Potential Free agent/trade/sign tracker
- Thread starter iowamcnabb
- Start date
I discussed what happened in the PO. It's in my post.
Into last season, we had more injuries and the west got tougher. We still played well against the top teams but just couldn't figure out NO and dropped a couple of close ones we should have won; we still were 10 games over 0.500 for the year and kicked the Warriors out of the play in.
Was it disappointing? Of course! But that doesn't mean the right decisions weren't made at the time (not in retrospect) given the data in front of us and the moves that were likely available at the time.
And if those teams rose, for a short time, but crash hard after not succeeding, did it really matter? Being judicious at times is better than making rash moves that don't play out, especially when it could handicap the team for years to come. Let's see how this offseason goes before we get too wound up, shall we?
Into last season, we had more injuries and the west got tougher. We still played well against the top teams but just couldn't figure out NO and dropped a couple of close ones we should have won; we still were 10 games over 0.500 for the year and kicked the Warriors out of the play in.
Was it disappointing? Of course! But that doesn't mean the right decisions weren't made at the time (not in retrospect) given the data in front of us and the moves that were likely available at the time.
And if those teams rose, for a short time, but crash hard after not succeeding, did it really matter? Being judicious at times is better than making rash moves that don't play out, especially when it could handicap the team for years to come. Let's see how this offseason goes before we get too wound up, shall we?
So let’s say we sign Fox to a max extension, Murray to a max rookie extension (and it could be easily lower depending on Murray’s next 2 years), and Ellis ends up getting $20 mil a season on his 2nd contract (which could be lower depending on his play over the coming seasons), that leaves us with the following for the 2026-27 season…
$51.183 Fox
$46.772 Sabonis
$42.652 Murray
$20.190 Monk
$20.000 Ellis
...that sums to $180.797. And the 2nd apron is projected to be at $229.279. That’s gives us $48.482 of space to fill out the rest of the roster. That’s seems like a comfortable amount (especially since I feel like I’m overestimating Murray’s and Ellis’ future contracts).
Now if we did trade a combination of Barnes, Huerter, and Vezenkov for someone like Jerami Grant, we’d have $215.003 wrapped up in our starting lineup and sixth man leaving us with $14.276 to fill out the rest of the roster before hitting the 2nd apron. That’s definitely tighter but again, I feel like I’m overestimating Murray’s and Ellis’ future contracts (especially if we add someone like Grant who could make it harder for Murray’s offensive game to breakthrough).
I think this just shows why it would be a good idea to be patient and see what we have in Murray and Ellis this season. If Murray continues to just look like a 3&D player in year 3, then we can feel comfortable about making a trade for a big salary “star” because, in all likelihood, Murray is not going to receive a rookie max extension. If Murray does like a potential star in the making in his 3rd season, we can try to target a role playing PF who won’t command as much salary.
$51.183 Fox
$46.772 Sabonis
$42.652 Murray
$20.190 Monk
$20.000 Ellis
...that sums to $180.797. And the 2nd apron is projected to be at $229.279. That’s gives us $48.482 of space to fill out the rest of the roster. That’s seems like a comfortable amount (especially since I feel like I’m overestimating Murray’s and Ellis’ future contracts).
Now if we did trade a combination of Barnes, Huerter, and Vezenkov for someone like Jerami Grant, we’d have $215.003 wrapped up in our starting lineup and sixth man leaving us with $14.276 to fill out the rest of the roster before hitting the 2nd apron. That’s definitely tighter but again, I feel like I’m overestimating Murray’s and Ellis’ future contracts (especially if we add someone like Grant who could make it harder for Murray’s offensive game to breakthrough).
I think this just shows why it would be a good idea to be patient and see what we have in Murray and Ellis this season. If Murray continues to just look like a 3&D player in year 3, then we can feel comfortable about making a trade for a big salary “star” because, in all likelihood, Murray is not going to receive a rookie max extension. If Murray does like a potential star in the making in his 3rd season, we can try to target a role playing PF who won’t command as much salary.
To the bolded, everyone follows the “wait and see” approach until of course when that moment comes, you don’t.
Nobody here is saying this team is good enough or could be good enough (if given time) to be a contender one day. So from that perspective, nobody is advocating a “wait and see” approach. What we are discussing is the idea that we have to make a big move this offseason which of course we don’t (and sactownkid agreed with posts later).
