A point guard log jam
- Thread starter sactowndog
- Start date
I think this works itself out just due to the financial constraints.
Davion is currently a luxury. A low cost defensive specialist that shows some flashes of good offensive production at times.
But I don't see a way that the Kings re-sign him at anywhere near 4/40 while Fox is the face of the franchise. So while I love the kid, I wouldn't be surprised to see McNair make the logical decision to package him this summer to address bigger needs.
If so, that opens up additional floor time for Malik to eat up most of the backup guard minutes behind both Huerter and Fox. Against good defensive PGs you may not get away with playing Monk at the PG (especially if Domas is also on the bench) but most nights it should work just fine.
In the regular season you'll still want to go 10 deep when you can just to keep guys fresh, but in big games and the playoffs you're really looking at a likely 8 man rotation if everyone is healthy.
If Sasha comes over, I could see those three reserves being Monk, Vezenkov, and Lyles in most cases.
Fox, Huerter, Murray, Barnes (?), Sabonis as starters with Monk as the backup 1/2, Lyles and Vezenkov taking the 4/5 reserve minutes and Murray and K'von taking most of the minutes at the 3 with maybe a sprinkling of Kessler Edwards and maybe a big body C when needed.
Davion is currently a luxury. A low cost defensive specialist that shows some flashes of good offensive production at times.
But I don't see a way that the Kings re-sign him at anywhere near 4/40 while Fox is the face of the franchise. So while I love the kid, I wouldn't be surprised to see McNair make the logical decision to package him this summer to address bigger needs.
If so, that opens up additional floor time for Malik to eat up most of the backup guard minutes behind both Huerter and Fox. Against good defensive PGs you may not get away with playing Monk at the PG (especially if Domas is also on the bench) but most nights it should work just fine.
In the regular season you'll still want to go 10 deep when you can just to keep guys fresh, but in big games and the playoffs you're really looking at a likely 8 man rotation if everyone is healthy.
If Sasha comes over, I could see those three reserves being Monk, Vezenkov, and Lyles in most cases.
Fox, Huerter, Murray, Barnes (?), Sabonis as starters with Monk as the backup 1/2, Lyles and Vezenkov taking the 4/5 reserve minutes and Murray and K'von taking most of the minutes at the 3 with maybe a sprinkling of Kessler Edwards and maybe a big body C when needed.
I think the Bucks would trade Portis for Monk yesterday, if not sooner. Would the Kings do it? Not sure. But when I think of trades that make you squirm a little this is one. And this has nothing to do with Monk as the starting point guard of the future premise. Monk is what he is - a very fine 6th man point a minute type of guy.
Which pretty much leaves you where you started - an undersized team that needs more defense and rebounding. Ughh. That lineup doesn't move the needle. We need a game-changing lineup change. Sasha is nice addition, but his value has probably more to due with giving the Kings leeway to let Harrison/Lyles go and use his/their money for a defensive game-changer. In other words, the Sasha move is probably more of a hockey assist in the strategic thinking of Monte.
This team's identity is largely already cast.
Fox has shown improvements on defense, but Sabonis is what he is. And every shooter (Huerter, Murray, Monk, Lyles, even Barnes) that you sub out for a defender/rebounder may improve those problem areas but at the sacrifice of offense.
Some of that can be a good thing, but at a certain point it will go too far the other way.
Naz Reid is a popular choice to replace Barnes as the PF next to Sabonis. If so, you get more rebounding and interior defense (though not much rim protection/shotblocking) while getting worse defensively on the perimeter and a slight dip on outside shooting.
And that's the same story with all the names that are essentially centers who have been proposed as PFs for the Kings, or guys that would play center and shift Sabonis to PF. Okongwu and Brook Lopez are names I've heard. Yes, you'd be better on the boards and with interior defense, but your perimeter defense suffers and likely you get a bit worse in terms of outside shooting.
Or you bolster the perimeter defense with a guy like Matisse Thybulle, but now you have a non-shooter that makes the offense easier to stop.
Unless the Kings can find a Jaren Jackson Jr or Andrei Kirilenko type player who adds shotblocking, interior defense, switchable perimeter defense AND shooting, then everything is a trade off.
