Who Should We Sign? (2023 Off-Season)

[funkykingston]

I mean, HB isn't a guarantee to come back as of now, even though he said he'd like to.

Depends what you did with that cash. Like could you go grab Josh Hart? Naz Reid? And I don't think it would totally exclude HB from coming back, you probably just wouldn't bring Vezenkov (who isn't a guarantee also to come over).

Definitely.

But if HB doesn't return I'd rather see Monte fill holes via free agency rather than trade a second starter.

I'm guessing the FO feels the same way I do - that preserving as much continuity as possible is probably a better approach than wholesale changes in an effort to make another leap. It's not as fun for us to discuss as fans, but likely the most practical thing to do.

 

[SacTownKid]

Hmm.

Probably like right at the line of us giving up too much, but I'd say yes. Still a pretty massive risk with OG only under contract for 2 more seasons. You'd have to be sure you could reup him with Domas and Monk next off-season.

Fox
Monk
OG
Keegan
Domas

I could absolutely buy that developing into a title contender if you could keep it together. Problem is, I don't think that's enough to get TOR to pick up them phone.

I would try not to include Huerter but I think they really want a pick with value. Keep Huerter and drop in a lightly protected pick a few years away too much? If so, maybe they use Holmes as filler for salary.

 

[sactowndog]

Would you trade Davion, Huerter, #24 and one more first for OG?

Fox Monk
OG Pody
Keegan Edwards
Barnes Sasha
Sabonis Lyles

no way too much for a Role player who will be looking for his next contract in a year. The new CBA makes it imperative you have contributing role players on rookie deals. Keep your firsts.

 

[Hoovtrain]

Read a few execs questioning jist how much value TOR guys like OG and Pascal will have on open market due to contract restraints. I feel like a move like this would be ideal. Yes you are rolling the dice, but you get a top talent without having to mortgage the future. My philosophy would br just get them in house and deal with the rest later.

 

[hrdboild]

Considering how difficult it has been for this franchise to acquire and keep plus defenders, I'm vetoing any deal which includes Davion Mitchell. I also think keeping Kevin Huerter is a good idea since he'd still be valuable for us off the bench as a shooter and secondary playmaker and he has an affordable multi-year contract already.

Siakam and Anunoby are favorite targets of mine too and both of them will be free agents next summer meaning we can get them a year from now without giving up anyone. It doesn't seem like it would be difficult to have a conversation with Sabonis this summer and tell him that we're going to give him a max contract in 2024 after we use our cap space to add an important piece in free agency.

 

[SacTownKid]

Just read an article about the potential for MAJOR NBA shakeups ahead. This is the time to make a franchise changing move. It's better to be too early than too late.

 

[hrdboild]

Just read an article about the potential for MAJOR NBA shakeups ahead. This is the time to make a franchise changing move. It's better to be too early than too late.

This is true in theory, but how many of these major shakeups will result in teams getting better? We've discussed already how many of the top NBA franchises right now are built on the foundation of a core group of aging stars each making $40+ million per year. Those teams are already in desperation mode because they can see their windows closing. On the other hand you've got the lottery teams stockpiling first round picks and hoping one of them develops into a superstar. We're on a different timeline than most franchises at this point and probably shouldn't allow ourselves to get sucked into the maelstrom of win-now panic spending.

 

[SacTownKid]

This is true in theory, but how many of these major shakeups will result in teams getting better? We've discussed already how many of the top NBA franchises right now are built on the foundation of a core group of aging stars each making $40+ million per year. Those teams are already in desperation mode because they can see their windows closing. On the other hand you've got the lottery teams stockpiling first round picks and hoping one of them develops into a superstar. We're on a different timeline than most franchises at this point and probably shouldn't allow ourselves to get sucked into the maelstrom of win-now panic spending.

Number 1, I don't expect anything reckless, but I disagree that the Kings are on a different timeline than teams at least on the cusp of win now because win now to me doesn't mean start making aggressive moves when Fox is 29 or 30. If you ever have a chance to add another all star or star and it makes sense you have to consider it. It could happen, it might not happen, but the league because of potential rules changes and certain teams finally being ready to pull the plug could find itself ready to boost teams right where a team like the Kings are at. The Kings aren't as crunched as some other teams as far as time, but once they went with Fox over Haliburton they're now building around a player on a max contract who is ready to win now with a potential max for Domas quickly on the way. Monk ending next and rookie extensions not too long after. The Kings have two options here. They are confident enough that all they need is time. Nothing more. They have their pieces now. That could be the case, but it could also not be the case. If it isn't, the question then is how do they add to the team without taking steps back in the process by potentially having to move key pieces to take that next step when it's much harder to move said players due to cap restrictions? I've heard 2024, 2024. OK, draw out that cap and find a way to add to the teams core without subtraction. Letting Barnes walk and just pretending it's addition by subtraction is the first step for anything like that to work unless he signs a 1 year deal basically.

