For very different reasons, a plurality of the questions I got for my traditional November mailbag were either about the Warriors’ Jonathan Kuminga or the 49ers’ Nick Bosa. That’s not surprising, I guess, given this moment and those two players’ unique place in the Bay Area — and sometimes national — sports conversation.
Most of these questions came from a prompt we inserted into a column last week, so they were submitted before the 49ers’ minor move at the trade deadline, the Warriors’ big victory over Boston on Wednesday, and, oh yeah, the election. They were still good and mainly on point, though.
Questions have been edited for length and clarity. I didn’t answer every one of them, but I tried to pick a representative question or two if I was asked similar things multiple times.
Let’s get to it.
Bosa’s MAGA politics
On the whole Bosa/MAGA stuff: I agree he has every right to his views. However, these aren’t simply disagreements about tax policy. These are extremely racist, misogynistic, and homophobic viewpoints that are exposed daily by this candidate [Donald Trump] that simply shouldn’t be normalized. How do you typically handle situations like this as a sports journalist? Just keep to sports or is it fair to question him on why he feels this way? — Russell Schwartz
These are good points. To answer them, I’m going to flash back to another political moment that crossed into the 49ers’ universe — which was very different than this one and which I treated very differently than this one. Of course, I’m talking about Colin Kaepernick’s protest during the national anthem throughout the 2016 season. This was newsworthy and admirable (at least to me) because of what Kaepernick was risking. Because he knew his career and life would never be the same.
Bosa wasn’t risking anything by barging onto the NBC postgame set two weekends ago. He’ll probably get a fine for violating NFL interview policy. I’m sure he can afford it. Risk level: Zero. Bosa had every American right to do this (and the league has every right to fine him for breaking their rules about political discourse during a postgame interview), but as an act of sports theater, it wasn’t anything close to Kaepernick’s message about social injustice and police brutality.
Bosa was supporting the man who now has won the presidency twice. I personally find most of Donald Trump’s entire political existence and fanbase repellent, and, like tens of millions of people who voted for Kamala Harris, don’t want the MAGA platform thrown in my face. But Trump won the election. It’s not like Bosa was supporting a fringe candidate whose values don’t match the electorate.
And it has nothing to do with the way the 49ers either win or lose games. Kaepernick invited a discussion — he held court as his locker for as long as any media person asked him questions about his protest. Bosa probably won’t do that, which is entirely his right. You can be angry about it. You can be happy about it. But it was a minor thing, and I’m treating it that way.
I don’t think it’s appropriate for Bosa to wear that hat and I laughed when someone commented, “Shut up, Bosa, and tackle.” But as the great Marcus Thompson said on KNBR (when discussing Stephen Curry), athletes want to express their full selves, and that includes their political feelings. Should Bosa’s action here be viewed differently than others such as Curry and Steve Kerr because he chooses to support someone who is (very) unpopular in the Bay Area? — anonymous
In a nutshell: No, I don’t think an athlete or coach who agrees with me or the political leanings of the Bay Area should be viewed wildly differently in the sports universe from an athlete or coach who believes in very different things. Curry and Kerr have taken on causes — and they can be loved or hated for doing it. They’ve put themselves out there, and they don’t ask to be shielded from criticism. The same for Bosa or anybody who supports Trump. They can be loved for this and I’m sure they are in many parts of this country. And they can be rebuked, as Bosa has been by many in the Bay Area. I just don’t get into the role of sports righteousness cop. I write about the things that either push teams to success or break them apart — or things that are either especially courageous or feckless — and what Bosa did was none of that.
Do you think Bosa’s stunt will have a negative effect on the 49ers’ locker room? — Paul E. Lovallo
No, I’m quite sure that it has had zero effect on the 49ers’ locker room or Bosa’s standing as a team leader. What matters in there is that Bosa helps them win and that he’s a thoughtful teammate.
Does everybody in the locker room agree with Bosa’s gesture or that he made it a national issue after a big win? No, probably not. But NFL teams aren’t put together — and players don’t grind through bruised muscles and strained tendons — to achieve political unity. The whole point is to win a lot of football games and make a lot of money. I totally understand.
Has Shanahan lost the touch?
Given the Niners’ offensive struggles in the first half of the season, do you or people behind the scenes believe Kyle Shanahan’s giving up play-calling duties during the preseason led to any rustiness on his end? —Hanson Wang
Though it was an interesting decision by Shanahan, no, I don’t think letting Klay Kubiak call the preseason plays had any effect on the 49ers’ offense. Despite some clunky moments and the absence of Christian McCaffrey, the 49ers’ offense is still ringing up top-5 numbers in almost every important category. For instance, the 49ers are the No. 2-ranked team in yards per play at 6.5.
The main problem has been the struggle to score touchdowns once the 49ers get into the red zone (48.6%, ranked 28th in the league). But two things about that: 1) they’ve had an uptick over the last three games (61.5%) and 2) getting McCaffrey back Sunday or a little later should put them back near 70% the rest of the way, which is where they were last season.
If the 49ers do not make it past the first round of playoffs or possibly don’t make the playoffs, what would you foresee as the biggest potential change? — PGR via Twitter
If this is a back-door question about the likelihood of Shanahan, John Lynch, or Brock Purdy getting dumped if the 49ers don’t make it into the deep rounds of the playoffs, I’ve got a one-word answer: No. None of them are getting dumped. Of course, we don’t know the timing and price tag for Purdy’s new contract, but that’ll be about numbers and negotiations, not about the 49ers deciding they need a new quarterback.
