Kuminga to SAC, is there a middle ground?

[SNPA]

Don’t think you get it. You think the Warriors upped the offer because they want Kuminga? lol. Him being gone is about the only thing both sides agree on.

GS wants a reasonable return, Kuminga wants to be sure he’s not in this same situation next summer if the Warriors can’t find a deal by the deadline. Hence why player or team option is the point of debate

He wants to control his career now and going forward. He doesn’t trust them to trade him into a good spot…for him. The bridge is burned. Sure looks like he isn’t giving GS any more authority over him than the absolute minimum required at this point.

A good spot for him is a team offering minutes, money and touches. If he's making $20+ mil, no team is trading for him to be the eighth man. He'll go to a spot he'll be good with (which contrary to some Kings fans belief, isn't just there. Probably not even first choice). If he was so determined, he'd have taken the QO already because it's been made clear GS isn't coming off no player option and no sign and trade

He hasn’t signed the QO because as the deadline approaches he has better leverage. GS just upped their offer, his plan is working.

[NW]

He wants to control his career now and going forward. He doesn’t trust them to trade him into a good spot…for him. The bridge is burned. Sure looks like he isn’t giving GS any more authority over him than the absolute minimum required at this point.

A good spot for him is a team offering minutes, money and touches. If he's making $20+ mil, no team is trading for him to be the eighth man. He'll go to a spot he'll be good with (which contrary to some Kings fans belief, isn't just there. Probably not even first choice). If he was so determined, he'd have taken the QO already because it's been made clear GS isn't coming off no player option and no sign and trade

He hasn’t signed the QO because as the deadline approaches he has better leverage. GS just upped their offer, his plan is working.

GS was always going to up the offer with more guaranteed money. Everyone knew that. What they won't do is come off the no player option or no sign and trade. Would be better off letting him take the QO and saving the $70 mil in tax money

[NW]

[x]

Read on Twitter

[/x]

[Scoot McGroot]

I do not understand the fascination with acquiring Kuminga when you still have Demar and Murray? Or why you're desperate to move Monk, just so you can sign Russ?

[sackings916]

I do not understand the fascination with acquiring Kuminga when you still have Demar and Murray? Or why you're desperate to move Monk, just so you can sign Russ?

I’m not so sure that any of that is true. There’s a lot of smoke for sure so I guess it’s possible. But I agree that it doesn’t make sense.

[SNPA]

I do not understand the fascination with acquiring Kuminga when you still have Demar and Murray? Or why you're desperate to move Monk, just so you can sign Russ?

My suspicion is Monk goes out in the JK deal and DDR on a followup deal ends up on the Lakers or Heat, outside chance the Bucks.

[xdrta+]

[x]

Read on Twitter

[/x]

The problem with acquiring Monk is they'd have to dump either Hield or Moody, which they're not prepared to do.

[gswhoops]

[x]

Read on Twitter

[/x]

The problem with acquiring Monk is they'd have to dump either Hield or Moody, which they're not prepared to do.

If they do it now, yeah. If I had to call my shot right now, I'd guess that Kuminga re-signs with GS and then gets traded to SAC sometime between Jan. 15 and the trade deadline for Monk or DDR and a 1st

[Scoot McGroot]

I do not understand the fascination with acquiring Kuminga when you still have Demar and Murray? Or why you're desperate to move Monk, just so you can sign Russ?

I’m not so sure that any of that is true. There’s a lot of smoke for sure so I guess it’s possible. But I agree that it doesn’t make sense.

Seems a lot of smoke for both separate reports this offseason...

I do not understand the fascination with acquiring Kuminga when you still have Demar and Murray? Or why you're desperate to move Monk, just so you can sign Russ?

My suspicion is Monk goes out in the JK deal and DDR on a followup deal ends up on the Lakers or Heat, outside chance the Bucks.

Then, I guess the next question is what do you do with the received players from a DDR followup? Surely you're not getting expirings for him?

[longfellow44]

I do not understand the fascination with acquiring Kuminga when you still have Demar and Murray? Or why you're desperate to move Monk, just so you can sign Russ?

I’m not so sure that any of that is true. There’s a lot of smoke for sure so I guess it’s possible. But I agree that it doesn’t make sense.

Seems a lot of smoke for both separate reports this offseason...

I do not understand the fascination with acquiring Kuminga when you still have Demar and Murray? Or why you're desperate to move Monk, just so you can sign Russ?

My suspicion is Monk goes out in the JK deal and DDR on a followup deal ends up on the Lakers or Heat, outside chance the Bucks.

Then, I guess the next question is what do you do with the received players from a DDR followup? Surely you're not getting expirings for him?

DeRozan's contract is only guaranteed for 10 million next season, I don't think that trading him for expirings would be difficult at the deadline. maybe I am wrong but it seems to me that a contender that is trying to edge out other teams would be willing to take on an extra 10 million next season to get a useful player if all it is costing them are less useful expirings.

