Potential Free agent/trade/sign tracker
- Thread starter iowamcnabb
- Start date
I never said I wanted Kuzma so that point isn’t really resonating in this conversation we’re having.
Also, not wanting Randle =/= I want to over rely on the DHO.
With how punishing the new cap rules are (and considering we’re a small market team), it’ll be that much more important to build a team that complements each other. Randle doesn’t fit that description.
Also, not wanting Randle =/= I want to over rely on the DHO.
With how punishing the new cap rules are (and considering we’re a small market team), it’ll be that much more important to build a team that complements each other. Randle doesn’t fit that description.
I think anyone that can get this team buckets when it counts fits at this point. I mean, as long as they aren't a super small G of course. If I were personally able to choose between the two, Grant has always been higher on my personal list. But a free LaVine in a worst case should be an option. Especially if as I said, that same amount of money is sitting in players fading from your rotation and not filling that glaring need anyway.
And I disagree for the reasons I stated above. And anything that doesn't improve the teams ability to score outside of the DHO consistently and especially against size causes an over reliance on the DHO so it really doesn't matter. That's just pure fact unless someone other than Fox currently on the roster steps up and fills that void. Murray is still probably the best option there.
And it doesn't mean that he isn't. If Monte is waiting for the "perfect" fit, good luck. He'll be waiting awhile. Sometimes you have to change up some things and getting as close to filling needs isn't always a bad thing. Ask the C's with KP, the Pacers with Siakam, the Mavs with Irving. There are no guarantees but you always want to be ahead of the game as a GM and usually the clearest vision of what that game is is based on talent level. If you start looking at All Star talent, you're probably headed in the right direction there if there is a positional hole for them to slide into.
You're just missing the point that LaVine isn't in the same tier of player as these guys. Current version of Beal isn't/wasn't either.
Those dudes are all movers. Yes, there was downside (KP injuries, Siakam contract, Irving...showing up?), but the best case scenario was always them getting a stud. That's not LaVine.
Those dudes are all movers. Yes, there was downside (KP injuries, Siakam contract, Irving...showing up?), but the best case scenario was always them getting a stud. That's not LaVine.
Oh but I’m making the claim that he isn’t the answer.
You can diagnose a problem accurately but it doesn’t necessarily mean you have the correct solution. I’m not disagreeing with your assessment of the problem, but I am disagreeing if you think Randle is the answer.
I never said we need to find the “perfect” fit. I’m basically making the claim that Randle is far from the perfect fit. Those aren’t the same thing.
As for KP, Siakam, and Irving, I can easily argue that those guys are solid fits on their respective teams. I can’t say the same for Randle on this team.
You can diagnose a problem accurately but it doesn’t necessarily mean you have the correct solution. I’m not disagreeing with your assessment of the problem, but I am disagreeing if you think Randle is the answer.
I never said we need to find the “perfect” fit. I’m basically making the claim that Randle is far from the perfect fit. Those aren’t the same thing.
As for KP, Siakam, and Irving, I can easily argue that those guys are solid fits on their respective teams. I can’t say the same for Randle on this team.
And I just don't understand how a major talent upgrade at a position of need, with skills your team could use, isn't a solid fit. The Kings two openings are around Fox, Domas, and Murray at this point. The Kings need someone to take pressure off of Fox to create iso looks. Does Randle not fit both of these descriptions to a T?
He doesn't when you account for negative defensive value and scoring efficiency (Randle takes a lot of shots and doesn't make enough of them to justify lowering everyone else's opportunities). Randle puts points on the board but he also gives them back. And it's significant that New York got better this season when he was out injured. Sometimes the right role-player in the right role ends up improving the team more than a major talent who is miscast as a plug and play solution to a problem they don't really fix. For us that problem is rim protection (not just iso shot creation).
I do agree with you that the Kings need another iso scorer besides Fox, Monk, and the DHO game with Sabonis. We saw extended injuries to Fox and Monk this year which combined probably cost the Kings enough wins to keep them out of the playoffs. But I don't think we need to get that from the starting lineup. We're not going to find an imaginary unicorn iso scoring PF who is also a switchable plus defender. What we need to find instead is another player who can generate offense off the dribble, a post defending specialist, and a playable two-way wing who can handle the same types of defensive assignments Keegan has been handling every night. That might be two or three different players -- it's highly unlikely to all come from one player.
