Trade Bagley?
- Thread starter Sac4cwebb
- Start date
We don't even have to make a QO for another year and a half. If at that point we decide not to keep him, then there's no need to make a QO. If at that point we determine that it's not worth the risk that he accepts a one-year, $14.7M contract, then we don't make the QO and consider signing him in free agency at a lower cost (but unrestricted). And if he gets and stays healthy and develops on the path he's been on, then the QO probably makes sense.
If I were the GM of a playoff team right now, I would gladly trade this year's #1 for Bagley. But maybe I'm just an idiot.
My point, however, is that it really can't be both. If we have to overpay Bagley, it's because other teams want him. If nobody wants him, we won't have to overpay him - we don't even need to keep him. But somehow the fanbase is so panicked about Bagley that both of these seem to be true at the same time, even though they can't be.
If I were the GM of a playoff team right now, I would gladly trade this year's #1 for Bagley. But maybe I'm just an idiot.
My point, however, is that it really can't be both. If we have to overpay Bagley, it's because other teams want him. If nobody wants him, we won't have to overpay him - we don't even need to keep him. But somehow the fanbase is so panicked about Bagley that both of these seem to be true at the same time, even though they can't be.
Our best bet is to hold him most likely. Won't get much now if anything. Next year we have to pay him anyways.
If we don't expect to use the qualifying offer at the end of the season next year, try to move him as an expiring contract. The only other option right now is to take back bad salary on the books for next year. This could pool some incentive increasing the perk.
If we don't expect to use the qualifying offer at the end of the season next year, try to move him as an expiring contract. The only other option right now is to take back bad salary on the books for next year. This could pool some incentive increasing the perk.
While I agree with your logic, I think many fans don't agree with your take on Bagley's value.
I think it's the realization that the Kings are going to get basically nothing of value whatsoever from the #2 pick in the draft. It's like investing a million bucks in the stock market and getting $5 back in the end. Tough pill to swallow.
I think it's the realization that the Kings are going to get basically nothing of value whatsoever from the #2 pick in the draft. It's like investing a million bucks in the stock market and getting $5 back in the end. Tough pill to swallow.
I'd be happy if McNair could somehow get an ender for him this year to clear money off the books for next year. Let some other team roll the dice. I know the Kings aren't usually able to do much with cap space but I'd rather have the option than pay Bagley a bunch of money to be hurt and/or not very good.
I like that, or something along the lines of Bagley and Bjelica for Markkanen and Felicio (expiring). Bjelica would give the Bulls some shooting to replace Markkanen's, assuming they want to keep pushing for the playoffs, while also giving them Bagley's upside to keep one foot in the future camp. Kings get the rest of the year to try out Markkanen before he hits restricted free agency.
This is what happens when you draft a player number 2 and then put them on the back burner. You can't waste any time otherwise that value will evaporate. The Kings did this to themselves by signing a bunch of win now role players to play in front of him. They darn near did the same thing to Fox but luckily he made it. The Hawks are doing the same thing to some of their young guys as well. Kings/Hawks/Celtics, learn your lessons GM's. You can't always have your cake and eat it too. Either develop or trade out to win now. Rarely can you do both.
Don't forget a lot of this talk on Bagley is likely coming from other teams. That tells me he does have interest and other teams are trying to drop the cost. I like Bey but if Marvin didn't have these injury concerns that's an easy difference in talent there. Bey should be a good, good player with abilities that don't always show in the stats with his hustle and defense but Marvin has the tools in natural talent and size that will be valuable to someone if he can stay healthy.
Teams know Marvin probably wants out and the Kings are moving on. Watching this team play, they see Marvin waiting in the corner while the team runs plays for Holmes. This is another situation where the team shot themselves in the foot. Why would a team give up a 1st round pick or starter for a guy the Kings aren't showing that they themselves value? You irritate Marvin and tank his value at the same time. The Kings still can't get out of their own way.
Last edited:
I would have too but if there were no concerns about how Marvin fits in and injuries I wouldn't. Marvin has easy 20 and 10 potential that's gone to waste for a variety of reasons. He's even developed that 3 pointer which is beyond what many expected. What I see is what Livinthedream mentioned, a team running pick and roll through Holmes while Bagley plays stretch 4. That was NEVER where his true potential was. There were a few games this season where they quit f'n around and Bagley and Fox got all the pick and roll they could eat and Marvin looked like a star.
Is he going to help the team win now over a polished vet like Holmes? Probably not, but this team is bouncing around at .500 ball depending on the tank team they're facing on which day and in a hole already so, winning what?
