After making little progress in sign-and-trade talks, the Warriors expect Jonathan Kuminga to be on their roster when the season begins, a source tells Tim Kawakami of The San Francisco Standard.
As a restricted free agent, Kuminga has been involved in a stalemate throughout the summer. No interested teams have enough cap space to make a competitive offer, and no one is willing to give Golden State what it wants in a potential deal. The Kings and Suns have been mentioned most prominently as possible trade partners for the 22-year-old forward, but negotiations have been fruitless so far.
Several sources tell Kawakami that the Warriors have been “unenthusiastic” about the prospect of trading Kuminga since the process began. Owner Joe Lacob remains a huge supporter of Kuminga and isn’t willing to part with him unless the trade package includes “real value.”
Kawakami adds that Lacob is willing to be patient until the situation is resolved. That means there’s no pressure on general manager Mike Dunleavy Jr. to take the best available deal just to have a sense of certainty as training camp nears.
In the absence of an offer sheet from a rival team, Kuminga’s options are limited. He can either accept a reported two-year, $45MM offer from the Warriors that includes a team option for the second season, or he can sign his one-year, $8MM qualifying offer.
Kawakami views the Kings as the best destination for Kuminga and states that he probably would have signed with them by now if he had been unrestricted. Sacramento could offer a definite rotation role and is rumored to be willing to pay him $63MM over three years.
The Kings are reportedly offering Malik Monk and a protected future first-round pick in return, which hasn’t piqued the Warriors’ interest. Sam Amick of The Athletic reported that Golden State wants the pick to be unprotected, and Kawakami is doubtful that the team has interest in giving up Moses Moody or Buddy Hield, as one of them would have to be added to the deal due to base year compensation rules.
Kuminga has until October 1 to accept the qualifying offer, and Kawakami notes that the date can be pushed back if both sides agree. That means there’s no urgency to get a deal in place, especially from the team’s perspective.
Kawakami’s compromise solution is for the Warriors to replace the second-year team option in their proposal with a partially guaranteed year, perhaps around $14MM. That would guarantee Kuminga in excess of $30MM and take away his right to block a trade. Kawakami points out that it would provide a lot more security than taking the QO and would leave Kuminga with a contract that would be easy to move by the February trade deadline.
Kuminga takes QO and traded immediately to a team for a young player and a draft pick. Most teams can’t fit him under the cap at $25 million a year but if he makes $8.9 million and signs a extension for 2/$60 million then he gets back all his money. The team obtaining him only needs to match the $8.9 million in trade so they can offer a young player and a draft pick. That makes teams he can be traded to a lot more than a few that get him under the cap.
If he signs the QO he has a no trade clause.
If Kuminga gets the extension he wants to a team with playing time he will waive it fast.
You really should read more. Info is out there.
you just hate anything that doesn’t fit your opinion. If the info is out there post it.
Not my opinion its the facts. Warriors can’t pay out more than 12 mill. That is why they have not gone higher than 45 mill two yrs. It benefits them to pay the QO. Only way they can sign Horford and Melton.
So this is all Warriors doing again. Yet you just have to make this about everything else but the Warriors. I know you are not this dumb. So clearly you are an apologist for the Warriors. Nothing they do is wrong. Its childish lol. And how long are you and Warriors fans doing this THREE YEARS …. just can’t move on.
Fact ———- Not my opinion !!!!
Reports and rumors from various NBA insiders and news outlets indicate that the Golden State Warriors have reached verbal agreements with free agents Al Horford and De’Anthony Melton. These potential signings, however, are reportedly contingent on the resolution of restricted free agent Jonathan Kuminga’s situation.
link to google.com
Fact —— not my opinion
why would you even ask to decline your Bird rights. That only means he can’t max out his next contract. So basically they know he will decline this offer. A real adult can look at facts, stories, rumors and see the truths in there. This nonsense with Kuminga has been going on for THREE YEARS … and you want to make this about me. Grow up lol …..
The Golden State Warriors have offered Jonathan Kuminga a two-year, $45 million contract, but he has reportedly declined the offer. This contract includes a team option for the second year and Kuminga is being asked to waive a de facto no-trade clause. Kuminga is also considering a one-year, $7.9 million qualifying offer, which would allow him to become an unrestricted free agent next summer.
link to google.com
Any afult with some knowledge would look at all possibilities and both sides. For you and most Warriors fans in here. It’s all about the Warriors. And what Kuminga has done to them. And how he still is the one holding things up …… class is out
Did they not offer him a contract last year that was in the 3/75 range? Look it up if you don’t believe me. He tunred it down.
The highest salary on an extension after a QO trade is 10M.
> The highest salary on an extension after a QO trade is 10M.
OK, you get the “that’s great knowledge” prize for this week.
Question: which and how many teams will have cap flexibility next summer? Are there any obvious ones where Kuminga just fits?
I wouldn’t be surprised if he’s already eyeing the LAKERS, who could have up to $80M. They really need a big, athletic wing. And the Reddick offense with Luka would fit JK perfectly.
.
If I’m JK’s agent, I’m floating that Lakers rumor…
Wrong ———- One day you should just state facts. And stop putting it on him. Or defending the Warriors actions ….. you are better than this ….
Any team can fit him on their team. All they have to do is clear 12.5 mill in cap space. For a 25 mill contract.
Its the Warriors who can’t fit the 25 mill in their cap.
This is the issue with Kuminga today. And why they are fools to not trade him at the draft or even last yr. Warriors still want to sign players. And there are even stories players are waiting to sign with Warriors. Which can’t happen till Kuminga is settled. Their only hope now is someone comes up with an offer they want. If there is a trade. You can guarantee Kuminga is getting 25 mill or more. Otherwise he would have signed Warriors offer of 45 mill two yrs. Without giving up his Bird rights of course. Warriors would just have to shed salary another way.
Fact is no team wants to go over the first apron. Most teams are at the m limit without going over the apron. So name the teams that can give him a $25 million contract that will not go over the ribbon. Take out the teams with their own RFA that they are negotaiting with. Go0 ahead and show me. take out Utah who has said they do not want to use their cap space for Kuminga.
There are 20 teams that will cut salary to keep Kuminga. If he signs for 25 mill and 12.5 mill goes out. Then that team only has to manage the 12.5 mill. Coming in.
So why should they do it when they can get him straight up for 7.9 mill on Oct 1st. Why are teams going to help the Warriors . You still don’t understand how this was a terrible decision by Warriors to let it get here. You are still making up scenarios to help Warriors look better. Everything you say is from Warriors side. You are not dealing with reality. Wanting or wishing something doesn’t make it true or rational.
name them… Since Kings want Kuminga why don’t they cut a few players and sign him? See you know what you said is not true or your would name all 20 clubs.
Cause why should they help you. They are reading this roght now and saying “why should we help arc the whinny Warriors fan”.
Nobody is going to help Warriors. Cause on Oct 1st Kuminga can be had for 7.9 mill and even less value in a trade. You just don’t get it lol. All your whining is making you blind. The longer this goes on. The worse the offers will get. Once he signs QO offers will be worse. Cause now he will be harder to sign next year for team who trades for him. Wake up man. You are close to losing him for nothing. No team is going to help. When they can have him for free next yr. Oct 1st and you are toast ——/
Why should the warriors help out the kings? Taking players they do not want just to help Kings get a player they want doesn’t make sense. Why are you whinning about Kuminga being treated badly he choose to be a RFA. Nobody forced him to be a RFA. So why are you crying about its unfair to Kuminga? If the kings don’t want to trade any of their real players that is OK just don’t expect the warriors carry garbage just to help Kuminga get a contract he wants.
aristotle —- you are the biggest clown on here. Not only are you a coward. You want to bash me then mute me. I doubt you ever bounced a ball. Everything you post is based on what you read or look up. So basically someone else’s ideas.
I get you have no clue what I post. Cause you would have to know ball to understand it. Yet ever since you became a Warrior fan. You think you got backup lol. Dude with my handle I can go thru teams. This is childs play to me. I guess I will have to remind you of that again ……
post info. Cause most vliwns like you can’t believe or understand how I can come up with it. The Warriors have done this to themselves. You know how long I been saying this. Yet you want to join the take. Cause you have this need to prove something to me. Join the club. To come at me. You have to kniw the game. Most in here aren’t qualified.
You take quotes and sentences to try and show a point. And sll you do is show your ignorance. I get you don’t like I know too much. But I don’t talk umless I believe what I’m talking about. I don’t make up BS to try and make myself look good.
80% of teams in NBA would take Kumings today. If the cap was different today. He would already have signed an offer sheet. Yet considering how much you write and think you know about the cap. You forget no team has that space to sign him. And no teamd is going to do it now. When is on his way out. Dude I am constantly ahead of the curve cause I care about tge game. And I llok it all and search all my ideas or takes. I don’t do it for you or this board. I do it cause this game is a part of me since 6 yrs old. Its not rocket science lol.
> There are 20 teams that will cut salary to keep Kuminga. If he
> signs for 25 mill and 12.5 mill goes out. Then that team only
> has to manage the 12.5 mill. Coming in.
Brilliant! Was this an AI’s answer to: “Create a statement about Jonathan Kuminga so packed with untruth and misunderstanding that nobody will be able to respond.”
Al I think if he signs for 25 yes the Warriors can only count 12 million going out…, but the incoming team still counts the 25 coming in. That’s how I understand it.
Al, do you ever read the articles you post under? It would save you so much typing.
