Blow It Up
- Thread starter SLAB
- Start date
Simmons isn’t the only option, nor are picks (although I agree that Simmons is still a unique situation where there’s a young all-NBA guy potentially out there at a discount).
Maybe this is easier said than done, but I’d like to get back to being a team that found guys who were about to break out. A few of us were talking about going for Miles Bridges last year and before. I remember a good amount of talk here about nabbing Van Vleet before he broke out a few years ago. Who’s next? What do we have to lose?
Maybe this is easier said than done, but I’d like to get back to being a team that found guys who were about to break out. A few of us were talking about going for Miles Bridges last year and before. I remember a good amount of talk here about nabbing Van Vleet before he broke out a few years ago. Who’s next? What do we have to lose?
Last edited:
Simmons only because that Philly situation ain't improving anytime soon. There would be motivation on both sides though the Kings will likely have to pay.
If it's not Simmons, I'd rather the Kings go after Sabonis.
I agree with the rest of your statement. I'm all for finding pre-break out gems. Monte has been frustrating, but he does have a good eye for talent.
If it's not Simmons, I'd rather the Kings go after Sabonis.
I agree with the rest of your statement. I'm all for finding pre-break out gems. Monte has been frustrating, but he does have a good eye for talent.
That would be soooo Kangz. At this point, I really don't get Vivek's rationale. Fans aren't coming, because of the on the court product. Covid has put a cap on customers at the Sawyer and their surrounding interests. I believe they have arrangements worked out with their lenders. Freaking tank. This is the window to do so.
"You can't get there from here" has always been one of my favorite expressions. Obviously, you can always get from one place to another, but often there's no direct route between them. That's where the Kings find themselves now. There's no direct path from this mediocre team (the latest in a long line of iterations) to actually being a consistent playoff team or even a contender.
There was a chance. The Suns showed that. Their rebuild from the remnants of the Stoudamire/Marion/Nash team really started in 2012 when they traded Nash to the Lakers. Like the Kings they blew a lot of draft picks. Between 2011 and 2017 they had 11 first rounders. They packaged three of them (2 picks plus Bogdanovic's rights) to the Kings for Marquese Chriss. They used lottery picks on Markieff Morris, Kendall Marshall, Alex Len, Dragan Bender, and Josh Jackson. But in the middle of it they hit on Devin Booker. Not too dissimilar from the Kings hitting on Demarcus Cousins and then later De'Aaron Fox.
But the Suns did three things the Kings have failed to do.
1. They hit on another high pick to compliment their star. Ayton will never be Doncic, but he's a great complimentary piece and has come on strong to show he was a worthy #1 pick in a strong draft.
2. They hired the right coach. The Kings actually did that with Malone before he was run out of town. And possibly Joerger though he seemingly ran himself out of town. They certainly didn't do that with Walton. But Monty Williams has shown he's the right man for Phoenix and they've let him do his job.
3. They traded for the veteran piece they needed and surrounded their core with the wings you need to win in today's NBA. CP3 was by far the biggest difference maker for the Suns. He transformed that team. But Bridges, Crowder, Johnson etc are the type of role players you need around Paul, Booker, and Ayton.
Now they are coming off a finals appearance and just won 17 straight, including last night's victory over the resurgent Warriors.
The Kings could have been a few breaks from a similar tranformation. Hali is a good player but maybe not a great fit with Fox and Mitchell at least looks like a long time NBA player, but neither is the compliment the Kings really need for De'Aaron. Bagley certainly isn't. And instead of balancing the roster with trades the Kings have a glut of guards and bigs and almost no true wings. Which is especially frustrating when it's clear that guys like Hield and Bagley don't have a long term future with the team. Even Barnes is probably gone after next year.
But most of all, the player that they hoped to build around has regressed. We all hoped for Fox to take his game to a higher level this season and instead we're left wondering what's wrong or if he was never the guy we thought he was. It's depressing honestly.
The Kings can't get there from here.
There isn't a piece they can add or a reasonable trade they can make that will turn this roster into a contender. With Fox not looking like a star you can build around and not enough value left in the rest of the roster to trade for a second star there's no path forward.
It's hard to stomach the idea of a full rebuild after so many years of losing but the reality is that it's because this team should have gone that route a long time before.
