Golden State Warriors Eye Michael Porter Jr., But Risks Loom Large

The Golden State Warriors are entering a critical stretch of the NBA season, and the clock is ticking for any team with championship aspirations. While the Warriors have shown flashes of brilliance this year, they face a glaring need: an additional impact scorer who can complement the gravitational pull of the aging Stephen Curry. As such, speculation has begun to swirl around the possibility of a blockbuster move at the trade deadline. One name consistently mentioned in these discussions is Michael Porter Jr. of the Brooklyn Nets.

At first glance, a Porter acquisition seems like a no-brainer. The 6-foot-10 forward is averaging 25.9 points, 7.5 rebounds, and 3.4 assists this season, while knocking down over 40% of his 3-point attempts. On paper, he offers the spacing, versatility, and scoring punch that Golden State lacks beyond Curry, Draymond Green, and Klay Thompson. Porter’s ability to stretch the floor could give the Warriors an offensive dynamic reminiscent of their 2015–2019 championship teams, where floor spacing and high-volume shooting created nearly unstoppable offensive gravity.

Yet, despite the allure of such a deal, former NBA executive and current columnist John Hollinger has expressed serious reservations about whether Porter Jr. is the move that will actually push Golden State into true championship contention. In a recent guest appearance on The Athletic’s NBA Daily Show, Hollinger questioned whether the addition of Porter would meaningfully change the Warriors’ trajectory.

“Are they okay going forward having Porter at $40 [million], and Steph at his money, and Draymond at his money, and Jimmy at his money?” Hollinger asked rhetorically. “Porter’s good, but he’s not at that level where he’s going to move the needle that much if you’re basically an average team.”

Hollinger’s point is twofold. First, there is the financial dimension. Even if the Warriors have tradeable assets—potentially including Moses Moody, Buddy Hield, and even Jonathan Kuminga’s contract routed to a third team—a Porter trade would significantly increase the top-heavy nature of Golden State’s payroll. Currently, Curry, Draymond, and Jimmy Green’s salaries already total roughly $140 million for this season and next. Adding Porter would push the combined salaries for the top four players to around $180 million, leaving minimal flexibility to address depth or bench scoring, which have historically been areas of vulnerability for the Warriors.

Second, Hollinger questions the basketball fit. While Porter’s stats in Brooklyn are impressive, there are legitimate questions about whether he could replicate that efficiency and usage rate within Golden State’s offensive system. The Warriors’ offense relies heavily on Curry and Thompson as primary creators, with Draymond orchestrating as a point-forward facilitator. Could Porter find the same number of touches and maintain shooting efficiency in a system that is already heavily occupied? The risk is that Porter’s production could decline, and the trade could fail to yield the desired championship impact.

Adding to the complexity is the broader issue of roster construction. Golden State faces both a talent and a depth problem. Their core of Curry, Thompson, and Green remains elite, but the supporting cast lacks a consistent second scorer and reliable bench production. A singular trade to acquire Porter may improve the top end of the roster, but it does nothing to address the Warriors’ need for depth and secondary contributors. Hollinger argues that this makes the move a high-risk proposition: the Warriors could gamble big on one star acquisition and end up depleting their future flexibility without gaining enough immediate impact to justify the cost.

There is also the timeline to consider. Stephen Curry is in the later stages of his prime, and the Warriors’ championship window is finite. The front office has to weigh whether Porter can provide an immediate boost without compromising the team’s long-term sustainability. Even if Porter performs at a high level, the cost—both financially and in terms of assets surrendered—may limit the Warriors’ ability to make complementary moves in the future, such as adding another wing scorer, depth big, or defensive specialist.

In other words, the Porter trade represents a classic high-risk, high-reward scenario. On one hand, he could provide the offensive lift Golden State desperately needs. On the other, the financial commitment and potential fit issues could leave the Warriors worse off if the deal does not pan out as hoped. The risk is magnified by the fact that Golden State’s current roster is already aging, and the margin for error is small.

Hollinger’s cautionary perspective highlights an important reality: not all superstar acquisitions are created equal. The fit, usage, and surrounding roster must align perfectly for a midseason trade to transform a team from “good” to “championship contender.” Simply adding a high-scoring forward like Porter may not be enough to overcome deficiencies in bench depth, defensive versatility, and salary flexibility—particularly for a team whose core players already command elite salaries.

Ultimately, the Warriors’ front office faces a delicate balancing act. They must decide whether to gamble on Porter’s scoring and hope he integrates seamlessly into Golden State’s system, or explore alternative solutions that preserve flexibility, protect the core, and address multiple roster needs simultaneously. The trade deadline looms, and fans can expect a flurry of rumors and speculation. But as Hollinger cautions, a flashy move alone may not be sufficient to vault the Warriors back into the championship conversation.

Golden State undoubtedly has the talent to contend, but the margin for error is razor-thin. The next few weeks will reveal whether the Warriors’ brass opts for a high-risk, high-reward gamble or a more measured approach that prioritizes long-term flexibility alongside short-term improvement. Either way, the outcome could define the team’s trajectory for years to come—and determine whether Curry’s era ends with another championship or a missed opportunity.