Kuminga to SAC, is there a middle ground?

[giberish]

Not really, because five years from now, I probably won’t be GM. Trading a player the owner loves for a mediocre return isn’t good for one’s career aspirations.

The pick Kings fans keep talking about is their pick in 2030, lottery protected, otherwise, the worst of their pick and the Spurs pick in 2031. Given the direction both teams are going, that probably means a very late first rounder six years from now. The two second rounders proposed before was actually a better return return, and that wasn’t exciting either.

It also matters that GS is a win-now team with a very short timetable. Making the team worse next season in exchange for a minor long-term asset is a terrible idea for them - when for a team in a different situation it would be just fine.

And you expect Kuminga to play a part in this window?

Yes.

While not an ideal style fit Kuminga fills a position need for the warriors. Trading him away for extra guards leaves a big rotation hole.

I'm not that worried about sulking and whatnot as the Warriors and Kuminga will need each other. The Warriors will need Kuminga for some bench scoring at full strength and big minutes for the games that Draymond and/or Butler miss. Kuminga needs to show how he can help a good team in order to get paid when he hits UFA states (in 1-3 years). He's not like a late career Butler who can sulk and still get paid.

I had some hope for a deal that would have improved GS this season but that would have had to happen early when teams still had flexibility (or even better, last summer or before).

[Nate the Great]

We can hold the position that GSW should hold on to an unhappy Kuminga that their coach doesn't want to play over taking a protected first that doesn't convey for several years.

We can't state that pick holds no value though. Of course if we can assign an asset no value it allows us to justify our position that is getting harder to justify. Same with the poster who is aware his team might give said first for the right to give Kuminga way more gtd money than any other team is willing to do so he's writing narratives about a multiyear deal starting upwards of $22M being his "real value".

Not sure why we do this? I mean if GSW really loved this guy as much as you are selling, they'd simply meet his contract demands. So that narrative feels flimsy at best. And I find it hard to believe anyone earnestly thinks Kuminga is worth more than a future protected first. So not sure the narrative of bemoaning the return holds much value either.

But maybe the governor really loves the player but is willing to let the FO overrule him. And maybe there are other bidders we just haven't heard about willing to give up a better asset for the right to meet his contract demands. But even if true, a first round pick still holds value even if its not the idealized return you want.

Okay, so who is the best player ever traded for a draft pick six years in the future? Because I struggle to see how it would be viewed as better than a second-round pick next year.

[sackings916]

It also matters that GS is a win-now team with a very short timetable. Making the team worse next season in exchange for a minor long-term asset is a terrible idea for them - when for a team in a different situation it would be just fine.

And you expect Kuminga to play a part in this window?

Yes.

While not an ideal style fit Kuminga fills a position need for the warriors. Trading him away for extra guards leaves a big rotation hole.

I'm not that worried about sulking and whatnot as the Warriors and Kuminga will need each other. The Warriors will need Kuminga for some bench scoring at full strength and big minutes for the games that Draymond and/or Butler miss. Kuminga needs to show how he can help a good team in order to get paid when he hits UFA states (in 1-3 years). He's not like a late career Butler who can sulk and still get paid.

I had some hope for a deal that would have improved GS this season but that would have had to happen early when teams still had flexibility (or even better, last summer or before).

A 6’8 athletic 22 year old forward that has already shown the ability to score. Why are the Warriors not rushing to lock him up? That’s the biggest red flag here.

[Texas Chuck]

Okay, so who is the best player ever traded for a draft pick six years in the future? Because I struggle to see how it would be viewed as better than a second-round pick next year.

Yeah not going to research all that, but I can assure you better players than current Kuminga have been.

If you want to assign 2nd round pick value to 1st round picks, I can't stop you, but it seems like an incorrect valuation to me. But I'm sure you can turn all your future Warriors 1sts into 2nds at next year's draft.

[parsnips33]

IDK I have a different opinion on this than other Warriors fans I guess. Trade Kuminga for whatever. He sucks and we know he sucks. If we get a pick, try to turn that into a player that can help this team.

I don't get why we haven't done the Royce O'Neal trade already

[Nate the Great]

IDK I have a different opinion on this than other Warriors fans I guess. Trade Kuminga for whatever. He sucks and we know he sucks. If we get a pick, try to turn that into a player that can help this team.

