Does MB III make WCS expendable?

Does MB III make WCS expendable?


  • Total voters
    30
  • Poll closed .
#31
It’s really simple for me.

Out of Bjelica, Cauley-Stein, Giles, and Bagley, who would you consider a building block? To me, that’s very easily Giles and Bagley considering their age, contract, potential, and skill set.

From there, you have to ask yourself if these two can play minutes together. If the answer is no, you’ll need to move one now/down the road. If the answer is yes, the next question is what type of 3rd big would complement these two and make for a great 3 big rotation.

I think that tandem lacks:
  • Pure shooting
  • Size
  • Strength
To me, that 3rd big would need to have these attributes and should be someone who can be signed/had for cheap so we can save our cap on other positions (e.g., SF). These guys would seem to work:
  1. Kelly Olynyk
  2. Frank Kaminsky
  3. Channing Frye
  4. Noah Vonleh
  5. Brook Lopez
Vonleh is shorter than a lot of these guys (6’8” without shoes) but his vertical athleticism (31” standing vertical and 37” max vertical), strength (250 lbs and 7.3% body fat), length (7’4.25” wingspan and 9’0” standing reach), and his rebounding ability (11.7 rebounds per 36 min)

Bjelicia fills this role very well minus the ideal size/strength. Labissiere is a dark horse to fill this type of role but I’m not holding my breath. I guess what I’m saying is that we may already have the making of a very good, complementary 3 big rotation.

Bagley and Giles do make WCS expendable because he’s not the long term, ideal fit with those two. If Bagley and Giles are going to be big pieces for our future, the fit next to them matters. Cauley-Stein (while at least a productive player) isn’t the ideal fit.
Thinking about it more, if we can make some sort of trade centered around Cauley-Stein, expirings, & 2nd round picks for Otto Porter, it gives us $31.4 mil in cap space next year with the following players under contract:

PG - Fox / Ferrell / Mason
SG - Hield / Bogdanovic
SF - Porter / Jackson
PF - Giles / Bjelicia / Labissiere
C - Bagley

I'd target Middleton first in free agency. If we can pick him up and resign a big, strong C like Koufos, we would be a very interesting team:

PG - Fox (36 min) / Bogdanovic (12 min) / Ferrell / Mason
SG - Hield (30 min) / Bogdanovic (18 min)
SF - Middleton (34 min) / Porter (14 min) / Jackson
PF - Porter (16 min) / Giles (28 min) / Bjelicia (4 min) / Labissiere
C - Bagley (32 min) / Bjelicia (16 min) / Koufos

Fox - 36 min
Middleton - 34 min
Bagley - 32 min
Hield - 30 min
Bogdanovic - 30 min
Porter - 30 mn
Giles - 28 min
Bjelicia - 20 min

Now if we can't get a guy like Middleton, I think the smaller level signings would be Shumpert, Vonleh, & Koufos would be a solid get with perhaps selling the remaining cap space for a pick. I think Bagley, Giles, Vonleh & Bjelicia make for a solid big man rotation (while also having someone like Koufos in case a big C is destroying us).
 
#32
My question is: what kind of contract does Willie stand to command? If last year is any indicator, it'd probably be something like Jusuf Nurkic's 4 year 53 Million?
I thought Nurkic got massively underpaid. For that price, I would comfortably resign Willie no matter what.
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
#33
Its a contract year for WCS, and I would say he is playing great. With that said, it seems to me that MB III brings most of what WCS does and is superior on the offensive side of the ball. Would it behoove us to pass on WCS in favor of featuring Bagley as a main piece? Also, this would give us more money to resign our other promising young guys and/or add some more FA's/nifty Serbians.
If we were a couple of years down the road I might say yes, based purely on your premise. But right now Bagley isn't strong enough to match up with some of the bigger centers in the league. Personally, I think Bagley is more of a PF than a Center, but that's just my opinion. Also, I'll never understand why the development of one player has to be to the detriment of another player. What's wrong with having a lot of talented players?

Now my opinion is also going to be based on how much money it will take to resign Willie. Willie has a certain value, and he deserves to get paid that value, but not over payed. I can see the Kings with a three man rotation in the future made up of Willie, Bagley, and Giles. Start whomever you desire.
 
