Player Kornhub

[spurs10]

Have no idea what this 'Magic City' talk is, but Luke Kornet seems to be a bright and funny person. I think he needs a bit of rest and hope he comes back soon. He looked good against Charlotte.

 

[Ice009]

A Spurs player podcast apperance? What is this?
Someone said Spurs players aren't allowed to podcast, I think it was @RC_Drunkford.

I thought they're not allowed to have their own podcast? Are they not allowed to go on them either? D-Fox has been on one last season.

Super interesting about his shooting. It seems his body got jacked up that started with a broken nose as he couldn't breathe properly anymore, and then he had other injuries after that sort of messed his body up. He's had surgery for a deviated septum and apparently he had to have it done again before this season. Said his breathing now is better than it was even after the previous surgery, so that is a good thing - it gives me a bit of hope about his game holding up. Anyway, thanks to Luke bringing it up, looks like I might have one too. I looked it up what it is and I've got a lot of the symptoms, and I'm pretty sure if I do have it it mine is caused by getting hit it the face/nose with a golf club when I was younger. I probably should have had it looked at, but I just toughed it out and let it heal on it's own. I didn't even know what it is, but since it can be caused by a blow, I thought I'd look it up. lol. I will have to go get it looked at sometime soon to see if I actually have one. I won't say "thanks, Luke" yet like he said "Thanks Joel" as I could be wrong still.

Anyway, I was happily watching this podcast and they were talking about what he'd do if he didn't play basketball and the subject came up about SAT scores or whatever it's called and Luke brought up Maxime Raynauld. Luke said Maxime is "basically just me with more potential and hope." I paused it at that point. I know Luke was talking about academics, but man, another gut punch as I really wanted the Spurs to draft him. Even though Luke was joking, I believe what he said can apply on the court too. Spurs should have tried to talk him around, or just drafted him and let it play out. I'm sure he wouldn't have been upset going to a team with a good friend of his. If he was adamant on not playing for the Spurs even after drafting, they could have just traded him to the Kings. Second round players should not get to dictate where they go.

 

[scott]

I thought they're not allowed to have their own podcast? Are they not allowed to go on them either? D-Fox has been on one last season.

It's just something @RC_Drunkford made up. Castle has been on podcasts, Mamu was on podcasts when he was here, Fox was obviously on one... the Spurs even had an official one hosted by Matt Bonner, who is now doing TV with the Raptors

 

[timtonymanu]

Major regression that it's like we're back to having Zollins out there and Wemby has to carry all the load.

 

[spursistan]

He really might be washed before the end of his first year. Brian Wright structuring that contract the way it is is was a perspicacious move

 

[scott]

Price needs to be load managed. Need that 3rd string C next year.

 

[spursistan]

He really might be washed before the end of his first year. Brian Wright structuring that contract the way it is is was a perspicacious move

Team worst -18. Biggest non-injury related fall off of Spurs player since....?

 

[Ice009]

I had doubts about the signing from the get-go. Just because he's usually been a 3rd string center who hadn't played a lot of minutes. I did believe you guys that said he was a good, very solid player, but he's not looking too good now. Can't do much of anything out there. Spurs have got 3 guys at backup center that don't look like they can carry any load from Victor. I hope one of them or two of them between each other can step up during the playoffs.

 

[spursistan]

I had doubts about the signing from the get-go. Just because he's usually been a 3rd string center who hadn't played a lot of minutes. I did believe you guys that said he was a good, very solid player, but he's not looking too good now. Can't do much of anything out there. Spurs have got 3 guys at backup center that don't look like they can carry any load from Victor. I hope one of them or two of them between each other can step up during the playoffs.

The way we cornered the market on washed-up backup centers is simply inexcusable FO malpratice.

 

[Bruno]

Since the all star break:
Spurs are +244 with Wembanyama on the court in 453 minutes.
Spurs are -49 with Kornet on the court in 238 minutes.

+/- is to me the most important stat for Kornet. It's fine if a 15mpg backup center isn't a great player, but Spurs shouldn't be crushed when Wembanyama is on the bench.

At the end, what Kornet will do in playoffs should obviously determine his future. The good news is that Spurs have a lot of flexibility with Kornet because of how Wright has structured his contract (declining structure with almost 2 non-guaranteed years). Sticking with him or moving away from him are both easily doable contract wise.

 

[tearsofmorningdew]

Team worst -18. Biggest non-injury related fall off of Spurs player since....?

He’s gotta be injured

Since the all star break:
Spurs are +244 with Wembanyama on the court in 453 minutes.
Spurs are -49 with Kornet on the court in 238 minutes.

