Kings approach at the draft...

[SLAB]

What do you think we get for Bagley and 9? Except egg on our face in a year or two?

I honestly have no idea. If the front office thinks winning now is what’s going to happen Bagley’s gotta be on the block still/again.

I’d honestly prefer to just keep shoveling him out there and hope a light turns on, but that wouldn’t be a winning move in the short term.

Bexause (*IF TRUE) everything needs to be the short term!!!

 

[pdxKingsFan]

I honestly have no idea. If the front office thinks winning now is what’s going to happen Bagley’s gotta be on the block still/again.

I’d honestly prefer to just keep shoveling him out there and hope a light turns on, but that wouldn’t be a winning move in the short term.

Bexause (*IF TRUE) everything needs to be the short term!!!

My preference is to just make next season hinge on him breaking out. (since we probably lose Holmes, let's just go for it)
We bet the farm on the guy and we spent the last season or really since he got hurt in the first game against the Suns way back hedging against that bet. And THAT is why we suck.

Pick a position, one position, and give him all the minutes he can play. If we go 0-82 take the draft pick. If we win, good, our #2 overall actually turned out to contribute.

 

[mac]

I really hope when it's all said and done that we don't regret placing our bets on Fox to be our franchise-changing superstar.

 

[Woot!]

My preference is to just make next season hinge on him breaking out. (since we probably lose Holmes, let's just go for it)
We bet the farm on the guy and we spent the last season or really since he got hurt in the first game against the Suns way back hedging against that bet. And THAT is why we suck.

Pick a position, one position, and give him all the minutes he can play. If we go 0-82 take the draft pick. If we win, good, our #2 overall actually turned out to contribute.

"Give him all the minutes he can play." How many minutes do you think that is? Bagley averaged 26 mpg last year. Some folks - including you, I think - believe the Kings held him back by not playing him more minutes. I don't think that's right.

First of all, I suspect the biggest reason he played *only* 26 was his health history. They tried to protect him. More to the point, playing time is hardly all that matters: weight room & physio, film study, individual and team drills, scrimmages, game time - hard to believe that the extra 5 for 6 mpg he arguably *missed* out on would have made the difference between what we saw and the budding superstar we'd like to have seen.

 

[iowamcnabb]

My preference is to just make next season hinge on him breaking out. (since we probably lose Holmes, let's just go for it)
We bet the farm on the guy and we spent the last season or really since he got hurt in the first game against the Suns way back hedging against that bet. And THAT is why we suck.

Pick a position, one position, and give him all the minutes he can play. If we go 0-82 take the draft pick. If we win, good, our #2 overall actually turned out to contribute.

if Bagley breaks out and averages 19 and 10 and plays in 70 games are you willing to sign him to a long term deal? You would probably let him test restricted free agency but I would still be uncomfortable giving him a big long term deal.

 

[kingsboi]

I think Siakam is a decent player but is he the final piece or anything close? Doubtful. Removing future assets for a true production PF in a non-true PF era is probably not wise.

Doesn't need to be the final piece. Kings are in the mode of acquiring as many talented players as possible and Siakam would put the Kings in the hunt for the Playoffs, which is the goal of the organization. Don't let this current era of guards fool you into not acquiring talent.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

if Bagley breaks out and averages 19 and 10 and plays in 70 games are you willing to sign him to a long term deal? You would probably let him test restricted free agency but I would still be uncomfortable giving him a big long term deal.

If he does that and stays healthy you absolutely match his market value.

"Give him all the minutes he can play." How many minutes do you think that is? Bagley averaged 26 mpg last year. Some folks - including you, I think - believe the Kings held him back by not playing him more minutes. I don't think that's right.

First of all, I suspect the biggest reason he played *only* 26 was his health history. They tried to protect him. More to the point, playing time is hardly all that matters: weight room & physio, film study, individual and team drills, scrimmages, game time - hard to believe that the extra 5 for 6 mpg he arguably *missed* out on would have made the difference between what we saw and the budding superstar we'd like to have seen.

I think the guy has been unable to stay on the court and its a huge problem. But we better decide wtf to do with him and if we let him walk and he blows up elsewhere I don't know what to say. I do think pushing for the playoffs at all costs and retaining Luke are going to hinder his development IF he stays healthy. But his health is the biggest factor and I've been frustrated with that for the last 2.5 seasons now.

 

[Turgenev]

There are a lot of constraints with the possible responses for this poll. For example, you cannot say ‘I wouldn’t mind if they traded the pick’ without saying ‘all that matters is making the play in’. Nor can you say, ‘trading the pick could have benefit for both the short and long term’ because option three assumes team building is binary – decisions are either short term positive or long term positive. Thinking about it for a brief moment, this poll feels more like another statement than a genuine question.

 

[sactowndog]

Given this draft is wing heavy and we need a wing or 2 and it’s unlikely you will get a productive wing for the 9th pick it would be dumb to trade the pick but it’s the Kings front office so it wouldn’t surprise me.