 

[sactowndog]

The results of the draft lottery could impact us.


Portland getting the 3rd pick with Charlotte at 2 could be interesting.

Seems they have 2 Choices:

1: take Scoot and trade Dame committing to a rebuild

2: trade 3rd pick and go for it with Dame now…….

If they go with 1 then Grant could open for us……

 

[hrdboild]

Number 1, I don't expect anything reckless, but I disagree that the Kings are on a different timeline than teams at least on the cusp of win now because win now to me doesn't mean start making aggressive moves when Fox is 29 or 30. If you ever have a chance to add another all star or star and it makes sense you have to consider it. It could happen, it might not happen, but the league because of potential rules changes and certain teams finally being ready to pull the plug could find itself ready to boost teams right where a team like the Kings are at. The Kings aren't as crunched as some other teams as far as time, but once they went with Fox over Haliburton they're now building around a player on a max contract who is ready to win now with a potential max for Domas quickly on the way. Monk ending next and rookie extensions not too long after. The Kings have two options here. They are confident enough that all they need is time. Nothing more. They have their pieces now. That could be the case, but it could also not be the case. If it isn't, the question then is how do they add to the team without taking steps back in the process by potentially having to move key pieces to take that next step when it's much harder to move said players due to cap restrictions? I've heard 2024, 2024. OK, draw out that cap and find a way to add to the teams core without subtraction. Letting Barnes walk and just pretending it's addition by subtraction is the first step for anything like that to work unless he signs a 1 year deal basically.

I should clarify that I don't expect the Kings to do nothing. Rather I don't want to see them packaging all of our depth and future assets to go out and chase a star who is ultimately just going to take shots away from Fox/Monk/Sabonis/Murray. If we do get another star, it better be a star who plays defense and fits Mike Brown's offense (ie they help to space the floor or create well for others). If we have to give up depth to do that there should be a plan in place to add talent back over time and it's really hard to do that if the star in question is late in their career, absurdly expensive, and/or costs all of our future picks. I'm in favor of the right win-now move if it comes up and understand that it might not come up this year.

 

[SacTownKid]

I should clarify that I don't expect the Kings to do nothing. Rather I don't want to see them packaging all of our depth and future assets to go out and chase a star who is ultimately just going to take shots away from Fox/Monk/Sabonis/Murray. If we do get another star, it better be a star who plays defense and fits Mike Brown's offense (ie they help to space the floor or create well for others). If we have to give up depth to do that there should be a plan in place to add talent back over time and it's really hard to do that if the star in question is late in their career, absurdly expensive, and/or costs all of our future picks. I'm in favor of the right win-now move if it comes up and understand that it might not come up this year.

Monk did a good job in the playoffs. Is he capable of being a teams 3rd guy though? And if not how much is he worth? Murray? There's potential still. Monte will be staking his career one way or the other on that if one of those right "win now" moves is available whether he pulls the trigger or not. He's given no F's either way before though so I expect no sweat from him if and when the time comes. I brought it up during the season, the Kings shot distribution during the season was a little too spread out, and it didn't translate to post season. History is the guiding light and the only recent team with legit success that had a shot distribution like that were the mid 2000's Pistons. One of the most dynamic defensive teams in history. During the season you had Fox at 18, in the playoffs he had no choice but to push up to around 23-24 because he was all they had most of the time. Monk stepped into that role of 2nd/3rd guy and the results varied in the up and down fashion you'd expect. Domas even pushed up to 14 or so. The teams that are usually at the end have a consolidated shot chart with 2-3 or so players really taking on the onus of their teams offense. Even the ones that don't have a clear separation somewhere around player 3 or 4.