I don't get why we haven't done the Royce O'Neal trade already

Probably because the screwed-up CBA would also require the Warriors to trade a couple players to the Nets, because they can’t send out more salary than they receive. Or because Lacob loves Kuminga and MDJ loves his job. I don’t know.

But yes, I agree, the Suns offer was much better than any coming from the Kings.

[LightTheBeam]

Ya but we also need to keep in mind he doesn't control all the leverage. He can sign the QO (and I do think this is more on the table than most Warriors fans want to admit), but that still puts him in GS all season and makes it far less likely he gets traded as he won't have value on the QO. No other team has cap space, and the 2 do that do, don't want him. There's going to be some compromise, or more than likely Kuminga is going to spend a lot of time on the bench in GS.

He'd still have rental value to a playoff team in need of a sixth man. That said, if there's a protected 1st on the table, the Warriors need to take it.

A protected first five years from now has no real value.

What a crazy take lol. Ask OKC about this one

[LightTheBeam]

We can hold the position that GSW should hold on to an unhappy Kuminga that their coach doesn't want to play over taking a protected first that doesn't convey for several years.

We can't state that pick holds no value though. Of course if we can assign an asset no value it allows us to justify our position that is getting harder to justify. Same with the poster who is aware his team might give said first for the right to give Kuminga way more gtd money than any other team is willing to do so he's writing narratives about a multiyear deal starting upwards of $22M being his "real value".

Not sure why we do this? I mean if GSW really loved this guy as much as you are selling, they'd simply meet his contract demands. So that narrative feels flimsy at best. And I find it hard to believe anyone earnestly thinks Kuminga is worth more than a future protected first. So not sure the narrative of bemoaning the return holds much value either.

But maybe the governor really loves the player but is willing to let the FO overrule him. And maybe there are other bidders we just haven't heard about willing to give up a better asset for the right to meet his contract demands. But even if true, a first round pick still holds value even if its not the idealized return you want.

Let me state my position first.

Trading any Kings 1st round pick to pay Jonathan Kuminga 20+ a year is an awful idea. Trading any Kings 1st for any non star is a terrible idea. The Kings suck, this core has no future, there is no salvaging it, the sooner they accept that the better off we will be.

Now that I got that out of the way. I have a question for your 2nd paragraph regarding Kings paying him more than any other team is willing. Well, it sounds like right now the Warriors are offering more annual money, but they want a team option. Fair. The Suns offer was reportedly a year longer than Sac's with more annual money as well, although they aren't offering a future 1st (battle of most incompetent orgs).

But also this summer was one of basically zero cap space. I guess my question is, based on the context surrounding this summer, do you think it's fair to say Kuminga, Giddey, Etc are actually worth mid-level salaries because no teams with cap space want them, and the teams that do want them would only realistically be able to offer MLE (at best, considering a lot of teams cant even offer this) which GS would match.

I'm not sure what Kumingas real value is tbh with you. Next year when 5-10 teams have cap space its going to be interesting. I'd peg him as a guy I think a few teams would take a risk on at 3/60 if they had the space to do so. I personally don't love the trade, but my reasoning is more to do with the 1st than paying Kuminga 21 a year for the next 3.

[gswhoops]

Okay, so who is the best player ever traded for a draft pick six years in the future? Because I struggle to see how it would be viewed as better than a second-round pick next year.

Yeah not going to research all that, but I can assure you better players than current Kuminga have been.

If you want to assign 2nd round pick value to 1st round picks, I can't stop you, but it seems like an incorrect valuation to me. But I'm sure you can turn all your future Warriors 1sts into 2nds at next year's draft.

Ironically the answer might be Chris Paul in the Jordan Poole dump

[Nate the Great]

He'd still have rental value to a playoff team in need of a sixth man. That said, if there's a protected 1st on the table, the Warriors need to take it.

A protected first five years from now has no real value.

What a crazy take lol. Ask OKC about this one

You’re saying the Warriors should rebuild?

[LightTheBeam]

A protected first five years from now has no real value.

What a crazy take lol. Ask OKC about this one

You’re saying the Warriors should rebuild?

No.. I'm saying that stacking assets is never "no real value". Even if it leads to upgrading Moody/Buddy whoever at the deadline. 1st will always have value. Especially Kings 1st round picks.

[jscott]

A protected first five years from now has no real value.

What a crazy take lol. Ask OKC about this one

You’re saying the Warriors should rebuild?

