spitzer had long denied: that his office operated with a policy of violating transparency laws, which concealed evidence of racial disparities in prosecutions,” said Emi MacLean, senior staff attorney at the ACLU Foundation of Northern California and attorney for the plaintiffs in the case.

A 2022 ACLU Foundation of Northern California report on the OCDA’s prosecutorial practices previously revealed racial disparities in the office’s charging and diversion practices from 2017 to 2018, when former DA Tony Rackauckas led the office. The report also revealed that, despite DA Spitzer’s unwillingness to provide more recent office data, all available evidence suggested that the office’s racially disparate practices had not changed. Spitzer was the first district attorney in California to be personally found in violation of the RJA in 2022—a fact that underscores the urgent need for prosecutorial transparency.

I think Old Blue is right. But this issue has been disposed of by the courts. In the legal world, we don't try to change what has already happened. We try to make best decisions based on current info.

[vvoland]

Agree to disagree. The racial disparities in the criminal justice system are stark, to say the least, particularly in the South. Though I'm not sure if this girl is from OK, I think it was a SoCal case so she must be an LA resident. Regardless, when the 15 year old girl is white and the 21 year old is black, I don't think the money would matter as much as you think.

I've already provided this link twice before. It's worth reading if you want some background on Todd Spitzer - the District Attorney who handled the Giddey case. Some of the OCDA's problems appear to have preceded Spitzer's time in office:

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

In a rebuke to Orange County District Attorney Todd Spitzer, an OC Superior Court judge ruled today that Spitzer unlawfully withheld crucial records related to the California Racial Justice Act (RJA)—a groundbreaking law designed to prevent racial bias in the criminal legal system.

The ruling comes after a 2022 lawsuit filed by Chicanxs Unidxs de Orange County, the ACLU Foundations of Northern and Southern California and the Peace and Justice Law Center challenged Spitzer’s refusal to release prosecutorial data, policies and training materials as a violation of the Public Records Act.

“Todd Spitzer dismissed this lawsuit as ‘frivolous’ and ‘completely divorced from reality,’ but the court has now made it clear—the only thing frivolous were his excuses for hiding the truth,” said Sean Garcia-Leys, executive director of the Peace and Justice Law Center and attorney for Chicanxs Unidxs. “Spitzer fought to keep this data from public view, but today’s ruling confirms what many in our community have long known: he is more interested in covering up racial injustice than correcting it.”
...

“The judge’s order exposes what Spitzer had long denied: that his office operated with a policy of violating transparency laws, which concealed evidence of racial disparities in prosecutions,” said Emi MacLean, senior staff attorney at the ACLU Foundation of Northern California and attorney for the plaintiffs in the case.

A 2022 ACLU Foundation of Northern California report on the OCDA’s prosecutorial practices previously revealed racial disparities in the office’s charging and diversion practices from 2017 to 2018, when former DA Tony Rackauckas led the office. The report also revealed that, despite DA Spitzer’s unwillingness to provide more recent office data, all available evidence suggested that the office’s racially disparate practices had not changed. Spitzer was the first district attorney in California to be personally found in violation of the RJA in 2022—a fact that underscores the urgent need for prosecutorial transparency.

I think Old Blue is right. But this issue has been disposed of by the courts. In the legal world, we don't try to change what has already happened. We try to make best decisions based on current info.

I may be out of my depth on the legal stuff but I read blue's link as evidence that this DA was much more likely to prosecute JK than JG. Am I wrong in that interpretation?

[Larry Ellison]

I've already provided this link twice before. It's worth reading if you want some background on Todd Spitzer - the District Attorney who handled the Giddey case. Some of the OCDA's problems appear to have preceded Spitzer's time in office:

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

In a rebuke to Orange County District Attorney Todd Spitzer, an OC Superior Court judge ruled today that Spitzer unlawfully withheld crucial records related to the California Racial Justice Act (RJA)—a groundbreaking law designed to prevent racial bias in the criminal legal system.

The ruling comes after a 2022 lawsuit filed by Chicanxs Unidxs de Orange County, the ACLU Foundations of Northern and Southern California and the Peace and Justice Law Center challenged Spitzer’s refusal to release prosecutorial data, policies and training materials as a violation of the Public Records Act.

“Todd Spitzer dismissed this lawsuit as ‘frivolous’ and ‘completely divorced from reality,’ but the court has now made it clear—the only thing frivolous were his excuses for hiding the truth,” said Sean Garcia-Leys, executive director of the Peace and Justice Law Center and attorney for Chicanxs Unidxs. “Spitzer fought to keep this data from public view, but today’s ruling confirms what many in our community have long known: he is more interested in covering up racial injustice than correcting it.”
...

