[Game] 33/82: Kings @ Clippers 30 DEC 2025, 8pm PT/11pm ET

[Srzly]

The most important thing to do is to get them off the roster to clear the deck. Any asset we get back is a bonus. Finding out what Keegan looks like without the vets around, can Nique really run an offense as a point-SG/SF, can Devin Carter impact the game positively, already seeing Max and Cardwell in their roles, etc

Completely agree. I want to see some combination of:

Carter
Nique
Keon
Keegan
Domas
Max
Cardwell

The rest of the way. I don’t care about losses but at least we will be watching younger guys that try hard and pass the rock.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

If we are saying its a "wasted draft pick" its purely incompetent organizational incompetence to not play him. We haven't even given him a chance to see if he can play or not; he's never had a consistent game in and game out role with the nba club.

Instead of seeing what he's got, those minutes are going to Russ and Dennis. Sad

Is it not possible the pick was a whiff and he isn't showing anything in practice meriting more time?

I'm not saying that's the case and that there aren't valid complaints about other players' minutes but at the end of the day Carter is in a much different category than everyone else who are still actually getting to play and we just don't like the distribution.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

The most important thing to do is to get them off the roster to clear the deck. Any asset we get back is a bonus.

I disagree. Assets are incredibly important in a rebuild. OKC didn't get to the top by building from scratch, they got to the top by controlling some ridiculous percentage of all draft picks for like a decade and by getting a future MVP in trade.

Yes, a bunch of dudes on our roster aren't part of the future. But we don't need cap space. As Sacramento, we won't be signing any significant free agents until we're compete-ready, you can book that. So there's no real penalty to letting contracts like LaVine's just expire if we can't trade them for positive value.

There's this zeitgeist of impatience around here that holds something like the view that if Nique doesn't play 30 MPG starting right now that we're blowing the rebuild, or that not giving Carter any run in his second year will bury us, and I think it's silly. Nique isn't even ready for 30 MPG. Let him move from the shallow end to the deep end at his own pace, don't just throw him in and hope he doesn't drown. There's obviously some reason that Carter has been buried on the depth chart thus far, and we've still got two and a half years of control of him to figure out what he can do.

There's just no hurry. There should be no difficulty in trading DDR for positive assets by the deadline. We can almost certainly get something for Westbrook (if we even want off of him - yes, he dominates the ball, but I'm pretty convinced that he teaches the kids the right attitude and effort by example, so for that alone he's probably worth keeping). Monk should have value, too. Maybe even Schröder can be flipped for less than nothing. And while I remain an advocate of keeping Domas and trying to incorporate him in whatever we're doing, if we choose to deal him we should get a truckload back. Now, we may not be able to (or want to) trade all of these guys, but we should be able to trade some of them, and with the exception of Schröder none of them has a chance to be a burden on us beyond next year (and we can get out of that for about $4M).

TL;DR: Patience and assets is a lot better than impatience and an empty cupboard.

 

[ShastaKingsFan]

There's obviously some reason that Carter has been buried on the depth chart thus far, and we've still got two and a half years of control of him to figure out what he can do.

Do you agree with how the rotations and playing time have gone this season?

 

[Capt. Factorial]

Do you agree with how the rotations and playing time have gone this season?

In a binary choice, yes. I don't have major complaints with the rotations this season.

 

[SacTownKid]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2006251978029162527

This is the sad thing about this, the unit with Carter, Keon, Clifford, Keegan, and Maxime is right there. When they played together the ball moved and you could see the glimpse of being a TEAM. Yet, they spin wheels in the mud game after game after game. Bring up the 2 way guys and get this freaking development on the road already.

 

[ShastaKingsFan]

In a binary choice, yes. I don't have major complaints with the rotations this season.

Really? You're satisfied with the averaging playing time for DeRozan, Lavine, and Westbrook?

 

[SacTownKid]

I disagree. Assets are incredibly important in a rebuild. OKC didn't get to the top by building from scratch, they got to the top by controlling some ridiculous percentage of all draft picks for like a decade and by getting a future MVP in trade.

Yes, a bunch of dudes on our roster aren't part of the future. But we don't need cap space. As Sacramento, we won't be signing any significant free agents until we're compete-ready, you can book that. So there's no real penalty to letting contracts like LaVine's just expire if we can't trade them for positive value.