McNair said it and I’ll say it here too. Success isn’t linear. We need to be thoughtful and meticulous in how we improve as there are many moves we can make that may immediately improve our roster next year (something instant gratification fans may be excited about), but be detrimental to our long term goal of being a contender.
Nobody here is saying this team is good enough or could be good enough (if given time) to be a contender one day. So from that perspective, nobody is advocating a “wait and see” approach. What we are discussing is the idea that we have to make a big move this offseason which of course we don’t (and sactownkid agreed with posts later).
McNair said it and I’ll say it here too. Success isn’t linear. We need to be thoughtful and meticulous in how we improve as there are many moves we can make that may immediately improve our roster next year (something instant gratification fans may be excited about), but be detrimental to our long term goal of being a contender.
I'm talking about what happened in the games. You're talking about the circumstances that impeded the Kings ability to be 100%, what happened is the offense had starts and stops. Much like the season after as the DHO started to lose effectiveness depending on matchups. Running it back was going all in on system, the results weren't far off the mark season over season, 48 wins/46 wins. The issue is the bar got higher. Once Fox got hurt, the Warriors ended up winning 4 out of 5. It wasn't much of a competition after that.
What? These are the exact reasons people are looking at the Knicks right now. What do the Kings do with any draft picks? Renounce them? Don't sign anyone to a deal beyond 2026? I already brought those things up. Yeah, it's doable with a whole roster to fill out with no MLE to speak of, again, ADD A PLAYER LIKE GRANT NOW, NOT THEN. You're missing that point. I think doing it now gives Monte an extra season buffer to see what he has. Start in 2025 and you have half the amount of intel to work off of and you're risking just letting Barnes and Huerter walk eventually if they lose too much value. The value of pure expirings is all over the map. I wouldn't bet that those expirings net much and if they do, it's probably a bad contract gamble like LaVine is. Even if those things don't happen, it's much safer to prepare for that now.
I mean.. duh?
If Steph got hurt, I'd expect us to have closed that series out in 5 games. To me, it's not really productive to plan around your star player getting hurt. If your star goes down, you're done. Title hopes are dashed. Doesn't matter what you have behind him.
Even this Celts title team, which had one of the absolute deepest top 6 in recent memory with 2-3 quality rotation guys (Hauser, Pritchard, Kornet) behind them wouldn't survive a Tatum injury.
If Steph got hurt, I'd expect us to have closed that series out in 5 games. To me, it's not really productive to plan around your star player getting hurt. If your star goes down, you're done. Title hopes are dashed. Doesn't matter what you have behind him.
Even this Celts title team, which had one of the absolute deepest top 6 in recent memory with 2-3 quality rotation guys (Hauser, Pritchard, Kornet) behind them wouldn't survive a Tatum injury.
Why would you need a MLE when you’re operating well above the cap and pushing up against the 2nd apron? That doesn’t make sense.
Again, being patient and seeing what you have in Murray and Ellis allows us to better project what they will be and therefore allow us to better project what their salary will be and therefore allows us to find the right player, at the right salary level that won’t push us into the 2nd apron.
Again, being patient and seeing what you have in Murray and Ellis allows us to better project what they will be and therefore allow us to better project what their salary will be and therefore allows us to find the right player, at the right salary level that won’t push us into the 2nd apron.
Im not saying make moves to make moves, but you do need to make moves to upgrade talent or upgrade assets. Beating the warriors if our guys are healthy may have changed our playoff run (possibly a western conference run) last year, but would us having made it to that found have made an iota of difference on how this year panned out? NYK made it to the east semis. They still sent a boat load of picks out to upgrade their roster. My perspective if that you need to make a determination after every season, can we get better and by how much. Do any of us believe that even healthy, our team last year would have beat last years Nuggets in 7? If not you need to up your team. Every team not named Boston is going to try and upgrade their roster to beat Boston, including the Mavs. Every team on the rise will look to make moves to get better. We just have a longer way to go. And if we dont see a path to get significantly better, we need to blow it up and get 10 picks in the next 3 years for Domas and Fox. Because to be honest, lets say huerter and monk were healthy we would have been between seed 6-8. I dont see this team, even healthy, beating OKC OR denver in a 7 game series. And Minnesota may have been a tall order (albeit possible). So we have a long gap to make up in terms of talent behind Fox and Domas.