The only guy that kind of fits that mold and could be gettable is Jonathan Isaac and that's a huge gamble. It's also one where if Orlando is willing to trade him cheap I don't think I want him.
Fox has shown improvements on defense, but Sabonis is what he is. And every shooter (Huerter, Murray, Monk, Lyles, even Barnes) that you sub out for a defender/rebounder may improve those problem areas but at the sacrifice of offense.
Some of that can be a good thing, but at a certain point it will go too far the other way.
Naz Reid is a popular choice to replace Barnes as the PF next to Sabonis. If so, you get more rebounding and interior defense (though not much rim protection/shotblocking) while getting worse defensively on the perimeter and a slight dip on outside shooting.
And that's the same story with all the names that are essentially centers who have been proposed as PFs for the Kings, or guys that would play center and shift Sabonis to PF. Okongwu and Brook Lopez are names I've heard. Yes, you'd be better on the boards and with interior defense, but your perimeter defense suffers and likely you get a bit worse in terms of outside shooting.
Or you bolster the perimeter defense with a guy like Matisse Thybulle, but now you have a non-shooter that makes the offense easier to stop.
Unless the Kings can find a Jaren Jackson Jr or Andrei Kirilenko type player who adds shotblocking, interior defense, switchable perimeter defense AND shooting, then everything is a trade off.
The only guy that kind of fits that mold and could be gettable is Jonathan Isaac and that's a huge gamble. It's also one where if Orlando is willing to trade him cheap I don't think I want him.
Last edited:
The identity may be cast, not the lineup. And maybe the sacrifice of offense for defense would be a good thing, just not in a radical absolutist manner (e.g. Thybulle's great defense and poor offense). As you imply, there is going to be a weighing of pluses and minuses in order to maximize the effectiveness of the lineup. There's always a trade-off in every trade; that's why they call it a trade. It's going to be up to Monte to figure out what trade-off maximizes the effectiveness of the entire team.
I'll be surprised if McNair makes wholesale changes. He's definitely shown that he can make bold moves, even ones that were unpopular at the time. But he's riding the Kings first playoff appearance in nearly two decades. I'll be pleasantly surprised if he upgrades the team this summer, but my guess is that he re-signs Barnes and Lyles, tries to bring over Vezenkov and makes a couple minor signings and maybe one small trade (#24 for a rotation piece maybe?) and calls it an offseason.
We'll see.
We'll see.
I think it would be a mistake to try too much too soon, but obviously we can't re-sign all of our FAs this off-season, so there is going to be some movement and making sure we upgrade if we move on from TD, Len, etc. is utmost priority. We also have Holmes eating up a nice chunk of cap space while not being a part of Brown's scheme. As we are going to be operating above the cap it's imperative he turns that into a useful piece before the contract expires.
Isaac is an excellent fit on paper but obviously it’s hard to rely on him knowing his injury history. If you could shed Holmes salary (e.g., Holmes & #24 for Isaac) in the process, maybe it lessens that risk considering we’d still have some cap space to go out and sign a solid FA (e.g., Bruce Brown, Barnes, etc.). You could have a roster like…
PG - Fox / Mitchell
SG - Huerter / Monk
SF - Murray / Brown
PF - Isaac / Lyles
C - Sabonis
...and after our 2024 1st hopefully conveys to ATL, you’d have all future 1sts at your disposal.
The other guy that would likely keep our offense elite while improving the defense greatly is Anunoby. Obviously he’s not a Jaren Jackson or Isaac level rim protector, but he’s not horrible in that department (and he gives you elite perimeter defense regardless). You’d have to sacrifice more assets/picks to get him vs. someone like Isaac considering he’s not nearly the injury risk that Isaac is but he’s a rare guy that has the ability to keep our offense elite and inch our defense to that average level.
PG - Fox / Mitchell
SG - Huerter / Monk
SF - Murray / Brown
PF - Isaac / Lyles
C - Sabonis
...and after our 2024 1st hopefully conveys to ATL, you’d have all future 1sts at your disposal.