Kuminga has no pathway to play for any team other than the warriors. No team is cutting players to sign Kuminga. How many teams even have the cap space to cut one player to fit Kuminga? It’s not aprons they would have to get under, it’s the actual salary cap, which is absurdly low. Even if he was unrestricted, he would still need the warriors to sign and trade, as again, nobody has the space to just sign him.
Your hate for the warriors, a real team unlike the Knicks, is blinding you to reality. You are sitting here calling people names yet you can’t even comprehend the bad math you posted.
If he takes the QO and allows himself to be traded then whichever team he lands on wont have his bird rights and will only be allowed to offer him 120% of 8M next year without cap room.
On top of that there may be a waiting period after where he isnt trade eligible for a while.
I didn’t know that is only how much he can get paid 120%. That rules out him signing an extension. I wonder if this is all a bluff by warriors to get Kings to up their offer. If he becomes a free agent he will be able to pick the best offer with a longer term deal. they will need to pay off Zach’s last year to get cap space of Kuminga and will need money to sign Muarry that will be a free agent. lakers could easily come in and offer him a contract if LeBron leaves. Heat who likes him will have a lot of cap space to make an offer. Kings are the ones that need to either up the trade offer or bid him goodbye.
Why would the return be better for GS when the contract they’re trying to move is only 8 mil? Who would they be targeting that costs that little, is an impact player, and a player his former team would be willing to ship out? On top of a first.
They want to call JKs bluff. I don’t see that working out.
I think his thought is that JK is easy to fit on most teams at 8M. So you dont get players back but you get more draft capital since a team with a TPE of 8M can just take Kuminga into it and pay you in draft picks.
Course as I said Kuminga then cant get paid so it would be idiotic to allow the trade and be stuck at 10M on his next deal.
But if the Warriors wanted draft capital then why use this ploy of wanting a talented young player in return? Would it not make sense to come out now and say “Hey we’ll take your garbage as long as we get some nice picks!”? Instead the’re doing the opposite approach of “Hey we want your talented young guy in exchange for a guy we clearly don’t view as very talented and on top of that go ahead and give me an UNPROTECTED 1st”
If Sacramento actually offered Monk and a 1st then this FO has smoked their brains out of their bodies by turning that down. They are clearly split on deciding when to call it quits. The Jimmy trade forced their hand this season and they don’t want to admit that paying Kuminga ruins their plan of a last horah before dismantling.
Guess it comes down to how much they value an 7-9 seed this season.
They want either a rotation player that is close to Kumingas current value, but may fit better now with less upside later, or draft capital that is real quality picks that can be added to an offer for a star or rotation player to fill the void. The whole point is either fill the void that Kuminga leaving creates in the trade, or give us assets to fill that void somewhere else. Thats a pretty fair ask.
They value Kuminga correctly while also understanding that the lack of shooting in the top 6 players on the roster with him is a problem for lineup construction, and hitting the teams best outcomes.
GSW dont like Monk as a no defense microwave bench scorer. The league doesnt value those players either since UTH had to send a pick with Sexton to get Nurks dead money back. Sexton is better than Monk and you could have had him free.
The pick they offered was protected and most likely two 2nds which arent worth s***. Like I dont care about 2nds that wont convey for 6 years.
If they take Monk back they are hard capped and much send out Moody to still sign Horford, or even just be able to sign enough players to get to the min 14 on the roster.
It sounds like they are going to pay Kuminga and see how it looks while realizing that trading him becomes much more viable once BYC isnt involved. That wont be changed by the Butler deal. They are just trying to get the best terms possible on a Kuminga contract, since they plan to probably trade it soon. Once Kuminga signs to anything thats not an overpay by a mile they can finish there other signings and be ready to roll with a ton of options to make moves in season.
Preach CV
Wash, I think Malik Monk’s game is fine and can fit almost anywhere. But it’s the three more years on his contract that Golden State doesn’t want on their books. I think that’s why they haven’t pulled the trigger.
I can understand why they’d be hesitant to add his contract but it’s very moveable if they want to get off of it and isn’t an overpay in a sea of bloated contracts.
I’m really just not understanding what would make the Warriors happy. It seems like their gameplan is to just wait until another team bails them out. I can’t imagine that everyone on the roster is thrilled by that.
If you take in Monk you also have to trade away Moody in all likelihood for the team to not get hard capped. So its not just 1 for 1. If you dont trade both you lose Horford/Melton etc and have to sign the second rounders to regular spots to fill the rotation. Kuminga would only count for 10M outgoing and Monk makes 19M.
Monks contract is an overpay by at least 5M based on what similar guys got this offseason, and GSW would probably have to attach picks to get off him.
Kuminga to Chicago for Vuecuc and Noa
@arc89 All of that seems completely contradictory to the above article, doesn’t it?
To me the article is saying OK Kings you don’t want to give us a real deal that helps both teams then you can negotiate against every team that wants him after he signs the QO. There is very few teams that they can trade him to right now that has cap space. Also gives Kuminga agent a reset to find a team that only can take in $9 million but is willing to give him an extension once traded.
@arc89 if you’re referring to the Kawakami article, that isn’t remotely close to what it said.
The article, basically, says:
– Lacob has never wanted to trade Kuminga, and will continues not to unless it’s a fabulous offer.
– GSW never expected a fabulous offer, and none happened.
– Expect Lacob to sign Kuminga to a multi-year offer before the season starts.
– Do not expect Lacob to lose Kuminga.
I just don’t see why Kuminga would want to sign with the warriors? Even lacob knows Kuminga doesn’t want to be here.
This article also says Owner Joe Lacob remains a huge supporter of Kuminga and isn’t willing to part with him unless the trade package includes “real value.”
As it stands now the 2 teams that want Kuminga doesn’t want to trade real value to the warriors. So its a stale mate. Once the QO happens the trade market for teams open up and the warriors can get value for him.
> As it stands now the 2 teams that want Kuminga doesn’t want
> to trade real value to the Warriors.
It’s time to stop saying this, arc. There is no deal involving the Kings or Suns that doesn’t make the Warriors worse this upcoming season. That has nothing to do with Kuminga.
Trading for Monk means the Warriors get hard-capped at the first apron (which further limis them) and also have to give up Moody or Hield. Result: this team is much worse than last year’s.
Same applies to Phoenix. ChapmansVaccuum explained this thoroughly 2 days ago.
All the deals make the warriors cap situation worse for this year and next year. They can’t go over the 1st apron because it hurts their future which is what they are protecting right now.
@arc
If he takes the QO he has to change teams again next summer to one with cap space as a UFA in order to get more than 10M.
The QO is not really a option for anyone since Kuminga loses bird rights in any deal on an 8M contract.
If he takes the QO they become 15M below the cap with the TPMLE, BAE, and Anderson TPE available along with the space to sign 15 vets, and still have room for others if you need to cut someone on a 1 year mid season when they get hurt long term, and add more.
I dont think the team wants him on the QO, but it does give them lots of options to spend on smaller 6M- contracts if he does.
See you guys are talking about rumors of What owners and Warriors want. The same stuff for how long now. Kuminga has been jerked around for three years now. He isn’t signing an extension unless its a massive overpay. And Warriors can’t do that cause of cap space. The salary cap is not working with the Warriors now. There is no way of keeping him. But the main thing none of you get ——-
Is Warrior want to fill out their roster. That can’t happen till Kuminga is signed. And right now from Warriors perspective. that means best course of action is the QO. Is that so hard to see. You keep talking about other teams and Kuminga value. All this is about salary cap space for Warriors. And the fact is …….. it’s looking more and more like the best path to that is a QO. That is what this is about now. Reality
Why are you guys talking about Rumors on Hoops Rumors?…Im with AL on this one
Crunch, I have to defend myself on this one. If Tim Kawakami says Warriors’ sources tell him that Lacob has always wanted to keep Kuminga throughout this process, believe it.
If you’re a Warriors fan in the Bay Area, you know that Kawakami’s sources are unimpeachable. (I know that there are sports journalists of this stature in LA.)
Kawakami has direct access to Lacob, who often appears on his podcast. When Kerr wanted to air his grievances after this season, he called Kawakami. Then, Dunleavey did the same.
Kawakami knows a lot more than he can tell, but he also tells only what he knows to be true. He has the stature to report about Warriors’ organizational dysfunction, while retaining the respect of the parties he’s reported on.
We need a sarcasm font in here
Kawakami is the Homer of Homers, among major publications. Add in Entitled and a bit Arrogant. Little wonder the Bay Area loves him so…
ari …., my friend…, you have to know that a billionaire team owner is going to take the high road when speaking publicly.
Of course he’s going to say he loves JK and Wants to sign him to a long-term contract and keep him on the team forever.
Yada yada yada.
That is not necessarily the truth in cases like this, and it’s definitely not the truth in THIS particular case.
Behind the scenes, I’m positive Joe Lacob is seething that this young player who has proven nothing, is holding the team hostage in filling out the roster for one.., and turning down $25 million a season.
Not cool no matter how anyone spins it.
Is Jonathan Kuminga Correct from his point of view?
Of course he is !!
You have to take care of your own and he’s doing that. No problem at all. But here we are.
Gary, To be clear, Kawakami didn’t report that Lacob said anything (including anything about positive) about Kuminga. Or to Kuminga.
What Kawakami did say is that Warriors insiders say that Lacob has no interest in trading Kuminga, and that’s likely to continue.
That’s all.