 

[sactowndog]

There are a lot of constraints with the possible responses for this poll. For example, you cannot say ‘I wouldn’t mind if they traded the pick’ without saying ‘all that matters is making the play in’. Nor can you say, ‘trading the pick could have benefit for both the short and long term’ because option three assumes team building is binary – decisions are either short term positive or long term positive. Thinking about it for a brief moment, this poll feels more like another statement than a genuine question.

you are free to make your own poll.

Given we have not even made the play-in at this point assuming we would have a trade that would take us into the 6th seed or better in the west seems remote. Especially since our area of need is at the wing and few good wings are on the trade block or available for the mid-level exception.

But if you want to make a poll disconnected from reality feel free.

 

[upinsmoke]

K.i.s.s
Keep it simple stupid
Go to the draft and hit.

 

[hrdboild]

Just one more reason to hope for a top 4 pick. Save us from ourselves please!

 

[Woot!]

If he does that and stays healthy you absolutely match his market value.

I think the guy has been unable to stay on the court and its a huge problem. But we better decide wtf to do with him and if we let him walk and he blows up elsewhere I don't know what to say..

Between his injury history, his play, and his young age the guy will likely remain the grayest-of-gray areas over the next year. If they decide to trade him or let him walk, they'll do it knowing that the chance of him blowing up eventually is real. (Because he's young, has real talent, and works.) If they pay to keep him, they'll do it knowing he very well might never be worth the investment. (Because he's injury-prone, a mediocre-at-best defender, and doesn't have a high BBIQ.)

It's the nature of the Bagley beast.

 

[funkykingston]

I've said this for a while now with Bagley - if he can't play the five then his value in today's NBA is pretty low even if he's healthy. Very low if he misses a bunch more games next season.

If you watch even MB's good games, he's running in transition for easy looks (often basket hanging actually), posting up, and getting dump offs in the lane. He shot 34% from three on 2.5 attempts per game but he's largely left wide open from outside right now.

His game is not that of a modern PF and he doesn't bring toughness or defense to offset having two bigs on the court.

The problem is that Bagley also lacks crucial center skills. He's not strong on the defensive block, doesn't offer much rim protection and is still slow to rotate and help all of which adds up to him being a defensive sieve in the paint.

What may frustrate me the most is that 3 years in he still sets terrible screens. I don't know that you can even call them screens. He looks to slip at every opportunity instead of being physical.

Overall I see a kid who seems very focused on his own scoring over playing winning basketball.

I keep hoping the Kings don't give him away for pennies on the dollar on the chance that the light turns on for him but I don't have a lot of hope of that happening at this point.

Still, if they don't get a good deal for him this off-season and Holmes is overly expensive to retain I think you start him at center and let him sink or swim. There's really nothing to lose at this point I guess.

 

[midtowner]

Agree with all this. And I know our front office wants to compete next year, but depending on what’s out there in the trade market, it may be the right time to add talent through the draft (multiple picks). Nobody wants to take a step back next year, including me. But I think there is talent in this draft and I think a playoff or bust mindset may be premature.

 

[Section 101]

if Bagley breaks out and averages 19 and 10 and plays in 70 games are you willing to sign him to a long term deal? You would probably let him test restricted free agency but I would still be uncomfortable giving him a big long term deal.

It's not the offensive numbers that matter.

 

[Woot!]

T

It's not the offensive numbers that matter.

To wit: Porzingis avg'd 20 and 9 for the Mavs this year. No one's impressed.

 

[beb0p]

T

To wit: Porzingis avg'd 20 and 9 for the Mavs this year. No one's impressed.

But if Porzingis doesn't come with an albatross contract and only 22 yrs old. I bet at least a couple teams will bite.

And even with the current version of Porzingis, I still expect the Mavs to get an interesting offer.

.

 

[iowamcnabb]

But if Porzingis doesn't come with an albatross contract and only 22 yrs old. I bet at least a couple teams will bite.

And even with the current version of Porzingis, I still expect the Mavs to get an interesting offer.

.

Porzingis has to be the number one option or he doesn’t play up to his abilities. Orlando or Charlotte could be potential fits. Orlando doesn’t have a number one offensive option and Lamelo could focus on running the offense at least for another year or so.

 

[funkykingston]

But if Porzingis doesn't come with an albatross contract and only 22 yrs old. I bet at least a couple teams will bite.

And even with the current version of Porzingis, I still expect the Mavs to get an interesting offer.

Bagley doesn't have an ugly contract but he's also a FA after next season. Any team trading for him has to be wary about getting into a bidding war to keep him vs losing him for nothing.

That's the catch-22 of it. If Bagley doesn't improve and/or keeps getting hurt then trading for him is a bad idea. But if Bagley were to finally put it together and look great then you may have to either overpay or watch him walk which would make trading for him a bad idea.

