[Trade] Warriors have obvious Jonathan Kuminga trade demand after latest Kings reports

  • Thread starter Thread starter Blue Man Hoop
  • Start date Start date
pdxKingsFan said:
We have Bird rights and it's not like we'd use them if we were going to bury him. There's some GM logic in not showing all our cards by starting him over all the more expensive guys we are trying to move, it all comes down to what was discussed in the offseason and if Keon was aware he'd need to take a backseat until we could make some moves imho.
Click to expand...
before or after they added Westbrook at the last minute?
 
iowamcnabb said:
What do y’all think of Kuminga’s fit in Perry’s Six pillars?
Click to expand...

He doesn't, really. I think the goal would be to mold Kuminga to eventually fit somewhere between those "six pillars", given that he's still only 23 years old. Of course, I'm not entirely sure Doug Christie is the right coach for developing an intriguing if somewhat volatile underachiever. Kuminga is and has always been more of an idea than an actual talent. He's got the physical tools, but does he have what it takes between the ears? That remains to be seen.

Personally, I'd be down if the Kings traded for him at the cost of... very little. That's been the deal with Kuminga since the summer. He's a depreciated asset because of the way the Warriors have jerked him around for his entire career, so he represents an opportunistic possibility. If you can snag him on the cheap, then sure, go get him. But I certainly would not want to see Scott Perry surrender a first-rounder for him.
 
Padrino said:
He doesn't, really. I think the goal would be to mold Kuminga to eventually fit somewhere between those "six pillars", given that he's still only 23 years old. Of course, I'm not entirely sure Doug Christie is the right coach for developing an intriguing if somewhat volatile underachiever. Kuminga is and has always been more of an idea than an actual talent. He's got the physical tools, but does he have what it takes between the ears? That remains to be seen.

Personally, I'd be down if the Kings traded for him at the cost of... very little. That's been the deal with Kuminga since the summer. He's a depreciated asset because of the way the Warriors have jerked him around for his entire career, so he represents an opportunistic possibility. If you can snag him on the cheap, then sure, go get him. But I certainly would not want to see Scott Perry surrender a first-rounder for him.
Click to expand...
I don't think Christie is the developmental guy though. Question is how many developmental guys did we keep around after the turnover? Seems like a few, though they may be focused on bigs. But then if we want Kuminga to focus on defense and hustle and worry about getting his offense as it flows into the rest of the game (a la Keegan) maybe we do have the guys.
 
pdxKingsFan said:
I guess that's cool but needs to be worked into a Kings Motif.

I could see my son's football coach explaining how each pillar does this blah blah blah, and there's 6 because we're also repping the 6th man, the fans.
Click to expand...

I was mostly kidding, a spoof on distressed wood/ live laugh love 😁
 
Padrino said:
He doesn't, really. I think the goal would be to mold Kuminga to eventually fit somewhere between those "six pillars", given that he's still only 23 years old. Of course, I'm not entirely sure Doug Christie is the right coach for developing an intriguing if somewhat volatile underachiever. Kuminga is and has always been more of an idea than an actual talent. He's got the physical tools, but does he have what it takes between the ears? That remains to be seen.

Personally, I'd be down if the Kings traded for him at the cost of... very little. That's been the deal with Kuminga since the summer. He's a depreciated asset because of the way the Warriors have jerked him around for his entire career, so he represents an opportunistic possibility. If you can snag him on the cheap, then sure, go get him. But I certainly would not want to see Scott Perry surrender a first-rounder for him.
Click to expand...

I guess Im wondering if this isn’t a “he could be anything, even a boat” situation, with the boat being Lavine. Many fans are desperately trying to unload Zach and he is a better scorer, athlete and shooter.

I’m not completely out on Kuminga, he is talented and hasn’t been given the best opportunity to succeed, so maybe he is worth a shot if the price is right.
 
iowamcnabb said:
I guess Im wondering if this isn’t a “he could be anything, even a boat” situation, with the boat being Lavine. Many fans are desperately trying to unload Zach and he is a better scorer, athlete and shooter.

