Keon Ellis

[SacTownKid]

I mean you can't just wait for a superstar to fall in your lap. Not everyone gets the 1% luck chance like the Mavericks to get Flagg. And I think the idea here is that we'd give this a real shot for a year or 2 with LaVine/Domas at the head and then look to move them if it doesn't work... while Keon/Keegan/Kuminga/Nique headline the next good Kings team. Or if Vivek ever signs off on a real rebuild, then those are all pieces you can move for a ton of draft assets.

Yeah, but when you start your situation like that you kind of have to. Again, it's the classic too good to be bad, yadda, yadda, yadda. We've seen this go around and around before albeit on a worse options. The next question would be if Kuminga is going to be on a Fox/Cuz level as a talent. Better hope he is and he might be. Ditching youth/picks/and paying actual money on day 1 are all impediments to rebuilding, pure and simple. As for value? Tough call. Look at Monk. Looks like indeed that might have been exactly what history said when it came to that kind of monetary value on a 6th man scoring guard. The fact that teams aren't beating the Warriors door down to offer big money to Kuminga is yes, another gamble. One that shouldn't bite the Kings but more than possible that it could.

 

[The_Jamal]

Yeah, but when you start your situation like that you kind of have to. Again, it's the classic too good to be bad, yadda, yadda, yadda. We've seen this go around and around before albeit on a worse options. The next question would be if Kuminga is going to be on a Fox/Cuz level as a talent. Better hope he is and he might be. Ditching youth/picks/and paying actual money on day 1 are all impediments to rebuilding, pure and simple. As for value? Tough call. Look at Monk. Looks like indeed that might have been exactly what history said when it came to that kind of monetary value on a 6th man scoring guard. The fact that teams aren't beating the Warriors door down to offer big money to Kuminga is yes, another gamble. One that shouldn't bite the Kings but more than possible that it could.

Ok, but when do YOU actually want to spend money? You said earlier this off-season you'd let Keon walk rather than pay him. So again, what happens if the Kings never get the chance to draft Cooper Flagg? What's the long-term focus?

If you're not willing to gamble on Kuminga/Keon type talents, then what DO you gamble on?

Let's pretend that the Kings didn't have Dennis/LaVine/Domas/DDR on the team right now. Why would you still not go try and get Kuminga in that scenario? Young guys with promise that are affordable are basically never available. You can wait for it in the draft, but what if that never comes either?

I just don't get the trepidation with Kuminga. Now Dennis Schroeder? Yeah, that's treading tires if I've ever seen it. An entirely worthless bet for a team stuck in the middle that doesn't really move the needle to win more games, but keeps playing time out of the hands of guys who need development

 

[SacTownKid]

Ok, but when do YOU actually want to spend money? You said earlier this off-season you'd let Keon walk rather than pay him. So again, what happens if the Kings never get the chance to draft Cooper Flagg? What's the long-term focus?

If you're not willing to gamble on Kuminga/Keon type talents, then what DO you gamble on?

Let's pretend that the Kings didn't have Dennis/LaVine/Domas/DDR on the team right now. Why would you still not go try and get Kuminga in that scenario? Young guys with promise that are affordable are basically never available. You can wait for it in the draft, but what if that never comes either?

I just don't get the trepidation with Kuminga. Now Dennis Schroeder? Yeah, that's treading tires if I've ever seen it. An entirely worthless bet for a team stuck in the middle that doesn't really move the needle to win more games, but keeps playing time out of the hands of guys who need development

Not exactly, I said if Keon wanted 20 plus million THIS summer like that article stated yes, that value isn't there yet. That's why I said picking up the option and then figuring it out was a much better play for Sacramento. However, that was before the Kings went out and started to target higher money players using rebuild packages and also targeted players beyond 30 years of age so... The Kings are actively trying to cut a portion out of their rebuild potential so now the question would be how good the team is and whether or not the Kings can survive their own KCP level contract in a worst case.

Look at the Thunder. They didn't draft the superstar they have. They also didn't attempt to fully build around him from day 1. They let their situation develop over time. Draft, signings, trades. They utilized that space in many different ways to build a stockpile of assets. The Kings are always trying to stockpile pure talent on higher pay which when it doesn't work? It becomes an anchor. Youth = financial flexibility and development. It doesn't always work that seamlessly obviously, but c'mon, we've seen the Kings indeed go against every common sense grain when it comes to rebuilding, anyone paying attention can guess the potential flaws in these plans. Assumption has not worked 19 out of 20 seasons. Then when it did it was a blip because there was no real upside, you were what you were as a team.

