Free Agency Open Thread (NBA and Kings!)

roasthawg

roasthawg

Starter
#241
#241
Čarolija said:
Look around the NBA! Harrison Barnes gets a Max. Bradley Beal gets a max. Allan Crabbe get $20m per season. Max for Porter is not the same as Max for Curry. His max over 4 years is about $25m per season. In time that will be a reasonable contract. Just as you have bargains now on deals signed 3-4 years ago.

Porter is still only 24 and has development left in his game. He was a border line all star last season. He would be a very good get for us and can grow with the team. You ae not going to get the type of player you are talking about to Sacramento EVER. Its a life of a small market franchise, they have to pay moe to attract players. That will never change unless you turn into a contender and you get bandwagoners jumping on for a chance at a ring.
Click to expand...
Exactly... Three years from now he may look like a steal while helping us win a lot of games.
 
E

ESP47

All-Star
#243
#243
The Hammer said:
I think the concept of #1/2 options is a bit dated.

All competitive teams will have to have 2 or 3 guys on max deals. Porter can be one of those guys on a contending team. He's a great fit for us and a max contract for him is not an overpay in today's market.
Click to expand...
I don't understand. How is the concept of #1/2 options dated? Every good team has them. Lebron and Kyrie. Durant and Steph. I don't think the concept of ranking your players from best to worst can ever be outdated. My point was that you don't want to be paying the 4th best player on your team 1st option money. I personally don't know where Porter would rank. Right now he would be the best player on our team but he could slip down the chart quickly depending on what the younger players do. All in all I think I would still go for him over any other free agent right now.
 
J

joemama

Starter
#244
#244
Tim Kawakami @timkawakami
3 minutes ago
Iguodala's last bit of leverage is to tell GSWs he'll take SAC offer unless they sign-and-trade him elsewhere. Will he take it that far?

This dude has twice talked about our offer as if it is the best

Tim Kawakami @timkawakami
about 8 minutes ago
If Iguodala takes more money from SAC or tries to push GSWs into a sign-and-trade to go elsewhere, they've done what they could w/this offer
 
Blob

Blob

Starter
#246
#246
kingsfan101 said:
If he's a border line all star glue guy, he may be worth a lot, but is not worth the max.

I understand our need, and Porter's fit. However, we've suffered a lot as a fan base to get to this position of hope for the future. We should not screw it up by giving max money to a border line all star. That kind of money should be given to all NBA guys and MVP/DPOY candidates.

I don't know what's the right move or number for Porter, but you shouldn't give max money to border line all stars. There's a reason Wizards are not doing it already.

I know the contracts some folks are getting make things look absurd. E.g, we all were pretty sure that Galloway will opt in, since he won't get such a sweet deal anywhere else. There's a silver lining though. In a few months, some of these teams will be suffering from buyer's remorse, and will want to shed some salary. You know what I'm driving at.

So, what action should we take? I don't know. I do agree that we need to get some SF, but don't want to hand out a long term deal. As to who should be that guy, and at what price, hell, if I had any clue, I would be asking Vivek to hire me for some big bucks.
Click to expand...
There's degree of projection you have to do with a 24 year old. There's risk his development curve will stall. But you could be rewarded for that risk. Otto just turned 24 years old. He logged season with a 63% TS! It doesn't get much better than this. His offense to defense rating was 129 to 108 (+21). The Wizards were 108.5 to 107 (+1.5) so Wizards were +20 better with him on the floor. The Wizards offense hummed with him. Otto's usage was only 15%. Selective shot taker.

The hope would be if his usage increased to 20% he could have TS% close to 60%. That would be part of the bet with max deal. It is worth mention he is a prudent decision maker with 1.7 assists to 0.6 turnovers per game. Outstanding. He gets 1.6 steals per game. (23rd in NBA) Outstanding! The metrics are there to pay him 100M . The fact he is also a tremendous position need justifies the outlay. The risk would be he is at best in complementary role behind Beal and Wall and taking on more prominent role would expose his limitations. I don't know if this bet is worth making. Like I said before I highly highly highly doubtful the Wizards let him go under any realistic scenario, but like I said before, impossible is nothing. ;)
 
kingsboi

kingsboi

Hall of Famer
#247
#247
T

The Hammer

All-Star
#248
#248
ESP47 said:
I don't understand. How is the concept of #1/2 options dated? Every good team has them. Lebron and Kyrie. Durant and Steph. I don't think the concept of ranking your players from best to worst can ever be outdated. My point was that you don't want to be paying the 4th best player on your team 1st option money. I personally don't know where Porter would rank. Right now he would be the best player on our team but he could slip down the chart quickly depending on what the younger players do. All in all I think I would still go for him over any other free agent right now.
Click to expand...
1/2 options that only get max deals I should say. Draymond is a max player anywhere for example.

Porter would instantly be our #1 offensive option and one of, if not the, best defender on the squad.
 
