Why not?
This is the right answer.
His wife is tied to the vineyard in Napa so they want to be in CA. I am not sure he'd be ok with Portland and he certainly won't be ok moving much further away.
My biggest fear is that, even if we offer him what might be seen as "a reasonable contract", are we sure that he will be willing to accept it over a more lucrative contract to go and play elsewhere?
Keon is a guy that on his current contract might actually be able to get a FRP all by himself. Not saying I want to do that, but to throw him in seems rather silly. Unless you are getting a haul (3+ FRP).
And what I am saying is that if we do want to get a haul, Keon likely needs to be a part of the deal.
Only one or two teams have any money, so he's probably going to get MLE offers, we can beat those.
I think we aren't getting a haul.
Then Keon might (most likely will) be staying in Sacramento.
They've already traded their '30. The picks they can give are '26 and '28 (or '27 if neither of those) and '32. In '29 and '31 they can only swap unless they acquire another unprotected first.
I really hope this GM doesn't mess up the Keon situation. At the absolute worst, you give him whatever extension he will sign. Best case, you get him for 3 more years while developing good habits for the kids. Worst case, you trade him next year after hes on an extension. I think they really need to find an expiring for Schroder &/Or Monk so that they feel comfortable with Keon/Keegan extensions next year. Maybe can get some expirings for Sabonis to help as well.
At this point due to mismanaging that asset, that's entirely up to him.
I think the desire to use Keon the way Keon has been used is more of a directive from the owner as opposed to both head coaches just not knowing what the heck they're doing out there. Vivek's hands have been all over this a lot more than most would like to admit, I'm afraid.
Right, but that’s exactly my point. Even if the Kings finished with the 10th worst record, the upside still isn’t meaningful enough to justify tanking. It only slightly increases the chance of jumping into the top 4, but the odds are still incredibly low across the board. Flattened odds mean that unless you’re a bottom 3 team, the difference in realistic outcomes isn’t big enough to outweigh punting on a chance at the playin.
I'm replying to someone who said he would force a trade and make demands. Stating what the teams he is likely to demand to.
Huh???
Remember when we traded him Detroit or whoever thought they fleeced us initially.
I think we value him because he was untouchable during the Kuminga saga. But if we are doing a tear down anything is possible.
The only barrier is that if we are doing a tear down we are going to have to take some bad salary in exchange for picks, and we can't go into luxury tax on a team that is doing a reset. With any luck we can move off some of our dead weight without taking on long term dead money, but doing that should net us better picks.