At least this finally kind of looks like someone worth gambling on, but a gamble it still is. This even though a lot better looking on paper is an attempt to skip the line in the process so to speak. I do think Kuminga can easily live up to that deal but look at what's happening right now in terms of trade value when it doesn't. Monk not being a big value contract doesn't completely surprise me but both he and DeMar supposedly being considered poor in value is pretty shocking if true. This makes that not trading Holmes after getting Domas mistake look like nothing. You don't overpay or keep things tight cap wise with no guaranteed results for the very reason we see in the Kuminga situation. If the Kings had prioritized flexibility in the face of middling results Kuminga is probably already a King with those rebuild pieces still in their back pocket.

The one good thing is the initial results on a Schroder, LaVine, Keegan, Domas, and Kuminga core would be pretty much what it is. No more guessing. Just better hope it works at that point because there's no choice but to commit with Keegans extension on the way and it might work. If LaVine and Kuminga jive that could be a foundation offensively that you can build around. Defensively? Time will tell.

 

[The_Jamal]

Not exactly, I said if Keon wanted 20 plus million THIS summer like that article stated yes, that value isn't there yet. That's why I said picking up the option and then figuring it out was a much better play for Sacramento. However, that was before the Kings went out and started to target higher money players using rebuild packages and also targeted players beyond 30 years of age so... The Kings are actively trying to cut a portion out of their rebuild potential so now the question would be how good the team is and whether or not the Kings can survive their own KCP level contract in a worst case.

Look at the Thunder. They didn't draft the superstar they have. They also didn't attempt to fully build around him from day 1. They let their situation develop over time. Draft, signings, trades. They utilized that space in many different ways to build a stockpile of assets. The Kings are always trying to stockpile pure talent on higher pay which when it doesn't work? It becomes an anchor. Youth = financial flexibility and development. It doesn't always work that seamlessly obviously, but c'mon, we've seen the Kings indeed go against every common sense grain when it comes to rebuilding, anyone paying attention can guess the potential flaws in these plans. Assumption has not worked 19 out of 20 seasons. Then when it did it was a blip because there was no real upside, you were what you were as a team.

At least this finally kind of looks like someone worth gambling on, but a gamble it still is. This even though a lot better looking on paper is an attempt to skip the line in the process so to speak. I do think Kuminga can easily live up to that deal but look at what's happening right now in terms of trade value when it doesn't. Monk not being a big value contract doesn't completely surprise me but both he and DeMar supposedly being considered poor in value is pretty shocking if true. This makes that not trading Holmes after getting Domas mistake look like nothing. You don't overpay or keep things tight cap wise with no guaranteed results for the very reason we see in the Kuminga situation. If the Kings had prioritized flexibility in the face of middling results Kuminga is probably already a King with those rebuild pieces still in their back pocket.

The one good thing is the initial results on a Schroder, LaVine, Keegan, Domas, and Kuminga core would be pretty much what it is. No more guessing. Just better hope it works at that point because there's no choice but to commit with Keegans extension on the way and it might work. If LaVine and Kuminga jive that could be a foundation offensively that you can build around. Defensively? Time will tell.

You're not really answering the question. So what do you do? How do you build your team? Who do you actually pay? Do you keep punting the rock down the line until a Cooper Flagg walks in? What if we don't pick in the top 5 in the next 3 years and get locked out of the stars?

Again, if you don't bet on Kuminga/Keon types, you're never going to bet on anyone.

 

[SacTownKid]

You're not really answering the question. So what do you do? How do you build your team? Who do you actually pay? Do you keep punting the rock down the line until a Cooper Flagg walks in? What if we don't pick in the top 5 in the next 3 years and get locked out of the stars?

Again, if you don't bet on Kuminga/Keon types, you're never going to bet on anyone.