The other guy that would likely keep our offense elite while improving the defense greatly is Anunoby. Obviously he’s not a Jaren Jackson or Isaac level rim protector, but he’s not horrible in that department (and he gives you elite perimeter defense regardless). You’d have to sacrifice more assets/picks to get him vs. someone like Isaac considering he’s not nearly the injury risk that Isaac is but he’s a rare guy that has the ability to keep our offense elite and inch our defense to that average level.
Last edited:
What I'm saying is I wouldn't be surprised to see the starting lineup for game 1 next season be exactly the same:
Sabonis
Barnes
Murray
Huerter
Fox
With Monk, Lyles, and Mitchell off the bench. I'm not saying it's what I would do, but I wouldn't be surprised if McNair takes a really conservative approach and the only changes are Vezenkov (if he comes over), a new backup center, and some end of bench shuffling.
Sabonis
Barnes
Murray
Huerter
Fox
With Monk, Lyles, and Mitchell off the bench. I'm not saying it's what I would do, but I wouldn't be surprised if McNair takes a really conservative approach and the only changes are Vezenkov (if he comes over), a new backup center, and some end of bench shuffling.
I just don't see that happening. This will very likely be HB's last big contract. You don't pay a guy like that $18-22 million per season to come off the bench. And if the Kings aren't willing to pay that much, I'm pretty certain another team will.
I'm pretty confident in saying Barnes will either start for the Kings or start for a different team next season.
I'm pretty confident in saying Barnes will either start for the Kings or start for a different team next season.
I agree that this seems likely, and I probably lean more in favor of the proposition "Vezenkov is coming this year" than the average KF.com denizen.
If so, our primary 8-man lineup (as you identified) plus Sasha is probably the top 9. I think we keep Edwards and we are unable to get rid of Holmes, so that's 11 spots. The remaining three spots are probably filled with a third-string PG, a backup defensive C, and #24. That's my best guess right now, but obviously a lot can happen, and if we get a deal we have to bite on we could look significantly different. But even then, Fox, Sabonis, Monk, and Murray are probably going absolutely nowhere.
If so, our primary 8-man lineup (as you identified) plus Sasha is probably the top 9. I think we keep Edwards and we are unable to get rid of Holmes, so that's 11 spots. The remaining three spots are probably filled with a third-string PG, a backup defensive C, and #24. That's my best guess right now, but obviously a lot can happen, and if we get a deal we have to bite on we could look significantly different. But even then, Fox, Sabonis, Monk, and Murray are probably going absolutely nowhere.
Honestly, it's pretty easy to look at the playoffs and say:
If Fox and/or Domas are healthy, we win the series.
If HB and Huerter shoot even "poorly", we win the series. They were that bad and unplayable for 90% of the series.
It does seem perfectly reasonable to keep things simple, bring in Vezenkov, bring in pick #24 and see what sort of internal growth you have from Murray/Davion/Edwards/#24. Just from a process stand-point, it does seem bad to make sweeping changes that was finally good after 16 years. We should want to gamble on continuity and growth in year 2 before making real decisions about what this team needs to take us over the top.
I do think the one major change that should be on the table is the HB decision. Whether it's bring him back, whether it's give his role to Vezenkov and increase Lyles role and maybe give a 1+1 deal to an elite defender like Okogie. Whether it's bring in a splash guy at that position like a Cam Johnson/Grant Williams/PJW/Naz Reid. All those seem fine to me, whichever route we do pick.
If Fox and/or Domas are healthy, we win the series.
If HB and Huerter shoot even "poorly", we win the series. They were that bad and unplayable for 90% of the series.
It does seem perfectly reasonable to keep things simple, bring in Vezenkov, bring in pick #24 and see what sort of internal growth you have from Murray/Davion/Edwards/#24. Just from a process stand-point, it does seem bad to make sweeping changes that was finally good after 16 years. We should want to gamble on continuity and growth in year 2 before making real decisions about what this team needs to take us over the top.
I do think the one major change that should be on the table is the HB decision. Whether it's bring him back, whether it's give his role to Vezenkov and increase Lyles role and maybe give a 1+1 deal to an elite defender like Okogie. Whether it's bring in a splash guy at that position like a Cam Johnson/Grant Williams/PJW/Naz Reid. All those seem fine to me, whichever route we do pick.