I’m not completely out on Kuminga, he is talented and hasn’t been given the best opportunity to succeed, so maybe he is worth a shot if the price is right.
Click to expand...

Well, what Zach LaVine can't be is 23 years old and thus of appropriate age for the timeline the Kings will be on after the upcoming draft. He's 30, and he also just is who he is at this stage of his career. Few see a winning player when they look at LaVine. I certainly don't.

Kuminga, on the other hand, could theoretically be coached into the kind of player that Perry envisions as representative of his six pillars, especially if it doesn't come at great cost to the Kings to take a flier on him. He's also a versatile wing in a league that wrings value from those positions on the court, whereas LaVine is a scoring 2-guard with no defensive ability and limited playmaking skill. Not much of a premium on those types these days.

To be clear, I'm not a necessarily a huge believer in Kuminga. I'm just a fan of opportunistic GM'ing, and Kuminga represents a great buy-low opportunity for a team in need of young talent and depth on the wing.
 
pdxKingsFan said:
I don't think Christie is the developmental guy though. Question is how many developmental guys did we keep around after the turnover? Seems like a few, though they may be focused on bigs. But then if we want Kuminga to focus on defense and hustle and worry about getting his offense as it flows into the rest of the game (a la Keegan) maybe we do have the guys.
Click to expand...

I don't think Christie is the developmental guy, either. I've been very vocal about my distaste for his role in the organization and on the sideline. My larger point was that acquiring Kuminga at very little cost would be great opportunism on Perry's part, but that the Kings would likely need to revamp their coaching infrastructure at some point if they were going to accomplish what the Warriors couldn't.
 
Padrino said:
He doesn't, really. I think the goal would be to mold Kuminga to eventually fit somewhere between those "six pillars", given that he's still only 23 years old. Of course, I'm not entirely sure Doug Christie is the right coach for developing an intriguing if somewhat volatile underachiever. Kuminga is and has always been more of an idea than an actual talent. He's got the physical tools, but does he have what it takes between the ears? That remains to be seen.

Personally, I'd be down if the Kings traded for him at the cost of... very little. That's been the deal with Kuminga since the summer. He's a depreciated asset because of the way the Warriors have jerked him around for his entire career, so he represents an opportunistic possibility. If you can snag him on the cheap, then sure, go get him. But I certainly would not want to see Scott Perry surrender a first-rounder for him.
Click to expand...

There was that report this summer where I thought it was leaked that Perry/Armstrong thought he was an "All-star talent"

Regardless of how I feel about him, if that's their valuation on Kuminga, I was fine with the giving up a protected FRP for someone they thought that highly on. You don't let that guy pass through your fingers.

Now, price of the brick has gone down. Whatever little leverage the Warriors might have had this summer is totally gone with how they've decided to use him so far this season.

To me, it's Monk or DDR and maybe a 2nd, max. If the Warriors scoff, that's fine, they can go find a very useful rotation player for the guy they're shoving out the door somewhere else.
 
Padrino said:
To be clear, I'm not a necessarily a huge believer in Kuminga. I'm just a fan of opportunistic GM'ing, and Kuminga represents a great buy-low opportunity for a team in need of young talent and depth on the wing.
Click to expand...
This. Kuminga probably never gets himself above 4th-best player on a contender but A) You never know, and B) Grab pieces while you can.
 
Padrino said:
I don't think Christie is the developmental guy, either. I've been very vocal about my distaste for his role in the organization and on the sideline. My larger point was that acquiring Kuminga at very little cost would be great opportunism on Perry's part, but that the Kings would likely need to revamp their coaching infrastructure at some point if they were going to accomplish what the Warriors couldn't.
Click to expand...
But my point was that head coach aside, I think we've done ok developing guys we brought in this year? Plus Keon and a few others, and those who didn't develop was largely a function of playing time as several have succeeded elsewhere (Davion).
 