It also basically says:
Kuminga would be gone for a real offer, but not for scraps. (we knew this)
The offers have been far below reasonable for a 22 year old with upside thats already a rotation player. (I think they may be shooting a little high, but also a trade right now is so complicated that its hard to make the deal be legal while getting everyone what they want)
I do think if they are interested at all in keeping JK beyond the next 6 months that they should try to lock him down for the 4/90M that PHX supposedly was offering, since that contract could become waayyy more valuable if he improves, and after year 2 he would be making around the MLE. (You want him longer if he pops and you keep him, and you want him contracted longer if your dealing him for value)
I still wouldnt be shocked if they trade him by the next season. It will really depend on how he fits on the roster this year, and which stars come available.
I dont think it was a coincidence that they havent inked his deal, while reports are coming in that Giannis could still be in play this offseason. If they keep things on ice with Kuminga then they have all the options on building a Giannis package.
Chapman, IMO, if you’ve been following all the Lacob and Dunleavy interviews with Kawakami over the last 15 months, you don’t have to read between the lines to know that Lacob wants Kuminga on board because the rebuild starts soon — maybe in 1 year, but definitely not longer than 2. This is, literally, the oldest starting group in NBA history.
The FO maintains a 4-5 year plan for the roster. The rebuild could start after this season (which is why Kerr doesn’t have a contract for next season), but not later than after next, 2026-27 season.
Weird how every little nuance to player’s contracts benefit the owners. From caps to aprons to QOs to luxury tax payment distributions somehow the primary benefactor is always the owners. I’ll admit the new CBA is interesting in it’s own way but player’s and stars being forced to new teams for financial reasons isn’t fun. And when the novelty wears off I think everyone will slowly start to realize how bad of a deal the CBA is in its current form – for everyone but the owners of course. Maybe I’m just the old man yelling at clouds…
Pretty spot on
Ill add Max guys are surely benefiting from this Cba and the players need to look into their player reps a tad more (*Dont like the Cj move currently, he seems like a company man which they dont need any more of )
Also Rfa’s of the past were probably overpaid a bit (just Imo) – I dont have a problem with GSW wanting to keep JK sub 25 or Nets Cam sub 20…In the past they kinda got those asks based on upside and upside alone and many of those deals ended poorly.
Today the downside of a bloated contract kinda defeats the upside so we are where we are and I actually kinda find the current RFA market as a healthier one than years past despite all the remaining ones today
But your overall point of suppressing def stands. But know that this was ALL small market doings, and its currently hurting small market teams mostly…hell both La teams and Mia pretty flush on the cap sheet currently moving forward ….GSW doesn’t have a dollar on the books for 2027. Those teams are going to EAT soon
> GSW doesn’t have a dollar on the books for 2027. Those teams
> are going to EAT soon
I agree with the most all of your post except the inference that teams with lots of cap space will want to fill it with FA signings.
Well-run organizations don’t believe that’s the way to build a contending team. Instead, these teams want to build around younger players, and exploit rookie extensions. Also, the ciites in states with high income tax (CA, NY, Massachussets, etc) know that they are at a disadvantage attracting the non-superstar FA’s.
(OT: the Kawakami article shows that Lacob’s biggest consideration continues to be 2026 and beyond, and not this season. As a business, the Warriors cannot survive 3 years as a bottom feeder, maybe not even 2 years. Fans don’t $800/ticket to watch a 20 win team. It’ll cost them $500M-$750M in annual revenue.)
One of the reasons the warriors want a 1st round draft pick included in a deal for Kuminga. Not a pick 5 years from now. The warriors know they need to rebuild and get more draft picks.
Nope. Its because Giannis is apparently still not 100% in with MIL and GSW want more pieces to offer for him.
Giannis is Lacobs white whale. He seems at least interested in pairing with Steph. GSW picks after ’27 are very very valuable compared to picks ’28-32 for teams like SAS/OKC that have used most of the good picks they owned, and while they have a lot none should be better than 20th in the drafts so they are super low upside picks. OKC does have a few best ofs they could deal, but I think only the SAC swap has really good upside.
Agree that No team wants to build off of cap but as currently stands thats kinda how all 4 teams stand-
They will control the markets
Its def nice to have those rookie exts but for every Okc theres 5 failed projects spinning their wheels
Important to note cap goes well beyond free agency, when your getting a manufactured twist and tug from player and now your trying to slip an apron these small market teams will again be leveraged from many different angles
Small market over shot their target, I understand the fear that the Lacobs Ballmers Ishbias and future Walters put into them but Imo the 2nd half of this Cba will heavily favor those Big market teams who have all cleaned (purposefully) their books in anticipation
Reality is Curry retires in 2 or 3 years. When he does its a complete rebuild which will takes some time. There is no more a 2 time line for the team. Even if you have cap sapce to sign an all star it takes a bench to go along with a starting 5 to win. So even with cap space you got to get real lucky with signing teh right players and drafting the right players.
Id take the over on 3 years w Curry
Id also wager GSW will have another bonified All- Star to start the 27/28 season out the gates who is not on the team today
They’ll have a solid bench to go with it as well Imo
*If Curry does peace out in 2 years, stricken everything I just said HA
The future is only a guess by all of us. Just like if warriors sign Kuminga to a QO and they start the season real bad with injuries do they trade Butler to have money to sign Kuminga? nobody knows the future.
Cap, Don’t tell me you, too, believe Father Time will ignore the Warriors! This is literally, the oldest core group in NBA history. The Warriors are already planning their upcoming rebuild.
Bank on it: this team is in rebuild mode in 2027, no matter what Steph does. You’ve recognized that the organization has synchronized the “ancient” — Curry, Green, and Butler — contracts to end just before. Butler and Draymond are too old to be resigned.
Keep in mind that Curry is 38 years old. The organization can hope Father Time isn’t coming, but they can’t plan on it. Curry’s season-ending hamstring injury was medically labelled as from “over-use”. He said that he needs to take more games off and play less minutes per game this year. He cannot be the core of the next Warriors’ generation.
IMO, internally, the Warriors’ FO has the following plan for 2025-26. (Let’s take Vegas’ expected 45 wins as the baseline.)
1) they do better than expected — say 52 wins, and then win 2 playoff series. In this case, they’ll run it all back for the retirement tour in 2026-27.
2) they do worse than expected. At mid-season, they’re not on a 46 win pace and not a top 6 team. Lacob will immediately trade Butler, Draymond, Hield, etc, for youth and/or draft picks
3) as expected, they win 46 games, and exit in the play-ins or first round. In this case, they will start the rebuild after this 2025-26 season ends, and 2026-27 is the start of the rebuild.
Maybe Steph will be a Warrior in 2027-28, but the Warriors will be laser-focused on developing young players, not on making the playoffs.
@arist you are correct 2027 will be most likely a rebuild year. Green will retire age is catching up to his body. Butler will move on most likely. Curry may stay but after Curry what do you have? Podz, Post, and Moody which none are all stars.
All depends on Steph
You have the draft capital, you have the cap, if he’s there I don’t see a soft start up happening, not with Steph in tow
They have made it a point to stay in contention while Steph wears the colors. That Jimmy trade last Feb was pretty risky knowing the ext was built in
*IF ALL that you are saying is true, not saying it isnt an option then Im assuming YOU would have to look at trading Steph to really start a rebuild- I dont see it, they just had 3 lottery picks and saw the dark side of it. I dont see a white flag coming as long as Steph wants to stay/compete which I think he will for many many years.
Crunch, I didn’t say they would trade Steph. That would be a bridge too far for other reasons. But I’m certain that they are not counting on Steph defying age because that would be irresponsible. Your case rests on the a priori proposition that Steph can go on indefinitely. They’re not thinking that way (same as with LeBron) and the Lakers right now.
I’m basing all this on what Lacob has been saying over the last 2 years, which is consistent with what the rest of the NBA is saying: successful franchises must be based on a high-value young core. The Warriors succeeded with that so well (Steph, Draymond, and Klay) that at lasted longer than expected. But they’re not going to drag it out further.
Lacob and Dunleavey are prepping to make this team young again — with or without Steph.
I think they can do both tbh
I hear ya, and it certainly may go that way But
I think they can BOTH at once
I am NOT a prescriber to just being bad for 3 or 4 years is going to build ya back up. Knicks just leveraged a team up drafting savvy outta the 20’s on the yearly by making good trades and signs in the offseason. You got draft capital, I think they can spin it up while still starting to develop a young core w Curry in tow
Crunch, It’s a fascinating discussion. I’d say your ideas apply to the Lakers and Clippers, but not the NBA at large, including the Warriors.
Lacob is pretty open in saying you cannot build a sustainable winner by acquiring veteran players via trade and free agency. First, the players are too expensive. Second, the Bay Area, unlike LA, will never be a popular free agent destination.
Success is about youth, retention, and continuity. You’ll hear Brad Stevens and Sam Presti say exactly the same thing. The goal is to do what they did with Steph, Klay, and Draymond, starting in 2013: keep great players over the first 9 years of their career (longer, if possible). The Celtics are using the same principal (Brown, Tatum, Smart, White,etc), as are OKC (SGA, Holmgren, JWilliams), and, now, Houston, San Antonio, Detroit, and Orlando.
Keep in mind that the Lakers and Clippers can operate on a completely different model than the rest of the NBA because they can reliably attract free agents. Like I say, Lacob says the Warriors will never be able to do that.
I believe that Lacob will tell you that what the Knicks are doing is completely different: they’re targeting a very small window of 2-3 years, after which the luxury will force them to break it up — like what just happened in Boston. The Warriors want to be contenders for a continuous 5-6 year stretch.