[NW]

[x]

Read on Twitter

[/x]


Notes from Sam Amick’s article that sounds straight from Kuminga’s camp

[Scoot McGroot]

I’m not so sure that any of that is true. There’s a lot of smoke for sure so I guess it’s possible. But I agree that it doesn’t make sense.

Seems a lot of smoke for both separate reports this offseason...

My suspicion is Monk goes out in the JK deal and DDR on a followup deal ends up on the Lakers or Heat, outside chance the Bucks.

Then, I guess the next question is what do you do with the received players from a DDR followup? Surely you're not getting expirings for him?

DeRozan's contract is only guaranteed for 10 million next season, I don't think that trading him for expirings would be difficult at the deadline. maybe I am wrong but it seems to me that a contender that is trying to edge out other teams would be willing to take on an extra 10 million next season to get a useful player if all it is costing them are less useful expirings.

I think it requires Sacramento to pay a little extra? Or taking EVEN less back? Teams generally aren’t willing to tie up an extra $10m on the books a year early? And with the tougher apron environment, $10m is huge. And they likely won’t want a stretched $3+m on the books for 3 years? Or, they know they’ll have to pay to dump that $10m guarantee next summer and will want compensation now to do that? Etc.

[gswhoops]

[x]

Read on Twitter

[/x]


Notes from Sam Amick’s article that sounds straight from Kuminga’s camp

Weird. This is basically the opposite of what Kuminga's camp has been angling for all offseason (less years of team control)

[sackings916]

I do not understand the fascination with acquiring Kuminga when you still have Demar and Murray? Or why you're desperate to move Monk, just so you can sign Russ?

I’m not so sure that any of that is true. There’s a lot of smoke for sure so I guess it’s possible. But I agree that it doesn’t make sense.

Seems a lot of smoke for both separate reports this offseason...

I do not understand the fascination with acquiring Kuminga when you still have Demar and Murray? Or why you're desperate to move Monk, just so you can sign Russ?

My suspicion is Monk goes out in the JK deal and DDR on a followup deal ends up on the Lakers or Heat, outside chance the Bucks.

Then, I guess the next question is what do you do with the received players from a DDR followup? Surely you're not getting expirings for him?

I’m cautious in taking these reports as fact. There’s just a lot of different agendas from multiple different sides.

[jbk1234]

[x]

Read on Twitter

[/x]

So the Warriors have the same position they had in July and decided if they repeated it, it would sound better?

[jbk1234]

[x]

Read on Twitter

[/x]


Notes from Sam Amick’s article that sounds straight from Kuminga’s camp

Weird. This is basically the opposite of what Kuminga's camp has been angling for all offseason (less years of team control)

RFAs almost always want the most guaranteed money they can get. If it's from the Kings, great. If it's from the Warriors, that's fine as well. However, a three year deal makes sure he'll still have Bird rights wherever he ends up, and assuming things work out for him, that'll give him leverage heading into unrestricted free agency.

[SNPA]

[x]

Read on Twitter

[/x]


Notes from Sam Amick’s article that sounds straight from Kuminga’s camp

Weird. This is basically the opposite of what Kuminga's camp has been angling for all offseason (less years of team control)

RFAs almost always want the most guaranteed money they can get. If it's from the Kings, great. If it's from the Warriors, that's fine as well. However, a three year deal makes sure he'll still have Bird rights wherever he ends up, and assuming things work out for him, that'll give him leverage heading into unrestricted free agency.

Agreed. Everyone has a number. Locking in 88m over three years can help rebuild a burnt bridge.

[jbk1234]

i think you can also have a team option (ie partial or nonguaranteed) 2nd year then player option 3rd year so each side gets a turn or something..

Could do a partial guarantee on the 2nd year, and a separate option on the 3rd year? But 3rd year can’t be more guaranteed than the 2nd year is, and there can only be one option total, and only on the last year of the deal. But yeah, guarantees can be the means to work a similar endgame?

So just to lay it out, the idea is the contract would look something like:

Year 1: $25M fully guaranteed
Year 2: $25M, $10M guaranteed
Year 3: $25M Player Option

Is the third year non-guaranteed?

[Godaddycurse]

Could do a partial guarantee on the 2nd year, and a separate option on the 3rd year? But 3rd year can’t be more guaranteed than the 2nd year is, and there can only be one option total, and only on the last year of the deal. But yeah, guarantees can be the means to work a similar endgame?

So just to lay it out, the idea is the contract would look something like:

Year 1: $25M fully guaranteed
Year 2: $25M, $10M guaranteed
Year 3: $25M Player Option

Is the third year non-guaranteed?

Its a Player option in 3rd year

[jbk1234]

So just to lay it out, the idea is the contract would look something like:

Year 1: $25M fully guaranteed
Year 2: $25M, $10M guaranteed
Year 3: $25M Player Option

Is the third year non-guaranteed?

Its a Player option in 3rd year

What if the Warriors cut him on year 2?