+/- is to me the most important stat for Kornet. It's fine if a 15mpg backup center isn't a great player, but Spurs shouldn't be crushed when Wembanyama is on the bench.

At the end, what Kornet will do in playoffs should obviously determine his future. The good news is that Spurs have a lot of flexibility with Kornet because of how Wright has structured his contract (declining structure with almost 2 non-guaranteed years). Sticking with him or moving away from him are both easily doable contract wise.

Some people are adamant that it’s completely normal for leads to vaporize when Vic comes off the court because it’s a backup C out there

 

[Raven_]

He’s gotta be injured

Some people are adamant that it’s completely normal for leads to vaporize when Vic comes off the court because it’s a backup C out there

there is very little reason to believe it is about korn specifically though..

 

[RC_Drunkford]

It's just something @RC_Drunkford made up. Castle has been on podcasts, Mamu was on podcasts when he was here, Fox was obviously on one... the Spurs even had an official one hosted by Matt Bonner, who is now doing TV with the Raptors

lol Mike Finger said this on the Spurs Insider podcast. If it's made up why don't you ask him about it?

No podcast policy obviously means they don't want their players to have THEIR OWN podcast where they spill the tea on a weekly basis. That doesn't mean they can't be guests. Even a person with half a braincell could understand that. Matt Bonner had his podcast in 2022, which is 6 years after he retired from basketball.

 

[Ice009]

Since the all star break:
Spurs are +244 with Wembanyama on the court in 453 minutes.
Spurs are -49 with Kornet on the court in 238 minutes.

+/- is to me the most important stat for Kornet. It's fine if a 15mpg backup center isn't a great player, but Spurs shouldn't be crushed when Wembanyama is on the bench.

At the end, what Kornet will do in playoffs should obviously determine his future. The good news is that Spurs have a lot of flexibility with Kornet because of how Wright has structured his contract (declining structure with almost 2 non-guaranteed years). Sticking with him or moving away from him are both easily doable contract wise.

That's a very good positive (his contract structure) that I think a lot of us forgot about. BW did well with that.

My reservations which I mentioned on ST were his lack of court time as a primary backup and that he never had to play big minutes so I didn't know what happen if it did. So far (unless he's injured or carrying an injury), it's not looking good.

But then you have the Victor effect. I also believe teams are feeling massive relief when Vic goes to the bench and start trying to get to the paint a lot more when he's not on the court, and unfortunately for Luke, he's getting attacked a lot more as none of the backup centers on the team can provide even close to the defense/rim protection Victor provides.

lol Mike Finger said this on the Spurs Insider podcast. If it's made up why don't you ask him about it?

No podcast policy obviously means they don't want their players to have THEIR OWN podcast where they spill the tea on a weekly basis. That doesn't mean they can't be guests. Even a person with half a braincell could understand that. Matt Bonner had his podcast in 2022, which is 6 years after he retired from basketball.

Yeah, this is what I figured. They're likely allowed to go on podcasts and chat in general, but they don't want their players giving up information about the organization and how they do things, which would likely happen if they have their own.

 

[Exstatic]

Those things are in fact positive. They’re not taking a clear negative and reframing it as a positive.

Like drinking. Which has zero health and public benefits. Probably the single most destructive thing in society. Even an innocuous drink in the privacy of your home has negative health effects.

I don’t know what the percentage of strippers were trafficked or abused but I bet it’s exceedingly low and probably lower than the number of people trafficked in and out of hotels or in and out of the agricultural sector.

I think the number being trafficked is,probably a lot higher than Janie, paying her way through college.

 

[BacktoBasics]

I think the number being trafficked is,probably a lot higher than Janie, paying her way through college.

It’s not. The number is exceedingly low. Trafficking in agriculture and the hospitality industry are significantly higher as a whole.

Now if you want to compare women who got college degrees compared to women trafficked then maybe that’s a more fair comparison but that’s a disingenuous argument.

Most women are simply working to survive. That number is exponentially higher than those trafficked.

Edit

Loosely according to this you’re looking at potentially 6-7% trafficked. That’s all sex workers not just strippers.

But we know that is predominantly from foreign countries. Especially where prostitution is legal or more rampant in plain sight. Which makes the US number likely way less for strippers legally working.

So you have well upwards of 94- probably 98/99% of strippers just living life within the law.

Sex Worker Statistics by Country, Gender [2024]

Sex services are considered the world's oldest profession which has been practiced by people since ancient times. With years passing people can witness a

iusw.org

 

[OK Computer]

It’s not. The number is exceedingly low. Trafficking in agriculture and the hospitality industry are significantly higher as a whole.