Tanking last year could have got the Kings Evan Mobley who looks like a transformative player. Or Cade Cunningham or Scottie Barnes. Even Wagner would have been a much better fit for the current team. I like Mitchell, but he's not moving the needle so far.
The Kings have one decent trade chip and a bunch of mediocre ones with no real path for true improvement. It's definitely time to blow it up.
Deal Fox. Deal Barnes. Deal Hield and Bagley if anyone will actually offer anything of value. I love Holmes for his play, his efficiency and his contract, but you deal him if the offer is right too. Hold on to Haliburton and Mitchell (who play well together) and see what you have in low cost flyers like King, Queta, Ramsey, Davis, and Woodard. Maybe nothing. Maybe something. But this team has never allowed itself to be all the way bad. And that's probably the only path to eventually being good.
There was a chance. The Suns showed that. Their rebuild from the remnants of the Stoudamire/Marion/Nash team really started in 2012 when they traded Nash to the Lakers. Like the Kings they blew a lot of draft picks. Between 2011 and 2017 they had 11 first rounders. They packaged three of them (2 picks plus Bogdanovic's rights) to the Kings for Marquese Chriss. They used lottery picks on Markieff Morris, Kendall Marshall, Alex Len, Dragan Bender, and Josh Jackson. But in the middle of it they hit on Devin Booker. Not too dissimilar from the Kings hitting on Demarcus Cousins and then later De'Aaron Fox.
But the Suns did three things the Kings have failed to do.
1. They hit on another high pick to compliment their star. Ayton will never be Doncic, but he's a great complimentary piece and has come on strong to show he was a worthy #1 pick in a strong draft.
2. They hired the right coach. The Kings actually did that with Malone before he was run out of town. And possibly Joerger though he seemingly ran himself out of town. They certainly didn't do that with Walton. But Monty Williams has shown he's the right man for Phoenix and they've let him do his job.
3. They traded for the veteran piece they needed and surrounded their core with the wings you need to win in today's NBA. CP3 was by far the biggest difference maker for the Suns. He transformed that team. But Bridges, Crowder, Johnson etc are the type of role players you need around Paul, Booker, and Ayton.
Now they are coming off a finals appearance and just won 17 straight, including last night's victory over the resurgent Warriors.
The Kings could have been a few breaks from a similar tranformation. Hali is a good player but maybe not a great fit with Fox and Mitchell at least looks like a long time NBA player, but neither is the compliment the Kings really need for De'Aaron. Bagley certainly isn't. And instead of balancing the roster with trades the Kings have a glut of guards and bigs and almost no true wings. Which is especially frustrating when it's clear that guys like Hield and Bagley don't have a long term future with the team. Even Barnes is probably gone after next year.
But most of all, the player that they hoped to build around has regressed. We all hoped for Fox to take his game to a higher level this season and instead we're left wondering what's wrong or if he was never the guy we thought he was. It's depressing honestly.
The Kings can't get there from here.
There isn't a piece they can add or a reasonable trade they can make that will turn this roster into a contender. With Fox not looking like a star you can build around and not enough value left in the rest of the roster to trade for a second star there's no path forward.
It's hard to stomach the idea of a full rebuild after so many years of losing but the reality is that it's because this team should have gone that route a long time before.
Tanking last year could have got the Kings Evan Mobley who looks like a transformative player. Or Cade Cunningham or Scottie Barnes. Even Wagner would have been a much better fit for the current team. I like Mitchell, but he's not moving the needle so far.
The Kings have one decent trade chip and a bunch of mediocre ones with no real path for true improvement. It's definitely time to blow it up.
Deal Fox. Deal Barnes. Deal Hield and Bagley if anyone will actually offer anything of value. I love Holmes for his play, his efficiency and his contract, but you deal him if the offer is right too. Hold on to Haliburton and Mitchell (who play well together) and see what you have in low cost flyers like King, Queta, Ramsey, Davis, and Woodard. Maybe nothing. Maybe something. But this team has never allowed itself to be all the way bad. And that's probably the only path to eventually being good.
Just a short followup to my super long post above. Two things:
1. I would rather watch a promising team full of young talent go 12-70 and feel like there's a future than season after season of 30 win Kings teams.