 

[hrdboild]

Monk did a good job in the playoffs. Is he capable of being a teams 3rd guy though? And if not how much is he worth? Murray? There's potential still. Monte will be staking his career one way or the other on that if one of those right "win now" moves is available whether he pulls the trigger or not. He's given no F's either way before though so I expect no sweat from him if and when the time comes. I brought it up during the season, the Kings shot distribution during the season was a little too spread out, and it didn't translate to post season. History is the guiding light and the only recent team with legit success that had a shot distribution like that were the mid 2000's Pistons. One of the most dynamic defensive teams in history. During the season you had Fox at 18, in the playoffs he had no choice but to push up to around 23-24 because he was all they had most of the time. Monk stepped into that role of 2nd/3rd guy and the results varied in the up and down fashion you'd expect. Domas even pushed up to 14 or so. The teams that are usually at the end have a consolidated shot chart with 2-3 or so players really taking on the onus of their teams offense. Even the ones that don't have a clear separation somewhere around player 3 or 4.

We don't have to win the same way any other team has won -- real history is rarely written by plagiarizing the past. I don't think there's any way this season could have gone better for the Kings. Coach of the Year, two guys on an All-NBA team, a RoY runner-up who broke the 3pt shooting record and showed well in his first playoff series. And they pushed the defending champs to 7 games. This team already has enough #2 and #3 options to average 120 points per game. The only thing they were missing this year was someone to knock Dray and Looney on their backsides.

 

[SacTownKid]

We don't have to win the same way any other team has won -- real history is rarely written by plagiarizing the past. I don't think there's any way this season could have gone better for the Kings. Coach of the Year, two guys on an All-NBA team, a RoY runner-up who broke the 3pt shooting record and showed well in his first playoff series. And they pushed the defending champs to 7 games. This team already has enough #2 and #3 options to average 120 points per game. The only thing they were missing this year was someone to knock Dray and Looney on their backsides.

I think it was more than that, and yes, this is why I cited that distribution chart during the year. Open shots being missed aside, that best of all time offensive team dropped to 12th in net rating come playoff time, and yes, the playoffs are still a different beast than the regular season. Lesson learned. And unless you are the one staring down from the top of the mountain, you cheat off of anyones homework that is on top. The NBA has never been any different. At least you better find a way to counter them should it come to that. Just like the players you build around, it's fairly monochromatic. Look at the top 25 scorers and G skills are the primary factor you see. From PG to C. Trends decide almost everything. Look at the Warriors run which really started with the Nash era Suns. Teams eventually caught up with a similar style including the Kings.

 

[The_Jamal]

Monk did a good job in the playoffs. Is he capable of being a teams 3rd guy though? And if not how much is he worth? Murray? There's potential still. Monte will be staking his career one way or the other on that if one of those right "win now" moves is available whether he pulls the trigger or not. He's given no F's either way before though so I expect no sweat from him if and when the time comes. I brought it up during the season, the Kings shot distribution during the season was a little too spread out, and it didn't translate to post season. History is the guiding light and the only recent team with legit success that had a shot distribution like that were the mid 2000's Pistons. One of the most dynamic defensive teams in history. During the season you had Fox at 18, in the playoffs he had no choice but to push up to around 23-24 because he was all they had most of the time. Monk stepped into that role of 2nd/3rd guy and the results varied in the up and down fashion you'd expect. Domas even pushed up to 14 or so. The teams that are usually at the end have a consolidated shot chart with 2-3 or so players really taking on the onus of their teams offense. Even the ones that don't have a clear separation somewhere around player 3 or 4.

One of my hot-takes of this off-season is I think he actually can be. He flashed offensive hub potential all regular season and it really all came together in the playoffs. Offensive creation, shooting, playmaking, getting to the Free throw line. He just straight up looked like an elite offensive player in any facet.

And I hate this stat, but it does kind of illustrate the point I want to make here. His per 36 between the playoffs and regular season were very very close.

per 36/regular season
21.8 PPG
6.2 APG
4.3 RPG
4.3 FTA/game

Per 36/Playoffs:
23.4 PPG
4.4 APG
6.7 RPG
8.6 FTA/game (woah)


And at 29.3 MPG in the playoffs, he did show he could sustain that level of production to an extent. So the real key is can he attack the rim and draw fouls at the same rate in the regular season that he did in the playoffs? Was that something he unlocked? Because if it is, he's every bit the Brad Beal/Zach Lavine type of 2 guard offensive hub without having to gut our team to go acquire or keep him. Even if that isn't sustainable, I think he's shown enough comfort with the ball in his hands that he could easily be a 20-5-4 on great efficiency type guy if given the role.