What I do is basically what the Kings did, to borrow a phrase, punt as much interim salary down the road like they did with Keon. If they signed Keon to that deal now then guess what? This Kuminga thing isn't even a conversation. That provided flexibility. Now it's a question of whether it costs them Keon. I still don't think so, if the Kings offer a legit extension he's certainly not turning it down looking at how many players on a higher tier have been left in the cold.

Also, as I said from day 1, I would bring the roster back (now we know they didn't actually have much of a choice), see what it is on the floor, then make a determination based on need at that point. Do you rebuild? Do you go farther in? Does this team NEED a Kuminga? Do they need something else? Right now they are just trying to scoop talent and potential with no real leverage to do so. The bigger issue with Kuminga isn't just the salary, it's the combination of things that depletes a little in all 3 areas potentially. Youth, picks, and financial flexibility when if you're rebuilding, those are the only priceless valuables in your possession.

And no, you bet on flexibility. The Kings will still have some but it's a tighter window for sure. We are literally seeing now when you bet on players or fit and watch it not pan out. The very same could happen again. I feel better about Kuminga than the other ones the Kings have suffered through however.

 

[kingsfan101]

I mean you can't just wait for a superstar to fall in your lap. Not everyone gets the 1% luck chance like the Mavericks to get Flagg. And I think the idea here is that we'd give this a real shot for a year or 2 with LaVine/Domas at the head and then look to move them if it doesn't work... while Keon/Keegan/Kuminga/Nique headline the next good Kings team. Or if Vivek ever signs off on a real rebuild, then those are all pieces you can move for a ton of draft assets.

While I don't disagree with your point, want to digress a little and put a caution around already declaring Flagg as a star (and by extension, treating a future high pick as a franchise savior). To illustrate, here are the last 20 #1 picks (before Flagg)

• Andrew Bogut (2005)
• Andrea Bargnani (2006)
• Greg Oden (2007)
• Derrick Rose (2008)
• Blake Griffin (2009)
• John Wall (2010)
• Kyrie Irving (2011)
• Anthony Davis (2012)
• Anthony Bennett (2013)
• Andrew Wiggins (2014)
• Karl-Anthony Towns (2015)
• Ben Simmons (2016)
• Markelle Fultz (2017)
• Deandre Ayton (2018)
• Zion Williamson (2019)
• Anthony Edwards (2020)
• Cade Cunningham (2021)
• Paolo Banchero (2022)
• Victor Wembanyama (2023)
• Zaccharie Risacher (2024)

Yes, there are several stars and future HOFs there, but also many many misses. Many who had decent careers, but shortened due to injuries. in other words, if getting the #1 pick is a stroke of luck, getting a star (particularly a long term star), is another stroke of luck. Between 2013 and 2019 in particular, the returns were extremely poor. Simmons, Fultz, and Zion could never stay healthy enough; Wiggins and Towns have had decent careers, but not franchise superstar material.

This is not to suggest that a high draft pick is not a valuable asset, and that rebuilding teams should not aim for that. Just that a #1 pick is not necessarily a savior. Plus, if you want to suck bad enough to have a decent shot at the #1 pick, make sure you collect enough assets that you can leverage in case the pick doesn't pan out as expected.

 

[Warhawk]

While I don't disagree with your point, want to digress a little and put a caution around already declaring Flagg as a star (and by extension, treating a future high pick as a franchise savior). To illustrate, here are the last 20 #1 picks (before Flagg)

• Andrew Bogut (2005)
• Andrea Bargnani (2006)
• Greg Oden (2007)
• Derrick Rose (2008)
• Blake Griffin (2009)
• John Wall (2010)
• Kyrie Irving (2011)
• Anthony Davis (2012)
• Anthony Bennett (2013)
• Andrew Wiggins (2014)
• Karl-Anthony Towns (2015)
• Ben Simmons (2016)
• Markelle Fultz (2017)
• Deandre Ayton (2018)
• Zion Williamson (2019)
• Anthony Edwards (2020)
• Cade Cunningham (2021)
• Paolo Banchero (2022)
• Victor Wembanyama (2023)
• Zaccharie Risacher (2024)

Yes, there are several stars and future HOFs there, but also many many misses. Many who had decent careers, but shortened due to injuries. in other words, if getting the #1 pick is a stroke of luck, getting a star (particularly a long term star), is another stroke of luck. Between 2013 and 2019 in particular, the returns were extremely poor. Simmons, Fultz, and Zion could never stay healthy enough; Wiggins and Towns have had decent careers, but not franchise superstar material.