It sounds great in theory but there’s not too many teams that get a Klay Dray Steph or Chet SGA JW via the draft
It just doesn’t happen all that much. EX look what the 2, 7 , 14 pick has netted the GSW today
Hou is a good medium ground for example between OKC and Knicks. They built that team off trades, good free agent pickups and ironically off an OKC draft pick outta the 16 slot
While getting those 3 studs via draft might be the most optimal route it could also be the most risky if you dont. I just think theres more than one way to skin the cat here in team building . Look at Indy, required 2 nice trades with a little risk no tanking
Remember when Utah had the most wins in a 4 year stretch in the Western Conf…It wasn’t that long ago, they thought they could pull this draft approach and have gotten nowhere in 3+ years
Cap, so many things to say, and each would be a massive topic. I accept your skepticism. But let me explain more…
It’s Lacob who says that the Warriors don’t intend to pay 3 declining players $140M/yr. GSW can be good, but it can never be great because there isn’t cap space left to build a Championship roster after you pay Steph, Butler, and Draymond $140M. It’s that simple. (The Lakers have reached the same point — planning to spread the $55M of Lebron’s deal across several younger players.)
1. I should clarify why Houston isn’t a “middle ground”, but a strong example of the principles. The high return-on-the-dollar youthful core is what enables a team to opportunistically acquire a small number of more expensive players long enough to win a Championship. The Houston core is Sengun, Thompson, Smith, Eason, and Sheppard. Because this is so much value at a low price, Houston can afford to fit in KD and FVV for a short period. The youthful core will have multiple years left on their rookie exensions when KD and FVV are gone.
Similarly, with Boston last season: because Tatum and Brown were superstars on rookie extensions for a combined $65M/yr, the Celtics could also afford Holiday and Porzingis. Same thing with the 2017 Warriors: with Steph, Klay, and Draymond still on rookie extensions, they could afford to squeeze in KD and Iggy. Similarly, OKC is getting a fabulous value on SGA, Chet, and JWilliams, so they can fit in Hartenstein and Caruso.
Coming up: Cleveland, Houston, Orlando, and Detroit are all taking exactly the same strategy: lock in young core on extensions, and opportunistically use what’s left to fill out a championship roster.
I mean I have no idea how long Draymond can be anything. Curry was just interviewed where he sounded very much like this isnt his last contract.
I dont know if Butler is on the team next summer. I think they like him right now, but wouldnt hesitate to deal him if they get someone better or younger.
If Curry takes a smaller deal they could have Steph and a bunch of cap room in ’27 to bring in a younger FA and keep pushing the Steph timeline.
Steph still looks like Steph. Unitl that changes you just try and keep him healthy for the games that matter most.
This is the team for at least the next 2 years since all the contracts are already on the books for those. Your not going to trade Steph period. So they are committed to this roster till then. If they suck its because Dray/Butler arent performing so you cant trade them for a haul. The team probably wont want to trade Draymond no matter what, and none of the rest of the veterans are getting you anything in return that moves the needle. Like oohhh lets get a bad second for Hield.
I dont think the status quo changes until Steph becomes a pro golfer. Like as long as he is here this is the plan, and the games will still sell out.
They probably have to do some rebuild where they take a step back after Steph anyways so you dont do it till its over with him. Like there is no way for this team to be some up and coming young team when he goes right away. They wont draft high enough to have a core piece, and wont be able to sign or trade for one before then either.
This is what we all want. If they wanted to be the best team in ’27 they would trade Steph and rebuild now with a super sick top of next years draft. They kept the pick as insurance on a lost season to injury, but this team is locked into this for the foreseeable future. Of course where they can they will try to get good future talent.
“Steph still looks like Steph. Unitl that changes you just try and keep him healthy for the games that matter most.”
I like that quote, kinda where I was gearing towards
Chapman REALLY said and Crunch REALLY agreed:
“Steph still looks like Steph. Unitl that changes you just try and keep him healthy for the games that matter most.”
Super-smart dudes, this is some wild ***t ! Have you gone through your late 30’s and early 40’s yet? Because your stuff start slowing down. Fast. Not just for normal guys, but for 99.9% of pro basketball players.
The Warriors aren’t counting on Steph being back after 2026-27, because that wouldn’t be responsible. And, if he does come back, they’re not counting on him being a top 15 player because that’s not realistic.
The Warriors front office must have a plan based on reality and what they can control. If Steph lasts longer, great, but the Warriors can’t be dependent on that. It’s the same thing the Lakers are going through with LeBron right now.
I cant think of too many players in the history of the league that should age better than Steph
Will it happen, who knows
But his game is tailored to age well. They will need to help by finding a great POA defender and wing defender but they’ll have over 100 M summer 2027 to do that
Lebron was a top 15 player at 40 Curry will be 39 27 summer
I certainly think he can be a top 15 player
* Slow month, I’m arguing FOR the Warriors to a Warrior fan , strange times ….not dismissing your thoughts tho they very well could come to fruition I just disagree here
> I cant think of too many players in the history of the league
> that should age better than Steph
Cap, I respect your takes a lot, but why? Because I’d say exactly the opposite.
1. There is no small player that has been great past 40. Stockton came closest. He wanted to go longer, but his body broke down.
2. Steph draws more contact and gets more banged up than any guard in the game. The contact he draws at the basket most often leads to a violent fall. He carries 20 years of wear-and-tear
3. Unlike LeBron, he’s already shown vulnerability to “over-use” injuries. That’s why he missed the Minnesota playoff series.
4. Steph’s game depends heavily on quickness and explosiveness. He’ll always be able to make open shots, but getting open is going to be more difficult. He said as much this past season: he has to be much smarter about choosing his shots.
BTW, I would say that KD’s game ages much better than Steph’s because KD takes so little contact and doesn’t need to work hard to get his shot. KD expends much less effort relatively, which is why he can still play 40 minutes per game.
Ill be 42 soon. I still run circles around 20 somethings in open gym runs lols.
I mean I think he might extend again for another season. The over 38 rule means he can only add 1 each year, but thats not his choice. He was just on a interview talking about how the offseasons are harder, and when he cant do them he knows its time, but was talking up playing into his 40s like that was his plan if his body doesnt quit.
Also a player like him should age incredibly well. He doesnt play above the rim at all, shooting never ages, and the running is more about endurance than peak sprinting which is an old mans game. Theres a reason Sprinters age out in their mid 20s but marathon guys are winning golds in their 40s. Steph plays a game much closer to a marathons physical demands than a 100M sprint, and he does incredible amounts of work to be peak conditioned.
I would say its injuries that could end things sooner, otherwise I dont see Steph at 41 being all that different to now. Maybe he plays off ball a little more and drives into traffic a little less.
There is no real plan. In almost every circumstance the plan is to tear it down, but you cant tear it down when you want your star to “retire for nothing” with your team. Like you wont draft high till he leaves, so you cant start working on the after hes gone, till hes actually gone.
> Also a player like him should age incredibly well.
Yes, but that’s already happened. He’s 38 now. No NBA guard has ever excelled after 40. Stockton tried, but his body gave out.
The “he can play into his 40’s” narrative comes up with every aging NBA superstar. It’s a fantasy.
> There is no real plan. In almost every
> circumstance the plan is to tear it down.
I don’t believe that’s correct Like most of the best run NBA-franchises, GSW has a team that manages a 4-5 year plan for their roster. It’s constantly changing, but without such a plan, your current decisions suffer.
Because Lacob and Dunleavey talked publicly about it last summer, we know that GSW:
– was actively preparing for the post-Steph era
– believed youth was the way to sustained success
– believed in retaining their draft picks as long as possible, and not trading them for older players
– wanted to avoid an extended rebuild by having several young players ready to contribute when it happened
– those young players were JK, Podz, TJD, and Moody
– GSW would need to add more stars to contend
– the Warriors didn’t want to include Podz and JK in deals for George, Markkanen, etc
Modern medicine and sports science is way different than it was even 20 years ago, and the game has changed away from more paint dominant play where injuries are more likely and the play is more physical. Its far more skill based now than it was even 10 years ago.
I know they want to prepare for it, but that doesnt change the fact you cant tank, and really you can only prepare so much before your just rebuilding, and making Steph question staying. Especially after he has been such a low maintenance super star it would seem stupid to drive him away now. Like they may never again have a top 5 all time player, that has to be the focus until they dont anymore.
If you can say anything its that the team keeps trying to keep its powder dry so it has the juice for a big deal, when they could have used some draft capital to improve more now. Like I wish they had traded Baldwins pick for a future 1st to add to the assets. I kinda get it though there have been a lot of deals that were proposed where I didnt really like the value at the time. In hindsight some would have worked, but some would have been really bad.
They were willing to include some of that stuff for Lauri and George, and I thought they made the right reads that the ask was to high. I wouldnt be happy today with Lauri and no future picks or any of the kids.
Chapman- I wouldn’t be so blunt if you obviously hadn’t read the research I sent you a few weeks ago :—) … but you’re wrong to say that modern sports medicine has:
1. extended players careers,
2. made players perform better late in their careers
3. made players less injured and more available
In every major sport, all of the above are untrue. The trend is to shorter careers and more injuries. Good players are not performing better late in their careers. The odds of 38 year old Steph Curry playing into his 40’s have never been worse than today.
Just for you:
link to claude.ai
Im saying modern medicine has made it so that surgeries that used to be career ending are now repairable. Our understanding of the human body and fitness/training is constantly advancing, and the current technology to maintain and monitor your body is much more advanced than it was.
Things like the survey you mentioned are lagging indicators. In the same way that polling tells you what people thought several weeks ago, not what they think right now. You cant expect numbers based on careers that mostly occurred before the things Im talking about to set the baseline for future outcomes. A lot of the changes in lifestyle and technology wont be apparent yet in the numbers because no players that have had them for their careers have hit that age yet. Like the way Steph is training now would have been unheard of in ’15, so players retiring in ’19 wouldnt have benefitted.