And maybe even more importantly to what you keep pointing out; someone who can create when the DHO system fails. Huerter/Barnes/Keegan and even Domas all crumbled outside of in the playoffs. Fox and Monk were the only guys able to operate off their own bounce and make something happen.

 

[hrdboild]

I think it was more than that, and yes, this is why I cited that distribution chart during the year. Open shots being missed aside, that best of all time offensive team dropped to 12th in net rating come playoff time, and yes, the playoffs are still a different beast than the regular season. Lesson learned. And unless you are the one staring down from the top of the mountain, you cheat off of anyones homework that is on top. The NBA has never been any different. At least you better find a way to counter them should it come to that. Just like the players you build around, it's fairly monochromatic. Look at the top 25 scorers and G skills are the primary factor you see. From PG to C. Trends decide almost everything. Look at the Warriors run which really started with the Nash era Suns. Teams eventually caught up with a similar style including the Kings.

Considering we were either one quarter or one shot away from advancing, depending on how you look at it, I'm not going to write this year off as a playoff failure. If Huerter and/or Barnes make a reasonable amount of the same shots they were making all year this series is over before we even get to Game 7. And no that wasn't "playoff intensity defense" from the Warriors -- those guys were missing wide open shots.

 

[SacTownKid]

One of my hot-takes of this off-season is I think he actually can be. He flashed offensive hub potential all regular season and it really all came together in the playoffs. Offensive creation, shooting, playmaking, getting to the Free throw line. He just straight up looked like an elite offensive player in any facet.

And I hate this stat, but it does kind of illustrate the point I want to make here. His per 36 between the playoffs and regular season were very very close.

per 36/regular season
21.8 PPG
6.2 APG
4.3 RPG
4.3 FTA/game

Per 36/Playoffs:
23.4 PPG
4.4 APG
6.7 RPG
8.6 FTA/game (woah)


And at 29.3 MPG in the playoffs, he did show he could sustain that level of production to an extent. So the real key is can he attack the rim and draw fouls at the same rate in the regular season that he did in the playoffs? Was that something he unlocked? Because if it is, he's every bit the Brad Beal/Zach Lavine type of 2 guard offensive hub without having to gut our team to go acquire or keep him. Even if that isn't sustainable, I think he's shown enough comfort with the ball in his hands that he could easily be a 20-5-4 on great efficiency type guy if given the role.

Monk was obviously huge come playoff time considering playoff ball is all pick and roll and both he and Fox are clearly the most dynamic in that on the team but he's also quite erratic. It's a question as to sustainability and is it one that compels you to not do something should it become available? Monk's production is good. His net ratings historically are a little more flat numbers production level. This was by far his best season overall to compare to a LaVine, Beal, etc. That said they've had better seasons for sure, and more of them. His numbers look a little closer to a Poole type than the other guys. Part of that could be bench role oriented. It's close, could improve maybe, but close can sometimes still be too far. I liked Browns usage of sparkplug off the bench and it certainly seemed to put his own game into a positive area.

 

[The_Jamal]

Monk was obviously huge come playoff time considering playoff ball is all pick and roll and both he and Fox are clearly the most dynamic in that on the team but he's also quite erratic. It's a question as to sustainability and is it one that compels you to not do something should it become available? Monk's production is good. His net ratings historically are a little more flat numbers production level. This was by far his best season overall to compare to a LaVine, Beal, etc. That said they've had better seasons for sure, and more of them. His numbers look a little closer to a Poole type than the other guys. Part of that could be bench role oriented. It's close, could improve maybe, but close can sometimes still be too far. I liked Browns usage of sparkplug off the bench and it certainly seemed to put his own game into a positive area.

Basically I'd much much rather just bet on Monk continuing to ascend with his chemistry with Fox/Domas than spend any assets to get an overpriced Beal or Lavine in that role. Monk in a 30 MPG role vs Beal and Lavine next season isn't near worth what it would take to acquire either of them (assuming 2 FRP at the very least and Huerter to match salary).

 

[SacTownKid]

Considering we were either one quarter or one shot away from advancing, depending on how you look at it, I'm not going to write this year off as a playoff failure. If Huerter and/or Barnes make a reasonable amount of the same shots they were making all year this series is over before we even get to Game 7. And no that wasn't "playoff intensity defense" from the Warriors -- those guys were missing wide open shots.