2. At this point I've been out of California for over 2 years and the lack of any improvement for the Kings just has me at the point where I don't even know if I want to bother following them for a while. At least not until there's some reason to be engaged again. Sports should be a fun distraction and the Kings can't even manage to be that. Clawing their way into a 10th seed just to be eliminated and draft 16th instead of 9-12 won't change that for me.
Vivek can't be dumb enough to think that level of "success" would really re-engage the fan base, can he?
1. I would rather watch a promising team full of young talent go 12-70 and feel like there's a future than season after season of 30 win Kings teams.
2. At this point I've been out of California for over 2 years and the lack of any improvement for the Kings just has me at the point where I don't even know if I want to bother following them for a while. At least not until there's some reason to be engaged again. Sports should be a fun distraction and the Kings can't even manage to be that. Clawing their way into a 10th seed just to be eliminated and draft 16th instead of 9-12 won't change that for me.
Vivek can't be dumb enough to think that level of "success" would really re-engage the fan base, can he?
Simmons as your #2 works great. Dude has warts, but he brings one thing the Kings lack: elite talent. All NBA defense, connector on offense, defends 5 positions, can play him 1-5 on offense. That is a great re-start. And a no brainer. Then tank for Banchero. Kings got their 1 and 2 for the rebuild with Hali and Mitchell.
Love the guy who called into mo and deuce last night. He was an old timer (like me!) and he was talking about kings/lakers games at arco and how he use to fight it out with laker a-holes out in the parking lot. Not saying it was right because of course its not, but his point was kings fans use to have passion, especially when it came to the lakers. Now theres 4-5,000 empty seats and the arena is littered with laker a-holes chanting "lets go lakers" and the fans in attendance are so demoralized that they really don't put up any resistance. Thats insane!
Vivek and his FO have broken the spirit of this fan base and its sad to see.
Vivek and his FO have broken the spirit of this fan base and its sad to see.
Last edited:
They're just a bad team. Bad teams have players that can put up numbers on certain nights but they usually have one thing in common and that is lacking consistency. The closest thing we have to a consistent player is Holmes and Holmes should at the very least be your 4th best player. Fox, Buddy, Hali and Barnes....these guys are all terribly inconsistent. Nearly impossible to get 2 good games in a row out of Buddy. Fox and Hali the same this year. Barnes will give you 2 weeks of good play and then quietly disappear for the next 2 weeks. He's done this ever since he got here.
I didn't want to poo on anyone's parade but that Lakers win the other night was pure luck. Buddy taking and making crazy shots with Fox making nearly all of his low percentage midrange shots. That is not sustainable. It got them a good win and lifted spirits but it was pure luck and is rarely duplicated.
I didn't want to poo on anyone's parade but that Lakers win the other night was pure luck. Buddy taking and making crazy shots with Fox making nearly all of his low percentage midrange shots. That is not sustainable. It got them a good win and lifted spirits but it was pure luck and is rarely duplicated.
I was sitting 4 rows behind the Kings bench last night. When the Lakers run started in the third, there was a mood change where everyone on the bench disengaged. Fox was listless to start the 4th…I thought there was something wrong with him and wondered if he was going to come back in at all.
I agree that this needs to be blown up. I just wish the core of players had a little more fight in them as the ship is sinking. This kind of culture is really hard to change.
I agree that this needs to be blown up. I just wish the core of players had a little more fight in them as the ship is sinking. This kind of culture is really hard to change.
Well, to the eternal shame of the Lakers fans, they hardly made a peep at all - couldn't even tell they were in the building except for the yellow in the seats - until after their team had netted 21 points on us in 7 minutes, and I don't think even then. I don't think it was until they were up 20 in the fourth that they started in in earnest. At that point, I mean, yes the Kings fans were demoralized. We had been up 14 or 15 and looking good and then all of a sudden we were down 20+ and the game was dead. And THEN the opposing fans start chanting? You can't be expected to put up resistance at that point.
Nah, the fans who were meek last night were the Lakers fans, sitting on their hands and being good little spectators until they locked it up, because they knew their team was bad enough that it could cough up almost any lead. Almost. Needed to be up 20 in the fourth to get a little courage up.
Nah, the fans who were meek last night were the Lakers fans, sitting on their hands and being good little spectators until they locked it up, because they knew their team was bad enough that it could cough up almost any lead. Almost. Needed to be up 20 in the fourth to get a little courage up.