I honestly don't think the Kings will get anything of value offered for him in the current situation.

 

[SacTownKid]

Doesn't need to be the final piece. Kings are in the mode of acquiring as many talented players as possible and Siakam would put the Kings in the hunt for the Playoffs, which is the goal of the organization. Don't let this current era of guards fool you into not acquiring talent.

That's not really possible when you start acquiring max contract talents. You then close off a lot of avenues to get to that next step if necessary.

 

[Section 101]

Bagley doesn't have an ugly contract but he's also a FA after next season. Any team trading for him has to be wary about getting into a bidding war to keep him vs losing him for nothing.

That's the catch-22 of it. If Bagley doesn't improve and/or keeps getting hurt then trading for him is a bad idea. But if Bagley were to finally put it together and look great then you may have to either overpay or watch him walk which would make trading for him a bad idea.

I honestly don't think the Kings will get anything of value offered for him in the current situation.

He's restricted assuming he gets a qualifying offer.

 

[midtowner]

I think the Kings need to explore any and every Avenue of acquiring an All Star level player. If that outcome is unavailable or too costly, then they need to get draft assets - and should start selling off Barnes and Hield and put Bagley in the best position to succeed.

But I would trade Bagley, Hield and the 9th pick for Siakam in a heartbeat.

 

[kingsboi]

That's not really possible when you start acquiring max contract talents. You then close off a lot of avenues to get to that next step if necessary.

Kings can worry about max contracts and salaries when they field a team that's worthy of keeping intact

 

[funkykingston]

He's restricted assuming he gets a qualifying offer.

So was Bogi. All it takes is one offer from one other team.

 

[ESP47]

if Bagley breaks out and averages 19 and 10 and plays in 70 games are you willing to sign him to a long term deal? You would probably let him test restricted free agency but I would still be uncomfortable giving him a big long term deal.

Absolutely not unless he all the sudden magically went from one of the worst big men defenders in the league to average. He would probably need to average 25 and 12 to claw back to average as an overall player. He's basically Jabari Parker. Needs to be a main cog in your offense just to be an average player.

Question is, do you want an average player to be the main cog in your offense? That's probably not a recipe for success.

 

[SacTownKid]

Kings can worry about max contracts and salaries when they field a team that's worthy of keeping intact

They are already in or should be in worry mode. Fox is on a max already. Siakam is 30 mil plus a year. So, you already start off with half of your cap being spent on 2 guys and no knowledge of where you sit in terms of success after the fact. Typically you want to add a huge contract difference maker when you do know your team is worthy of keeping intact. The Kings don't so it's a major risk even with that potential for payoff.

 

[kingsboi]

They are already in or should be in worry mode. Fox is on a max already. Siakam is 30 mil plus a year. So, you already start off with half of your cap being spent on 2 guys and no knowledge of where you sit in terms of success after the fact. Typically you want to add a huge contract difference maker when you do know your team is worthy of keeping intact. The Kings don't so it's a major risk even with that potential for payoff.

you and neither do I know whether Siakam would make a big difference or not but I am more than willing to find out, this talk is moot anyway. I don't see Siakam as a realistic trade target for the Kings considering what they would have to give up.

 

[SacTownKid]

I think the Kings need to explore any and every Avenue of acquiring an All Star level player. If that outcome is unavailable or too costly, then they need to get draft assets - and should start selling off Barnes and Hield and put Bagley in the best position to succeed.

But I would trade Bagley, Hield and the 9th pick for Siakam in a heartbeat.

Not all All Stars are equal though. I mean, if a Kawhi were an option, or a Harden, or Durant level player that's one thing but ranges for all stars differ. And I'm sure the Kings do not have a package to pull something like that off even if it were an option. Not without giving up things they shouldn't be.

 

[SacTownKid]

you and neither do I know whether Siakam would make a big difference or not but I am more than willing to find out, this talk is moot anyway. I don't see Siakam as a realistic trade target for the Kings considering what they would have to give up.

Well this goes back to some frustrations last year and prior to last year by some of us. The time to start thinking about moves like that when they should be primed and timed to do it is likely already gone. Unless a guaranteed no doubt superstar was in the picture the time to gamble on that jump up was prior to when you have start signing back your own picks and FA's to big money deals. While Vlade was allowing his team of "super team, just young" to be misused or underused so that much of their main assets values were being drained to hope for a run in the bubble or a shot at the 10th seed they made it tougher and tougher to make gambles like that. Now matching salaries in deals comes into play which means you either have to add incentives if teams don't want that salary or you have to move players that you otherwise don't want to move to do deals. If they really want to stay the course the best thing they can do is maybe shed some salary in the form of a Buddy/Barnes deal and hope you don't become even worse competitively in the interim and if you do, shift back the other way as far as you can to get a better pick and hope for a quick rebuild on the fly around Fox.