In a lot of sports the age has been shifting younger because athletic peaks are in those ages, and for a lot of sports its more about your peak athleticism than skill/iq. The NBA has always been a later peak than a lot of sports because the skill development continues after the athletic peak has passed. Like NBA peaks are 27-32 by most considerations compared to like 24-29 in MLB, and even younger for NFL. I also think a lot of leagues cycle through young players more so that its a reverse survivor bias in the numbers. In some sports its just better now to have a fresh 20 year old, because with AAU and what have you the 20 year olds are more skilled than they used to be. If your skilled enough to have a long career in the NBA though, modern tech should make it easier to prolong it compared to ages past.
Steph and LeBron are already proof that 2 is correct. We have never before seen players at the age of Bron/KD/Steph still perform at a top 10 level. So we are already seeing major outliers compared to history, and this is just the beginning of it not the end. Do a statistical breakdown 10 years from now and we will see if anythings changed.
Chap, I guess I can’t get you to even look at what I sent but, in summary: your specific misunderstanding is precisely what the stastical and medical research addresses: namely, the claim that the last that 10-20 years’ of advances in medical technology have fundamentally altered phenomena that reflect deeper physical/biological constraints.
The key takeaway: there may be be improvements in repair and regeneration technology, but those are not great enough to outweigh the perenially increasing physiological demands of the major sports. Every year, the physiological demand on players’ bodies increases.
“Things like the survey you mentioned are lagging indicators.”
1) First, there was no “survey”. This is an analysis of ALL historical data — every player for 50 years. There is a constant trend
2) Calling these numbers “lagging indicators” is inaccurate, for several reasons:
– We’re not talking about, as you put it, “what people think” — a date regime too complex to model. Instead, we’re talking about a data regime with causal mechanisms in the natural world which enables explanation of changes in the data — biological aging patterns, cellular regeneration, etc.
– The change in the data has been continuous, not discontinuous. That means the underlying causal mechanisms have not changed (including medical technology). Until that changes, the data trends should continue.
> Steph and LeBron are already proof that 2 is correct.
> We have never before seen players at the age of
> Bron/KD/Steph still perform at a top 10 level.
As the data I sent you shows, that’s been proven wrong . Every era has a small number of statistical outliers. By the way, KD isn’t a statistical outlier at 36 years old. Steph is on the verge of becoming an outlier, but needs to stay healthy for one more year to get there. At 40, LeBron is the only true outlier at the NBA level as of today.
Your surveying data from now going backwards to build your data set. Thereby the more data you want the more you have to go back to data that is tainted by major societal changes. Like at one point most players, and most fans at games smoked.
They are lagging indicators because we havent seen how players that were in their peak in the last 10 years perform into their 40s compared to historical data, because most arent yet 40.
Historically outside like Kareem almost no older players were able to perform at a high level. We have never before seen an era when so many of the top 25 players in the league are over 35 as they are now. We also have never really seen the players of that age still be main engine starters. Think Vince Carter and Dirk/Duncan.
Also if you have nearly infinite money, like Steph Bron, from a health and wellness budget sense, it can help keep you close enough to your peak to let you rework your game to compensate.
All this cant ignore the fact that the older you are, the more likely a Andre Iguadala situation happens, where you still look pretty good when your playing healthy, but you just cant play without getting hurt.
I just believe in Stephs ultra high conditioning and body preparation. As well as the fact that I think his particular play style puts him at less risk for certain common NBA injuries. He barely jumps on his 3pt shot its so fast, and doesnt ever try to go over guys in traffic.
Chapman, IMO, when we have a proven model of the causalities and 50 years of data to support that model definitively, “lagging indicator” isn’t an appropriate description.
With the aove post, you do realize that you’re predicting a sudden and dramatic change, starting now, the likes of which we’ve never seen in 50 years? As in, out of nowhere, you’re arguing for a radical discontinuity in the underlying causalities of athletic performance.
Of course, anybody could have made the same prediction anytime over the past 50 years. (Breakthoughs in pharmaceuticals, gene therapy, stem cell therapy, etc seem to me to be as revolutionary for their time as anything is today.)
But the data shows retrospectively that they would have been wrong, including in this year, 2025. And in every major sport.
It just feels unlikely on so many levels. If this revolution was going on, then why are all the non-superstar veterans also having shorter careers. And why wouldn’t we be seeing it in football and hockey and soccer? And why can’t we identify another population where this is happening?
I mean I would argue that what George Mikan did was so far from modern basketball to almost not be the same game. It goes the same for the 90s when it was all inside the arc post up offense.
I think there has been both a dramatic change in medicine both diagnostic and surgical in the last 20 years. At the same time we know so much more about physiology, nutrition, recovery, sports science, and bio monitoring since 2010. That can cause a dramatic change. How many NBA players do you think were doing yoga in ’05?
Im not saying every player will have an elongated career, most NBA careers end because the players production never moves forward, and teams are more inclined to take a back of the roster risk on a younger player for a marginal talent. I am saying that top level players will sometimes have longer peaks because they are able to slow the athletic decline, and the occasional true outliers like LeBron, and I think Steph will happen just a little more frequently.
I think also things like the avg age of players and how sports age composition changes over time for a variety of reasons. Like Steph ended a bunch of careers, or made what would have been once promising ones never start, by changing the way the game was played. Guys who couldnt hang in the 3pt era went to EU.
I think a big part of attrition in sports is that older players, even if they keep developing their skills, have to constantly compete with young players that have spent the whole time they have developed playing that way. Like look at how skilled most 7′ are in the last 3 drafts compared to 17-20. So its sort of a evolve or die natural selection where either your skills develop constantly or your replaced by a player that comes in able to do what you cant. I think this has been incredibly dominant in the NBA the last decade with how much the game has been evolving.
I think Steph is enough of an outlier in some of his skills, that are some of the least age dependent ones, where I just think barring injuries taking him down, he could probably do something pretty close to this till like 45. So since he works so hard to prevent injury after his early career, and maybe with just a little karmic payback for those bad ankles hes got quite a few cracks at getting number 5.
Chapman, despite my disagreeing with you, I’m very grateful for the opportunity to chat with somebody that writes so thoughtfully. Sorry to be an a**h**e at times, but hopefully you’ve gotten used to it.
Cheers
Oh for sure I never take it the wrong way. I think you may be right. I mean most data points to that. I just have a sneaking suspicion like when I smell a bluff at the table.
Enjoy running circles while you can. Father time is unbeaten.
Kindly back your claim that a 20 win team Warriors will cost ownership $500-750M unless youre just pulling this again from your behind like always
> Kindly back your claim that a 20 win team Warriors will cost
> ownership $500-750M
Here’s a back-of-envelope explanation. You can find more by Google’ing how the Warrior’s $11M market capitalization is dependent on winning/losing. There are similar economics in LA and NY.
Warriors have the highest ticket prices in the NBA. Ticket prices are highly elastic — up with winning, and down with losing. They make almost $18M in revenues per game. All in (seating, amenities, alcohol, etc) it’s about $700-$800 per person per game visits to Chase Center.
Season ticket pricing and attrition are leading indicators. Ticket prices go down quickly as the product worsens. A team can have one really bad season, but the fans need to believe it will improve. If the Warriors are bad for 2-3 years, expect prices to drop by 40%-60%. As in, $700/person/game becomes $350/person/game.
From the way he was just talking in interviews I dont think its a lock he retires that soon. He could play 4-5 more if he wants to.
Excellent stuff.
Its funny how GSW are some big bad cap monster that can spend. It really wasnt long ago this was a broke franchise that you would never expect to be a 2nd apron team.
Its called smart management. lacob is a real good businessman and knows how to create money. Across the bay you had Fisher a nepto baby. He could have made the A’s into a profitable team but wasted the team. Lacob asked about buying the team to build a stadium and make Oakland a sport town but Fisher said no.
I would have loved an A’s sale 25 years ago. Watched almost every A’s game for years. Havent watched one in like 3 seasons now and dont plan to ever again. I sure aint flying to Vegas for games.
I hope moving to the smallest media market, with no population to speak of for 100 miles in any direction outside the city, and way to much for the locals to do to care about 82 baseball games a year goes just as badly as I expect it to. On top of that the actual costs on the completed stadium could I think be double the current projected price. Most people that saw the stadium design think the cost projections are way low, and they dont have a way to you know have parking at the stadium.
Fisher will end up selling the team. Vegas tourism is down almost 15% this year. They just lost a big hotel that was supposed to open up in the future. Vegas is about the worse place to place a baseball team. Raiders found that out but a free $2 billion stadium is onlyu reason they went there. Who would not love free $2 billion.
Its such a dumb idea to leave one of the top 3 media markets, and population centers in the country for the like 54th media market. Everything in MLB revenue has been tv based for 2 decades so lets move to the place with no population.
arc89, great points about Lacob and Oakland. I grew up a rabid A’s fan, but the last 10 years have been so painful that I work hard to ignore any info about them.
I’m not surprised by the Valkyries’ first year success. I’ve watched interviews of the women he brought in to run the franchise, and they are obviously top-notch. Fischer would be too intimidated to hire people of that caliber.
i grew up an A’s fan through all the championships. Its a shame what MLB did to Oakland. I will never spend one more dime on MLB. They are dead to me.
My story is identical.
Sad too since the A’s had literally the best fan base.
Yup, the best and most loyal fans.
Please, let’s not talk anymore about the A’s, Raiders, and Warriors leaving Oakland. It just gets me down.