There's this zeitgeist of impatience around here that holds something like the view that if Nique doesn't play 30 MPG starting right now that we're blowing the rebuild, or that not giving Carter any run in his second year will bury us, and I think it's silly. Nique isn't even ready for 30 MPG. Let him move from the shallow end to the deep end at his own pace, don't just throw him in and hope he doesn't drown. There's obviously some reason that Carter has been buried on the depth chart thus far, and we've still got two and a half years of control of him to figure out what he can do.

There's just no hurry. There should be no difficulty in trading DDR for positive assets by the deadline. We can almost certainly get something for Westbrook (if we even want off of him - yes, he dominates the ball, but I'm pretty convinced that he teaches the kids the right attitude and effort by example, so for that alone he's probably worth keeping). Monk should have value, too. Maybe even Schröder can be flipped for less than nothing. And while I remain an advocate of keeping Domas and trying to incorporate him in whatever we're doing, if we choose to deal him we should get a truckload back. Now, we may not be able to (or want to) trade all of these guys, but we should be able to trade some of them, and with the exception of Schröder none of them has a chance to be a burden on us beyond next year (and we can get out of that for about $4M).

TL;DR: Patience and assets is a lot better than impatience and an empty cupboard.

This team has wasted more assets than almost any other team before. 1st round picks, now recent lottery picks, etc. And for what? This is a question about alternatives and the common sense realization is that it's time to get the show on the road. Letting Westbrook run offense like is 2015 does literally nothing for this team. Nothing. The Thunder partly got to where they are because they didn't bury their youth. They cut cap, used it as an asset, and developed their young guys. Simple as that. The Kings never do and appear to be not doing that now. The same hamster wheel derails this franchise again and again. The only patience that matters is being patient with the young guys going through their growing pains. That's what patience is in a rebuild.

 

[dude12]

I disagree. Assets are incredibly important in a rebuild. OKC didn't get to the top by building from scratch, they got to the top by controlling some ridiculous percentage of all draft picks for like a decade and by getting a future MVP in trade.

Yes, a bunch of dudes on our roster aren't part of the future. But we don't need cap space. As Sacramento, we won't be signing any significant free agents until we're compete-ready, you can book that. So there's no real penalty to letting contracts like LaVine's just expire if we can't trade them for positive value.

There's this zeitgeist of impatience around here that holds something like the view that if Nique doesn't play 30 MPG starting right now that we're blowing the rebuild, or that not giving Carter any run in his second year will bury us, and I think it's silly. Nique isn't even ready for 30 MPG. Let him move from the shallow end to the deep end at his own pace, don't just throw him in and hope he doesn't drown. There's obviously some reason that Carter has been buried on the depth chart thus far, and we've still got two and a half years of control of him to figure out what he can do.

There's just no hurry. There should be no difficulty in trading DDR for positive assets by the deadline. We can almost certainly get something for Westbrook (if we even want off of him - yes, he dominates the ball, but I'm pretty convinced that he teaches the kids the right attitude and effort by example, so for that alone he's probably worth keeping). Monk should have value, too. Maybe even Schröder can be flipped for less than nothing. And while I remain an advocate of keeping Domas and trying to incorporate him in whatever we're doing, if we choose to deal him we should get a truckload back. Now, we may not be able to (or want to) trade all of these guys, but we should be able to trade some of them, and with the exception of Schröder none of them has a chance to be a burden on us beyond next year (and we can get out of that for about $4M).

TL;DR: Patience and assets is a lot better than impatience and an empty cupboard.

Assets are always important, I think everyone agrees with that but my perspective is we are wasting time finding out exactly what the younger guys can and can’t do. I feel strongly that we have stunted Keegan’s growth offensively. Maybe he is a 2nd or 3rd option offensively and never a 1. Right now, he looks like a 3 and D guy who doesn’t knock down the 3. Defensively, he’s grown and he’s damn good. But how long have we had him and still don’t know what the potential is on the O side?
How much more can Keon do offensively? Does Carter’s play lead to winning basketball despite his shortcomings?
Currently Nique is allowed to do nothing that he’s capable of as long as these vets are here.

Yes, patience is needed but patience in not acquiring, say, a Trae Young.
If we don’t trade these vets at the trade deadline because Perry doesn’t like the assets coming back, it’s a giant loss because Christie is going to continue to play the vets heavy minutes. The younger guys will not be able to expand their roles on the floor.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

Really? You're satisfied with the averaging playing time for DeRozan, Lavine, and Westbrook?

Yes, I'm fine with it. Do people really think we're going to play those guys 10-15 minutes a game? We need to have realistic expectations.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

This team has wasted more assets than almost any other team before. 1st round picks, now recent lottery picks, etc. And for what?