#34
Thinking about it more, if we can make some sort of trade centered around Cauley-Stein, expirings, & 2nd round picks for Otto Porter, it gives us $31.4 mil in cap space next year with the following players under contract:

PG - Fox / Ferrell / Mason
SG - Hield / Bogdanovic
SF - Porter / Jackson
PF - Giles / Bjelicia / Labissiere
C - Bagley

I'd target Middleton first in free agency. If we can pick him up and resign a big, strong C like Koufos, we would be a very interesting team:

PG - Fox (36 min) / Bogdanovic (12 min) / Ferrell / Mason
SG - Hield (30 min) / Bogdanovic (18 min)
SF - Middleton (34 min) / Porter (14 min) / Jackson
PF - Porter (16 min) / Giles (28 min) / Bjelicia (4 min) / Labissiere
C - Bagley (32 min) / Bjelicia (16 min) / Koufos

Fox - 36 min
Middleton - 34 min
Bagley - 32 min
Hield - 30 min
Bogdanovic - 30 min
Porter - 30 mn
Giles - 28 min
Bjelicia - 20 min

Now if we can't get a guy like Middleton, I think the smaller level signings would be Shumpert, Vonleh, & Koufos would be a solid get with perhaps selling the remaining cap space for a pick. I think Bagley, Giles, Vonleh & Bjelicia make for a solid big man rotation (while also having someone like Koufos in case a big C is destroying us).
My biggest fit with this is that a starting front-court of Porter/Bagley would be extremely weak. I think they would get bossed around in the front court. Porter Jr is 6'8 200lbs. Giles and Bjelica also lack strength.

I think we'd need to find a legitimate C with size. Not sure I see a capable center... KK's play has regressed a lot this year. If it didn't, I would be fine with the rotation. Haven't watched much of Vonleh as a NYK, so maybe I'm not giving him enough credit.
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
#35
I think we've seen enough Willie and Bagley on the court this year to know that they aren't a great combo together on the floor. The spacing disappears with them out there at the same time. Due to that, even though I think Willie really is a good player all around and I think the Kings would miss that size and athletic ability, you have to move on. Keeping him if you can't play him with one of your top prospects doesn't make much sense. To the right team Willie is easily worth 100 million.
Well to be honest, the two of them haven't played that often together, but that aside, I think you have to project toward the future. If Bagley develops his outside shot, then it's not much different than Willie and Bjelica, except more athleticism. Of course there's an if there, with no guarantee's, and the decision on Willie will have to be made before we know the outcome of Bagley's potential.

If Willie can be signed at a reasonable amount, then he'll still be a tradeable asset if fit becomes the problem. There will always be a team out that that will want a player like Willie, as long as we don't sign him to an inflated contract.
 
#36
My biggest fit with this is that a starting front-court of Porter/Bagley would be extremely weak. I think they would get bossed around in the front court. Porter Jr is 6'8 200lbs. Giles and Bjelica also lack strength.

I think we'd need to find a legitimate C with size. Not sure I see a capable center... KK's play has regressed a lot this year. If it didn't, I would be fine with the rotation. Haven't watched much of Vonleh as a NYK, so maybe I'm not giving him enough credit.
It's definitely the weak point. No doubt.

I think a lot of this banks on the fact that Bagley & Giles continue to get stronger and become good to great rebounders. Like I mentioned above, I think a guy like Brook Lopez would be an interesting fit. He spaces the floor really well, has the size/strength to bang with a bigger center, and may only cost a few million dollars (the size of Yogi's contract).

At the end of the day, I think our best lineup will be when Bagley is at C. If that's the case, we really shouldn't be paying any Cs a lot of money. That's not a wise cap move (not saying you're recommending that).
 
#37
Well to be honest, the two of them haven't played that often together, but that aside, I think you have to project toward the future. If Bagley develops his outside shot, then it's not much different than Willie and Bjelica, except more athleticism. Of course there's an if there, with no guarantee's, and the decision on Willie will have to be made before we know the outcome of Bagley's potential.

If Willie can be signed at a reasonable amount, then he'll still be a tradeable asset if fit becomes the problem. There will always be a team out that that will want a player like Willie, as long as we don't sign him to an inflated contract.
Never say never, but I'm having a hard time seeing Bagley get to a point where he is in the same conversation as Bjelicia as a shooter. Obviously, he could become that level of a shooter (it's not impossible) but the trajectory he is on leads me to think that it's less likely rather than more likely.