I’m the same. Lifelong A’s fan. Never again. Even if they came back it would not be the same. This whole process killed some part of the fan in me. Pro sports in the USA! It’s a dirty business.
Cap & Crunch got it right. Max players benefit too. The stars took over the Union several years back. Same percentage of revenue goes to the players, it just who it is distributed to that has changed.
RFAs arent supposed to depress salary, just give a team the right to not lose a player they spent time developing just after they start to produce.
Of course none of that works when most teams arent interested in making offer sheet when it ties up your cap space, and will just be matched.
It seems like a compromise would be something along the MLB design where teams get 6 years instead of 4 on a rookie deal, but you have something like arbitration for the final 2 seasons so they get paid closer to full value. You then would make them UFA, and RFA wouldnt exist anymore.
I know RFAs aren’t supposed to suppress salary – that’s part of my thinking. But an ancillary effect of the new CBA is it’s not beneficial and/or valuable for teams to preserve cap space so they aren’t. Which then DOES suppress RFA deals in turn. The new CBA has so many tendrils that are layered in a manner that the only solutions to problems are players getting less money and owners saving it. Or by entering into negotiations with the owners again. Obscenely rich people are just the worst.
I think its more that once players understood they could force there way out of most places if they wanted, its way more lucrative to sign with your own team than as a UFA.
Like players all choosing to extend both dries up the future cap space available, and disincentivizes teams to do any work to open up cap room. You get at least 1 or 2 rebuilding teams keeping it open to facilitate everyone elses trades for a fee and nothing else.
This all started before the new CBA and most of the rules outside the 2nd apron penalties have been in the last several CBAs. The rules were there 10 years ago but the league was operating different then.
I think players are a bit screwed since they have to take the extra money since its a lot more, but it also means that anytime a star changes teams a big package is coming back for them, so you never just add a star to your existing roster without giving up a bunch of matching salary and draft capital. Guys would be paid less but in a much better position to win with there new teams if they signed with them rather than trades.
It could be completely coincidental that RFA’s stopped getting offers with the new CBA and you’re correct to point it out there were already fewer and fewer RFAs to begin with. Either path gets us to the same place – players are the ones getting screwed by all this. That’s why I landed on cursing the obscenely rich. Even MLB screws its players relative to revenue but at least without the cap player’s maintain some leverage. That’s why Manfred is doing his “I’m a Jaghole” tour trying to convince all the players to shoot themselves and future players in the foot.
At the end of the day, I enjoy sports for roster construction and stats and the drama. And all three are worse for wear with the new CBA.
Ayton was the last RFA to get a real offer and that was in ’22 before the new CBA.
Nobody even bothered to make LAL pay the full amount on AR with a real offer. Everyone knew LAL would match but they could have had to match 4/95M with 2 player options rather than just get him for the 4/58M with 1 option that was literally the max they were allowed to offer without a competing one.
RFA has been a problem because around ’21 offseason most teams stopped opening cap space.
53% of BRI is still more of the pie the MLB players make. The whole fight against a cap in MLB is that the owners are always trying to lock in a cap with the players making a worse %.
If you want to complain about owners and profiteering a far more valid target is the cost of tickets for a game, and the cost of everything once your there. It would be better for everyone if games were cheaper, players made a higher % of revenue even if they made a little less, except for the owners who have the power.
Like I say f*** the billionaires. Most of the team owners in sports are some of the worst people in the country, but I dont know how you fix the fact that most people who are rich enough to buy sports teams are awful. I mean unless you want to go full socialism and make all teams community owned.
Like I said maybe this predates the new CBA and the end result is still players being put in awful situations. I’m not sure what hill youre even trying to die on at this point. Do you think the new CBA is good for the NBA or the players?
Dont think this CBA is appreciably worse than the old one no. I think they are worse than they should be, but better than other leagues in some ways.
As I said f*** the billionaires. Like Lacob is on the better end where he seems to care more about the team than the money, and he didnt make his money from some super messed up business.
I am just correcting you because your wrong about a lot of how this works, sorry. Not trying to die on a hill just explaining how this actually works.
I concede I don’t have a great memory or knowledge of the RFA market the past few years but I don’t think I have anything factually incorrect. Whether the new CBA is good or not is subjective ultimately, I just couldn’t tell where you were landing or what the point of that correction amounted to. It’s difficult to agree billionaires/owners are being manipulative and not see the CBA as an extension of that. That’s why the luxury tax not being included in BRI is massive data point in my calculus.
I mean I just compare the CBA for the NBA to other leagues since thats just how they work, and it isnt horrible in comparison. I think lots could be fixed, but are the NBAPA as a whole willing to give up some sort of concession in order to fix RFA? This seems like the worst year for RFA because teams spent according to the old CBA and were seeing a correction. This also should be ameliorated by revenue raising where this is mostly a one season log jam. Lots of teams at least currently have cap room in both of the next two years.
> This seems like the worst year for RFA because teams spent
> according to the old CBA and were seeing a correction.
That’s a huge reason.
Also, on June 30, 2025, the league surprised teams by announcing that there would be only a 7% increase for the 2026-27 salary cap, rather than the previously expected 10%… which reduces the cap for 2026-27 by almost $5M. Apparently, that was enough to kill a bunch of in-process deals that extended into next season.
Honestly MLB’s team control and arbitration is mostly wildly skewed for the owners since they can usually stash people in the minor leagues to maximize their years of control (and most players hit FA’s less often before their apex unless they are truly elite).
For the NBA, I thought that drafted players should scale differently against the cap (adopt some of the same cap weights that the NFL uses) so that teams could operate easier under the cap (aka 1st/2nd aprons).
Doesn’t the cap increases far outpace rookie scale increases though? So as a percentage rookie deals are less and less impactful every season unless the contract goes underwater itself.
How does that amount to anything but slicing a few mil off rookie contracts for a few mil of cap space compared to how it is now?
Every year rookie deals go up in value. The 1st pick this year will get more in year 1 than Flagg. I dont know the calculations, but it isnt a fixed scale it changes with the cap.
Of course when you limit earnings rookie deals are some of the most valuable. Like in a open market some team offers Flagg 40M probably year one instead of the like 14M he will make.
Dude. No. The NBA CBA is the most favorable to players of any sport by miles and miles and miles.
Not true imo. MLB doesn’t even have a cap.
On the flip side the AAV of most deals is still barely more than the Arod contract from ’00. The contracts keep getting longer with all this deferred money, but the salaries havent grown nearly as fast as revenue has in MLB.
The NBA has a guaranteed split of revenue thats a larger piece of the pie than the other 3 major sports.
Seam that’s a terrible argument considering how predatory the other models are. But you’re not entirely wrong either. It’s important to consider revenue from going over the tax isn’t part of the equation when you look at the 53% figure everyone loves to point to. Also most favorable /= fair or right or good or anything but not as shi**y as something else that’s also shi**y. You can use that standard, I find it distasteful and impractical personally.
There is no revenue from going over the tax. The money teams are paying in tax goes into a general fund that is distributed amongst teams, but that money was generated as normal revenue, which the players are entitled to. The fact that the money is being redistributed amongst teams is irrelevant to the revenue stream, or the bottom line.
The NFL distributes all TV revenue generated from the league equally amongst teams, giving each team an equal salary base to remain competitive. Baseball Has no cap, but also doesn’t share revenue at nearly the same rate as the other leagues, making some teams unable to carry large payrolls. Baseball also allows 1/2 a billion in debt for its teams to pay salaries they cannot afford. Basketball rigged its salaries to give star players the vast majority of the revenue going to players. They also severely limit the money players can make, which other leagues do not.
Because each team only plays once a week all the TV deals are national and negotiated as a group for the NFL.
That is why baseball is broken the TV money is not split and some teams have such big TV contracts they are able to spend without any care in the world.
Arc not a single team loses money in the MLB despite what their lying accountants try to cook up. It’s true TV deals make for an unequal playing field but even the Twins elected to carry that debt as a business decision not necessity. There’s a reason teams with worse payroll to market revenue dynamics aren’t in debt like they are. You’re not wrong but any MLB owner deciding not to spend is making a business decision not financial one. Or whatever, the point remains regardless of the semantics and it’s Monday so I’m not gonna think more deeply lol.
Its not losing money but the big markets have a endless supply of money. Even the A’s found a loop hole by going to Sacramento they were still able to get a bigger market money is why they choose Scaramento. If they moved to the Veags AAA stadium they would have lost their contract and get a lot less. Rangers for example has one of the best TV contracts is why they spend and stay in playoff shape.
Pretty sure the Rays are losing money this season playing in a tiny 1A park with a trash tv deal. Going to go out on a limb that the team from SAC is losing money too since nobody wants to pay money to see that.
Also if you own the station like NYY then it doesnt count as part of revenue sharing. You can effectively cook the books by keeping a bunch of the revenue outside the team, but in a business making the money off the teams broadcasts, and owned by the same exact people as the team.
This was why everyone from SEA to NYY was trying to start their own sports network to carry the team. Of course that was before the collapse of cable tv and carriage fees.
Revenue for all basketball related income is included tax or not. The only thing that goes straight in owners pockets is expansion fees. Almost all NBA team income is part of BRI.
No the tax revenue isn’t included in the 53% split. And no it doesn’t go straight to owners pockets. Only half of it goes to non paying teams. Everyone else benefits from reduced overall costs, especially relative to the previous CBA. Then the NBA league office pockets the other half. It’s a racket and I’ve looked into it. I don’t speak from ignorance. Judge my conclusions all you want, I have the facts straight.