So what? So rebuild WITHOUT assets?

 

[ShastaKingsFan]

Yes, I'm fine with it. Do people really think we're going to play those guys 10-15 minutes a game? We need to have realistic expectations.

I don't think it anybody expected that. The continual 36+ games is what has many questioning things

 

[Capt. Factorial]

I don't think it anybody expected that. The continual 36+ games is what has many questioning things

I expected it.

Here's why: You can't expect a team to just bench established veterans who are being paid like starters and still play like starters and not burn your reputation with every agent and player in the business. "Should my client go to the Kings? Hell no, Sacramento is where vets go to get benched. Ain't gonna do it." Of course we're playing the veterans. And of course, given that we couldn't make the fit of like four vet SGs who can't play defense work, and now we're blowing it up, we're going to do the right thing by the players and try to get them into good situations. Why? Because we need to be the good guy for five years from now when we need free agents or we need to get an implicit blessing for a trade. The short-sighted move of benching the vets to tank will backfire big-time. Now, getting out from under the vets and going with a youth movement? That's a different story. But it's going to take time to get there.

 

[Warhawk]

Yes, I'm fine with it. Do people really think we're going to play those guys 10-15 minutes a game? We need to have realistic expectations.

I don't think it anybody expected that. The continual 36+ games is what has many questioning things

Well....in another thread....

But why bit carve out a real role for them? Doesn't need to be all in or all out, but its plainly ridiculous that Keon/Nique/Carter somehow dont have consistent 20+ MPG roles.

And yeah, that means the vets get their minutes reduced, but it doesn't need to be fully to 0.

I don't think there should be any difficulty finding justification for benching 36-year-old DeMar DeRozan, 37-year-old Russell Westbrook, and/or 32-year-old Dennis Schroder, who's been a journeyman for his entire career and is no stranger to the bench.

Zach LaVine is another matter, but with the team sporting an OFFRTG of 108.1 (26th), a DEFRTG of 120.7 (27th), and a NETRTG of -12.6 (27th), I can't imagine any head coach staring down a 3-13 record and coming to the conclusion that it's not worthwhile to engage a meaningful shake-up of their rotation.

If the top of the roster were merely bad, you could get away with stunting the development of the younger players until you moved off some of these veterans. But the top of the roster is not merely bad, is it? It's a nightly embarrassment, and it makes it head-scratching in the extreme that Devin Carter can't even get on the court in the middle of a blowout.

Again, the vets start.
A question to Doug, why are you grooming the vets? You think they gonna give you more wins? Their time is limited in the Kings uniform, there's no point showcasing them, they got nothing to prove. Bench 'em, groom the youngsters while you have this golden opportunity when winning is not the priority.

 

[Padrino]

The short-sighted move of benching the vets to tank will backfire big-time. Now, getting out from under the vets and going with a youth movement? That's a different story. But it's going to take time to get there.

This is such a strange way of looking at things. Cutting the minutes of 36/37 year old veterans who are well beyond their primes is the short-sighted move, rather than the present course of relying on them at the expense of developing younger talent? I don't think anybody is suggesting that the Kings toss 10-15 minutes at their over-30 players and call it a day, but it does seem ass-backwards to give those guys regular extended run while the Kings have yet to discover what they have in, say, Devin Carter. It'd also be nice to see what any of the Kings' younger players look like when DeRozan/Westbrook aren't eating up 30 shots a game. You can give due respect to the veterans on the roster while still committing to getting your young guys meaningful and consistent playing time. I hate to say I'm grateful for the injuries to some of the older players on the roster, but the simple fact of the matter is that we wouldn't be seeing much of an increase in the workload of the Kings' younger talent without those absences.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

This is such a strange way of looking at things. Cutting the minutes of 36/37 year old veterans who are well beyond their primes is the short-sighted move, rather than the present course of relying on them at the expense of developing younger talent? I don't think anybody is suggesting that the Kings toss 10-15 minutes at their over-30 players and call it a day, but it does seem ass-backwards to give those guys regular extended run while the Kings have yet to discover what they have in, say, Devin Carter. It'd also be nice to see what any of the Kings' younger players look like when DeRozan/Westbrook aren't eating up 30 shots a game.