And to add to that, Bagley operates best around the basket. Whether it's a faceup move, back to the basket, lob threat, offensive rebound, he flourishes when he is close to the basket. Asking him to play mainly on the outside (like Bjelicia) would not be playing to his strengths. The strengths of both Cauley-Stein & Bagley are close to the basket. It's hard to be successful not maximizing the strengths of your core players. This is one of the reasons why I'd like to move Cauley-Stein.
 
#39
How old can this thread be? Bagley is a rookie.
This question will always be relevant until Bagley takes WCS' spot in the lineup.
Ideally you trade him before you replace him with Bagley in the starting lineup. Otherwise, your devaluing WCS right before you move him.
 
#40
Well to be honest, the two of them haven't played that often together, but that aside, I think you have to project toward the future. If Bagley develops his outside shot, then it's not much different than Willie and Bjelica, except more athleticism. Of course there's an if there, with no guarantee's, and the decision on Willie will have to be made before we know the outcome of Bagley's potential.

If Willie can be signed at a reasonable amount, then he'll still be a tradeable asset if fit becomes the problem. There will always be a team out that that will want a player like Willie, as long as we don't sign him to an inflated contract.

There is a reason for that. In theory they should be able to play together and it could realistically work. Willie should have a decent jumper that he's willing to take, Bagley will in time as well, but it seems like where they want to be on the floor overlaps a bit. Bjelica is a stretch four. He's comfortable facing and spacing and him being that role player willing to shed the offensive burden and be a complimentary piece is what makes it work beyond his shooting ability. Two bigs looking to be the top dog in your pick and roll scheme won't work for that price IMO. This is the main issue with where the Kings are at. They've taken a little longer than hoped to gain traction and now they've got some rookie's at the end of their deal that will have value in what should be an active market so that means future pinching to the salary cap. The big man depth that exists now makes it unlikely Willie will live up to that deal as Giles and Bagley grow. I'm not against Willie be re-signed totally especially if they get blocked from getting that SF target and it's on a shorter deal but I recognize that money would be much more wisely spent elsewhere.

Two things should happen. They need to put Bagley into Willies role and see how it looks. Then also, yes, they should play Bagley and Willie together for stretches of each game and see how it looks over some degree of time.
 
#41
Seems that he'd more likely be between Nurkic's 4 year 53 million and Capela's 5 year 90 million. Imo he'd land much closer to Nurkic's value from last off season.

NOTE: Can someone teach me how to edit a post? I wanted to add this to my post above. Thank you!
Nurkić is a better player than WCS.
 
#42
I saw Bagley play some center with Beli as the power forward last night but when Giles and Bagley came in they both are so good I did not even pay attention to who was the center as it just seemed that they both crashed the boards and both posted up on offense. But Giles passing makes him a threat in the pick and roll from the post.
 
#43
Nurkić is a better player than WCS.
I live in Portland and watch the Blazers almost as much as I watch the Kings. As of last year, Nurkic was not significantly better than WCS is this year. It would probably be a wash, but I'd take WCS over last year's Nurkic personally. He's having a career year. Also, Nurkic's style doesn't really fit in elite level basketball and he was fresh off of being exposed for that in the first round.
 

Kingster

Hall of Famer
#44
Maybe somebody on this board can help me out on this point. I was listening to Nate Duncan on 1140, a basketball/cap expert. He said that because of WCS's draft slot that under the CBA WCS would have to get a minimum of $14 mill/year if the Kings decided to resign him. I think he mentioned the term, "cap hold." Does anyone know something about this rule? Thanks.

He also said that WCS would not get the Kings to the next level and the Kings should spend their $$$ elsewhere.
 

Capt. Factorial

This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things
Staff member
#45
Maybe somebody on this board can help me out on this point. I was listening to Nate Duncan on 1140, a basketball/cap expert. He said that because of WCS's draft slot that under the CBA WCS would have to get a minimum of $14 mill/year if the Kings decided to resign him. I think he mentioned the term, "cap hold." Does anyone know something about this rule? Thanks.
There is a mix-up here between Cap Holds and actual salary, they are not the same.