“The judge’s order exposes what Spitzer had long denied: that his office operated with a policy of violating transparency laws, which concealed evidence of racial disparities in prosecutions,” said Emi MacLean, senior staff attorney at the ACLU Foundation of Northern California and attorney for the plaintiffs in the case.

A 2022 ACLU Foundation of Northern California report on the OCDA’s prosecutorial practices previously revealed racial disparities in the office’s charging and diversion practices from 2017 to 2018, when former DA Tony Rackauckas led the office. The report also revealed that, despite DA Spitzer’s unwillingness to provide more recent office data, all available evidence suggested that the office’s racially disparate practices had not changed. Spitzer was the first district attorney in California to be personally found in violation of the RJA in 2022—a fact that underscores the urgent need for prosecutorial transparency.

I think Old Blue is right. But this issue has been disposed of by the courts. In the legal world, we don't try to change what has already happened. We try to make best decisions based on current info.

I may be out of my depth on the legal stuff but I read blue's link as evidence that this DA was much more likely to prosecute JK than JG. Am I wrong in that interpretation?

The DA has the discretion to prosecute whatever is a criminal violation. Do not make assumptions about what the DA will pursue.

[vvoland]

I think Old Blue is right. But this issue has been disposed of by the courts. In the legal world, we don't try to change what has already happened. We try to make best decisions based on current info.

I may be out of my depth on the legal stuff but I read blue's link as evidence that this DA was much more likely to prosecute JK than JG. Am I wrong in that interpretation?

The DA has the discretion to prosecute whatever is a criminal violation. Do not make assumptions about what the DA will pursue.

How else would we discuss the idea of racial bias in prosecutorial decisions?

[Crazy-Canuck]

I would be a no on giddey for basketball reasons. He's not worth the gamble for a contending team because he'd be a liability in the playoffs.

He's shooting is suspect and his defense is even more suspect. No thanks on that 30M bill.

This team needs more shooting and defense around steph, dray, and jimmy.

The biggest problem for the Warriors last season was offensive production. I think Giddey's BBIQ and passing would help the offense a lot. He is going to get Stephen Curry the rock! You can say Giddey's .378 3 point shooting for the Bulls was an outlier, but his career average is .330 and has improved every season, and Kuminga shot .305 last season with no one guarding him so you can't argue it's not an upgrade. And he can play 1-4.

And if it's defense you want (remembering that the Warriors were a top 5 defense last season and are likely to add Melton and Horford), Kuminga is not exactly a great defender.

Of course this is all hypothetical and extremely unlikely.

Jg is a connector.

Jimmy and dray are also connectors.
Off the bench, podz is a connector.

In 2022, we had steph, dray, and iggy as connectors. But we also had secondary scorers who could shoot and play fast (klay, poole, and wiggs).

We need at least 1, ideally 2 more guys who can score and shoot with steph, jimmy, and dray.

Giddey is not that guy and neither is kuminga. But the contracts of those guys might get us one who is. That's my position on kuminga or giddey.

If we are trading everyone off and rebuilding, I might gamble on kuminga more than giddey.

[Onus]

All you age experts how old is mohamed dabone?

[AirP.]

I would be a no on giddey for basketball reasons. He's not worth the gamble for a contending team because he'd be a liability in the playoffs.

He's shooting is suspect and his defense is even more suspect. No thanks on that 30M bill.

This team needs more shooting and defense around steph, dray, and jimmy.

The biggest problem for the Warriors last season was offensive production. I think Giddey's BBIQ and passing would help the offense a lot. He is going to get Stephen Curry the rock! You can say Giddey's .378 3 point shooting for the Bulls was an outlier, but his career average is .330 and has improved every season, and Kuminga shot .305 last season with no one guarding him so you can't argue it's not an upgrade. And he can play 1-4.

And if it's defense you want (remembering that the Warriors were a top 5 defense last season and are likely to add Melton and Horford), Kuminga is not exactly a great defender.

Of course this is all hypothetical and extremely unlikely.

Jg is a connector.

Jimmy and dray are also connectors.
Off the bench, podz is a connector.

In 2022, we had steph, dray, and iggy as connectors. But we also had secondary scorers who could shoot and play fast (klay, poole, and wiggs).

We need at least 1, ideally 2 more guys who can score and shoot with steph, jimmy, and dray.

Giddey is not that guy and neither is kuminga. But the contracts of those guys might get us one who is. That's my position on kuminga or giddey.

If we are trading everyone off and rebuilding, I might gamble on kuminga more than giddey.