This is not to suggest that a high draft pick is not a valuable asset, and that rebuilding teams should not aim for that. Just that a #1 pick is not necessarily a savior. Plus, if you want to suck bad enough to have a decent shot at the #1 pick, make sure you collect enough assets that you can leverage in case the pick doesn't pan out as expected.

Preach! I've been saying this forever. Tanking for a #1 pick sounds great until you have to live through the years of tanking and then, if by some miracle you do get the top pick, you could end up with a Pervis or a Greg Oden.

A top pick is great to get but is by no means any guarantee of ANYTHING.

 

[SacTownKid]

While I don't disagree with your point, want to digress a little and put a caution around already declaring Flagg as a star (and by extension, treating a future high pick as a franchise savior). To illustrate, here are the last 20 #1 picks (before Flagg)

• Andrew Bogut (2005)
• Andrea Bargnani (2006)
• Greg Oden (2007)
• Derrick Rose (2008)
• Blake Griffin (2009)
• John Wall (2010)
• Kyrie Irving (2011)
• Anthony Davis (2012)
• Anthony Bennett (2013)
• Andrew Wiggins (2014)
• Karl-Anthony Towns (2015)
• Ben Simmons (2016)
• Markelle Fultz (2017)
• Deandre Ayton (2018)
• Zion Williamson (2019)
• Anthony Edwards (2020)
• Cade Cunningham (2021)
• Paolo Banchero (2022)
• Victor Wembanyama (2023)
• Zaccharie Risacher (2024)

Yes, there are several stars and future HOFs there, but also many many misses. Many who had decent careers, but shortened due to injuries. in other words, if getting the #1 pick is a stroke of luck, getting a star (particularly a long term star), is another stroke of luck. Between 2013 and 2019 in particular, the returns were extremely poor. Simmons, Fultz, and Zion could never stay healthy enough; Wiggins and Towns have had decent careers, but not franchise superstar material.

This is not to suggest that a high draft pick is not a valuable asset, and that rebuilding teams should not aim for that. Just that a #1 pick is not necessarily a savior. Plus, if you want to suck bad enough to have a decent shot at the #1 pick, make sure you collect enough assets that you can leverage in case the pick doesn't pan out as expected.

Yeah, it's not about the pick, it's about the ability to benefit from all 3 areas of team building, draft, trade, and signing and being able to strike in any of the 3 at any time to really improve. Look at most of those teams. Where did their trajectory head? Without fail almost every one of those teams to some degree added a long term piece to a winning combination. The Kings rarely seem to ever have all 3 areas line up and it's because they refuse to not skip steps. They always put themselves in a position to have to rely on 1 or 2 areas and those are typically the most costly risk wise either by trading or signing. They go out and sign short term pieces preaching long term outlook. They hang onto role players at a higher than market rate. They pick need when they are so far away from anything need won't move the needle nearly enough. They trade picks while preaching the same. They dump recent lottery picks on the low only to find out yet again, that maybe it wasn't "them" it was "you". lol.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

The Warriors managed to build their team picking mostly behind us. While not as successful - but also a realistic measuring stick - the Dame Portland teams were also built on players we passed on, notably Dame and CJ.

We've also had a history of sending or gifting them some of our notable misses who they managed to get more than we ever did out of.

 

[kingsfan101]

The Warriors managed to build their team picking mostly behind us. While not as successful - but also a realistic measuring stick - the Dame Portland teams were also built on players we passed on, notably Dame and CJ.

We've also had a history of sending or gifting them some of our notable misses who they managed to get more than we ever did out of.

I firmly believe that how draft picks fare is a function of both their own abilities/will (which is also a kind of ability), and the team/organization.

I have posted in the past the great success we had during our golden years of turning late FRPs into All Stars and valuable players, and contrasted it with the complete opposite; turning high lottery picks into busts.

Neither all of the former, nor all of the latter was on us, but quite likely, some part of it was. In particular, when Rick was our coach, almost all of our FRPs turned out great (unfortunately, some of them had their best years elsewhere, which is excusable for a contending team). After his departure in 2006, our draft history is one of doom and gloom. Some of it has to be a function of us being a dysfunctional organization for a large part of this period.