Hopefully Vivek finally realizes he needs to butt out and he's actually losing money by trying to push for the 8th seed, rather than let a GM build a contender that will consistently be in the playoffs for 5+ years. The "Monte ball" prospects have shown me more than enough that he's a good judge of talent and assuming we could bottom out this year with a new warchest from Fox/Buddy/Barnes and maybe Holmes that you could turn this around real real fast with Fox/Mitchell already in place.
I think virtually every Kings fan would vastly enjoy watching a rotation of like:
Mitchell
Hali || Ramsey
King || Woodard
Metu || Bagley || Woodard
Len || Queta
and just seeing what those young guys could do. They'll suck, but at least they'll suck properly and we'd give ourselves potentially the chance to see if any of these guys can really spike and be a key contributor in the long-term. It'd certainly be better than watching an 80 mil core max out at being a 35 win team for the 3rd consecutive season and being the 11th worst team in basketball.
I think virtually every Kings fan would vastly enjoy watching a rotation of like:
Mitchell
Hali || Ramsey
King || Woodard
Metu || Bagley || Woodard
Len || Queta
and just seeing what those young guys could do. They'll suck, but at least they'll suck properly and we'd give ourselves potentially the chance to see if any of these guys can really spike and be a key contributor in the long-term. It'd certainly be better than watching an 80 mil core max out at being a 35 win team for the 3rd consecutive season and being the 11th worst team in basketball.
I think owners often underestimate the intelligence of their fan base. Fans aren't dumb. And in one sport towns like Sacramento, Green Bay, Portland etc fans are generally very tuned in and knowledgable. If the Kings made this pivot the fans would understand what the strategy is. Of course, McNair would have to execute on that strategy long term, but I don't think fan support would change much from where it is now. You might even get more engagement. Because at least it would be clear that there's a plan. And a chance for things to get better. Both are lacking right now IMO.
And honestly, I'd rather watch a squad of young scrappy 2nd rounders and 2-way guys along with Hali and Mitchell than what we're seeing now.
And honestly, I'd rather watch a squad of young scrappy 2nd rounders and 2-way guys along with Hali and Mitchell than what we're seeing now.
Keep Holmes, Hali and Mitchell, and maybe Barnes if the reconstituted Kings' team has a chance of winning in the near term. I don't buy into the notion of doing the Philly-like "process" and tearing it down to the studs to just getting draft picks. As capt bill said in a great post, the new drafting odds make such a "process" a losing proposition.
The Kings must get players that work well together and players who consistently put in the effort, especially on defense, in every game. To my mind the team that should be used as a model is New Jersey. Not the NJ of today prior to when Durant, Harden and Irving joined the club. It was a team of mostly no-names (the biggest name was Russell, a cast-off of the Lakers) that worked very hard every game, were well coached, and they seemed to accept their roles gladly rather than despondently. They were very fun to watch and they did get to the playoffs. Once their reputation was established as a very competitive solid club, voila, they got some major free agents. And no, I would not expect the Kings could ever land the caliber of FA of New Jersey, but they could get some very good FAs if they established themselves as a reputable team rather than a joke.
The Kings must get players that work well together and players who consistently put in the effort, especially on defense, in every game. To my mind the team that should be used as a model is New Jersey. Not the NJ of today prior to when Durant, Harden and Irving joined the club. It was a team of mostly no-names (the biggest name was Russell, a cast-off of the Lakers) that worked very hard every game, were well coached, and they seemed to accept their roles gladly rather than despondently. They were very fun to watch and they did get to the playoffs. Once their reputation was established as a very competitive solid club, voila, they got some major free agents. And no, I would not expect the Kings could ever land the caliber of FA of New Jersey, but they could get some very good FAs if they established themselves as a reputable team rather than a joke.
Agreed. Look at the NJ Nets prior to Durant. For the most part they were no-names, but they were tough, played hard, especially on defense, and were well coached. They made the play-offs on their grit more than anything else. To me, there is no reason why the Kings couldn't have a team like that in short order if the GM made up his mind to do it.
One issue is that the Nets were digging out of a hole of not having draft picks etc. They HAD to be scrappy. I also think the long term goal was always to attract big names to Brooklyn. That's not a path the Kings can follow.
