Kings interested in trading for Malcolm Brogdan according to guy who said we’d look at hiring Frank Vogel as Head coach
- Thread starter Tetsujin
- Start date
$67.6M for three years for a point guard, sure, that makes sense. It's not like we have two of those and traded another one away just a few months ago.
I actually think Brog is a pretty good fit next to Fox and Davion. He can defend the 2, spaces the floor, gives a strong secondary creator.
But there's no chance we're trading 4 or even Barnes for him. If they'd take Holmes+Contracts for him? Sure? But that seems unlikely they'd flip him for that.
LPKingsFan
All-Star
What if 6 was coming back?
Oh that's interesting. 4+Holmes+their pick of 2 of 3 (Harkless/Davis/Len) for 6+Brog works cap wise. If Keegan was still sitting there, that's pretty juicy. Move forward with:
Fox || Mitchell
Brogdon || DDV
Barnes
Murray
Sabonis
I think I'd rather try and get Grant+5 for 4+Holmes/Contracts. We can get a test-drive on Grant and if it doesn't work, not be tied to him for 3 years like Brog, who we'd be adding to a crowded back-court. And we'd still have the optionality of Sharpe or Murray at 5.
iowamcnabb
Hall of Famer
The Pacers want hometown Ivey for sure but if we trade back to 6, the Pistons will likely take Murray. We could then likely chose between Sharpe or go for the riser Sochan and hope he can shoot
Yeah it certainly makes sense that the Pacers have their site set on Purdue’ Ivey, not sure if he’s originally an Indiana boy.
If its about killing two birds with one stone with the 4th, get that established vet that might get us into the playoffs and a promising rookie, guess Brogdan is better than DDV but he’s also already 30.
Unless Monte really wants Murray, I suspect Sharp goes 5 in this case, I’d pass.
If its about killing two birds with one stone with the 4th, get that established vet that might get us into the playoffs and a promising rookie, guess Brogdan is better than DDV but he’s also already 30.
Unless Monte really wants Murray, I suspect Sharp goes 5 in this case, I’d pass.
Kings hold the pick at 4. To move up and obtain it, a team needs to give us a better asset to make this happen. Brogdon isn’t dog poo but he’s not THAT good. I mean, he’s always hurt. Misses massive amount of games every year and we would be locked into that contract. Shoots 31% from 3.
iowamcnabb
Hall of Famer
the injuries are a concern but he has shot 38 or above from 3 in 4 of his 6 years and is about a 90 percent free throw shooter. Good defender and can handle the ball. Might not be a bad pick up for moving down 2 slots.
sorting out the guard rotation could be messy
sorting out the guard rotation could be messy
I think we all know its a garbage proposal anyways, but I wasn’t aware of those Brogdan negatives.
If it’s a trade back were looking at it should bring us an established wing or PF. I can see a trade with Detroit involving pick swap and Grant. I would still like to see Siakam a King but don’t believe Toronto has any 1st this year.
SacTownKid
Hall of Famer
There might not be a team more rumored to have interest in sinking trade assets in the coming weeks. Beware, the Westbrook talks are sure to come, lol.
Well I've already seen lakers morons talking about THT and a second for Holmes.
serbiangoat
Starter
The Kings should have signed him when he left the Bucks if he's being traded for Fox in a deal it's a no brainer better defender, higher IQ, shooter and just way more efficient and can play both guard spots.
ParniValjak
All-Star
I think people need to realise that Fox is not going anywhere unless its for an upgrade and it certainly wouldn’t be for a draft pick.
Front office made their choice to go with Fox when they traded for Sabonis. They have 2 years to get Sabonis to sign an extension and the only way they do that is to go all in for win now moves.
Fox and Sabonis are clearly the two that FO is sticking with unless they get an upgrade on either. Two of the hardest positions to fill are PG and C and the FO feel they got their. They are no perfect but they have signalled willingness to back them in.
Front office made their choice to go with Fox when they traded for Sabonis. They have 2 years to get Sabonis to sign an extension and the only way they do that is to go all in for win now moves.
Fox and Sabonis are clearly the two that FO is sticking with unless they get an upgrade on either. Two of the hardest positions to fill are PG and C and the FO feel they got their. They are no perfect but they have signalled willingness to back them in.
ockingsfan
Starter
So why would the Kings want to re-create the Indy PG-C (Brogdon-Sabonis) duo that failed in Indy?
This would only be as ironic as us trading Fox for Brogdon so that Indy can re-create our failed back court duo of Fox and Hali!
This would only be as ironic as us trading Fox for Brogdon so that Indy can re-create our failed back court duo of Fox and Hali!
iowamcnabb
Hall of Famer
So why would the Kings want to re-create the Indy PG-C (Brogdon-Sabonis) duo that failed in Indy?
This would only be as ironic as us trading Fox for Brogdon so that Indy can re-create our failed back court duo of Fox and Hali!
The Pacers went 45-28 in his first year there. Brogdan brings a different skillset than Hali. I don't know for certain it could work of course but he is a really good player. If you could get him for moving down 2 spots and still pick between Murray and Sharpe I don't think that's too shabby. The biggest concern for me is the injuries.
LPKingsFan
All-Star
So why would the Kings want to re-create the Indy PG-C (Brogdon-Sabonis) duo that failed in Indy?
This would only be as ironic as us trading Fox for Brogdon so that Indy can re-create our failed back court duo of Fox and Hali!
Right. Even if Indy failed, was the Brogdon-Sabonis paring the reason why?
Net rating (according to BBref) of lineups with Brogdan and Sabonis (per 100 possessions):
2019-20: +5.2 (1084 minutes)
2020-21: -2.9 (1558 minutes)
2021-22: +5.1 (711 minutes)
For comparison, Fox-Sabonis lineups were -3.8 during 359 minutes this season (likely not a big enough sample, but...)
Yeah, it's hard to really say that player core failed. They fired McMillan and Bjorken pretty much tore that team down in one season. I remember being insanely high on that Pacers team, especially after they got Caris.
ockingsfan
Starter
Sure, if all we had to give up is a #4 and #6 switch, but I doubt that would be enough and it wouldn’t work with the salary cap ramifications. Otherwise, unless Indy is having a fire sale, I don’t see them giving up Brogdon for peanuts.
iowamcnabb
Hall of Famer
if they make the move it’s because they really want Ivey. We could send them salary filler to make it work and they get to start over with Hali, Ivey and maybe Turner with pretty clean books.
If Banchero or Chet falls I guess you never know what deals might be had, plus I guess if a team is pre-emptively plotting to tank for the 2023 stronger draft class, may as well swing for the fences in the process? I don't know Indy's timeline.
iowamcnabb
Hall of Famer
I change my mind every day so I’m glad the decision isn’t mine. I think trading down to 5 or 6 in exchange for a veteran is in the lead for me currently (assuming a trade is even an option). I think it’s the best of both worlds as a win now and win later move.
TaxMan
Starter
Agree. I think a trade down with a solid starter vet coming back, would make it much more likely we could take a swing on someone like Sharp if he's available.
See_Hanks
Bench
No thank you. This guy is on the floor about as much as Fox is. Why trade for someone that's going to only play 50%-70% of the season? I don't think the Kings should trade #4 for it.
Noble
Bench
Why dont we just do that for ourselves? Fox, Ivey, Sabonis, with pretty clean books.
iowamcnabb
Hall of Famer
you do if you think he is a star. If that’s Monte’s decision I’ll be good with it. Personally I have my reservations
Similar threads
- Locked
- Poll