To fill out your roster. That's how you sign higher end players that will make more than the minimum typically. Sorry, the plan you laid out in a worst case is one you absolutely don't shoot for. You aren't factoring in future picks, signings, etc. You are pitching stagnation which while it can payoff, didn't once already. And again, I've laid out the reasons why to try for now. You give yourself an entire other chance to re-tool before you go over the 1st and potentially into the 2nd apron in 2026 which you really don't want to be over either at this point. Unless you are surefire contender you do not want to be there. Add now and expect to pay Murray/Ellis later even if you don't have to. If both pan out, you're that much better off. Sure someone even better than what's on the market now could pop up, but that's a gamble and so far Monte has already lost out on 3 of his prime targets starting last summer and new options have yet to appear. The other caveat is you now have teams like the Nets stockpiling picks and cap space. That's just more options for teams and players. If the Kings had the potential for legit space that would be one thing, they don't, not after the Monk signing. Monte has only gone further down this particular path, he's pretty much made it clear he's got to go there whether it's this summer or next. While he can't have cap space, Monte still IMO needs to move off of the contracts of one of Huerter or Barnes sooner than later to soften that cap a little bit. Hitting those aprons makes trades far more complicated.
Exactly what Jamal said. We likely would have won the series w/o Fox and Domas being additionally injured in the series itself.
Also, I've said before that our system 2 years ago seemed to work better than last year. Our offensive flow was better. We need to get back to what we were doing then a bit more. And Fox should penetrate more like he did then. I'm glad he improved his 3 point percentage, but the team is more dangerous when he's hitting the afterburners a bit more often. Hopefully he can start getting more calls, though. They let him get hammered in there, and that needs to change (I know that's also one reason why he's likely limiting such paint touches).
Also, I've said before that our system 2 years ago seemed to work better than last year. Our offensive flow was better. We need to get back to what we were doing then a bit more. And Fox should penetrate more like he did then. I'm glad he improved his 3 point percentage, but the team is more dangerous when he's hitting the afterburners a bit more often. Hopefully he can start getting more calls, though. They let him get hammered in there, and that needs to change (I know that's also one reason why he's likely limiting such paint touches).
If you don't think Monte is watching for strategic ways to improve the team, I don't know what to tell you. They are definitely not sitting on their hands thinking what we have is "championship caliber". But they also aren't going to just blow it up or make rash moves, either. If the moves aren't there to improve the team, you don't panic. You also can't make moves in a vacuum. It takes two to tango, and like we've seen recently, some trades are heavily influenced by the players themselves (Pascal, for instance). You can't blame him for not landing that one when the player was the one who nixed it.
Yeah, but what were the Warriors at that time? Apparently 2nd round fodder and a play in team next season. Is it what the Kings were doing, or the defense? And Fox should penetrate more, but I think he still needs less of that burden. It's only natural that a 180 pound guard crashing up against defenses is going to take it's toll. As it did in the playoff series against the Warriors. Stay in the paint with big bodies and it's the little guys taking the chance on injury more often than not.
Well, without the injuries I think we beat the Warriors and also beat the Lakers. On to the WCF.
I agree about Fox, but we're going to have to figure something out because him becoming a largely 3-point shooter is eliminating a lot of what makes him special. So whether it is getting the refs to call fouls more evenly, or changing something up with X's and O's, or whatever, using your star players to do non-star player things isn't usually a recipe for success.
I agree about Fox, but we're going to have to figure something out because him becoming a largely 3-point shooter is eliminating a lot of what makes him special. So whether it is getting the refs to call fouls more evenly, or changing something up with X's and O's, or whatever, using your star players to do non-star player things isn't usually a recipe for success.
…but if those players and depth are already signed and on the team…there’s not really a need (unless you’re okay dipping into these tax aprons to get a end of the rotation guy). Depth can be added along the way as we approach these aprons but we have to be smart about it.
Oh but I am. The picks and signings will be lower salary players so the focus in my post has been on how much their big salary players will cost and how close that puts us to those aprons.
See…we have 2 ways of thinking about this, and I can respect that.
You’re basically saying do whatever you can to make a big move this offseason because you can always undo or tweak the roster again next offseason before Fox, Murray, and Ellis are on their new contracts. Totally understand it.
My issue with that is what happens if we do make a trade for a Grant, Randle, etc. and the chemistry/fit is just not there and they have a down year? At that point we would have surrendered a pick or two just to acquire them but we very well may not get a pick or two back when trying to undo/tweak the roster again the following offseason.