Other than the Big Three, certainly, if the 49ers stall out from here, there could be some changes. There always are changes from year to year. There could be some changes on Shanahan’s staff, but again, that almost always happens anyway, and if you need a reminder, just check with Steve Wilks these days. A familiar veteran or two could be unloaded. Young players could be pushed into broader roles, which is more feasible than ever after the 49ers aced this year’s draft. But barring a total collapse, I can’t see Jed York or anybody else ordering any kind of reboot.
When do you think Dre Greenlaw will return? — Mark Espinosa via Twitter
I’d guess the 49ers and Greenlaw are aiming for some point after the back-to-back games in Green Bay and Buffalo (which is their last artificial-turf game on their regular-season schedule). So, if everything goes right, maybe Greenlaw returns for the Dec. 8 home game against the Bears, which would give him five games, all on grass, to rev up for the postseason.
Warriors trade rumor mill
Which Warriors players and picks would be in a trade offer for Giannis Antetokounmpo, when he finally tells the Bucks he wants out? — anonymous
Any Warriors offer for a superstar player would have to start with Jonathan Kuminga. If the Bucks like him, that’s a great way into a potential Giannis move. If the Bucks don’t like Kuminga or are wary of his contract demands, that might end the talks right there. Especially with Houston among several other teams that can load up their offers with players who are already on long-term deals or aren’t quite so close to decision time on their contracts.
But if Milwaukee is intrigued by Kuminga, who can be very intriguing for many reasons, I’d think a Warriors starting offer could be Kuminga plus Andrew Wiggins (would need him in there for salary balance) plus two first-round picks. Is that too much to offer by a Warriors team that just went to 7-1 by beating the defending champions in Boston? Not enough? It’d depend mainly on the Kuminga valuing.
Do you think it’s likely that the Warriors make a consolidation trade before the deadline? — Nikhil
I might be changing my mind on this. I’ve thought for a while that the Warriors’ 12- or 13-man rotation is a setup for a three-for-one deal that gets them a true 1B scorer next to Curry by the trade deadline. But after watching them wear down the Celtics, I’m wavering. Yes, Boston was without Jaylen Brown. But the Warriors’ depth was cut down because they were without Brandin Podziemski and De’Anthony Melton. And the Warriors were still the deeper and, dare I say, tougher team on Wednesday.
One more thing: Is Buddy Hield already that 1B guy?
Kuminga is the one piece who doesn’t seem to fit in the new improved GSW roster. Is he basically a higher-skilled Kelly Oubre Jr.? An NBA player, for sure, but not a Steve Kerr Warrior player? — Ben Calvin
I think there’s value in a player who’s different than everybody else on the roster and can go at a different pace than everybody else. I don’t think we know the full answer about Kuminga’s fit with the Warriors. And yes, with that contract situation, time is running out. The Warriors will get calls on Kuminga. They will make calls to measure the marketplace. But I’m not sure the Warriors can make a trade by February that would help them more this season than what Kuminga might give them going into April and May. Or what he might turn into by 2026.
Assuming no miracle trade formulates (Giannis demands out and the Bucks accept a GSW package) and there are no major injuries that cut the current depth, a 13-man rotation seems unsustainable. Who besides Giannis could we get for Kuminga (plus or minus picks) who would actually elevate this roster? — Anthony Yu, MD, via Twitter
The Warriors will be shooting high on this one. Because they can keep Kuminga through this season, then reassess in July, when he’ll be a restricted free agent. But if they consider a deal and Milwaukee’s not answering the phone… maybe check on Joel Embiid? But he comes with a whole lot of health question marks and a ton of salary.
I’ve mentioned Jarrett Allen in this context previously, but Kenny Atkinson has the Cavaliers at 9-0 and maybe out of any trade conversation. Jimmy Butler’s name comes up here, but I don’t see it — he’s 35 years old, only made 2 three-pointers in 11 games so far, feels like a bit of a declining player. And he’ll want a big new extension. Brandon Ingram is very gettable, but the Warriors already passed on him last summer.
So maybe there’s nothing huge coming in February and the Warriors can go back to calling Utah about Lauri Markkanen next offseason. Or hope the Suns thing blows up and the Warriors can check in about Devin Booker, a Kerr favorite from the Olympics. Or if the 76ers continue to implode, maybe call them about Paul George?
Possible Posey targets
Who in your opinion, is the biggest free agent the Giants have a real shot at landing given the change from Farhan Zaidi to Buster Posey? — anonymous
If Posey is ready to spend some money and he knows he can’t get Juan Soto, I think he’ll target a young, athletic, two-way shortstop. Which would bump Tyler Fitzgerald over to second base, a more natural position for him, and help out the pitching staff, too.
Could the Giants out-bid the Dodgers for Willy Adames? Or take a shot on Ha-Seong Kim, knowing his market might be down due to his shoulder injury? Or make a trade for Carlos Correa and then not flunk him on the physical? These guys just seem like they’d fit a Posey Plan. And they should be in the $120 to 160 million range, not the Scott-Boras-says-if-you-have-to-ask-you-can’t-afford-Soto range.