I think the ultimate thing that the keep him/trade him argument boils down to is that either way, it would be in the Kings best interest to see the dude play late game minutes to either give him the experience with the other young members of the core and/or to rebuild his trade value enough that you get assets back in a deal.
I want Bags to see late game minutes as well, but I'm not ready to choose a side yet (Bags development or Walton's totally understandable intentions), because of the following reasons:
1. I think all coaches want to win. Unlike lifelong fans, coaches have short battery lives. Walsh got pushed out. Seifert was a winning coach and he got tanked. Ben Howland took the Bruins to two final fours and got fired. It's just how things are for coaches.
2. Think Walton, despite his age and despite the fancy GSW NBA 2.0 background, is conservative. In crunch time, he's going to choose what is a known known over an unknown unknown.
3. I feel like I need to say this again, but I'm totally okay with the Kings firing Walton. What I think is a total farce, however, is that Gentry would play Bags or the kids more minutes. Gentry won't.
4. And even if Walton was canned, I don't know if McNair would go full Presti. Where he fires a proven coach (Donovan) and hires a new unproven coach who matches the team's arc (Dagineaul?). Hiring a young, innovative coach who is willing to play unproven rookies when his tenure is not dictated by whether the team wins or loses. Now, admittedly, I love that OKC front office. I'd trade an unprotected Kings first for Presti. Forget Hinkie. Presti is the dude. He settles on a strategy and then goes all in. Dude lost Durant, got George, sold Russ and George, and now have SGA, Bazely (who is looking like a young Odom), and Dort (who is looking like a 2 guard version of Artest). Plus 20 first round draft picks. And vet salary conversions in Hill and Horford once he's eaten up the bad $ years with salary cap space.
So, TLDR, I guess it's carry on with the status quo for now. We'll see.