Dude the tax is for one team. All revenue thats BRI is BRI no matter if the team generating it is in the tax or not.
The tax money goes into a general fund that gets redistributed to the non tax teams. This is why you always see teams ducking the tax when they are just over it at the deadline. If you shave 1M to get under you get 14M in additional money last season. Yes some tax money goes to fund the league offices, employees, and things like basketball Africa that are NBA funded programs. The amount of money the NBA gets from this is a small % compared to BRI total, but funds a bunch of things like paying the Refs. Also until the recent explosion in teams going way over the tax this was a tiny amount of money for years. Even when GSW was way into the tax 4 years ago non tax teams were only getting like 2M. It has exploded in recent seasons with several teams going deep into the tax.
BRI is calculated league wide and it encompasses almost all revenue. The BRI calculation is league wide revenue from all BRI sources against the total value of all NBA player contracts combined. Luxury tax has literally nothing to do with it.
Yes during expansion the giant expansion fee generated by selling the new franchises to the ownership groups goes straight into the owners pockets and the players get none. This is expected to be in the 8-12B mark for the 2 new teams. It also shows why they care more about EU league since they are asking for 1B per team and would do that for over a dozen teams. So NBAEU will bring in a bunch of non BRI money that will be split among 30 teams not 32. Then after they get all that money they want to expand so they dont share the EU money with the new teams.
Im sorry your wrong on your facts, and the tax doesnt in any way effect BRI.
Let me say in no uncertain terms – Luxury tax is not part of BRI calculations. Your entire argument rests on that assumption and instead of looking it up you just doubled down. That or google and AI are lying their faces off because I’m very interested in this topic and have attempted to educate myself on this repeatedly.
Dude how does the luxury tax get involved in BRI?
The calculation is:
League wide BRI combined – Total value of all player contracts. If the split is more than 47% to the league, the players get money back at the end of the season for the difference. If it is like this season where the player contracts total more than 53% of revenue, than a pro rated portion is taken from every player, since 10% of all players contracts are held in escrow till the end of season to cover the difference. Because so many teams were deep in the tax on player contracts the player made more than 53% this season by a lot.
The luxury tax applies to teams. The money the teams pay into the general fund is mostly BRI generated revenue that counts towards the BRI total. This is because almost every cent the teams generate is counted as BRI income.
GSW made something like 700M in BRI the year they paid the huge tax in ’23. Yes the money they paid in addition to the actual player salary in tax was BRI because the team generated massive BRI. It counts as BRI before they pay it in tax because they pay the tax with BRI revenue… The rest is just the league moving BRI money around to different teams and places with the tax, but it is still part of BRI in almost all cases. The only way tax money isnt part of BRI is when the team paying the taxes is losing money. If the team is generating debt to cover their expenses then no it isnt revenue because its dept.
Explain that to your AI.
I can’t emphasize this enough – luxury tax is not included in BRI calculations. It’s as simple as entering luxury tax payments as a nonrevenue item into their books. You speak so confidently for somebody so clearly unwilling to google it.
From the CBA:
“Player income or ‘privilege’ tax payments to Teams or Related Parties … will continue to be excluded from BRI for any Team or Related Party that received such payments…”
Dude…
The money in the luxury tax payments is BRI and was already calculated before the payment. They pay the tax with BRI unless they are operating at a loss. All the money teams generate is BRI then they pay the tax with some of it…
Only a very few tax payers are operating at a loss. When GSW generate 800M in BRI revenue in ’23 and then pay 170M in salary, and 32oM in tax or whatever it was that money doesnt just come out of nowhere. The 320M in tax is paid out of the 800M in revenue the team generated that season, almost all of which was BRI income.
I know you think there is some way for teams to hide revenue from BRI with the tax, but thats simply not whats going on.
As I said if say MIN didnt generate enough revenue to pay their tax bill this year then the extra money they put in to cover the shortfall isnt BRI. It isnt even revenue its debt accrued by the owner to pay the tax they werent generating revenue to cover. Most teams in the tax though dont choose to go deep enough in that they wont be able to cover the tax with revenue. Even GSW when the tax was huge were making way more than they were paying out.
The thing is the tax money has already been calculated with team revenue mostly so they are saying that because they dont want to double count. The place the thing your referencing effects is that the teams receiving tax payments dont count the payment thats already in the taxpayers BRI as BRI. So tax payouts to non tax teams arent added to those teams BRI revenue. Does that help?
As Horford and Melton wait!
Seems like theyre cool with it so no worries.
Handshake deals with Lacob are as sound as it comes. They will both be on the opening night roster (unless injury).
Vuecuc, Phillips and Matas for Kuminga
Then Chicago offers Noa and picks for Cam Thomas. Maybe offer something for Grimes
Chicago would have
PG. Giddy
SG. Thomas
SF. Patrick Williams or Grimes or Kuminga
PF. Kuminga or Jalen Smith
C.? And maybe trade Patrick Williams for a C starter the ages from 22-23
Joking
You do understand how BYC works right?
Can somebody please hook @KnickerbockerAl up with Joe Lacob so Knicker can tell Joe that Joe doesn’t care about Jonathan Kuminga? And also that Joe never has cared about Jonathan Kuminga.
I muted him months ago. Dude isn’t able to write a coherent sentence, but yet he never stops posting.
Tell that to aristotle ….. the self proclaimed Warriors guru. Its been three years of whining Warriors fans. And even when the end is here. They are still whining about his value ….
This stand off is all the Warriors doing. They knew he was coming to his RFA year. They know the by-laws of new cap. They know their salary cap issues. The reason Warriors have offered 45 mill two years. Is this way they still have room to sign Horford and other. The reason they want him to give up his Bird rights. Is cause he will be easier to move right away. They don’t want him on roster for a prolonged time. This is all about the Warriors———. Has nothing to do with Kuminga.
Warriors have till Oct 1st to figure it out. Better offers should come. There has only been two offers. So they have time. Warriors don’t want to go over 22 mill a year. Therefore making a trade value at 11 mill. If he signs QO then the value of trade goes down to 7,9 mill.
And Warriors don’t want to carry a disgruntled Kuminga till TD. So they would be taking a chance.
He could just refuse all trades and become a UFA. And really put it to Warriors. So Warriors have to be careful and smart here.
Al, don’t get your knickers in a twist. Read the article.
Lacob is going to hold on to Kuminga. He has been saying since this December that he expects to go over the first apron. The Warriors can afford it.
It’s called negotiating. On both sides. GSW just wants to squeeze out every million they can because there is so little margin to work with.
NBA should honestly get rid of the cap. This is mind boggling.
Greed disguised as earnest attempts at parity. Just convoluted enough most people can’t see through the rules to their intentions.
In the last 6 seasons, we’ve seen small market teams win more than Chips in any other majore sport. Toronto, Milwaukee, Denver, OKC.
This season, we saw:
– 2 small market teams in the Championship: OKC and Indianapolis.
– 3 in the Conference Championships: add Minnesota to the above.
– A negative correlation between market size and regular season wins. The smaller the market, the more wins you probably had. CLE, OKC, IND, DEN were great.
As time goes by and veteran players are waiting on his decision, JK depleting his value by showing his stubbornness against a class A organization.
Warriors know him the best, and if 45M/2yr (team option second yr) is all they’re willing to offer him, then that’s exactly what he’s worth – jimmy butler or not.
Dude has no middie or 3pt shot.. Athleticism declines quicker than shooting.. This is the warriors dude, you gotta be a shooter.. Get real.
> Warriors know him the best, and if 45M/2yr (team option second yr) is all
> they’re willing to offer him, then that’s exactly what he’s worth
You believe pro sports teams get to set the price of a contract without a negotiation?
Here’s another take. Pro sports is a business, like any other, and contracts are negotiated in absolute self-interest. Agents and front-offices often go toe-to-toe for months, even years. Usually, fans get no details — as with Klay Thompson and Draymond Green. Sometimes, as with Kuminga, we hear a lot.
When it’s over, nobody looks back. Ever. If you’re a 49ers fan, think the recent Trent Williams, Deebo Samuel, and Nick Bosa holdouts — which cost the team actual wins. Fans were furious through their negotiations. When they signed, we instantly forgave them. Like it never happened. That’s pro sports.
This was Lacob’s plan all along: GSW will throw their entire roster minus Steph for Giannis on Dec 15. Kuminga has to be in that package for it to be worth a thought for the Bucks.
How many times does Giannis have to say screw the taxes in California for you to listen? Kuminga isn’t some prize in a Giannis trade, that’s as ridiculous as Golden State not taking Monk and a first if that’s on offer. Not including Buddy in any trade is wild. Dudes worth a drink bottle in return. Warriors will be a mess with Kuminga on the roster.
Its very rare for a player to be worried about paying taxes in california. i remeber one ball player saying they would never play in california because of the cost living there but they still signed a contract to play in california.
Lols, OK. I remember Giannis saying stuff the taxes and cost of living in California. I love it here in Milwaukee. Im not the supeteam type guy either. Giannis is not and will not be playing for the Warriors, that’s laughable. For who or what? Kuminga, c’mon.
there is only 1 person that floats that foolish trade do i need to say his name? He muted me when I called him out for bullying me and others. Giannis will never be a GSW unless its at the end of his career.
As I said below the package is 4 1sts and 3 swaps.
If Giannis isnt playing in MIL, then GSW are one of the top 5 places he could land.
You can match salary with Butler straight up, and if he goes to a 3rd team it adds assets to the package for Giannis. So unlike most teams you dont gut the roster to get him.