Kuminga is a finisher that is needed by GS but he looks for his own shot (holds the ball stopping the offense) way too early in the shot clock basically stopping the offense. Playing the role Kerr wants him to play currently would generate a lot more minutes for Kuminga and he would get to use his talents more and when Curry is done (or no longer great), maybe it becomes Kuminga's turn to be an engine in the offense.

To me, what is so frustrating about this Kuminga situation is that the talent is there for him to be a difference maker for GS and even this current GS roster, the problem is that he's not willing to wait his turn even though it may be another couple of years so the team can try to win, he just wants to be a scorer (and get paid like it) even if an all-time great is on the court with him. From what I've seen on the offensive side, if he just didn't stop the ball early in the shot clock, sometimes icing out an all-time great he'd probably had gotten more minutes. I think we can all agree that if you're trying to win, unless there's a wide open shot high percentage shot, you ALWAYS want your #1 option to have a chance to get a good look and stopping the offense to find your own shot is a distant #2 option at best.

I don't think Kuminga's bad, I think he has a high ceiling but the one thing I would worry about if trading for him and giving him a large contract is that I may have to placate him. I do believe it's possible that had Kuminga went to a terrible team he would have had much more freedom to display his talents/play to his strengths and with that looked much more promising then he looks now but that doesn't mean that his play will lead to wins, just individual points.

Had Kuminga came back after injury, asked what he could do to help the team and play that role, I think GS would have been more than happy to pay him, not for his current role but for what he could bring in the future to the franchise as he was willing to sacrifice some of his game to win.

[Larry Ellison]

I may be out of my depth on the legal stuff but I read blue's link as evidence that this DA was much more likely to prosecute JK than JG. Am I wrong in that interpretation?

The DA has the discretion to prosecute whatever is a criminal violation. Do not make assumptions about what the DA will pursue.

How else would we discuss the idea of racial bias in prosecutorial decisions?

DA are human beings. They act based on their own beliefs. Sometimes from racial prejudice. Usually just trying to do their job in many situations where race is not at issue. I didn't mean to suggest you were wrong. It is an odd hypothetical to ask what the DA would have done if JK were the perp. JG got a pass on clear criminal conduct because he is rich. Did white privilege play a role? Maybe a little bit. But mostly it was money.

[Larry Ellison]

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.

It's not pedophilia. It is morally objectionable and illegal conduct. Respectfully, I think the back and forth between you and Evan is not connected in any way to whether Josh Giddey would be a good addition to the Warriors. Gently suggest you guys let it fade away.

By the legal definition, it is not pedophilia, it is sex with a minor. In the commonly accepted cultural definition, JG is definitely a pedo. Just ask Kendrick. I'm not debating evan in court so I'm fine using the socially accepted definition. It's like people saying "anti-semitism" isn't just about jews as 'semites' can include a number of non-jewish people. While technically true, it is not how the world views 'anti-semitism.'

I am clearly bothered by people excusing JG's behavior as "something millions of people do every day" and "no big deal." My daughter is 11 and is starting middle school next week. I'm sure I'm more triggered by this conversation today than I would have been a decade ago. Mostly because I know what people like Giddey would do to an 11 year old (when they were 15, for example, not 21). The fact that we have people on this message board trying to excuse that behavior is abhorrent. The fact that they're actually trying to normalize it is.... f'king disgusting and borderline criminal.

You aren't triggered. You are correct. I remember when it happened and I was thinking about what my own daughters looked like at 15. There is no excuse. Warriors can do better than trading for Josh.

[whatisacenter]

Maybe we should start a JK thread…


Edit: actually, why bother.

[statsman]

Maybe we should start a JK thread…

That would be too easy.

[vvoland]

Maybe we should start a JK thread…


Edit: actually, why bother.

Should we put the over/under on the date he signs? I'll bet by 9/1 and it's 2/47 with a partial guarantee in year 2 (something around 10M).

[Larry Ellison]

Maybe we should start a JK thread…


Edit: actually, why bother.

Sorry if I poured fuel on the fire. Happy to drop the JG discussion now.

[vvoland]

The DA has the discretion to prosecute whatever is a criminal violation. Do not make assumptions about what the DA will pursue.

How else would we discuss the idea of racial bias in prosecutorial decisions?

DA are human beings. They act based on their own beliefs. Sometimes from racial prejudice. Usually just trying to do their job in many situations where race is not at issue. I didn't mean to suggest you were wrong. It is an odd hypothetical to ask what the DA would have done if JK were the perp. JG got a pass on clear criminal conduct because he is rich. Did white privilege play a role? Maybe a little bit. But mostly it was money.