As I understand @Capt. Factorial's thesis (Capt., feel free to correct me where I'm wrong), and I'm not stipulating that I agree with this, he seems to be supporting some version of the Greater Good theory where, at least from his perspective, the harm to the Kings' goodwill at some hypothetical point in the future where y'all are on the precipice of competing and you need a quality free agent to agree to be traded to Sacramento, but he refuses because of the memory of how y'all treated these particular veterans exceeds the potential harm in risking a Devin Carter "dying on the vine" by waiting another season to integrate him into the rotation... Basically, Devin Carter will still be under contract by the time y'all get rid of Westbrook, DeRozan, LaVine and Schröder, so you might as well wait to play him until after you get rid of those guys, 'cause he can't opt out, anyway.

 

[ShastaKingsFan]

Yes, I'm fine with it. Do people really think we're going to play those guys 10-15 minutes a game? We need to have realistic expectations.

I don't think anybody expected that. The continual 36+ games is what has many questioning things

I expected it.

Here's why: You can't expect a team to just bench established veterans who are being paid like starters and still play like starters and not burn your reputation with every agent and player in the business. "Should my client go to the Kings? Hell no, Sacramento is where vets go to get benched. Ain't gonna do it." Of course we're playing the veterans. And of course, given that we couldn't make the fit of like four vet SGs who can't play defense work, and now we're blowing it up, we're going to do the right thing by the players and try to get them into good situations. Why? Because we need to be the good guy for five years from now when we need free agents or we need to get an implicit blessing for a trade. The short-sighted move of benching the vets to tank will backfire big-time. Now, getting out from under the vets and going with a youth movement? That's a different story. But it's going to take time to get there.

I'm not sure if we're crossing signals here or not understanding what is being said. You asked about 10-15 minutes a game for the name vets. I responded that I didn't think anybody expected that. You responded that you expected it. Sounds like you're fine with them averaging in the higher 30's?

I definitely would not want or expect any higher paid player or Westbrook to be completely benched and only playing very minimal time, but would rather some time be shaved off their average to allow more time for the players that need to get more look and to develop for this rebuild. Looks like for whatever reason, they have chosen Monk to be the one guy who gets shaved or benched

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

... I definitely would not want or expect any higher paid player or Westbrook to be completely benched and only playing very minimal time, but would rather some time be shaved off their average to allow more time for the players that need to get more look and to develop for this rebuild. Looks like for whatever reason, they have chosen Monk to be the one guy who gets shaved or benched

Interestingly enough, the one veteran that you would think has built up some equity with the team.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

I'm not sure if we're crossing signals here or not understanding what is being said. You asked about 10-15 minutes a game for the name vets. I responded that I didn't think anybody expected that. You responded that you expected it. Sounds like you're fine with them averaging in the higher 30's?

I definitely would not want or expect any higher paid player or Westbrook to be completely benched and only playing very minimal time, but would rather some time be shaved off their average to allow more time for the players that need to get more look and to develop for this rebuild. Looks like for whatever reason, they have chosen Monk to be the one guy who gets shaved or benched

Perhaps some crossed wires, I intended to indicate that I expected 30-ish minutes for the name vets. Yes, I am fine with that. It's the "cost of business" until we manage to trade them, as I outlined above.

I am surprised that Monk has had his minutes largely shaved (and man, I don't know what's going to happen when LaVine is healthy), but there may be an apoplectic fit on this board if/when Nique sits again, is all I can say.

 

[ShastaKingsFan]

Perhaps some crossed wires, I intended to indicate that I expected 30-ish minutes for the name vets. Yes, I am fine with that. It's the "cost of business" until we manage to trade them, as I outlined above.

I am surprised that Monk has had his minutes largely shaved (and man, I don't know what's going to happen when LaVine is healthy), but there may be an apoplectic fit on this board if/when Nique sits again, is all I can say.

30ish minutes would have worked just fine. It's the higher 30's to 40+ that doesn't leave time for the younger players to get a rhythm or play at all

 

[SacTownKid]

So what? So rebuild WITHOUT assets?

When a team continuously and egregiously does what this team has done and is doing now in some ways that's essentially the result. Or at the very least diminishing them with no true reasoning.

 

[SacTownKid]

I expected it.

Here's why: You can't expect a team to just bench established veterans who are being paid like starters and still play like starters and not burn your reputation with every agent and player in the business. "Should my client go to the Kings? Hell no, Sacramento is where vets go to get benched. Ain't gonna do it." Of course we're playing the veterans. And of course, given that we couldn't make the fit of like four vet SGs who can't play defense work, and now we're blowing it up, we're going to do the right thing by the players and try to get them into good situations. Why? Because we need to be the good guy for five years from now when we need free agents or we need to get an implicit blessing for a trade. The short-sighted move of benching the vets to tank will backfire big-time. Now, getting out from under the vets and going with a youth movement? That's a different story. But it's going to take time to get there.