Speaking of which... after this season I'm less married to the idea that Keegan needs to be the full-time starting SF. I saw him hold his own on defense against guys around his size and even slightly bigger who primarily play PF for their teams. The league as a whole has gone to smaller, quicker lineups with only a few exceptions. Case in point, Boston has been getting away with playing Tatum at the PF spot for years and he's the same size or smaller than Keegan. If we can find that perfect defensive fit at PF and keep Keegan more on the wing, great. If we have the opportunity to add another combo forward and play Keegan as more of a smallish PF, just as well. So long as we have multi-positional defenders on the bench that we can mix and match as needed based on matchups, I think either role would work for him.
I do agree with you that the Kings need another iso scorer besides Fox, Monk, and the DHO game with Sabonis. We saw extended injuries to Fox and Monk this year which combined probably cost the Kings enough wins to keep them out of the playoffs. But I don't think we need to get that from the starting lineup. We're not going to find an imaginary unicorn iso scoring PF who is also a switchable plus defender. What we need to find instead is another player who can generate offense off the dribble, a post defending specialist, and a playable two-way wing who can handle the same types of defensive assignments Keegan has been handling every night. That might be two or three different players -- it's highly unlikely to all come from one player.
Speaking of which... after this season I'm less married to the idea that Keegan needs to be the full-time starting SF. I saw him hold his own on defense against guys around his size and even slightly bigger who primarily play PF for their teams. The league as a whole has gone to smaller, quicker lineups with only a few exceptions. Case in point, Boston has been getting away with playing Tatum at the PF spot for years and he's the same size or smaller than Keegan. If we can find that perfect defensive fit at PF and keep Keegan more on the wing, great. If we have the opportunity to add another combo forward and play Keegan as more of a smallish PF, just as well. So long as we have multi-positional defenders on the bench that we can mix and match as needed based on matchups, I think either role would work for him.
if we’re extremely intent on improving our PF spot by going for Randle for some reason I’d much rather just try swinging a trade for Bobby Portis, who the Bucks are apparently intent on trading this summer despite him constantly looking awesome every single minute he plays for them and only makes like a third of what Randle makes.
now I have absolutely no clue what the possible market for Portis looks like considering how good his contract is and how good of a player he is and I’m sure all 28 other teams also have offers primed for him but just considering the Bucks need for depth AND a point of attack defender who isn’t PatBev, I wonder if we can get them to bite on a Sasha (your classic mystery box “We can make him work” situation from a roster building perspective) and Davion(capable of running Doc’s pick and roll heavy schemes on offense while also helping make up for the fact the Bucks are intent on dismantling their elite back line defense for some reason too) and draft compensation (in this case I chose our second round picks from this year and next year but I’d be willing to increase the number of picks/give up the Portland second rounder from next season to make it work but would not budge on not including the 13th pick this year). Probably not the strongest offer the Bucks would get for a Portis deal but we just saw the Bulls trade Caruso for Josh Giddey so stranger decisions have been made.
Sabonis/Goga(signed with tax payer MLE?)/Len
Portis/Lyles/Slawson
Keegan/HB/13th overall (Holland/TDS)/Duarte
Keon/Huerter/Colby
Fox/Monk/Mason Jones
is already a much deeper squad than last season and you could still swing HB and Huerter for more pieces as well.
now I have absolutely no clue what the possible market for Portis looks like considering how good his contract is and how good of a player he is and I’m sure all 28 other teams also have offers primed for him but just considering the Bucks need for depth AND a point of attack defender who isn’t PatBev, I wonder if we can get them to bite on a Sasha (your classic mystery box “We can make him work” situation from a roster building perspective) and Davion(capable of running Doc’s pick and roll heavy schemes on offense while also helping make up for the fact the Bucks are intent on dismantling their elite back line defense for some reason too) and draft compensation (in this case I chose our second round picks from this year and next year but I’d be willing to increase the number of picks/give up the Portland second rounder from next season to make it work but would not budge on not including the 13th pick this year). Probably not the strongest offer the Bucks would get for a Portis deal but we just saw the Bulls trade Caruso for Josh Giddey so stranger decisions have been made.
Sabonis/Goga(signed with tax payer MLE?)/Len
Portis/Lyles/Slawson
Keegan/HB/13th overall (Holland/TDS)/Duarte
Keon/Huerter/Colby
Fox/Monk/Mason Jones
is already a much deeper squad than last season and you could still swing HB and Huerter for more pieces as well.
Roster construction is more important than ever in today's NBA. Both because the new cap rules severely punish teams and because never in NBA history has creating space and defending space been more important than it is today.