 

[sactowndog]

While I don't disagree with your point, want to digress a little and put a caution around already declaring Flagg as a star (and by extension, treating a future high pick as a franchise savior). To illustrate, here are the last 20 #1 picks (before Flagg)

• Andrew Bogut (2005)
• Andrea Bargnani (2006)
• Greg Oden (2007)
• Derrick Rose (2008)
• Blake Griffin (2009)
• John Wall (2010)
• Kyrie Irving (2011)
• Anthony Davis (2012)
• Anthony Bennett (2013)
• Andrew Wiggins (2014)
• Karl-Anthony Towns (2015)
• Ben Simmons (2016)
• Markelle Fultz (2017)
• Deandre Ayton (2018)
• Zion Williamson (2019)
• Anthony Edwards (2020)
• Cade Cunningham (2021)
• Paolo Banchero (2022)
• Victor Wembanyama (2023)
• Zaccharie Risacher (2024)

Yes, there are several stars and future HOFs there, but also many many misses. Many who had decent careers, but shortened due to injuries. in other words, if getting the #1 pick is a stroke of luck, getting a star (particularly a long term star), is another stroke of luck. Between 2013 and 2019 in particular, the returns were extremely poor. Simmons, Fultz, and Zion could never stay healthy enough; Wiggins and Towns have had decent careers, but not franchise superstar material.

This is not to suggest that a high draft pick is not a valuable asset, and that rebuilding teams should not aim for that. Just that a #1 pick is not necessarily a savior. Plus, if you want to suck bad enough to have a decent shot at the #1 pick, make sure you collect enough assets that you can leverage in case the pick doesn't pan out as expected.

The odds a drafting a Hall of Famer drop off sharply after the top 3. Yes with the top 3 you often have a dud but most drafts with the top players go in the top 3 pick. The Euro invasion did impact it but it was only temporary until everyone was scouting Europe.

 

[kingsfan101]

The odds a drafting a Hall of Famer drop off sharply after the top 3. Yes with the top 3 you often have a dud but most drafts with the top players go in the top 3 pick. The Euro invasion did impact it but it was only temporary until everyone was scouting Europe.

To be clear, I'm not saying that a lower draft pick is better. Just that a rebuild is much more than a high draft pick.

I'm sure everyone knows this already. Despite this, sometimes the discussion seems to boil down to "if we land with a high pick, we will get a franchise savior."

 

[KingsFanSince85]

Preach! I've been saying this forever. Tanking for a #1 pick sounds great until you have to live through the years of tanking and then, if by some miracle you do get the top pick, you could end up with a Pervis or a Greg Oden.

A top pick is great to get but is by no means any guarantee of ANYTHING.

Not only is what you say true, I’d also point out that the KINGS landed Tyrese Haliburton with the 12th pick in the 2020 draft and last time I checked he’s developed into a franchise level player for the Pacers; arguably better than every player selected ahead of him sans, maybe, Anthony Edwards.

Nikola Jokić was the 41st selection of his draft class and has arguably been the most productive and impactful player of the past 5 seasons.
Jalen Brunson was the 33rd selection of his draft class. He’s played a huge part in turning the Knicks into a contender.
Shai Gilgeous-Alexander just won MVP, Finals MVP, and a ring; he was drafted 11th; 9 selections after the KINGS were on the board.
Giannis Antetokounmpo was selected 15th and Steph Curry 7th; both transcendent superstar players the KINGS also could have had.

There’s seemingly an endless list of examples that could be added above.

The belief that the KINGS, or any franchise for that matter, has to land a top 3-5 pick in order to rebuild their team is ridiculous. What’s even more ludicrous is the belief that tanking is the best way to get there.

The KINGS haven’t been in the #1 draft position since 1989. They’ve held a top 4 pick just 5 times over the past 37 drafts.

Yet despite that, they still had countless opportunities to acquire superstar players from those less than favorable draft positions. And they never had to tank to be in those positions. All they had to do was make better draft decisions.

Point is, the KINGS can continue to compete and try to win every single year and no matter which position they end up drafting there will still be players available to them that can lift their team from loser status to contender status.