There’s also something to be said for yanking big minute players in & out of the rotation each year and trying to have that player learn the offense, their teammates chemistry, defensive rotations, etc. Those things can take some time and making significant changes season to season can really disrupt that.
As for my approach, I’m simply suggesting we gather more data on both Murray and Ellis so we have a much better idea on the players they will become and thus allow us to more accurately target the type of player we need to elevate the team long term. It also allows Murray the room to grow offensively vs. if you add a Randle, Grant, Markkanen, LaVine, etc., Murray’s offensive growth could very well be blocked this not giving us an opportunity to see what type of player he could be.
Oh but I am. The picks and signings will be lower salary players so the focus in my post has been on how much their big salary players will cost and how close that puts us to those aprons.
See…we have 2 ways of thinking about this, and I can respect that.
You’re basically saying do whatever you can to make a big move this offseason because you can always undo or tweak the roster again next offseason before Fox, Murray, and Ellis are on their new contracts. Totally understand it.
My issue with that is what happens if we do make a trade for a Grant, Randle, etc. and the chemistry/fit is just not there and they have a down year? At that point we would have surrendered a pick or two just to acquire them but we very well may not get a pick or two back when trying to undo/tweak the roster again the following offseason.
There’s also something to be said for yanking big minute players in & out of the rotation each year and trying to have that player learn the offense, their teammates chemistry, defensive rotations, etc. Those things can take some time and making significant changes season to season can really disrupt that.
As for my approach, I’m simply suggesting we gather more data on both Murray and Ellis so we have a much better idea on the players they will become and thus allow us to more accurately target the type of player we need to elevate the team long term. It also allows Murray the room to grow offensively vs. if you add a Randle, Grant, Markkanen, LaVine, etc., Murray’s offensive growth could very well be blocked this not giving us an opportunity to see what type of player he could be.
Then you'd be betting they have a down year where as Huerter and Barnes have an up year. As for Randle, he's also expiring so in a worst case you have an out.
And I think you don't need to gather anymore data, you can go over those thresholds and keep them regardless. Go over them and adding a player like the ones being mentioned isn't likely.
And I think you don't need to gather anymore data, you can go over those thresholds and keep them regardless. Go over them and adding a player like the ones being mentioned isn't likely.
No, not really. Barnes and Huerter would be expiring contracts the following season. If Barnes and Huerter have a down year, their trade value will continue to remain around where it is today (neutral).
Well if you don’t need to gather anymore data, would you care to share the type of player Murray and Ellis will be down the road? I’m sure we’d all be excited to know how they turn out.
I don’t think I mentioned that we can try to make that “big” move AFTER we’re over the 2nd apron. That would be much more difficult knowing the restrictions. What I have said is that we don’t need to make that “big” move this offseason. It can be made this offseason, but we can do it during the 2025-26 off-season and even in the 2026-27 off-season (if we trade Barnes, Huerter, and/or Vezenkov for a player(s) that expire a year later and make the trade with cap holds in place for Murray, Fox, etc.).
Well if you don’t need to gather anymore data, would you care to share the type of player Murray and Ellis will be down the road? I’m sure we’d all be excited to know how they turn out.
I don’t think I mentioned that we can try to make that “big” move AFTER we’re over the 2nd apron. That would be much more difficult knowing the restrictions. What I have said is that we don’t need to make that “big” move this offseason. It can be made this offseason, but we can do it during the 2025-26 off-season and even in the 2026-27 off-season (if we trade Barnes, Huerter, and/or Vezenkov for a player(s) that expire a year later and make the trade with cap holds in place for Murray, Fox, etc.).
No, not really. Barnes and Huerter would be expiring contracts the following season. If Barnes and Huerter have a down year, their trade value will continue to remain around where it is today (neutral).
Well if you don’t need to gather anymore data, would you care to share the type of player Murray and Ellis will be down the road? I’m sure we’d all be excited to know how they turn out.
I don’t think I mentioned that we can try to make that “big” move AFTER we’re over the 2nd apron. That would be much more difficult knowing the restrictions. What I have said is that we don’t need to make that “big” move this offseason. It can be made this offseason, but we can do it during the 2025-26 off-season and even in the 2026-27 off-season (if we trade Barnes, Huerter, and/or Vezenkov for a player(s) that expire a year later and make the trade with cap holds in place for Murray, Fox, etc.).