The idea that the Kings can just take on a bunch of salary to add guys that don't neatly fit with the overarching concepts on offense and defense is ludicrous. Randle would negatively impact spacing, make a poor defense worse, and not fit within the flow of what the Kings are trying to do. What exactly does he do that would elevate this Kings team?
hrdboild is right - this shouldn't be about finding a discount "star" regardless of fit - it should be about carefully adding pieces that improve the overall team. Enough depth to weather a long regular season, but really focused on the ideal 8 or 9 man rotation for the post season.
The four building blocks are Fox, Domas, Murray, and Monk. So what do you need around them? I'd argue that you want two 3&D players in the starting lineup, a scoring wing and/or big off the bench to help Monk in the second unit, and a high level backup center, ideally one that can swing between the 4/5.
If Keon is your starting SG, then you need a 3&D guy at either the PF spot (ideally adding some rim protection/weakside shot blocking) or a rangy defensive SF, ideally with some secondary playmaking and who can create shots for himself.
It starts to become quite a wishlist, and you won't get everything you want, but you start with the bigger deals you can make and then you fill in the gaps.
Who's the ideal starting PF for this team? I"ve argued that it's a healthy Jonathan Isaac. If you can swing a trade to get him, then you need to add some bench scoring and floor spacing. Maybe in certain matchups that Lyles as a small ball 5 and Vezenkov at the 4 as a five out 2nd unit. Or maybe additional trades are needed.
If you can't pry Isaac from Orlando (and I've become resigned to that being unlikely) then maybe you do take a flyer on Kuzma. Maybe for Huerter and Davion and next year's 2nd rounder from Portland. Not a perfect fit, but it's something. Now you have plenty of scoring in the starting lineup. So maybe you give Portland some cap relief and trade for two guys that don't have a future with the Trailblazers by sending Barnes and Duarte for Thybulle and Robert Williams. Use #13 for a bit of bench scoring (Da Silva?) or an upside swing (Holland?) and see what that mix gets you.
Point being, roster construction is hugely important. Each move needs to be calculated to mesh with the overall goals of the team. And in my mind, guys like Randle or LaVine (ESPECIALLY with Monk back) don't do that.
The idea that the Kings can just take on a bunch of salary to add guys that don't neatly fit with the overarching concepts on offense and defense is ludicrous. Randle would negatively impact spacing, make a poor defense worse, and not fit within the flow of what the Kings are trying to do. What exactly does he do that would elevate this Kings team?
hrdboild is right - this shouldn't be about finding a discount "star" regardless of fit - it should be about carefully adding pieces that improve the overall team. Enough depth to weather a long regular season, but really focused on the ideal 8 or 9 man rotation for the post season.
The four building blocks are Fox, Domas, Murray, and Monk. So what do you need around them? I'd argue that you want two 3&D players in the starting lineup, a scoring wing and/or big off the bench to help Monk in the second unit, and a high level backup center, ideally one that can swing between the 4/5.
If Keon is your starting SG, then you need a 3&D guy at either the PF spot (ideally adding some rim protection/weakside shot blocking) or a rangy defensive SF, ideally with some secondary playmaking and who can create shots for himself.
It starts to become quite a wishlist, and you won't get everything you want, but you start with the bigger deals you can make and then you fill in the gaps.
Who's the ideal starting PF for this team? I"ve argued that it's a healthy Jonathan Isaac. If you can swing a trade to get him, then you need to add some bench scoring and floor spacing. Maybe in certain matchups that Lyles as a small ball 5 and Vezenkov at the 4 as a five out 2nd unit. Or maybe additional trades are needed.
If you can't pry Isaac from Orlando (and I've become resigned to that being unlikely) then maybe you do take a flyer on Kuzma. Maybe for Huerter and Davion and next year's 2nd rounder from Portland. Not a perfect fit, but it's something. Now you have plenty of scoring in the starting lineup. So maybe you give Portland some cap relief and trade for two guys that don't have a future with the Trailblazers by sending Barnes and Duarte for Thybulle and Robert Williams. Use #13 for a bit of bench scoring (Da Silva?) or an upside swing (Holland?) and see what that mix gets you.
Point being, roster construction is hugely important. Each move needs to be calculated to mesh with the overall goals of the team. And in my mind, guys like Randle or LaVine (ESPECIALLY with Monk back) don't do that.
We shouldn’t be only looking for a talent upgrade at a position of need. We need to consider the fit as well. Upgrading talent for the sake of upgrading talent is not a wise way to build a team. There are more factors that need to be considered if you want to generate that synergistic effect and maximize your roster.