 

[Joshyjosh31]

But it is a gamble for sure. Starting a rebuild with potentially Keon, Keegan, and Kuminga making 50% of the cap puts the Kings behind the 8 ball in further improving the roster. Also, if teams are kind of balking at paying Kuminga 30 a year that could end up in a bad way contractually yet again. If Vivek is refusing to do this the right way then this is a better gamble than past scenarios though.

We wouldn’t be behind the 8 ball if we were giving Keon, Keegan, and Kuminga major minutes and responsibilities. We’d be in position to get a good draft pick and add to that young core without paying top dollar

 

[Joshyjosh31]

Preach! I've been saying this forever. Tanking for a #1 pick sounds great until you have to live through the years of tanking and then, if by some miracle you do get the top pick, you could end up with a Pervis or a Greg Oden.

A top pick is great to get but is by no means any guarantee of ANYTHING.

Is what we’re doing better atleast there’s hope when your building with high picks we know we’re play-in at best with the roster we have. And it’s gonna be hell in here when Carter, nique, and Ellis are getting 15mpg so GSW can kick our ass in the play in

what was the better result this year trading for Lavine and watching Dallas beat us like a college team or not taking back Lavine get the 12th pick and a kings ransom from New Orleans at draft time

 

[The_Jamal]

While I don't disagree with your point, want to digress a little and put a caution around already declaring Flagg as a star (and by extension, treating a future high pick as a franchise savior). To illustrate, here are the last 20 #1 picks (before Flagg)

• Andrew Bogut (2005)
• Andrea Bargnani (2006)
• Greg Oden (2007)
• Derrick Rose (2008)
• Blake Griffin (2009)
• John Wall (2010)
• Kyrie Irving (2011)
• Anthony Davis (2012)
• Anthony Bennett (2013)
• Andrew Wiggins (2014)
• Karl-Anthony Towns (2015)
• Ben Simmons (2016)
• Markelle Fultz (2017)
• Deandre Ayton (2018)
• Zion Williamson (2019)
• Anthony Edwards (2020)
• Cade Cunningham (2021)
• Paolo Banchero (2022)
• Victor Wembanyama (2023)
• Zaccharie Risacher (2024)

Yes, there are several stars and future HOFs there, but also many many misses. Many who had decent careers, but shortened due to injuries. in other words, if getting the #1 pick is a stroke of luck, getting a star (particularly a long term star), is another stroke of luck. Between 2013 and 2019 in particular, the returns were extremely poor. Simmons, Fultz, and Zion could never stay healthy enough; Wiggins and Towns have had decent careers, but not franchise superstar material.

This is not to suggest that a high draft pick is not a valuable asset, and that rebuilding teams should not aim for that. Just that a #1 pick is not necessarily a savior. Plus, if you want to suck bad enough to have a decent shot at the #1 pick, make sure you collect enough assets that you can leverage in case the pick doesn't pan out as expected.

This is true, but it further illustrates my point honestly. We could be waiting a LONG time for a franchise cornerstone to walk through the door. The Jazz have punted the last 3 years and dont have anyone close to that to show for it.

Flagg is about as safe a bet to be an elite franchise player as any prospect we've seen in recent memory and he's still not guaranteed to be that guy. Which is why you really can't wait around for the franchise player to fall in your lap

 

[Padrino]

This is true, but it further illustrates my point honestly. We could be waiting a LONG time for a franchise cornerstone to walk through the door. The Jazz have punted the last 3 years and dont have anyone close to that to show for it.

Flagg is about as safe a bet to be an elite franchise player as any prospect we've seen in recent memory and he's still not guaranteed to be that guy. Which is why you really can't wait around for the franchise player to fall in your lap

THIS. You can always give yourself more dice to roll in a given draft, but it doesn't mean that you're going to walk away with an elite franchise player. There's no shame at all in being a team that scouts well no matter where you land in the draft, invests in your young talent, and nurtures that talent to reach its full potential. Even if none of them transform into a top-10 player, if enough of them pop and you can craft a strong team identity, your best case scenario is the 2024-2025 Houston Rockets, who just won 52 games in a brutally difficult Western Conference despite not having a true franchise cornerstone. That's something to root for, and it positioned them to land Kevin Durant this off-season. I'm not sure that acquisition elevates them past Oklahoma City, but they're a serious ball club that must be taken seriously, unlike the Kings, who stumble from one mid-level acquisition to the next without much of a plan or a team identity.