Neither am I. It turns to failure if you ignore the result though and that whole crop of teams that still appear to be above you. Which they are at least now by the results. Those don't lie. As for the Warriors, there's plenty of game thread to follow but the Kings were forced out of the DHO system at times. And yes, that was by design, from the defense the Warriors played and yes, it worked when they did it. How do you know? Because that shot distribution chart from the regular season? It transformed into one that mirrors that history we're talking about. Fox had to take on almost ALL the load, Domas ate more, and Monk munched. The rest fell down in the pack as those 3 created.

 

[SacTownKid]

Basically I'd much much rather just bet on Monk continuing to ascend with his chemistry with Fox/Domas than spend any assets to get an overpriced Beal or Lavine in that role. Monk in a 30 MPG role vs Beal and Lavine next season isn't near worth what it would take to acquire either of them (assuming 2 FRP at the very least and Huerter to match salary).

I don't know, I think LaVine could work with Monk and Fox. He has enough size to spot at the 3. Plus unless the idea is for Monk to become the full time starter he's still the teams bench ignitor moving forward. Beal would be a tougher sell unless Monk continues in this role.

 

[hrdboild]

Neither am I. It turns to failure if you ignore the result though and that whole crop of teams that still appear to be above you. Which they are at least now by the results. Those don't lie. As for the Warriors, there's plenty of game thread to follow but the Kings were forced out of the DHO system at times. And yes, that was by design, from the defense the Warriors played and yes, it worked when they did it. How do you know? Because that shot distribution chart from the regular season? It transformed into one that mirrors that history we're talking about. Fox had to take on almost ALL the load, Domas ate more, and Monk munched. The rest fell down in the pack as those 3 created.

And yet they still won 3 games and very nearly won a 4th. You get to run around with your "Kings still lost -- we need more" flag if you want and I'm not even disagreeing with you. I just don't think they're in a position now where failure to add a big piece will have them moving backward. How much more All-In could the Suns, Lakers, Warriors, or Clippers be than they are right now? What level of shakeup is possible in the Western Conference which pushes us out of the playoffs entirely? It's quite possible we'll spend the next 4 or 5 years losing in the playoffs. That's the NBA. We need to keep building to make sure we stay there but my point is simply that we should be careful of how much we subtract from this year's winning formula too.

 

[SacTownKid]

And yet they still won 3 games and very nearly won a 4th. You get to run around with your "Kings still lost -- we need more" flag if you want and I'm not even disagreeing with you. I just don't think they're in a position now where failure to add a big piece will have them moving backward. How much more All-In could the Suns, Lakers, Warriors, or Clippers be than they are right now? What level of shakeup is possible in the Western Conference which pushes us out of the playoffs entirely? It's quite possible we'll spend the next 4 or 5 years losing in the playoffs. That's the NBA. We need to keep building to make sure we stay there but my point is simply that we should be careful of how much we subtract from this year's winning formula too.

Then what is the argument here? They did lose. 4 of 5 at the end to a team that went out in 6 in the next round to one of those teams that went from the dumpster to WCF. If that didn't happen this wouldn't even be a discussion, but it did, and all teams have to deal with that. And yes, I think they do need more. Almost every team does. The results ended up following that exact trajectory history suggested in terms of the offense and needs to be factored into whatever anyone thinks about the team as it is. And for sure, it could have been a fluke, bad matchup, whatever, but as of now it's all the data they have to go on. Yeah, they won 3 games with a team that basically played more like a team with 3 stars rather than one with an even shot distribution rarely seen.

I'll say it again, I'm not viewing it in a negative way, the exact opposite in fact. I think that Kings are THAT CLOSE. Fox and Domas are THAT good. I'm not at all viewing this as the Kings getting pushed out of the playoffs, I mean, it could happen who knows, but the question is how to get to that top 5-6 who actually have a shot next year? Fox and Domas need help whether that improvement is internal or external, and that was basically Monte's tone in his end of season presser. Monte believe it or not, while he did get a huge payoff with some of his moves the reality is, someone like Monk is a cotractual ticking time bomb possibly. It's already been covered by now but this iteration of this team is one that will either be what it is for the long haul, or this little bit of flexibility Monte has with Barnes ending could be used a catalyst to make a move. We shall see. Very rarely does what might happen around the NBA this summer come around, if it even does. If it does, Monte needs to be lined up with everyone else and if his tenure in any indication, he likely will be.

