I bet the Lauri trade didn’t materialize because of Jazz demanding Keegan. Not sure how I feel about it. I love Keegan and think he will be a very good 2 way player in time… but that’s a tough call to make. We are essentially putting almost all of our eggs in the “Keegan developing into what we need” basket.
Kings after Ingram
- Thread starter Section 101
- Start date
You understand that if he died today, she might (I'd say almost 100% certainly would) be doing just that?
So wouldn't you rather her be setting popcorn prices in Stockton first? The whole idea is getting some ground floor experience before she could take over so she doesn't come in the same way Vivek did. That's why I have the opinion that it was not only appropriate, but probably necessary if you have any realistic look at what happens in the event something unexpected happened to Vivek.
The only way for her to ever have an idea is to work there. The Stockton GM job what do you think it does? Monte does all the major roster decisions.
So wouldn't you rather her be setting popcorn prices in Stockton first? The whole idea is getting some ground floor experience before she could take over so she doesn't come in the same way Vivek did. That's why I have the opinion that it was not only appropriate, but probably necessary if you have any realistic look at what happens in the event something unexpected happened to Vivek.
The only way for her to ever have an idea is to work there. The Stockton GM job what do you think it does? Monte does all the major roster decisions.
we have heard consistently that Keegan isn’t available through the OG, Siakam and now Lauri/Bi. I have to assume that that was never on the table so IMO if a deal was “almost made” it would be maybe other offers coming in that paused a deal.
Adding Lauri and subtracting Keegan makes you better on offense and worse on defense. When you factor in the potential of Keegan, the cheaper cost and the injury history it’s an easy no for me.
I hope we get Lauri for a pick package, we would be legit if we can pull it off
Adding Lauri and subtracting Keegan makes you better on offense and worse on defense. When you factor in the potential of Keegan, the cheaper cost and the injury history it’s an easy no for me.
I hope we get Lauri for a pick package, we would be legit if we can pull it off
If Ainge is willing to trade Markkanen, I'm assuming he would ultimately want to sell everything off so he can bottom out for the chance to draft Cooper Flagg in 2025. That would mean taking back assets that don't make the Jazz competitive this season. Would the Kings have a competitive package for Markkanen in that event without including Keegan? Perhaps, but I'd honestly doubt it.
I still would be really happy with DFS and Cam and only giving up one pick or something to make it happen.
Losing board favorite punching bags (who are still good players) Huerter and Barnes to pick up two who might improve the defense between Keegan and Domas without watching picks go to another team while we have holes we can't fill because of the tax aprons is just fine by me. And let's not even consider what happens if we trade capital and lose the player we trade for and wind up in the lottery forever again.
Losing board favorite punching bags (who are still good players) Huerter and Barnes to pick up two who might improve the defense between Keegan and Domas without watching picks go to another team while we have holes we can't fill because of the tax aprons is just fine by me. And let's not even consider what happens if we trade capital and lose the player we trade for and wind up in the lottery forever again.
You should feel great about it, if true.
Trading Keegan to get Lauri doesn’t make this team much better, if at all. The idea should be to add to the current core talent, not trade one very good player for another very good player. In this case, they’d lose defense for more consistent offense. Does that make the team better? Likely not.
While certainly difficult, the goal is to add to Keegan, Domas, Swipa, Monk, and now Carter. You don’t accomplish that by trading one of them away.
That’s precisely why these types of deals take time and are hard to come by. However there is a faction of armchair fantasy league GM’s that are under the impression that ideal trades can be willed into existence because their Playstation or Xbox always allows them to do so.
Trading Keegan to get Lauri doesn’t make this team much better, if at all. The idea should be to add to the current core talent, not trade one very good player for another very good player. In this case, they’d lose defense for more consistent offense. Does that make the team better? Likely not.
While certainly difficult, the goal is to add to Keegan, Domas, Swipa, Monk, and now Carter. You don’t accomplish that by trading one of them away.
That’s precisely why these types of deals take time and are hard to come by. However there is a faction of armchair fantasy league GM’s that are under the impression that ideal trades can be willed into existence because their Playstation or Xbox always allows them to do so.