Most teams in contention both LA/NYK/BOS/DAL/MIN/CLE have used all their draft assets already and cant build a package for Giannis period, or at least one far worse than a bunch of post Steph draft picks.
If he wants to play for a title, teaming with Steph is one of the best teams he could join that could make an offer that wouldnt be laughed out of the gym for being one pick and matching salary that sucks.
I think they have to pay taxes in multiple states in almost all cases anyways. Like lots of players play in one city, but have there primary residence in another state. Like MLB players all live in AZ in the offseason. Then theres the whole complication where I think they are taxed in the state they are playing in for road games, so you make your money in NY when you play in NY. It does mean that for home games you pay less, but its all super complicated accounting for most of these guys.
No the prize is all of GSW future 1sts and swaps. Kuminga would just maybe add a pick or two to the package.
Giannis isnt making his choice based on taxes and income he is basing it on winning a title. Most teams that could give him as good of a chance as GSW dont have any draft capital left for any sort of package, or its OKC/SAS who dont have much in the way of draft picks moving forward that arent protected or their own back of the 1st picks.
OK….not happening. Why the best place? Be all by himself soon enough. Pointless. You’re rebuilding, real soon. Total rebuild.
Because Steph is one of the best players you could pair with Giannis. They have probably the most gravity of any player, outside the arc in Steph, or inside the arc in Giannis. Like can you build a wall in the paint to stop Giannis when if you pull bodies your probably leaving Steph and Draymond to play 2v1 on a screen and pop wide open.
Like basketball wise GSW is a top 3 destination for Giannis.
If things change in 2 years maybe Giannis moves on, but they can do a lot to try and keep adding to that team.
You cant rebuild till Steph retires. You cant trade Steph without him asking out, and you cant rebuild with him on the roster. This team may not be a title favorite for the next 4 years, but I think they would be the next 2 with Steph and Giannis since that was 2 top 5 players last season…
Sounds like you’re trying to convince yourself the championship window is open and Steph has five good seasons left in him. Like Milwaukee would be interested in Jimmy at this point. Loads of other teams could easily beat out the Warriors. I’ll take whatever your price is, you name it. Giannis will not be going to Golden State.
You dont trade Jimmy to MIL. Jimmy goes to a contender for assets that get added to the package for Giannis. It just makes it much easier when its one player from the roster and not five to make the matching salary. Especially when the one player is a positive asset, Jimmy was just performing at a top level on a playoff team until him Steph/Podz/Moody all got hurt.
Sure a team like UTH or BRK with a ton of assets could beat out GSW package. You cant ship Giannis to go lose in UTH with what he has meant to MIL. He wouldnt want to go to UTH at all with that roster. So your left with a venn diagram where the two sides are teams that are title contenders after the Giannis trade, and teams that have assets to give MIL for Giannis. If you apply that diagram then most contenders MIN/LAL/LAC/BOS/CLE/PHX/SAC/NYK/DAL etc either dont have any draft assets left period, or are worse than MIL is now after the trade.
So the two that scare you are OKC/SAS. OKC have a lot of protected picks, and their own that could be 30 every year. OKC also would need to cobble together a large chunk of the rotation in order to match salary for Giannis so it really reshapes the team. SAS also has a bunch of draft picks that are probably at the back of the 1st. SAS also would need to combine a bunch of salaries to get to matching, and would be giving up a bunch of the young players on the roster as the main value, so again massive roster upheaval at this point in the offseason. They cant include Fox since he was just extended on the max. Both teams could do it, but it would be a lot of moving parts where players from your roster are the main value pieces in that package. HOU is similar where your probably able to put a good pick package together but you eat half the roster to match the salary.
You also have to think MIL might defer to Giannis somewhat, and he has most definitly expressed interest in playing with Steph in the past, so GSW might be near the top of his list of preferred destinations. GSW give a clean package thats like 6 1sts with ones from at least 2 teams including all the post Steph upside of their own, and 3 swaps. You pretty much just swap Giannis for Jimmy so the roster looks really good. Could even flip Kuminga as a 22M contract mid season 1 for 1 to get a better fit.
Im not saying its likely, but with todays news on Giannis…
If Giannis asks out I think they have a real package thats in the mix, and there are reasons to think some of the factors push it there way.
Okc, just one of many teams with better packages theoretically could trade….Dort, Wallace, I Hart and however many picks. No third team needed. I’m sure Milwaukee would love some of those young spurs too. With picks of course. Anyways, Giannis isn’t going anywhere. Until he asks out, you’re just dreaming.” Like every other fanbase. The Lakers theoretically clear Bron and Rua contract and all of a sudden flushed with cash. Old Steph or in prime luka isn’t a hard decision.
They could do that for 1 season. Then the cap sheet explodes because the extensions for Chet/Shae/JWill kick in and you have 4 max players.You also would probably need to include more high end player talent since as I said most OKC picks are either lottery protected or their own that wont be good.
The Lakers dont have any capital to trade for Giannis whos contract runs 2 more seasons so how you gonna get him to LA? Thats the point. He may not extend right after the trade, but you have to give MIL a real return, which only like 4 contenders have the assets to do.
Charania today said he still isnt sold on staying, and there isnt much else MIL can do this offseason. I dont know if he is all in. I dont know if he will ask for a trade if the season starts badly. This is whats holding up a number of teams though, wondering about Giannis.
They could if they suck next season and have more cap space known to man season after, before Giannis resigns or takes up his player option. He’ll be resigning. Good talk though l. But, I’m done with hypotheticals. Hypotheticals are largely full of S×××.
@DaveyJ
> This was Lacob’s plan all along: GSW will throw their
> entire roster minus Steph for Giannis on Dec 15.
> Kuminga has to be in that package for it to be worth a
> thought for the Bucks.
That would have made sense 2 years ago, maybe even last year, but not with Steph at 38 years old and only 2 more years under contract. When Steph is gone, we’d be left with Giannis, no surrounding cast, and no draft picks.
That’s exactly the situation Giannis wants out of in Milwaukee.
GSW future picks more than 2 years out are probably the most valuable draft assets on offer outside of like PHX/NOP next seasons picks. They can put a pretty competitive offer on the table when you look at the war chests of different teams.
Like how many picks in the 22-30 range from OKC is one GSW pick thats top 5 worth? I would say 4-6 picks at say 25 is what it would take to get 5. If your talking the #1 pick its probably worth what 12 picks in the 20s?
I think people forget that not all 1st round picks are even in the same ballpark in value. Like sure OKC can give you a ton of picks, none of which will be in the lottery.
Chapman- I’m seeing that our conflicting assumptions about how much longer Steph has to play drives a lot of our assumptions.
I’m convinced that GSW is not counting on more than 2 more strong seasons from Steph, (and, even if Steph does go longer, it won’t be at a superstar level). The season after will be a goodbye tour with a bad team.
This assumption drives all GSW’s current personnel assumptions. I believe that GSW has synchronized all their big/bad contracts to end at the end of next season’s, and focusing on an accelerated rebuild, starting no later than 2027-28.
I mean Steph may have talked to them internally in more depth. Most of the Marcus Thompson types were sort of alluding to him Dray and Kerr all retiring at the end of the current contracts. Steph was just on record talking about this in the last 2 weeks though so that trumps the old consensus. I dont know if he will be able to, but I think he has a better shot at aging really well with his game than most.
I just think the team cant really change course till he does. Theres no way to hedge, so until he announces a planned retirement date you keep things moving. It also would be horrible optics to switch to rebuilding while Steph is still this good.
The only other outcome is the team collapsing and Steph asking out. Which instantly triggers the full teardown rebuild.
If Steph takes 20M in an extension they have massive cap space and a mostly young roster outside the core 3. Sure this offseason they are filling it with old guys, but most everyone under long term control besides the big 3 is under 25 already.
The team is locked in with only one path forward till Steph is gone, and its totally on him whether he value money or winning more.
Kuminga should take the QO that would really mess up with GSW… and then leave as a UFA next summer, that would be smashing, right?
Signing the QO would be a contentious move, that benefits neither side – well, JK’s agent is free to cut his own deal, (while screwing the W’s).
And it seems the two sides have come to terms on two-year money, though control language is still an issue. A guess is they will work this out.
Understandably, JK is looking for an opportunity to be a team’s first or second scoring option. Get paid a lot more for that…
> Understandably, JK is looking for an opportunity to be
> a team’s first or second scoring option. Get paid a lot
> more for that…
He was asked about that recently, and says differently. He doesn’t expect to be a lead offensive player, he just wants a starting role and consistent minutes. He also said he wants to come to be known as a 2-way player.
It’s the “starting role with consistent minutes part” that Kerr is explicitly denying him. Maybe that can be worked out, maybe not.
Why not sign Kuminga for whatever Wiggins has left…trade straight up? Wiggins and Dubs loved each other…he’s better in a support role…Kuminga fits youth movement in MIA.
Wiggins was bad in GSW minus 3 months in 2022. He’s the reason why they underperformed from 2023-he was traded. Wiggins and Jimmy have the same role. Stop trying to bring back players who have been traded, there’s so many other better options out there.
Money doesnt work. BYC
@aristotle
You are missing the point: Giannis then becomes the franchise -after- Steph, while winning a couple rings with him. Steph is playing deep into his 40’s, he’s said it repeatedly. Makes perfect sense to do it now, also, getting rid of Jimmy and Draymond means there -can- be a decent supporting cast behind the two max guys.
Hey, I’m in the “muted by Davey” club !!!
Do I get a personal certification or ‘way to go’ or bravo or something?
Gary, basketball gods did the same thing to me! But we Davey and I persist.