These things aren’t mutually exclusive. You can set yourself up for the future while still trying to win now. Or you can use the pick in another trade and add talent for this season. Does this really need to be explained?

[raferfenix]

If the Warriors think there’s even a slim chance the Kings relent on an unprotected first I’d get it where they’d play a game of chicken here.

[gswhoops]

What a crazy take lol. Ask OKC about this one

You’re saying the Warriors should rebuild?

These things aren’t mutually exclusive. You can set yourself up for the future while still trying to win now. Or you can use the pick in another trade and add talent for this season. Does this really need to be explained?

Please don't give Joe Lacob any ideas

[nykballa2k4]

IDK why the Nets are not more involved here. They have some matchable contracts and Kuminga would have more freedom to break out in BKN.
Claxton
MPJ
Kuminga
Cam Thomas
Demin

[giberish]

What a crazy take lol. Ask OKC about this one

You’re saying the Warriors should rebuild?

No.. I'm saying that stacking assets is never "no real value". Even if it leads to upgrading Moody/Buddy whoever at the deadline. 1st will always have value. Especially Kings 1st round picks.

An unprotected or lightly protected Kings 1st probably would have enough value to make a follow-up deal (either now or midseason) that would net help the Warriors. Which is why GS reportedly would be willing to make such a deal with the Kings.

The Kings are only offering a pick that's protected so that it will almost certainly be a 2031 Sprus 1st with prime Wemby. That has much less value and probably wouldn't be enough to make a useful upgrade move (especially when a 3rd team would probably have to be paid off for salary logistics).

In order to take the gamble of a move that makes the Warriors worse, GS needs a more significant trade asset than the Kings are offering.

[SacTown Kings]

You’re saying the Warriors should rebuild?

No.. I'm saying that stacking assets is never "no real value". Even if it leads to upgrading Moody/Buddy whoever at the deadline. 1st will always have value. Especially Kings 1st round picks.

An unprotected or lightly protected Kings 1st probably would have enough value to make a follow-up deal (either now or midseason) that would net help the Warriors. Which is why GS reportedly would be willing to make such a deal with the Kings.

The Kings are only offering a pick that's protected so that it will almost certainly be a 2031 Sprus 1st with prime Wemby. That has much less value and probably wouldn't be enough to make a useful upgrade move (especially when a 3rd team would probably have to be paid off for salary logistics).

In order to take the gamble of a move that makes the Warriors worse, GS needs a more significant trade asset than the Kings are offering.

6 years is a long way away to know the situation for the Spurs/Wemby, especially for a guy built like Ralph Sampson. But regardless, the more time that passes the worst the value will be for the Warriors.

[giberish]

No.. I'm saying that stacking assets is never "no real value". Even if it leads to upgrading Moody/Buddy whoever at the deadline. 1st will always have value. Especially Kings 1st round picks.

An unprotected or lightly protected Kings 1st probably would have enough value to make a follow-up deal (either now or midseason) that would net help the Warriors. Which is why GS reportedly would be willing to make such a deal with the Kings.

The Kings are only offering a pick that's protected so that it will almost certainly be a 2031 Sprus 1st with prime Wemby. That has much less value and probably wouldn't be enough to make a useful upgrade move (especially when a 3rd team would probably have to be paid off for salary logistics).

In order to take the gamble of a move that makes the Warriors worse, GS needs a more significant trade asset than the Kings are offering.

6 years is a long way away to know the situation for the Spurs/Wemby, especially for a guy built like Ralph Sampson. But regardless, the more time that passes the worst the value will be for the Warriors.

As a trade asset, the rest of the league is going to see that as a very low value 1st (relevant for GS trying to use it for a later win-now move)

The trade value of JK is already at effectively zero - or neutral value (multi-year contract a team doesn't want + low-value 1st). I don't see it falling (unless JK gets signed to a huge long-term deal). Playing a year on a QO then leaving isn't a loss in value at this point.

Getting actual value for JK would involve a time machine. Nobody is currently offering clear positive value for him.

[Godaddycurse]

Its not spurs 1st in 2031, its minny 1st fwiw

[BoogieTime]

Its not spurs 1st in 2031, its minny 1st fwiw

its the spurs swapped pick..

Wemby's projected health is all over the place and he already has major issues IMO, but a swapped pick between two teams is not overly enticing (with the Spurs potential upside)