Now if you want to compare women who got college degrees compared to women trafficked then maybe that’s a more fair comparison but that’s a disingenuous argument.

Most women are simply working to survive. That number is exponentially higher than those trafficked.

Here’s what ChatGPT has to say about this:

The claim becomes misleading when used to imply:

“strip clubs are less associated with trafficking”

That is not supported. Law enforcement and NGOs consistently identify strip clubs as frequent venues where sex trafficking victims are exploited or recruited, even if they are not the largest category by total numbers.

Conclusion:

• It is misleading in a risk comparison context, especially when used to downplay trafficking risks in strip clubs

 

[OK Computer]

It’s not. The number is exceedingly low. Trafficking in agriculture and the hospitality industry are significantly higher as a whole.

Now if you want to compare women who got college degrees compared to women trafficked then maybe that’s a more fair comparison but that’s a disingenuous argument.

Most women are simply working to survive. That number is exponentially higher than those trafficked.

Edit

Loosely according to this you’re looking at potentially 6-7% trafficked. That’s all sex workers not just strippers.

But we know that is predominantly from foreign countries. Especially where prostitution is legal or more rampant in plain sight. Which makes the US number likely way less for strippers legally working.

So you have well upwards of 94- probably 98/99% of strippers just living life within the law.

Sex Worker Statistics by Country, Gender [2024]

Sex services are considered the world's oldest profession which has been practiced by people since ancient times. With years passing people can witness a

iusw.org

ChatGPT:

That argument is not supported by how the data works.

1) The “6–7% trafficked” figure is not a valid baseline

The page cited (International Union of Sex Workers) is not a primary data source. It aggregates mixed claims without consistent methodology.

Problems with that number:

• It is not derived from a representative sample of all sex workers
• It blends different countries, legal systems, and definitions
• It relies on detected cases, which are known to be undercounts

Conclusion: it is not a reliable “true percentage.”

2) You cannot isolate “strippers” from “sex workers” using that data

The claim does this:

• Takes a weak estimate for all sex workers
• Then narrows it to legal U.S. strippers

There is no dataset that:

• Breaks trafficking prevalence specifically for strippers
• Separates legal vs illegal environments cleanly
• Adjusts for underreporting

That extrapolation is unsupported.

3) “Mostly foreign trafficking” is incorrect

Data from Polaris Project and U.S. cases shows:

• A large portion of sex trafficking victims in the U.S. are U.S. citizens
• Many are recruited domestically, not imported

So the logic:

“trafficking is mostly foreign → U.S. strip clubs are mostly unaffected”

is false.

4) Detection bias destroys the “94–99% safe” claim

Trafficking statistics are based on:

• reported cases
• identified victims

But trafficking is:

• hidden
• underreported
• often misclassified as consensual work

So:

• A low detected percentage does not equal low actual prevalence

It means “low visibility,” not “low occurrence.”

5) Strip clubs are not neutral environments in the data

Law enforcement and NGO typologies (e.g., Polaris Project) consistently show:

Strip clubs used for recruitment pipelines

• Victims working in clubs under coercion or debt control
• Movement between stripping and other forms of exploitation

That contradicts the idea that the environment is overwhelmingly independent and risk-free.

6) The core logical failure

The argument assumes:

“Low reported % → most participants are safe”

But the actual structure is:

• Unknown denominator (total sex workers)
• Incomplete numerator (identified victims only)
• No clean segmentation (strippers vs others)

So the conclusion:

“94–99% are just living normal legal lives”

is not evidence-based. It is an assumption built on incomplete data.

Bottom line

• The 6–7% figure is not reliable
• It cannot be narrowed to U.S. strippers
• Domestic trafficking is significant, not mostly foreign
• Underreporting invalidates high-confidence “safe majority” claims

The argument is not disprovable with a precise number, but the confidence level (94–99%) is unjustified and unsupported by any credible dataset

 

[BacktoBasics]

Here’s what ChatGPT has to say about this:

The claim becomes misleading when used to imply:

“strip clubs are less associated with trafficking”

That is not supported. Law enforcement and NGOs consistently identify strip clubs as frequent venues where sex trafficking victims are exploited or recruited, even if they are not the largest category by total numbers.

Conclusion:

• It is misleading in a risk comparison context, especially when used to downplay trafficking risks in strip clubs

I provided some numbers and made a comparison. I don’t at all think what I said was misleading.

Your AI doesn’t provide stats but more of an opinion based off what numerical comparison?

That’s unclear.