Randle’s ability to score in iso does not mean he takes pressure off Fox and Sabonis in total. As I mentioned, he’s not a good shooter. That adds pressure to both Fox and Sabonis as teams can sag off more and crowd the paint. Randle is also not a good defender. That puts pressure on Fox and Sabonis. Fox and Sabonis are at their best when scoring in the paint and in the midrange. When taking our current roster construction into consideration, it would be best to add a perimeter oriented go-to scorer (a Khris Middleton type) who can also act as a floor spacer (to take pressure off what Fox and Sabonis do best) and solid defender (to take pressure off Sabonis since he’s only an average defender/rim protector).
I think it would be pretty unwise to surrender multiple assets on a player that has so many question marks from a fit perspective (not a talent perspective). I had similar offensive fit concerns with Siakam but at least with Siakam you had someone who would be a good defensive fit.
Randle’s ability to score in iso does not mean he takes pressure off Fox and Sabonis in total. As I mentioned, he’s not a good shooter. That adds pressure to both Fox and Sabonis as teams can sag off more and crowd the paint. Randle is also not a good defender. That puts pressure on Fox and Sabonis. Fox and Sabonis are at their best when scoring in the paint and in the midrange. When taking our current roster construction into consideration, it would be best to add a perimeter oriented go-to scorer (a Khris Middleton type) who can also act as a floor spacer (to take pressure off what Fox and Sabonis do best) and solid defender (to take pressure off Sabonis since he’s only an average defender/rim protector).
I think it would be pretty unwise to surrender multiple assets on a player that has so many question marks from a fit perspective (not a talent perspective). I had similar offensive fit concerns with Siakam but at least with Siakam you had someone who would be a good defensive fit.
I think the key difference between playing Tatum at PF and playing Murray at PF is who is playing C next to them.
Al Horford, Robert Williams, Kristaps Porzingis are great defensive Cs who have good to great length and protect the rim very well. We don’t really have that luxury with Sabonis at C. To me, that puts more emphasis on having a couple of forwards that have above average size/length for their position that are good defenders. Murray at SF checks one of those boxes for me but that “above average size/length” somewhat goes away if we’re starting Murray at PF. With that in mind, I’d like to prioritize finding a PF.
Al Horford, Robert Williams, Kristaps Porzingis are great defensive Cs who have good to great length and protect the rim very well. We don’t really have that luxury with Sabonis at C. To me, that puts more emphasis on having a couple of forwards that have above average size/length for their position that are good defenders. Murray at SF checks one of those boxes for me but that “above average size/length” somewhat goes away if we’re starting Murray at PF. With that in mind, I’d like to prioritize finding a PF.
Yeah I think what we discovered with Murray's unreal perimeter defensive ability and now Keon is with the right 4, we could be an absolute NIGHTMARE on switching everything. I mean Keegan very much proved he can defend 1-3 last season and was the go-to defender on dudes like Steph/Mitchell until Keon showed up in the rotation. That's just insanely impressive and fun to think about with his development going forward.
That's where I love a guy like Grant Williams. He could fit that mold perfectly of being a super switchable defender and continue to elevate what we're building here defensively. Same with a DFS type.
That's where I love a guy like Grant Williams. He could fit that mold perfectly of being a super switchable defender and continue to elevate what we're building here defensively. Same with a DFS type.
Keeping Keegan at SF is still my preference -- I just don't think it matters as much as I used to. If we find another forward about the same size as him (6'8" in shoes) who is also a plus defender (which I think Keegan is already) then I don't care which one we call the SF and which one we call the PF -- or rather I don't care which one starts at SF and which one starts at PF because throughout the course of the game they'll be playing in different 5-man lineups and switching on defense anyway.
I'd be prioritizing filling out the roster with only plus defenders at multiple positions, since we have a lot of scoring already and in a switching defense you're only as good as your weakest link. At least 2 of those guys should be taller PF/C's but something else to consider is that it's hard to justify playing multiple non-shooters at once in the current NBA. Horford and Porzingis are also guys who can space the floor and post defenders who can shoot aren't as rare as they used to be but they're also not guys you just go out and find on the scrap heap either. Playing Keegan at the 4 at least some of the time is a good way to keep an extra shooter on the floor.
I'd be prioritizing filling out the roster with only plus defenders at multiple positions, since we have a lot of scoring already and in a switching defense you're only as good as your weakest link. At least 2 of those guys should be taller PF/C's but something else to consider is that it's hard to justify playing multiple non-shooters at once in the current NBA. Horford and Porzingis are also guys who can space the floor and post defenders who can shoot aren't as rare as they used to be but they're also not guys you just go out and find on the scrap heap either. Playing Keegan at the 4 at least some of the time is a good way to keep an extra shooter on the floor.
