Kings trade rumor SZN 2023-2024 edition!
- Thread starter Tetsujin
- Start date
Maybe I am looking at it wrong but to get really good players or a all star your going to have to give up something of value. But having said that if we can off load players like Barnes, Mitchell and even Huerter that’s a win for me even taking a hit on the salary side.
A lot of teams have high dollar stars and fill in the rest of the roster with roll players and draft picks anyway. We are not going to be much better at the end of the season by not rolling the dice. A couple of teams already have greatly improved this season by making trades so why not us.
A lot of teams have high dollar stars and fill in the rest of the roster with roll players and draft picks anyway. We are not going to be much better at the end of the season by not rolling the dice. A couple of teams already have greatly improved this season by making trades so why not us.
But if they don’t want to add contacts, how are they supppsed to get better? Not saying that either guy is the answer or that adding a big contract is the best idea, but this team is not a true contender as currently constructed.
Maybe start targeting some cheaper , higher upside guys like Okongwu or cheaper solid role players like Bey.
Maybe start targeting some cheaper , higher upside guys like Okongwu or cheaper solid role players like Bey.
Ya Grant/Thubull or Grant/Brogdan makes us contenders especially if they gel right away. I’m trying to find out if brogan is still a plus defender but his shooting and play making are still good and he can play PG when fox is on the bench (hes shooting 40% from 3 on 5 attempts elite?
I think Grant/Thybull. Hangs this team we are small and can’t matchup vs teams like Boston, NO, and the Clippers. Having wings of Keegan, Thybull, and Grant would make us matchup with every team in the league
I think Grant/Thybull. Hangs this team we are small and can’t matchup vs teams like Boston, NO, and the Clippers. Having wings of Keegan, Thybull, and Grant would make us matchup with every team in the league
Yes, it's the better way to look at it. Ignoring players on minimum contracts, we currently have the following cap percentages committed
'23-'24: 101.3%
'24-'25: 103.7% - No Monk
'25-'26: 87.8% - No Lyles
'26-'27: 28.0% - Fox, Keegan, Barnes, Huerter, Sasha all off the books
So obviously '26-'27 is the year we need to worry about. Presumably we want to sign Monk. Currently his max contract sits somewhere around 14%. If we sign him to the max we can for four years, that's gravy. It's obviously possible that we sign him to a one-year with the intention of using full Bird rights in '25-'26.
For the upcoming three years, Grant is 21%, 20.5%, 20% (this is '26-'27) and then a player option for 19.3%.
If we trade, say, Barnes and change for Grant, then we'll presumably take on a bit of net salary for this year and the next two years, but our extension crunch doesn't actually come up until the third year, and that's where it gets a bit more problematic. Instead of being clear of Barnes/Huerter, we would have Grant still on the books. With Monk at 14%, we'd be paying 62% for three players (Domas, Monk, Grant) while looking to give big money to both Fox and Keegan - presumably at least in the high 20% range each...say 55% between the two, adding up to ~117% for just five players. With Grant not on board we're looking instead at ~97% for four players. Still a crunch, but if the model is "four players, a couple of mid-levels, and fill around with cheap contracts", that may be a better strategy than "five players, maybe no mid-levels, and fill around with cheap contracts".
You know, look at what Barnes is doing for us this year (and look at what Huerter is doing for us this year) and I think it starts to become clear that the #5 guy on the team may not contribute a lot. Do we want to pay Grant to come here, be unhappy about being #5, and get the HB treatment from the board?
We should make whatever moves make sense, but Grant is higher profile, higher salary, higher usage than I want for a guy who is about to become a role player. We need to find our Doug Christie, the glue/defense/passing/floor spreading role player that will be happy at 15% USG. I don't know who that is, but it's probably not a guy who has been stuck on 25% USG the last four years and it can probably be had for well under 20% of the salary cap if you dig the right player out.
'23-'24: 101.3%
'24-'25: 103.7% - No Monk
'25-'26: 87.8% - No Lyles
'26-'27: 28.0% - Fox, Keegan, Barnes, Huerter, Sasha all off the books
So obviously '26-'27 is the year we need to worry about. Presumably we want to sign Monk. Currently his max contract sits somewhere around 14%. If we sign him to the max we can for four years, that's gravy. It's obviously possible that we sign him to a one-year with the intention of using full Bird rights in '25-'26.
For the upcoming three years, Grant is 21%, 20.5%, 20% (this is '26-'27) and then a player option for 19.3%.