Blob

Blob

Starter
#249
#249
E

ESP47

All-Star
#252
#252
KingsFanSince85 said:
I don't understand your position here. How many young players do you want exactly? They've got 5 rookies, 4 players from the previous draft, and 1 from 2015. That's plenty for a rebuild. Now they've got to start a winning culture and you don't win with a roster of 1st and 2nd year players.

The Kings should be done with playing for lottery position. It's should be about winning games and developing a winning mentality. Adding some proven, good character vets goes a long way toward doing that. As the young kids develop and earn more PT, the hope is the wins continue to rise.
Click to expand...
I'll explain my position one more time but I've done it in multiple threads so it'll be the last time I bring it up in case I'm being redundant and annoying with it.

People are acting like we're rebuilt right now. Based on what? We could have a team full of busts. So far Hield looks solid, WCS looks alright, Bogdan might be good, Skal looks like he could be good, Malachi we don't know, Papa we don't know, ...the rookies from this year, we definitely don't know. We have an entire team full of question marks at the moment. All we have so far are glimpses of promise and our fingers crossed. You are rolling the dice big time by thinking that we're done rebuilding just because we have a bunch of young guys. We really only have a couple of high draft picks and a bunch of picks from outside the lottery that look promising. Odds are that a lot of those guys aren't going to turn out. It's just the nature of the draft. We aren't rebuilt until these guys become successful. Until then, we're still rebuilding.

We have 1 draft pick in the next 2 years so it's a can't miss draft. We are aligned at the moment to be pretty high up in the order but we are not aligned to make any sort of meaningful run at the playoffs, even with all these names we're rumored to get. My motto is "wait" just one more year so we can land another possible all star next to Fox. We aren't signing all stars in free agency. Just doesn't happen here. Then the year after, we have no pick, so that's the time to really go for it. At that point sign the vets and worry more about winning than pure development. But this year should be about development. It's intelligent tanking so you kill two birds with one stone. You get your rookies plenty of burn and you get another possible all star high up in next years draft. I don't see the negative in that. There is a very valuable asset waiting right there for the taking, why throw it away to sign a couple of old vets? It's like if the Sixers signed a bunch of vets last year and would up with Luke Kennard instead of Markelle Fultz. What would be the point in that? Their future is exponentially more bright with Fultz on their team. Why should we miss out on an opportunity like that to sign a bunch of aging vets that are going to be out the door or close to it once our core is developed? The timing simply isn't right.

Now once we land that player, we will have a better understanding of who may and may not make it on this roster. We can then make trades and configure the roster around the guys that we think will be successful. The cap space should be there so next years Milsap type free agent will then make sense because now it doesn't matter if we win 10 games or win 60, there's no draft pick to worry about anyway so you might as well just go for the win.

If you go for it now and these rookies don't pan out, we could be aligning ourselves for another half decade or more of purgatory because we're going to have vets that are good enough to win a handful of games but not good enough to lead us to the playoffs. At that point it's just more of the same for Kings fans. Personally I'm tired of that and I think waiting one more year gives us higher odds of digging out of this hole we're in. I'm high on nearly all the rookies we have but I'm not going to sit here and act like we're rebuilt or a couple of 32 year old vets away from winning because that's a huge gamble to take when you're aligned to nab yourself a possible all star in next years draft. It's too valuable of an asset to pass up for a team that does not attract high level free agents.

I'm not opposed to signing vets, I know we need them this year. I just think this year is for development so I'd rather have low level vets on the cheap for that and then next year we can make the bigger splash in FA when we have our highly touted draft pick and the money to sign these guys that can help take us to another level. We need all the assets we can get and I just don't see the need in throwing away one of our most valuable assets because we want to sign the vets a year earlier than schedule.
 
kingsboi

kingsboi

Hall of Famer
#267
#267
Blob

Blob

Starter
#269
#269
joemama said:
Adrian Wojnarowski @wojespn
now
Iguodala's deal will be worth $48M over the three years, league source tells ESPN. Warriors deepened offer, close deal tonight.

Chris Haynes @ChrisBHaynes
now
I'm being told Iguodala's deal is closer to 3-years, $48 million.

Connor Letourneau @Con_Chron
1 minute ago
Needless to say, it's been a terrific 24 hours for the Warriors. Locked up Curry, Iguodala, Livingston and West.
Click to expand...
Setting bias aside, this makes perfect sense. Iggy wins another 3 championships in his mind, then retires. I don't blame him and don't fault him for using the Kings as leverage. It's not personal. It's business. Iggy made the right move.

Let's move on to Simmons or Otto or whomever.....
 
kingsboi

kingsboi

Hall of Famer
#270
#270
Blob said:
Setting bias aside, this makes perfect sense. Iggy wins another 3 championships in his mind, then retires. I don't blame him and don't fault him for using the Kings as leverage. It's not personal. It's business. Iggy made the right move.

Let's move on to Simmons or Otto or whomever.....
Click to expand...
still need Gallinari and Millsap off the market so they can stop being associated with the Kings
 
You must log in or register to reply here.