Is he going to help the team win now over a polished vet like Holmes? Probably not, but this team is bouncing around at .500 ball depending on the tank team they're facing on which day and in a hole already so, winning what?
I would have been completely on board with that if they were doing it strictly to boost his trade value. Problem is that the coach, GM and owner are all on different pages...which is the usual in Kings land.
Now to play him like that to develop him and keep him? That would be a big nope for me. His defense is very very unlikely to ever get to average. The writing is on the wall as clear as its ever been. Big men rarely come into the league as complete sieves on defense and then improve drastically. The odds of that are already extremely low. Now take Bagley, who has been in the league for 3 years with very little or no real defense improvement and the odds go down even more. It would be a huge mistake to move forward with this guy as some sort of center piece.
But you're right, the way Walton has used him has been pointless because it has hurt his trade value and played against his strengths. But I also see it from Walton's side because if you play to Bagley's offensive strengths, then it takes away from the entire team because of his defense. Fast forward that into the future and is that something you'd want to deal with when really trying to win? I wouldn't.
Now to play him like that to develop him and keep him? That would be a big nope for me. His defense is very very unlikely to ever get to average. The writing is on the wall as clear as its ever been. Big men rarely come into the league as complete sieves on defense and then improve drastically. The odds of that are already extremely low. Now take Bagley, who has been in the league for 3 years with very little or no real defense improvement and the odds go down even more. It would be a huge mistake to move forward with this guy as some sort of center piece.
But you're right, the way Walton has used him has been pointless because it has hurt his trade value and played against his strengths. But I also see it from Walton's side because if you play to Bagley's offensive strengths, then it takes away from the entire team because of his defense. Fast forward that into the future and is that something you'd want to deal with when really trying to win? I wouldn't.
Yeah, I think that ship is sailing away anyway. And Walton takes more away from the team than anyone else on his own and Marvin being gone with him at the helm still is exactly the issues that won't be going away with him just like all the other players before him tarnished and then sent out, valueless. And you've hit the proverbial nail on the head as it goes back to what you're saying. The nightmare is it's not only different pages but maybe not even the same book it would seem, haha. This deadline is going to be very telling.
This is exactly what i was contemplating. Markkanens game goes far better with Fox, and Holmes as he opens the floor. Hali can ball with anyone.
Id also try tonsee about throwing buddy, parker's expiring and a future 1st and some seconds at detroit to see if they would part with Jerami grant, or at boston to see about parting with Jaylen Brown. Play them at SF and move barnes to 4 and Hali into the 2 spot.
Id also try tonsee about throwing buddy, parker's expiring and a future 1st and some seconds at detroit to see if they would part with Jerami grant, or at boston to see about parting with Jaylen Brown. Play them at SF and move barnes to 4 and Hali into the 2 spot.
The way I would look at Bagley at this moment is wether some team views him even as a slightly positive asset. In theory that would mean offering him as a part of trades like Holmes+Marvin <-> 1st round pick plus maybe something and so on.
The thing to consider with Bagley is his contract. He makes a lot of money and longer he demonstrates negative value, the less the opposing teams will view him as a positive asset instead of a negative one. One thing I also fear (mainly because of Vivek) is extending him to anywhere close to his qualifying offer/his fourth year contract just because of sunk cost fallacy.
Imo there isnt any probable outcomes where he a)drastically improves his trade value next year becuause teams might not be willing to trade anything significant for a guy that they would need to extend, or b) he would become a player that we should extend. For that reason I'm ready to trade him for even a smallish return and use the available cap space for something that is more productive for this franchise.
The thing to consider with Bagley is his contract. He makes a lot of money and longer he demonstrates negative value, the less the opposing teams will view him as a positive asset instead of a negative one. One thing I also fear (mainly because of Vivek) is extending him to anywhere close to his qualifying offer/his fourth year contract just because of sunk cost fallacy.
Imo there isnt any probable outcomes where he a)drastically improves his trade value next year becuause teams might not be willing to trade anything significant for a guy that they would need to extend, or b) he would become a player that we should extend. For that reason I'm ready to trade him for even a smallish return and use the available cap space for something that is more productive for this franchise.
Strongly disagree. Many of the runs thr kings have gone on were when he has been out. Yes offensively he is very gifted (though at this point he should be shooting better from 3), but offense is clearly not the problems for the kings. Plus compare his cost to what he is doing on the floor and the constant complaining from his camp about the kings and his role. He is the worst of the core players by a good margin.