The CBA allows teams to exceed the cap to sign their "own" players (Bird Rights, etc. not going deep on that here). In order to prevent teams from signing other teams' free agents up to the cap and THEN signing their own players, the league assigns a Cap Hold to the rights-holding team for every player eligible for Bird Rights, etc. That cap hold is not actual money, but it is a very simplistic (for players coming off rookie contracts usually based on draft position) formulaic estimate of what they might earn, and that Cap Hold is applied as if it were real money to the team's salary cap until the player signs (either with their old team or with a new one). But the ACTUAL SIZE of the contract is not limited by the Cap Hold.
 

Kingster

Hall of Famer
#46
There is a mix-up here between Cap Holds and actual salary, they are not the same.

The CBA allows teams to exceed the cap to sign their "own" players (Bird Rights, etc. not going deep on that here). In order to prevent teams from signing other teams' free agents up to the cap and THEN signing their own players, the league assigns a Cap Hold to the rights-holding team for every player eligible for Bird Rights, etc. That cap hold is not actual money, but it is a very simplistic (for players coming off rookie contracts usually based on draft position) formulaic estimate of what they might earn, and that Cap Hold is applied as if it were real money to the team's salary cap until the player signs (either with their old team or with a new one). But the ACTUAL SIZE of the contract is not limited by the Cap Hold.
So if WCS were to stay with the Kings $14 million would be applied to the Kings' salary cap in the "limbo period" when WCS hasn't signed with the Kings nor with another team. Therefore, the Kings would not have $14 million to offer to some other free agent during that limbo period? Is that correct? Thanks, again.
 

Capt. Factorial

This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things
Staff member
#47
So if WCS were to stay with the Kings $14 million would be applied to the Kings' salary cap in the "limbo period" when WCS hasn't signed with the Kings nor with another team. Therefore, the Kings would not have $14 million to offer to some other free agent during that limbo period? Is that correct? Thanks, again.
That is correct. The Kings would have the ability to "renounce" the cap hold, but then would no longer be allowed to exceed the cap to sign WCS.

(And I should add, although the cap hold for WCS - $14M sounds about right but I haven't looked - does not prevent us signing him to a smaller contract, my guess is that his actual market value is higher than that, not lower.)
 
#49
I live in Portland and watch the Blazers almost as much as I watch the Kings. As of last year, Nurkic was not significantly better than WCS is this year. It would probably be a wash, but I'd take WCS over last year's Nurkic personally. He's having a career year. Also, Nurkic's style doesn't really fit in elite level basketball and he was fresh off of being exposed for that in the first round.
I am not a big fan. I think the big difference in market value though is that Nurk is limited but consistent where as WCS shows enough flashes that it only takes one team to convince themselves that they can get good Willie 82 games a year and send his price to the moon. Once the price is over 16mil I don't think he can bring it at that level night in night out.
 
#51
WCS makes WCS expendable. I really believe Vlade and the rest of the staff including our coach did not want to totally upset the apple cart. Bagley May replace him someday but I think he will occupy the Power forward position first.

Fortunately or not starting a new center or inserting Giles or KK as starters the rest of the season did not look like the proper move. But after what I witnessed with our overall of the small forward position and even bringing in a big body to replace Skal showed me the revamping of that position will be a priority this summer.
 
#52
Yea I agree with Cojc. MB3 and WCS have totally different offensive skill sets with MB3 possessing solid post moves and the ability to hit from the outside, and WCS being essentially limited to lobs and putbacks. I also think WCS is strictly a C while MB3 has the ability to play both PF and C.

WCS' lack of touch around the rim, combined with his usually poor defense, lack of BBall IQ, incredibly inconsistent motor and occasional questionable attitude leave much to be desired. He's looking expendable, MB3 or no MB3.

If Willie put in the same amount of effort every day and really focused on defense he could be SUCH a force. He would be an incredible asset. But right now that's not the case. Coming out of the draft he was expected to develop into a defensive monster with his tools and athleticism. It's really disappointing to see such a rare athlete go to waste.

I'd like to point out, WCS was my favorite player for a while so this is an honest critique. I'm not a Willie hater. I loved his style of play At Kentucky and he's partially the reason I started developing interest in the Kings in the first place.
 