Capt. Factorial said:
This. Kuminga probably never gets himself above 4th-best player on a contender but A) You never know, and B) Grab pieces while you can.
Click to expand...
4th best player is still valuable as long as they aren't paid like a super star. Sometimes they are the glue you only notice when they are gone and everything turns to poop.

Barnes, Harrison.
 
The_Jamal said:
There was that report this summer where I thought it was leaked that Perry/Armstrong thought he was an "All-star talent"

Regardless of how I feel about him, if that's their valuation on Kuminga, I was fine with the giving up a protected FRP for someone they thought that highly on. You don't let that guy pass through your fingers.

Now, price of the brick has gone down. Whatever little leverage the Warriors might have had this summer is totally gone with how they've decided to use him so far this season.

To me, it's Monk or DDR and maybe a 2nd, max. If the Warriors scoff, that's fine, they can go find a very useful rotation player for the guy they're shoving out the door somewhere else.
Click to expand...

I was never good with the Kings moving a first rounder for Kuminga, even in the summer, mostly because I assumed the Kings were going to be really bad across the next 2-3 seasons, and I'd rather they just rebuild the right way for a change. But I agree that, if a first rounder was at all on the table over the summer, it is 100% off the table now. Monk or DDR, plus a second. That's the deal. The Warriors are 17-16 currently. They'll be competing in the play-in, despite the fact that Steph is turning out an absolute classic of a late-career season. If they want any shot at advancing past the first round, they need to bolster their rotation. If they want to turn their noses up at the Kings' package, then fine, but beggars can't be choosers, and all that.
 
pdxKingsFan said:
But my point was that head coach aside, I think we've done ok developing guys we brought in this year? Plus Keon and a few others, and those who didn't develop was largely a function of playing time as several have succeeded elsewhere (Davion).
Click to expand...

Eh, I would dispute this notion quite a bit. I hate literally everything about the way this coaching staff runs their offense and their defense, and other than Maxime's surprise breakout, I'm not convinced this coaching staff is doing right by the Kings' younger talent at all.
 
Padrino said:
Eh, I would dispute this notion quite a bit. I hate literally everything about the way this coaching staff runs their offense and their defense, and other than Maxime's surprise breakout, I'm not convinced this coaching staff is doing right by the Kings' younger talent at all.
Click to expand...
But I'm talking individual player development and not play style or minutes management in what has been a clear transition year. There's no way to discount Maxime in that. And you have to include Keon as well, and even Cardwell.
 
iowamcnabb said:
What do y’all think of Kuminga’s fit in Perry’s Six pillars?
Click to expand...

Perry also said that in the modern NBA he thinks that teams can't have enough guys that are 6'8" or 6'9" and super athletic. It gives you a lot of options on defense if you can get three of those guys on the court at once with a ball handling guard and a mobile big to compliment them (ie something like the approach that Houston is taking this year with their lineup). I'm a little skeptical of this approach, especially when it comes to assigning roles in the offense, but anything that takes us away from the guard heavy rotation we have now I'll count as a positive development until proven otherwise.

For his own sake, Kuminga needs to go to a team that has nothing to lose by just handing him the ball and letting him work through his shot-selection woes in real-time. With the right guidance he should find out where his spots are going to be in the NBA and how and when to apply pressure on the defense without getting out of control. I'd be concerned though that with Doug Christie's hands-off approach to offense that this could easily go the opposite way and the bad habits become irreversible. Kuminga could be an asset as an athletic defender, finisher, and occasional ball handler in the right situation or he could be another Jordan Poole style tank commander who fades into obscurity outside of Golden State.
 
hrdboild said:
Perry also said that in the modern NBA he thinks that teams can't have enough guys that are 6'8" or 6'9" and super athletic. It gives you a lot of options on defense if you can get three of those guys on the court at once with a ball handling guard and a mobile big to compliment them (ie something like the approach that Houston is taking this year with their lineup). I'm a little skeptical of this approach, especially when it comes to assigning roles in the offense, but anything that takes us away from the guard heavy rotation we have now I'll count as a positive development until proven otherwise.