As for tearing it down to the studs, the reality is that the Kings don't HAVE anything of real value beyond Fox and Haliburton and De'Aaron has dropped his value with his play so far this season and Tyrese hasn't made a leap either.
Buddy is about to turn 29 and is overpaid though still a great outside shooter that could possibly help a better team to stretch the floor. Barnes is 29 and maybe slightly overpaid but a versatile wing who could help another team but is a FA after next season and not a foundational piece for a rebuilding team. Also, neither fits your goal of putting in great effort or defense every game
I WOULD keep Holmes unless a great deal comes along due to his play and contract (both size and length of his deal)
The Thunder are still taking the Hinkie route of tanking and we'll see how it works out for them. I have a feeling that approach vs the Kings constant minor tooling will lead to OKC being a better team than the Kings in a short period of time.
As for tearing it down to the studs, the reality is that the Kings don't HAVE anything of real value beyond Fox and Haliburton and De'Aaron has dropped his value with his play so far this season and Tyrese hasn't made a leap either.
Buddy is about to turn 29 and is overpaid though still a great outside shooter that could possibly help a better team to stretch the floor. Barnes is 29 and maybe slightly overpaid but a versatile wing who could help another team but is a FA after next season and not a foundational piece for a rebuilding team. Also, neither fits your goal of putting in great effort or defense every game
I WOULD keep Holmes unless a great deal comes along due to his play and contract (both size and length of his deal)
The Thunder are still taking the Hinkie route of tanking and we'll see how it works out for them. I have a feeling that approach vs the Kings constant minor tooling will lead to OKC being a better team than the Kings in a short period of time.
This is also my thinking. Haliburton and Mitchell haven't become accustomed to losing, and they are steals that we were lucky to get. Barnes isn't accustomed to losing either, but he is playing the best basketball of his career right now at age 29. If you plan to get a return on Barnes then he needs to go now. The question is what do you try to bring back in return for some combo of Fox/Buddy/Barnes/Holmes? Draft picks? Large expiring contracts? Both?
I don't believe Fox has dropped in value. As Jones was saying during the game, he talked to a scout who valued Fox highly. Barnes is in his prime and definitely has value. Why should we care if he doesn't have value to a "rebuilding team"? If he's traded he should be of high value to a team in the "playoff hunt" or a "championship hunt."
As for NJ, it's irrelevant why they were scrappy. Does it matter whether you get scrappy out of necessity or out of an outcome you desire? The point is that they were scrappy and it yielded a fun, competitive product. The Kings are in a *better* position than NJ was. If anything, the Kings should come out of this *better* than NJ when they rebuilt, that is if they have a GM up to the job.
The Thunder route is loserville. You don't have to go down that route. With the draft odds being rearranged it's a very iffy proposition to rebuild by intentionally losing. Banking your life on a lottery is loserville, whether it's in the NBA or in real life.
As for NJ, it's irrelevant why they were scrappy. Does it matter whether you get scrappy out of necessity or out of an outcome you desire? The point is that they were scrappy and it yielded a fun, competitive product. The Kings are in a *better* position than NJ was. If anything, the Kings should come out of this *better* than NJ when they rebuilt, that is if they have a GM up to the job.
The Thunder route is loserville. You don't have to go down that route. With the draft odds being rearranged it's a very iffy proposition to rebuild by intentionally losing. Banking your life on a lottery is loserville, whether it's in the NBA or in real life.
Knowing that your only foundational pieces (Mitchell, Haliburton, maybe Holmes) are on team friendly deals for several years, I think you do exactly what OKC did. Deal guys like Barnes, Bagley, and Hield to other teams for their bad contracts and draft capital. Deal Fox for a larger haul similar to what the Bucks gave up for Jrue Holiday though ideally with higher picks.
Then you give the young guys all the minutes they can handle to see what you have there. Best case you have a piece (Queta, King, maybe Ramsey or Metu) that can be a solid rotational guy in the future. I think you'd see great effort but a lot of losses just because of the youth and lack of top tier talent.
You grab a kid like Banchero, Jabari Smith, maybe even Chet Holmgren with your own pick and let Monte continue to find good value with any later 1sts you got via trade.