If we trade, say, Barnes and change for Grant, then we'll presumably take on a bit of net salary for this year and the next two years, but our extension crunch doesn't actually come up until the third year, and that's where it gets a bit more problematic. Instead of being clear of Barnes/Huerter, we would have Grant still on the books. With Monk at 14%, we'd be paying 62% for three players (Domas, Monk, Grant) while looking to give big money to both Fox and Keegan - presumably at least in the high 20% range each...say 55% between the two, adding up to ~117% for just five players. With Grant not on board we're looking instead at ~97% for four players. Still a crunch, but if the model is "four players, a couple of mid-levels, and fill around with cheap contracts", that may be a better strategy than "five players, maybe no mid-levels, and fill around with cheap contracts".
You know, look at what Barnes is doing for us this year (and look at what Huerter is doing for us this year) and I think it starts to become clear that the #5 guy on the team may not contribute a lot. Do we want to pay Grant to come here, be unhappy about being #5, and get the HB treatment from the board?
We should make whatever moves make sense, but Grant is higher profile, higher salary, higher usage than I want for a guy who is about to become a role player. We need to find our Doug Christie, the glue/defense/passing/floor spreading role player that will be happy at 15% USG. I don't know who that is, but it's probably not a guy who has been stuck on 25% USG the last four years and it can probably be had for well under 20% of the salary cap if you dig the right player out.
The thing about Grant though is he has size and a history of the ability to effect things on defense. I think that combined with the ability to turn around and shoot over the defense, handle a little bit in traffic, and hit 3's on the catch and shoot is what you want if you aren't shooting for all star talent. I mean it depends on who the alternative is but putting guys like Duarte into the starting lineup likely isn't the answer. Or at least it wasn't.
This is getting ridiculous. Soon as the Wiz said they want 2 firsts for Kuz it opened the floodgates, lol. Wouldn't mind DFS but people are legit worried about moving picks for a LaVine/Siakam but will do it for role guys? Uh, no. You can always trade out talent, but if you start finishing things up with role guys at a top dollar price and you end up with a talent need at the end of the day you are essentially done. You have to start moving your core pieces out to hopefully improve. Huerter was a good pickup while he was in his first season, but he's the exact reason you don't hamstring future 1sts for what are essentially role players unless they are your final piece.
If the Wizards are looking for multiple firsts they want one deeper than 26'. Kuz has definite abilities and has aspects of what the Kings certainly need but if the Kings are going to give up what will likely be the last of their real trade assets for this current run it better be for something worth it.
I'm not as much concerned about Grant having skills that will help us, and more concerned with cost and satisfaction. I would love for us to find a way to grab a player who can do some of the things Grant does (presumably not as well, or not with as complete a package), but costs less and will be more willing to play a 5th banana role.
Well, of course you're exactly right on about that but that other option is who? Now if Grant is going to take a major haul to land then Monte probable stands pat but Grant at least on the surface seems like the best of all worlds. If Kuz didn't play like his body is moving faster than his brain half the time he might be as well.
I just don't see what some here are seeing. A Fox / Monk / Kuzma / Murray / Sabonis lineup will decimate all. Who's guarding that? It'll just be Kings players saying "this guy can't guard me". And while we are destroying the league, we'll have a guy who dresses like he's dating a "Born this Way" era Lady Gaga, which completely rules. I like his confidence. I'll take the extra swagger. I feel like Brown excels in the part of coaching that isn't on the floor so I don't worry about buying in being a problem. The problem is that the bench is already uncertain so losing depth will be challenging. But if you can make the dopest starting lineup in the league, it's practically an obligation.
I think it would adding Grant/Thybull takes pressure off of Fox/Sabonis scoring wise making them more efficient. Three point Shooting would still be there with Keegan being elite, Thybull shooting 38% on 4 attempts this and last season, and Grant shooting 40% on five attempts. We’d have five guys who could drop 20 any night that’s elite so on offense I’d expect us to be top 5. Defense Keegan and Grant are very good, add in Thybull who’s already an all nba defender that’s three great wing defenders all 6’8 or taller doesn’t get better than that. Fox should be respectable on defense so our only weak spots would be monk and Sabonis. I’m taking our guys vs any team that doesn’t have Jokic on it
I’d even make the two 1st we give Portland only top 3 projected to get the deal done
I’d even make the two 1st we give Portland only top 3 projected to get the deal done
If we are going to make a significant move, Grant/Thybulle would be my 1st choice.
I’d rather have Thybulle over Brogdon too. We would already have Fox, Monk, Murray, Grant, and Sabonis as shot creators/playmakers. I think his skills and usage would overlap a bit too much for us to really utilize him to his full potential (and then there’s the fact that he makes ~$12 mil more than Thybulle). A low usage, elite defender like Thybulle makes a lot more sense with that core.
I’d rather have Thybulle over Brogdon too. We would already have Fox, Monk, Murray, Grant, and Sabonis as shot creators/playmakers. I think his skills and usage would overlap a bit too much for us to really utilize him to his full potential (and then there’s the fact that he makes ~$12 mil more than Thybulle). A low usage, elite defender like Thybulle makes a lot more sense with that core.