I think people have too many value judgements attached to the word "racism." Not everyone that's racially biased is out to lynch black folks. Let me use a hypothetical that I don't expect you, as a practicing lawyer, to really respond to (but feel free, of course). This particular DA may have huge racial disparities in his cases. That may not be because he hates people of color. In fact, it may be ONLY due to the fact that he understands that a 12 person jury, in that particular county/state/etc. will be MUCH more likely to convict a person that looks like JK than one that looks like JG. In a profession (DA) where the conviction rate is often the only thing that matters (for job security, political future, money, etc.), this DA may simply be making a business decision. A racially biased one, to be sure, but not one motivated by hated of X. Should this DA risk his job by lowering the "effectiveness" of his office by prosecuting everyone, regardless of likely outcomes? Of course. Won't hold my breath, though.

And, of course, if JG was poor, there's no way he'd settle out of court but instead of taking it to trial to get the full sentence, would have plead out to time served or 2 years probation.

[whatisacenter]

Maybe we should start a JK thread…


Edit: actually, why bother.

Should we put the over/under on the date he signs? I'll bet by 9/1 and it's 2/47 with a partial guarantee in year 2 (something around 10M).

I’ll take it the over.

I’m still holding out for a S&T.

[HiRez]

Big question is if the statement attributed to Kuminga about preferring to take the QO is a bluff or negotiation tactic is true or not. If he really wants out and wants total freedom from the Warriors (or just wants to be vindictive because of burned bridges) then he might just take the hit. If not then he has to realize an offer in the $20M-$25M range is going to be as good as it gets for him, at least in the short term. There are not a bunch of teams out there just waiting to unload a lot of cash for him and he and his agent know it by now.

It seems the second year team option is a real sticking point, so call his bluff and either remove the option or make it a player option. If Kuminga isn't fuming sitting on the bench with the QO, it's better for everyone and I think without the current trade restrictions, it won't be that hard to move him later. Personally I'd rather see a deal done immediately so everyone can move on but the trade rules are making it almost impossible for everyone to be happy with a deal.

[statsman]

Personally I'd rather see a deal done immediately so everyone can move on but the trade rules are making it almost impossible for everyone to be happy with a deal.

Except for the team wanting to acquire Kuminga for a quarter on the dollar. They would be delighted with that.

But I agree, I would prefer to see him moved before the season started. But that would require a decent offer and for Lacob to give up his dream of either retaining Kuminga or retaining his salary slot (signed, not on the QO).

[EvanZ]

Big question is if the statement attributed to Kuminga about preferring to take the QO is a bluff or negotiation tactic is true or not. If he really wants out and wants total freedom from the Warriors (or just wants to be vindictive because of burned bridges) then he might just take the hit. If not then he has to realize an offer in the $20M-$25M range is going to be as good as it gets for him, at least in the short term. There are not a bunch of teams out there just waiting to unload a lot of cash for him and he and his agent know it by now.

It seems the second year team option is a real sticking point, so call his bluff and either remove the option or make it a player option. If Kuminga isn't fuming sitting on the bench with the QO, it's better for everyone and I think without the current trade restrictions, it won't be that hard to move him later. Personally I'd rather see a deal done immediately so everyone can move on but the trade rules are making it almost impossible for everyone to be happy with a deal.

If the team option is removed it makes it basically impossible to trade him for anything. So that’s a dealbreaker as far as I’m concerned.

[vvoland]

Maybe we should start a JK thread…


Edit: actually, why bother.

Should we put the over/under on the date he signs? I'll bet by 9/1 and it's 2/47 with a partial guarantee in year 2 (something around 10M).

I’ll take it the over.

I’m still holding out for a S&T.

Good point on the S&T. He'd still have to sign to get traded, care to guess when, for how much, and who he gets traded to? bonus points for guessing the assets coming back in the trade

[vvoland]

Big question is if the statement attributed to Kuminga about preferring to take the QO is a bluff or negotiation tactic is true or not. If he really wants out and wants total freedom from the Warriors (or just wants to be vindictive because of burned bridges) then he might just take the hit. If not then he has to realize an offer in the $20M-$25M range is going to be as good as it gets for him, at least in the short term. There are not a bunch of teams out there just waiting to unload a lot of cash for him and he and his agent know it by now.

It seems the second year team option is a real sticking point, so call his bluff and either remove the option or make it a player option. If Kuminga isn't fuming sitting on the bench with the QO, it's better for everyone and I think without the current trade restrictions, it won't be that hard to move him later. Personally I'd rather see a deal done immediately so everyone can move on but the trade rules are making it almost impossible for everyone to be happy with a deal.

There's no way he's turning down 22M next year after making 24M in his entire career, to this point. I mean, sure, there's like a <5% chance but I don't think any of the RFAs will take the QO with the exception of Cam.