 

[The_Jamal]

THIS. You can always give yourself more dice to roll in a given draft, but it doesn't mean that you're going to walk away with an elite franchise player. There's no shame at all in being a team that scouts well no matter where you land in the draft, invests in your young talent, and nurtures that talent to reach its full potential. Even if none of them transform into a top-10 player, if enough of them pop and you can craft a strong team identity, your best case scenario is the 2024-2025 Houston Rockets, who just won 52 games in a brutally difficult Western Conference despite not having a true franchise cornerstone. That's something to root for, and it positioned them to land Kevin Durant this off-season. I'm not sure that acquisition elevates them past Oklahoma City, but they're a serious ball club that must be taken seriously, unlike the Kings, who stumble from one mid-level acquisition to the next without much of a plan or a team identity.

And OKC is a SGA, Jalen, or Chet injury away from being entirely beatable. Winning a title is as much of having good injury luck as it is having the high end talent.

The Pacers were an excellent team but they had some of the best luck I've ever seen in a playoff run. Hali hitting like 5 game winners? Major injuries on the other team in Bucks and Cavs series? Outcomes like that are pretty severe outliers

 

[TheBigO]

We wouldn’t be behind the 8 ball if we were giving Keon, Keegan, and Kuminga major minutes and responsibilities. We’d be in position to get a good draft pick and add to that young core without paying top dollar

Vivek's insistance on trying to be "competitive" is the biggest impediment.

Sabonis
Murray
DeRozan
Lavine
Schroder

With Monk as the 6th man

Is likely a team that likely finishes somewhere between the 8-11 slot in the West.

On the other hand a starting lineup of

Sabonis
Kuminga
Murray
Ellis
Schroder

with heavy minutes for Carter, Clifford, Raynaud, and Jones probably finishes 10-12 in the West. Ultimately it's the same result minus a play-in game, but a much brighter future moving forward.

But if LaVine or DeRozan are on the team they'll start and Monk will get heavy minutes.

 

[Kingster]

This is true, but it further illustrates my point honestly. We could be waiting a LONG time for a franchise cornerstone to walk through the door. The Jazz have punted the last 3 years and dont have anyone close to that to show for it.

Flagg is about as safe a bet to be an elite franchise player as any prospect we've seen in recent memory and he's still not guaranteed to be that guy. Which is why you really can't wait around for the franchise player to fall in your lap

THIS. You can always give yourself more dice to roll in a given draft, but it doesn't mean that you're going to walk away with an elite franchise player. There's no shame at all in being a team that scouts well no matter where you land in the draft, invests in your young talent, and nurtures that talent to reach its full potential. Even if none of them transform into a top-10 player, if enough of them pop and you can craft a strong team identity, your best case scenario is the 2024-2025 Houston Rockets, who just won 52 games in a brutally difficult Western Conference despite not having a true franchise cornerstone. That's something to root for, and it positioned them to land Kevin Durant this off-season. I'm not sure that acquisition elevates them past Oklahoma City, but they're a serious ball club that must be taken seriously, unlike the Kings, who stumble from one mid-level acquisition to the next without much of a plan or a team identity.

The Houston ball club is a good model. I'm not sold on the Durant acquisition either, but starting several years ago a fan of the Rockets could get excited about the future because of the young long athletic talent they were acquiring, as well as a tough coach to mold them. That's all I want now. Give me some hope via young long athletic talent and I will gladly sacrifice the wins produced from an older grab-bag of veterans with no real future.

 

[Joshyjosh31]

Vivek's insistance on trying to be "competitive" is the biggest impediment.

Sabonis
Murray
DeRozan
Lavine
Schroder

With Monk as the 6th man

Is likely a team that likely finishes somewhere between the 8-11 slot in the West.

On the other hand a starting lineup of

Sabonis
Kuminga
Murray
Ellis
Schroder

with heavy minutes for Carter, Clifford, Raynaud, and Jones probably finishes 10-12 in the West. Ultimately it's the same result minus a play-in game, but a much brighter future moving forward.

But if LaVine or DeRozan are on the team they'll start and Monk will get heavy minutes.

