As the Golden State Warriors have sat stagnant this offseason, the long-foreseen Jonathan Kuminga saga has come to a head, with the restricted free agent refusing to accept a short-term contract with the organization if it means the team will have significant leverage over him going forward.
Yet, according to Marcus Thompson II of The Athletic, this can all be traced back to Warriors' owner Joe Lacob's persistent, and at times stubborn, fondness of Kuminga, and the team's inability to move Kuminga in the past can be blamed on his belief that the young forward can be a vital part of the post-Stephen Curry era.
Nevertheless, Kuminga now has expectations of himself as a future franchise cornerstone and, moreover, expects to be paid as such, leaving Golden State in a horrific position as they try to contend for the next two seasons.
Joe Lacob has prevented the Warriors from getting out ahead of the Kuminga drama
From essentially the outset of Kuminga's career, it has been clear that there has been a discrepancy between how Golden State's front office and their coaching staff view the role of the young forward. While the front office clearly values him, and hopes to do everything possible to retain him for the time being, head coach Steve Kerr has largely been hesitant to give Kuminga a full runway as a result of some of the issues in his game.
This came to a head last season when, upon his return from injury, Kuminga was thrust out of the rotation entirely after struggling to fit with new acquisition Jimmy Butler.
According to Thompson, the front office's stubborn stance on this issue means that this whole conundrum could have been easily foreseen: "The owner of the Warriors is very high on Jonathan Kuminga, and they've been thinking a lot about what to do in the post-Steph Curry era. Kuminga is one of those players who they could see surviving... This is one of them trainwrecks you saw coming."
For years now, the Warriors have been torn between two paths: going all-in to contend now or maintaining their flexibility to rebuild quickly after Curry retires.
In many ways, they have teetered the line between these two approaches, but their blockbuster move for Butler last season signaled a drastic shift toward the direction of contention.
If they were planning on going all-in, moving Kuminga prior to his restricted free agency, in order to maximize his value on a cost-controlled contract, would have been the smartest move. Now, however, Golden State has tanked his value on the market by sidelining him during the regular season and also virtually removed his willingness to negotiate through their conflicting stances.
Although it is highly important to maintain young talent beyond the current two-year championship window, this Kuminga situation, which has hampered one of the most vital offseasons for the Warriors in years, could have been avoided entirely.