Man, 3/$78M left on that contract and he's coming off the worst year of his career? And we've got Keegan to man the 4? Really, the only way we can match is to probably go Holmes + Huerter, but I don't think that makes us better even if it does shed the Holmes contract. We'd have to demand our pick back. But still...yuck.
I still don't understand why you think Barnes is so consistent with his offensive creation. It literally shows up for an 8-game stretch during the regular season and then he fades into oblivion as a C&S spacer. He literally had 1 quarter in the playoffs where he took over as an ISO creator and was garbage the rest of the series.
There's absolutely nothing wrong with his archetype as a super mega efficient shooter/scorer that every once in a while can get to the FT line. But let's not pretend he's anywhere close to an offensive hub as an on-ball scorer.
There's absolutely nothing wrong with his archetype as a super mega efficient shooter/scorer that every once in a while can get to the FT line. But let's not pretend he's anywhere close to an offensive hub as an on-ball scorer.
Monks per minute production is good, but the bigger issue is that those other two were the number 1 target of every teams scouting report. Can Monk take that next step with the same attention? Maybe. It's a little late in his career but it's certainly possible. LaVine and Beal have far more guarantees in the sense that you don't have to extrapolate their stats, they've actually done it.
It would be tough to do.
Richaun & Davion works but it eats up $8M in caproom, not to mention I don't see the Hawks wanting Holmes at his current salary.
Barnes for Collins always made the most sense, but now HB is a free agent. I don't see a sign & trade in the cards, especially if part of the rationale of trading Collins is to save money.
Richaun & Davion works but it eats up $8M in caproom, not to mention I don't see the Hawks wanting Holmes at his current salary.
Barnes for Collins always made the most sense, but now HB is a free agent. I don't see a sign & trade in the cards, especially if part of the rationale of trading Collins is to save money.
I mean, Monk just showed us he can on the biggest stage right? That has to count for something. And he doesn't cost you Davion+Huerter+Holmes+2 FRP to acquire him (at a minimum).
I'm not really sure it's too late either heading into his age 25 season. He's had a very encouraging career trajectory the last 3 years where he's taken a step every single from his last year in CHA, to his LAL year and again with us. And then he went crazy in the playoffs and started drawing fouls like prime James Harden.
I'm not really sure it's too late either heading into his age 25 season. He's had a very encouraging career trajectory the last 3 years where he's taken a step every single from his last year in CHA, to his LAL year and again with us. And then he went crazy in the playoffs and started drawing fouls like prime James Harden.
Because I watched how Brown uses him. Barnes is basically the teams second level iso shot creator from the perimeter in. He does fade, and that's the issue with him. He doesn't look to always be aggressive, but the stats don't lie, he's ELITE as an iso player when he does it. This is what got him attention of teams thinking he could not only be a good player but a star potentially. He was neck and neck with Carmelo as an iso scorer at one point. Barnes even then just didn't look to feast enough though. In these playoffs almost every player was garbage besides Monk at times and Fox pre injury. That's just a fact. Domas wasn't really garbage but his game certainly diminished. Everybody else on the team was fighting over middling PER's and inconsistent play. In the end, per minute Barnes was right there with Monk, Fox, and Domas in terms of getting to the line. Everybody else outside of variable minute bigs didn't even exist. The question is whether or not a far less efficient but potentially more willing scorer type like a Jerami Grant would improve the teams odds come playoff time. I think it might. Regardless, while these playoffs aren't entirely definitive Fox needs someone else that can step up so he doesn't have to destroy himself just to get past a first round series. If this team is thinking rings, it's got to be a little easier than that.
See, I think you can still add those other types to something around Fox and Monk. And Monk showed us as that sparkplug from the bench, which I think Brown doesn't really want to mess with unless he has to. Also, it was another case of him being that nuclear type that can either blow up in a positive way, or explode your chances. I mean, his playoff game log says a lot about the type of player he is and why he might be so good as the 6th man.
I'd still be opposed to moving all in for an OG or Siakam type, but that would be much much better than a Lavine or Beal move. I guess my thinking is Monk our version of "We have Lavine/Beal at home". If you move in for OG/Siakam, at least that's an archetype that's far more valuable, fits better with the Kings core and directly addresses our biggest needs.