You'd still have some veterans on bloated contracts for a couple years, but if the team's core next year was:
C Holmes/Queta (assuming there wasn't a great deal worth making for Richaun)
PF Banchero/Metu/Woodard
SF King
SG Haliburton/Ramsey
PG Mitchell
and another 1st rounder or two (Kendell Brown, Damion Collins, Ousmane Dieng, Roko Prkacin, Max Christie and Jabari Walker are some guys I currently like that should be available either late lottery or into the mid to late 20's)
would be a much more balanced and promising team than holding on to Fox, Hield, and Barnes.
Even with a great draft that team will probably be in line for one more lottery pick the next year before turning the corner.
I get Kings fans' reluctance to going this route. Yes, lottery odds have changed a bit, but more than anything I think it's the notion that the Kings have had countless lottery picks and have still managed to be bad. But for an example of what happens when it's done right you can look at the Sonics/Thunder and their drafts of Durant, Westbrook & Ibaka, and James Harden in three consecutive drafts.
OKC built a contending team primarily on the strength of those picks. And even when they had to make a decision between Harden and Ibaka and dealt Harden, they got a ton back for him. It's part of why they had the capital to trade for Paul George and part of why they now have a war chest of picks when they traded Westbrook and PG13. And that's after they lost their best player (KD) for nothing.
Lottery picks are the lifeblood of small market teams. They have to get high picks, but (and this is the point the Kings always miss) they have to HIT on those picks. I mean, even San Antonio's course was largely predicated on two #1 overall picks in Robinson and Duncan. They were masterful about roster building around those two (and later just Duncan) but the foundation were those two picks.
I doubt the Kings will go this route. But I don't see any other way to change the franchise's fortunes at this point. And barring a miracle deal from McNair, everyone on the team magically raising their game several notches, or a Giannis-like late lottery pick, I don't see anything else that's going to keep me from tuning out in the near future. I'm just about there as it is. At least a big gamble rebuild is a strategy.
Then you give the young guys all the minutes they can handle to see what you have there. Best case you have a piece (Queta, King, maybe Ramsey or Metu) that can be a solid rotational guy in the future. I think you'd see great effort but a lot of losses just because of the youth and lack of top tier talent.
You grab a kid like Banchero, Jabari Smith, maybe even Chet Holmgren with your own pick and let Monte continue to find good value with any later 1sts you got via trade.
You'd still have some veterans on bloated contracts for a couple years, but if the team's core next year was:
C Holmes/Queta (assuming there wasn't a great deal worth making for Richaun)
PF Banchero/Metu/Woodard
SF King
SG Haliburton/Ramsey
PG Mitchell
and another 1st rounder or two (Kendell Brown, Damion Collins, Ousmane Dieng, Roko Prkacin, Max Christie and Jabari Walker are some guys I currently like that should be available either late lottery or into the mid to late 20's)
would be a much more balanced and promising team than holding on to Fox, Hield, and Barnes.
Even with a great draft that team will probably be in line for one more lottery pick the next year before turning the corner.
I get Kings fans' reluctance to going this route. Yes, lottery odds have changed a bit, but more than anything I think it's the notion that the Kings have had countless lottery picks and have still managed to be bad. But for an example of what happens when it's done right you can look at the Sonics/Thunder and their drafts of Durant, Westbrook & Ibaka, and James Harden in three consecutive drafts.
OKC built a contending team primarily on the strength of those picks. And even when they had to make a decision between Harden and Ibaka and dealt Harden, they got a ton back for him. It's part of why they had the capital to trade for Paul George and part of why they now have a war chest of picks when they traded Westbrook and PG13. And that's after they lost their best player (KD) for nothing.
Lottery picks are the lifeblood of small market teams. They have to get high picks, but (and this is the point the Kings always miss) they have to HIT on those picks. I mean, even San Antonio's course was largely predicated on two #1 overall picks in Robinson and Duncan. They were masterful about roster building around those two (and later just Duncan) but the foundation were those two picks.
I doubt the Kings will go this route. But I don't see any other way to change the franchise's fortunes at this point. And barring a miracle deal from McNair, everyone on the team magically raising their game several notches, or a Giannis-like late lottery pick, I don't see anything else that's going to keep me from tuning out in the near future. I'm just about there as it is. At least a big gamble rebuild is a strategy.