 

[hrdboild]

Then what is the argument here? They did lose. 4 of 5 at the end to a team that went out in 6 in the next round to one of those teams that went from the dumpster to WCF. If that didn't happen this wouldn't even be a discussion, but it did, and all teams have to deal with that. And yes, I think they do need more. Almost every team does. The results ended up following that exact trajectory history suggested in terms of the offense and needs to be factored into whatever anyone thinks about the team as it is. And for sure, it could have been a fluke, bad matchup, whatever, but as of now it's all the data they have to go on. Yeah, they won 3 games with a team that basically played more like a team with 3 stars rather than one with an even shot distribution rarely seen.

I'll say it again, I'm not viewing it in a negative way, the exact opposite in fact. I think that Kings are THAT CLOSE. Fox and Domas are THAT good. I'm not at all viewing this as the Kings getting pushed out of the playoffs, I mean, it could happen who knows, but the question is how to get to that top 5-6 who actually have a shot next year? Fox and Domas need help whether that improvement is internal or external, and that was basically Monte's tone in his end of season presser. Monte believe it or not, while he did get a huge payoff with some of his moves the reality is, someone like Monk is a cotractual ticking time bomb possibly. It's already been covered by now but this iteration of this team is one that will either be what it is for the long haul, or this little bit of flexibility Monte has with Barnes ending could be used a catalyst to make a move. We shall see. Very rarely does what might happen around the NBA this summer come around, if it even does. If it does, Monte needs to be lined up with everyone else and if his tenure in any indication, he likely will be.

I don't think the Kings need another star to put them over the top. I also don't think they need to add another iso specialist to succeed in the playoffs. Yes the playoffs have skewed in that direction and what we saw in the Warriors series reinforces that but we also saw the Kings nearly win with Fox and Monk as their only iso scorers surrounded by a bunch of guys who knock down shots when the ball is swung to them. And Fox was not at 100% for the last 3 games of the series anyway.

If we're subtracting Barnes because of contract demands, I want to see us adding an interior scorer and offensive rebounder (probably the same player) so that we're less dependent on making threes and a perimeter defender who can take matchups that Davion is too small to handle. That's it. Get the right pieces not a big name. If there's a deal to be made for someone like OG Anunoby that doesn't involve a truckload of picks, another starter, and our only good defender than sure I'm all for that. But if the major shakeup you're alluding to becomes reality, we'll probably see the bidding for the few difference makers available on the trade block continue to go through the roof. There comes a point where the cost of acquisition outweighs the benefit.

 

[LPKingsFan]

I don't know, I think LaVine could work with Monk and Fox. He has enough size to spot at the 3. Plus unless the idea is for Monk to become the full time starter he's still the teams bench ignitor moving forward. Beal would be a tougher sell unless Monk continues in this role.

I will admit, there is a part of me intrigued by the idea of LaVine. I was surprised to see he has a better career 3pt% than Barnes. Plus, given his athleticism, I wonder if there’s a decent defender in there that Mike Brown could unlock, like he did with Wiggins.

 

[SacTownKid]

I don't think the Kings need another star to put them over the top. I also don't think they need to add another iso specialist to succeed in the playoffs. Yes the playoffs have skewed in that direction and what we saw in the Warriors series reinforces that but we also saw the Kings nearly win with Fox and Monk as their only iso scorers surrounded by a bunch of guys who knock down shots when the ball is swung to them. And Fox was not at 100% for the last 3 games of the series anyway.

If we're subtracting Barnes because of contract demands, I want to see us adding an interior scorer and offensive rebounder (probably the same player) so that we're less dependent on making threes and a perimeter defender who can take matchups that Davion is too small to handle. That's it. Get the right pieces not a big name. If there's a deal to be made for someone like OG Anunoby that doesn't involve a truckload of picks, another starter, and our only good defender than sure I'm all for that. But if the major shakeup you're alluding to becomes reality, we'll probably see the bidding for the few difference makers available on the trade block continue to go through the roof. There comes a point where the cost of acquisition outweighs the benefit.