No they didn't. The Knicks were 29-17 with him and 21-15 without him according to statmuse. That's literally twice as many wins over a .500 average. And yeah, you aren't going to find that unicorn so just don't even try and improve your team? No you move onto the next option. Ask the Mavs how that supposed horrible trade of Williams for PJ Washington worked. When you're up against it as a GM you have to keep grinding. This is all a number of spots at the top and whatever team that takes them, gets them. OG, Siakam, they didn't come to the Kings, but you saw why Monte was looking their way.
I think he's a bit better than you give him credit for, you have to dissect what shooting issues Randle has as it's not always about 3's alone. Is Keegan a better shooter than Randle? I would bet the quick answer is yes, but the reality is no believe it or not because it depends on the distance. Randles issues are the type of deep 25-29 foot shots where he hits only 27%. Keegan from that distance hits 36%. However, from 15-19 feet and 20-24 feet Randle shoots 44% and 39%. Keegan shoots 33% and 36%. In fact Randles mid range shooting from that distance is almost identical to Monks. And at least last season better than Fox as well who only shoots around 36% from both ranges.
My dream , yet somewhat realistic, off season at this point (deals I can actually see happening):
DFS for Duarte/13th pick
Kuzma for Barnes/2026 1st (unprotected)
Trade Huerter to any taker for a lottery protected 1st
Sign Derrick Jones Jr. to the MLE
Sign Goga Bitadze to the minimum
Re-sign Alex Len to the minimum
Fox/Mitchell
Ellis/Monk/Colby
Murray/Jones/Slawson
Kuzma/DFS/Lyles/Sasha
Sabonis/Bitadze/Len
No huge swings but several solid moves to add length and athleticism to the roster and bolster our wing depth.
DFS for Duarte/13th pick
Kuzma for Barnes/2026 1st (unprotected)
Trade Huerter to any taker for a lottery protected 1st
Sign Derrick Jones Jr. to the MLE
Sign Goga Bitadze to the minimum
Re-sign Alex Len to the minimum
Fox/Mitchell
Ellis/Monk/Colby
Murray/Jones/Slawson
Kuzma/DFS/Lyles/Sasha
Sabonis/Bitadze/Len
No huge swings but several solid moves to add length and athleticism to the roster and bolster our wing depth.
I think I've made it clear from all of my posts that "not even trying" to improve the team isn't what I'm interested in at all. You only have to go back 2 pages in this thread to find my proposed off-season plan. I don't like the fit with Randle. I want a plus defender at every position and I believe that with Fox, Ellis, Monk, Murray, and Sabonis we already have all the scoring we need. It would be ideal to have another shot creator for injury depth but if we can't trade for one, I'm fine with drafting one at 13 and developing them.
I also don't see how anyone could describe our current situation as being "up against it". We have a young-ish roster with two All Stars, no bad contracts, and a proven coach. Trading into a big contract veteran with injury history and not getting better is how we would end up "up against it" because there are no Plan B's left at that point. I liked OG but he didn't want to come here. I didn't like the fit with Siakam (nor do I like his new contract) so I'm glad Monte didn't make that trade. Some fans are manufacturing a level of desperation that feels wholly inappropriate for a team one year removed from the Light the Beam euphoria of 2023 which fell off by all of... 2 wins this year?
I also don't see how anyone could describe our current situation as being "up against it". We have a young-ish roster with two All Stars, no bad contracts, and a proven coach. Trading into a big contract veteran with injury history and not getting better is how we would end up "up against it" because there are no Plan B's left at that point. I liked OG but he didn't want to come here. I didn't like the fit with Siakam (nor do I like his new contract) so I'm glad Monte didn't make that trade. Some fans are manufacturing a level of desperation that feels wholly inappropriate for a team one year removed from the Light the Beam euphoria of 2023 which fell off by all of... 2 wins this year?
Watch the cap, that's where they are "up against it". As is they are a tax team without even the use of their MLE this offseason. In two years, likely an apron team. It will be way harder to make moves then. I'd say we'll see, but hopefully we don't. All I can say is look at yet another team like the Knicks. They are making their steps now, not when Brunson, Randle, or whoever is making 45 million a year instead of 25. Once that salary goes up, making a move like the Bridges one isn't even a possibility any longer.