For his own sake, Kuminga needs to go to a team that has nothing to lose by just handing him the ball and letting him work through his shot-selection woes in real-time. With the right guidance he should find out where his spots are going to be in the NBA and how and when to apply pressure on the defense without getting out of control. I'd be concerned though that with Doug Christie's hands-off approach to offense that this could easily go the opposite way and the bad habits become irreversible. Kuminga could be an asset as an athletic defender, finisher, and occasional ball handler in the right situation or he could be another Jordan Poole style tank commander who fades into obscurity outside of Golden State.
Click to expand...
Perry isn’t the only one. Pretty much everyone but Monte feels this way. Those guys are the hardest to find.
 
Padrino said:
I was never good with the Kings moving a first rounder for Kuminga, even in the summer, mostly because I assumed the Kings were going to be really bad across the next 2-3 seasons, and I'd rather they just rebuild the right way for a change. But I agree that, if a first rounder was at all on the table over the summer, it is 100% off the table now. Monk or DDR, plus a second. That's the deal. The Warriors are 17-16 currently. They'll be competing in the play-in, despite the fact that Steph is turning out an absolute classic of a late-career season. If they want any shot at advancing past the first round, they need to bolster their rotation. If they want to turn their noses up at the Kings' package, then fine, but beggars can't be choosers, and all that.
Click to expand...

Right. All I'm saying is from a process perspective from the decision makers; if they actually believe Kuminga is an all-star talent, then you don't let a FRP get in the way of going and getting him.

That math has changed now, but I would have been fine with it in the summer just purely from that perspective of how highly our FO viewed him.
 
pdxKingsFan said:
I don't think Christie is the developmental guy though. Question is how many developmental guys did we keep around after the turnover? Seems like a few, though they may be focused on bigs. But then if we want Kuminga to focus on defense and hustle and worry about getting his offense as it flows into the rest of the game (a la Keegan) maybe we do have the guys.
Click to expand...
I thought Christie was their development guy? Spending summers working with Sabonis and others
 
The_Jamal said:
Right. All I'm saying is from a process perspective from the decision makers; if they actually believe Kuminga is an all-star talent, then you don't let a FRP get in the way of going and getting him.

That math has changed now, but I would have been fine with it in the summer just purely from that perspective of how highly our FO viewed him.
Click to expand...
The Warriors are waiting, trying to get someone to bite and give them a 1st rounder for a guy that they have fully evaluated for years and found not worth playing. Marvin Bagley is currently a better NBA player than Kuminga, but I know that is hard to acknowledge, because we already got to see Bagley in a Kings uniform.

Go place a bet that Kuminga is going to make an All-Star team, if you're in favor of this trade. It isn't happening
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
  • Locked
[Trade] Warriors have obvious counter to Kings ridiculous Jonathan Kuminga trade offer
Replies
6
Views
1K
Jdbraver137
J
B
[Trade] Kings will crush Warriors' Jonathan Kuminga dream with another boneheaded trade
Replies
22
Views
2K
Jdbraver137
J
S
[Trade] NBA Insider Reveals Harsh Reality on Potential Jonathan Kuminga, Kings Trade
Replies
3
Views
896
Jdbraver137
J
S
[Trade] New Report on Kings' Interest in Jonathan Kuminga Trade
Replies
28
Views
2K
Capt. Factorial
Capt. Factorial
Y
[Rumor] Warriors could acquire $36 million Kings forward via win-now Jonathan Kuminga swap
Replies
3
Views
730
Tetsujin
Tetsujin
Back
Top