They did almost win, but how far is up with that? I think with a Fox and Domas, some of the pieces Monte scored this team might not be far away from contending NOW if they can maximize things. It certainly depends on the name, and value but I'm just totally against the approach of just sticking it out as some seem to think as a viable option. At the very least they need to bring over Sasha and factor in more offense outside of the system for someone like Keegan if Monte is confident. It's certainly possible that the Kings offense didn't transition into postseason for another reason but Monte can't ignore that his team struggled to find that next guy until Monk eventually took on the role but definitely in his very up and down style. As said, he's not here long term at this point so factor that into the cap as well. Not to mention that if Monk's that guy then it's a question of how do you maximize your best shot creators in Fox and Monk along with your best defender in Davion? I can't see that trio getting many minutes against a team like LA, or Boston, or Denver, or Phoenix unless the Kings can just flat out blaze by them offensively. The main reason to me that the Kings do need a legit 3rd, or a really good 3rd and 4th is because of Domas. He's more this teams PG than scorer and when called upon he has shown he'll top out when it comes to attempts. That means those attempts are either put over on Fox's plate or a lesser talent. The Warriors are a good comp in the sense how how they build their teams. Because of Draymond being their PG (like Domas although Domas is a better scorer than Dray), and Klay being their "system" guy, they are always very intent on adding another scorer or two. Once it was KD. Now it's Wiggins (to many fans dismay about his value at one point) and Poole. Can Murray be this teams Wiggins and Monk be this teams Poole? Perhaps. The real question is whether or not it's enough to begin with. It wasn't for the Warriors this season.

 

[Warhawk]

And Fox was not at 100% for the last 3 games of the series anyway.

Not at 100% is an understatement when describing a broken finger.

Also, our other all-star had a broken finger, chest contusion, and a shiner the size of Rhode Island. I'd say he wasn't even at 95% either.

When your two all-stars are playing hurt like that, it greatly diminishes your chances of winning. Or so I've heard.

 

[Tetsujin]

I will admit, there is a part of me intrigued by the idea of LaVine. I was surprised to see he has a better career 3pt% than Barnes. Plus, given his athleticism, I wonder if there’s a decent defender in there that Mike Brown could unlock, like he did with Wiggins.

LaVine's not quite the athlete he once was though and is 28 years old with a history of lower body issues and more importantly is getting paid 40 million dollars per season over the next four years. If we trade for LaVine, that, for all intents and purporses, is pretty much our version of the T-Wolves Gobert trade for better or worse.

 

[LPKingsFan]

LaVine's not quite the athlete he once was though and is 28 years old with a history of lower body issues and more importantly is getting paid 40 million dollars per season over the next four years. If we trade for LaVine, that, for all intents and purporses, is pretty much our version of the T-Wolves Gobert trade for better or worse.

Oh, no question, I’d only consider it if the contract and injury concerns heavily discounted the price.

I just remember seeing a post the other day about who could be our Aaron Gordon, and thought, who could be our Andrew Wiggins?

 

[Stan.Helsing]

I just remember seeing a post the other day about who could be our Aaron Gordon, and thought, who could be our Andrew Wiggins?

That is a very good question as this team really does need a lead defender on Forwards. Someone with strength, foot speed, good length and wingspan.

I'm not sure how you came to Zach Lavine as a potential answer to that question though.

He would be a replacement for or upgrade on Huerter, and then you would still need that defensive 3 or 4 (depending on whether you think Murray is a 3 or 4).

 

[LPKingsFan]

That is a very good question as this team really does need a lead defender on Forwards. Someone with strength, foot speed, good length and wingspan.

I'm not sure how you came to Zach Lavine as a potential answer to that question though.

Well, the thought process was that Wiggins was an elite athlete oversold and overcompensated as a #1 option (which made him more easily attainable) but who had latent defensive potential that Brown could unlock. LaVine has some similarities with the first couple points, although only Brown would know about the latter point! Agree that Wiggins is a better fit at 3 than LaVine, though.

 

[SacTownKid]

LaVine's not quite the athlete he once was though and is 28 years old with a history of lower body issues and more importantly is getting paid 40 million dollars per season over the next four years. If we trade for LaVine, that, for all intents and purporses, is pretty much our version of the T-Wolves Gobert trade for better or worse.

If Gobert put up star numbers like LaVine he'd still be in Utah. That 40 million is going somewhere at some point anyway, and sooner than later, so there are much worse things than it going to a player capable of putting up 25 a game and giving Fox a chance to literally not have to break himself just to make it a competitive first round. But yeah, LaVine breaking the bank value wise probably shouldn't happen but it's a fine line with him. He's going to have some degree of value for sure. It sounds like the Bulls might be content just sticking it out and being mediocre however.