Well if you don’t need to gather anymore data, would you care to share the type of player Murray and Ellis will be down the road? I’m sure we’d all be excited to know how they turn out.
I don’t think I mentioned that we can try to make that “big” move AFTER we’re over the 2nd apron. That would be much more difficult knowing the restrictions. What I have said is that we don’t need to make that “big” move this offseason. It can be made this offseason, but we can do it during the 2025-26 off-season and even in the 2026-27 off-season (if we trade Barnes, Huerter, and/or Vezenkov for a player(s) that expire a year later and make the trade with cap holds in place for Murray, Fox, etc.).
They still have no cap space to work with unless they renounce them. I didn't say he was, but as is, he's inching there and will be not long after. With the cap holds assuming they don't just let salary slide off or dump salary (which IMO at the very least he needs to shed one of Huerter or Barnes ASAP) the Kings are around 220 for 2026. And that's not counting future picks, or renouncing things like exceptions. That's just a fact if the numbers reported are correct.
You’re misunderstanding.
Nobody is talking about using cap space. I’m not sure where you’re getting that from. The $180 mil is my projection of what those guys will make after they are on their new deals (and I very well could be overestimating). Their cap holds actually lower that amount so if Barnes, Huerter, and or Vezenkov are trade for player(s) that expire 1 year later, you could leverage those cap holds and still make a “big” trade with the “new” expiring salary you have acquired by moving Barnes, Huerter, and/or Vezenkov.
Again, McNair is not backed up against the wall.
Nobody is talking about using cap space. I’m not sure where you’re getting that from. The $180 mil is my projection of what those guys will make after they are on their new deals (and I very well could be overestimating). Their cap holds actually lower that amount so if Barnes, Huerter, and or Vezenkov are trade for player(s) that expire 1 year later, you could leverage those cap holds and still make a “big” trade with the “new” expiring salary you have acquired by moving Barnes, Huerter, and/or Vezenkov.
Again, McNair is not backed up against the wall.
And who is that? That's too many what if's. Of course it's possible but I still can't see how it's ideal or not potentially very risky. If you can't match salary being over the cap, how do you make a deal then if the cap holds are in place roughly to the same amount? Why would the Kings trade for players with an extra year unless they improve things? I mean were talking waaay over the cap as is, which is my point, as is. In a worst case and Monte can't make value deals because values got lowered, he's still basically stuck to having to wheel and deal in the same offseason his cap is going to likely mostly tied into 4 players.
Do we need to have a player targeted that far out if we can’t find a trade next offseason? Didn’t know that was mandatory
Realistically, there will be teams that would be open to moving a player with 2 years left on their deal for expirings. I’d be shocked if that scenario isn’t available a couple years from now as I can come up with such a trade proposal every offseason when I go through my multitude of trade ideas.
But you’re missing the point…the point is that we don’t have to make a “big” trade this offseason. The math shows that such a deal can be made next offseason or even the following offseason if we rollover our expirings to another year via a trade.
Realistically, there will be teams that would be open to moving a player with 2 years left on their deal for expirings. I’d be shocked if that scenario isn’t available a couple years from now as I can come up with such a trade proposal every offseason when I go through my multitude of trade ideas.
But you’re missing the point…the point is that we don’t have to make a “big” trade this offseason. The math shows that such a deal can be made next offseason or even the following offseason if we rollover our expirings to another year via a trade.
Do we need to have a player targeted that far out if we can’t find a trade next offseason? Didn’t know that was mandatory
Realistically, there will be teams that would be open to moving a player with 2 years left on their deal for expirings. I’d be shocked if that scenario isn’t available a couple years from now as I can come up with such a trade proposal every offseason when I go through my multitude of trade ideas.
But you’re missing the point…the point is that we don’t have to make a “big” trade this offseason. The math shows that such a deal can be made next offseason or even the following offseason if we rollover our expirings to another year via a trade.
Realistically, there will be teams that would be open to moving a player with 2 years left on their deal for expirings. I’d be shocked if that scenario isn’t available a couple years from now as I can come up with such a trade proposal every offseason when I go through my multitude of trade ideas.
But you’re missing the point…the point is that we don’t have to make a “big” trade this offseason. The math shows that such a deal can be made next offseason or even the following offseason if we rollover our expirings to another year via a trade.