That's going to happen anyway. The kicker is now, get ready, but the days of agents sending their clients to workout for Sac during the draft process could likely be gone as well. Who the heck would want their young player to go to the Kings at this point? The history is pretty clear, if you get drafted into the NBA, don't let it be the Kings. We'll see what happens. There's still time for the Kings to correct some things so now we'll see who this FO actually is. It didn't take long to kind of figure out who Doug Christie is or who appears to be.

 

[The_Jamal]

30ish minutes would have worked just fine. It's the higher 30's to 40+ that doesn't leave time for the younger players to get a rhythm or play at all

25-30ish a game and you can make sure Keon/Nique and hopefully Carter can get on in a meaningful role game in and game out. We have a lot more information on Nique/Max/Cardwell than we did a month ago and have gotten to see some of their progression play out in real time, what they're excelling at, what they need work on. That doesn't happen if they can 5-10 minutes every 2 weeks like they do with Carter

 

[SacTownKid]

As I understand @Capt. Factorial's thesis (Capt., feel free to correct me where I'm wrong), and I'm not stipulating that I agree with this, he seems to be supporting some version of the Greater Good theory where, at least from his perspective, the harm to the Kings' goodwill at some hypothetical point in the future where y'all are on the precipice of competing and you need a quality free agent to agree to be traded to Sacramento, but he refuses because of the memory of how y'all treated these particular veterans exceeds the potential harm in risking a Devin Carter "dying on the vine" by waiting another season to integrate him into the rotation... Basically, Devin Carter will still be under contract by the time y'all get rid of Westbrook, DeRozan, LaVine and Schröder, so you might as well wait to play him until after you get rid of those guys, 'cause he can't opt out, anyway.

This may be the case. However, it's hard to not get a little concerned that in a 30 point blowout the only time we saw a true combo of the Kings youth as a unit was with barely 6-7 minutes left in garbage time. The story of the Kings is USE YOUR TIME WISELY. Build towards something. That was more sand running down to the other side of the hour glass, nothing more. Then when Carter, Ellis, Clifford, and Raynaud were in together we see the supposed desires from Christie with defense and sharing the ball come to the floor? That was easily another contest that should have given them more than merely the most garbage of garbage time. That provides very little true development. It's like what a lot of teams do and finally hand over the reins to their youth with 5-10 games left in the season. A team is probably better off sending guys to the G league than letting them romp and stomp during the dog days of the end of a season. Very rarely does that play translate to the next season because there was a handicap to begin with. It's corrupted data since the intentions of some teams are augmented to just prepping for the next phase of their season.

 

[ShastaKingsFan]

25-30ish a game and you can make sure Keon/Nique and hopefully Carter can get on in a meaningful role game in and game out. We have a lot more information on Nique/Max/Cardwell than we did a month ago and have gotten to see some of their progression play out in real time, what they're excelling at, what they need work on. That doesn't happen if they can 5-10 minutes every 2 weeks like they do with Carter

yeah, and the point can't be stressed enough, that had there not been key injuries, we would have little no idea what they might be capable of. The Kings organization didn't schedule for this to happen. It happened by chance

 

[The_Jamal]

yeah, and the point can't be stressed enough, that had there not been key injuries, we would have little no idea what they might be capable of. The Kings organization didn't schedule for this to happen. It happened by chance

100%. Had Domas and Eubanks stayed healthy, they would have been in Stockton all year. I think Nique would have likely had SOME sort of role as the 10th man, but nothing close to what he's gotten recently.

 

[SacTownKid]

yeah, and the point can't be stressed enough, that had there not been key injuries, we would have little no idea what they might be capable of. The Kings organization didn't schedule for this to happen. It happened by chance

And the Kings desperately need to know as much as possible about those questions marks when it comes to their young guys. Are Keegan and Nique truly "untouchable"? Can Devin and Nique run offense? Can Maxime create offense for himself consistently? This also factors into the truth that the Kings rookies aren't even that young, they are physically ready now. This isn't a wait and see in 3 years rotation of youth here. Keegan is practically the same age as Peja when Peja was in the MVP running. They need to be put in the fire sooner than later. They've hardly even touched the frying pan up to this point. If they can't consistently produce within the next season or so it's probably not going to happen and that could markedly change things like who they focus on in the drafts, trades, signings, etc. Everyone knows who Russell Westbrook is. Dennis Schroder. Drew Eubanks. And so on and so on.