#53
13 points and 8.5 rebounds in under 30 minutes. He doesn’t block shots, but he doesn’t turn the ball over much. His steals are nice and his shooting percentage is OK. Oh, and he constantly puts pressure on the defense with his speed and can switch out on wings.

Gotta balance the negatives with the positives. And Willie should improve over the next five years. Big men take longer to develop and elite athletes have a longer growth curve.

I’m a WCS fan - even with the maddening inconsistencies. But anything more than $15 mil/year I’m ok with saying bye-bye.
 
#54
Center is a position where its relatively easy to get quality production for very cheap. When thats the case and since this is a salary cap sport, it would be very stupid to give WCS anything significant. Also considering we have Bagley and Giles who should be capable to play big minutes at center next year, we really shouldnt extend Willy to anything long term.

And this isnt a knock on Willy, he is a starting caliber center in this league, it just doesnt make any sense to lock him down for anything near 10-15mil. Since we dont switch much on defense, we are not fully utilizing his skillset and some other team might get more out of him. Still, in a salary cap sport you have limited recourses and this team really needs to spend those recourses in other positions aka wings and offensive creator(s) to take the load off from Fox and Bogdan.
 
#55
I am more and more convinced that come free agency, that we will not bring back WCS. I think Bagley's development will continue and come next season he will be a starter at PF. Starting WCS and Bagley is going to be problematic in terms of spacing. We are obviously going to back in Bagley as our front court star.

I think we will want to start Bagley and that means a C that can spread the floor, pass and rebound. Vucevic is the most likely target here. If we manage to replace WCS with Vucevic for next season we are getting a talent upgrade but we are also spreading the floor for Fox and giving Bagley space to operate in. Brooke Lopez is another option but the rebounding takes a hit there.

Vucevic
Bagley
Barnes
Hield
Fox

Bogdanovic
Giles
Bjelica

That is a pretty good 8 man rotation but the starting 5 fit well together. Bagley and Fox will continue to improve but with Barnes, Buddy and Vucevic you have spacing from 3 positions on the floor. It could be pretty interesting.
 
#56
I am more and more convinced that come free agency, that we will not bring back WCS. I think Bagley's development will continue and come next season he will be a starter at PF. Starting WCS and Bagley is going to be problematic in terms of spacing. We are obviously going to back in Bagley as our front court star.

I think we will want to start Bagley and that means a C that can spread the floor, pass and rebound. Vucevic is the most likely target here. If we manage to replace WCS with Vucevic for next season we are getting a talent upgrade but we are also spreading the floor for Fox and giving Bagley space to operate in. Brooke Lopez is another option but the rebounding takes a hit there.

Vucevic
Bagley
Barnes
Hield
Fox

Bogdanovic
Giles
Bjelica

That is a pretty good 8 man rotation but the starting 5 fit well together. Bagley and Fox will continue to improve but with Barnes, Buddy and Vucevic you have spacing from 3 positions on the floor. It could be pretty interesting.
Vucevic would be nice, but he will have a lot of offers, including the Mavs and Doncic.

With all these teams having cap space, it’s going to be tough to sign a top free agent this summer.
 
#57
Vucevic would be nice, but he will have a lot of offers, including the Mavs and Doncic.

With all these teams having cap space, it’s going to be tough to sign a top free agent this summer.
I think with Vlade, Peja, Bogi and Bjeli in Sacramento, we have a very good chance. I think it will be a similar case to what it was with Bjelica last year “when Vlade calls, you pick up and listen what he has to say”. Vučević grew up watching Vlade and Peja, I am sure he will at the very least listen.
 
#58
I think with Vlade, Peja, Bogi and Bjeli in Sacramento, we have a very good chance. I think it will be a similar case to what it was with Bjelica last year “when Vlade calls, you pick up and listen what he has to say”. Vučević grew up watching Vlade and Peja, I am sure he will at the very least listen.
If Vlade can sign Vucevic, that opens the door for Bagley to start at Power Forward.

If we can sign him, that would the best free agent signing since the Kings signed Vlade himself.

The Kings would need to throw the max at him to have a chance, but I think he would be a great fit next to Bagley in the starting lineup. We shall see if Vlade can work his magic this summer! ;)