We’re nowhere even close to an 8th seed team barring injuries which is sad for a team trying to win yet traded Jonas in a salary dump now we don’t have a playable big behind sabonis or Keegan

 

[The_Jamal]

We’re nowhere even close to an 8th seed team barring injuries which is sad for a team trying to win yet traded Jonas in a salary dump now we don’t have a playable big behind sabonis or Keegan

I mean this just isn't true. Our range is somewhere around 7-11. But that's the inherent issue; there's talent here, but there's not many paths, outside of some incredible outlier years, for us to move into a true playoff contender.

 

[ESP47]

Kings were 8 games out of the 7 and 8th seeds. Grizzlies could fall if Morant is out for an extended period since they won't have Bane to carry the load anymore. Other than that, I don't see us closing an 8+ game gap on anyone. Plus we'll have Dallas more than likely finishing better than us unless they get hit hard by the injury bug. It seems to me like an 8th place finish is about the absolute max for this team in the luckiest of scenarios.

 

[Joshyjosh31]

I mean this just isn't true. Our range is somewhere around 7-11. But that's the inherent issue; there's talent here, but there's not many paths, outside of some incredible outlier years, for us to move into a true playoff contender.

Doesn’t Vegas odds have our over/under at 35.5 a 7-11 range is just looking through kings colored glasses.

 

[Joshyjosh31]

Kings were 8 games out of the 7 and 8th seeds. Grizzlies could fall if Morant is out for an extended period since they won't have Bane to carry the load anymore. Other than that, I don't see us closing an 8+ game gap on anyone. Plus we'll have Dallas more than likely finishing better than us unless they get hit hard by the injury bug. It seems to me like an 8th place finish is about the absolute max for this team in the luckiest of scenarios.

Grizzlies will fall but we won’t be better than the spurs or Mavs, Portland got better as well a 20 point blowout is waiting if we even make the play in

 

[The_Jamal]

Doesn’t Vegas odds have our over/under at 35.5 a 7-11 range is just looking through kings colored glasses.

I'll charity bet this. Kings finish somewhere 7-11 in the West. 12-15 you win. 7-11 I win. Above 7th is a push.

Sactowndog keeps dodging me, so we need to get some new action going. 3-0 on the forum is waiting for me

 

[SLAB]

I'll charity bet this. Kings finish somewhere 7-11 in the West. 12-15 you win. 7-11 I win. Above 7th is a push.

Sactowndog keeps dodging me, so we need to get some new action going. 3-0 on the forum is waiting for me

This team is so aggressively mid, how could they not hit play-in level? I certainly don’t take this against you as things stand.

I’d so much rather be actively awful. But instead we have a mismatched hodgepodge of solid but boring NBA contributor vets that will win enough games to be at that level even by accident.

 

[The_Jamal]

This team is so aggressively mid, how could they not hit play-in level? I certainly don’t take this against you as things stand.

I’d so much rather be actively awful. But instead we have a mismatched hodgepodge of solid but boring NBA contributor vets that will win enough games to be at that level even by accident.

Yeah, this is pretty much my point. We DO have talent on this roster, but it's in the worst possible spot to be; not good enough to be a contender and not bad enough to be truly bad. If you simulated our upcoming season 1000 times, a majority of them are between 35 and 43 wins.

 

[SacTownKid]

We wouldn’t be behind the 8 ball if we were giving Keon, Keegan, and Kuminga major minutes and responsibilities. We’d be in position to get a good draft pick and add to that young core without paying top dollar

But when though? Two years from now? The Kings would be adding to what they have. Unless the locker room ignites to a degree we haven't seen in 10 years or so then this isn't a top pick team.

 

[SacTownKid]

This is true, but it further illustrates my point honestly. We could be waiting a LONG time for a franchise cornerstone to walk through the door. The Jazz have punted the last 3 years and dont have anyone close to that to show for it.

Flagg is about as safe a bet to be an elite franchise player as any prospect we've seen in recent memory and he's still not guaranteed to be that guy. Which is why you really can't wait around for the franchise player to fall in your lap

It's all the casino. Just doing some brief research, would you rather bet on a pick that historically yields an all star 40-70% of the time? Or 15-35%? If you are looking for talent a team really wants to be in that top 6 historically.