This is me and my way of telling myself Keegan won't go: Monte has been in the role for four years now and for the most part has been quite conservative with what he has been willing to give up. We obviously lost Tyrese, but that was for Domas, was pretty necessary given the team composition, and didn't include any additional picks.
But I guess on the flipside of that, if the price for star players is something you don't want to give up then you probably need to hit a little more e.g., with free agents.
But I guess on the flipside of that, if the price for star players is something you don't want to give up then you probably need to hit a little more e.g., with free agents.
I can see us trading Keegan at some point but it would either be for a deal like Nets just got for Bridges or it would be for an all-NBA player like Domas. I think Lauri is a step below. And it wouldn't be a 1:1 trade as proposed, for my $$$ we should be the ones getting additional compensation in a Lauri deal that included Keegan not the other way around.
I have no idea what will happen but coming into this season the pressure is on Fox and Domas to show they can finish top 6 again and to progress beyond the first round of the playoffs. If they don't I can't imagine anyone is safe. We probably don't need to worry about that just yet though and can allow potential roster additions be the main source of anxiety.
While it's not at all like trading Lauri Markkanen, last year Ainge did ship out Mike Conley and Jarret Vanderbilt in order to net a far future first round pick, and as a former Celtic, he made the effing Lakers marginally better in the process by sending Vanderbilt their way and taking the husk of Russell Westbrook off their hands. If he's willing to do that in order to stock his asset cupboard, maybe there's a chance he'd prefer to trade Markkanen for future picks and spare parts before Markkanen hits UFA? Again, I don't see it. But the reporting makes it sound like the Jazz are treating the Kings' package as a serious offer.
I just really would like to see like a gamble that a 3 to 3.5 star player can improve us significantly more for less than reaching on a 4* level player who may also only be a 3* guy. The names we are attached to feel like they are recognizable names but not super awesome cornerstone guys.
Kuzma is the only one who has won anything and Bron sent him packing soon after.
Kuzma is the only one who has won anything and Bron sent him packing soon after.
To follow up on the financials here, under this deal we would be sending out a bit less than $45.5M of salary, meaning we could take back a bit under $57.1M. If you subtract Ingram's deal from that number, we could give DDR a max of $21M in the first year of his deal. In order to do this all, we would have to use the "Expanded" trade exception, and we would be hardcapped at the first apron. But it looks like this would come in at about $500K under the first apron...so it would work from our point of view.
Chicago is sending out $41M and bringing in $27.5M, so they're fine.
New Orleans is sending out $36M and bringing in $38M, so they're fine.
Obviously the question would be whether the various parties would agree to such a deal. DeRozan will definitely feel lowballed. The Bulls send out Vucevic to get salary relief and Huerter and a pick...they may actually find that acceptable. The Pelicans get Vucevic, Barnes, and a pick for Ingram, who they weren't planning on bringing back. Outside of DDR, everybody might actually like that deal OK.
The Kings would be:
Fox/Carter/Ellis
DeRozan/Monk
Ingram/Colby
Keegan/Lyles
Sabonis/Len
We would be forced by the hardcapping to fill out the rest of the roster with minimum players, but that rotation is pretty close to the best we could hope for. Kind of a dream scenario when you get down to it, but it looks like financially it would pass. The problem is DDR probably doesn't want to come to the Kings for $21M.
Chicago is sending out $41M and bringing in $27.5M, so they're fine.
New Orleans is sending out $36M and bringing in $38M, so they're fine.
Obviously the question would be whether the various parties would agree to such a deal. DeRozan will definitely feel lowballed. The Bulls send out Vucevic to get salary relief and Huerter and a pick...they may actually find that acceptable. The Pelicans get Vucevic, Barnes, and a pick for Ingram, who they weren't planning on bringing back. Outside of DDR, everybody might actually like that deal OK.
The Kings would be:
Fox/Carter/Ellis
DeRozan/Monk
Ingram/Colby
Keegan/Lyles
Sabonis/Len
We would be forced by the hardcapping to fill out the rest of the roster with minimum players, but that rotation is pretty close to the best we could hope for. Kind of a dream scenario when you get down to it, but it looks like financially it would pass. The problem is DDR probably doesn't want to come to the Kings for $21M.
