Kings picking 13th overall (formerly the draft lotto thread)
- Thread starter Tetsujin
- Start date
- Status
OK, who is an actual star then? They're awfully close and considering the cost asset wise, as good as it gets. Especially if LaVine returns to form. Landing multiple time all stars that aren't at the very end of their career for cheap always has merits if you are looking up at everyone else with limited options. It's all relative. If LaVine cost the Kings picks and youth, heck no. Grant if it costs the 13 as the main get, I'd do it.
Stars, I don't have to worry about their impact on winning. I don't trust LaVine/Grant/Kuz at that level. If everything breaks right? Sure. But thats a hell of an expensive gamble to make and you're just putting yourself in cap hell to do it. If PHX could just get rid of Beal's contract off the books right now, for no penalty, they'd do it in a heart-beat. So would CHI. That's telling.
I don't know the exact list, but Derrick White/Mikal Bridges/Lauri Markkanen type tier is pretty close to my cut-off as to what constitutes a "star".
I don't know the exact list, but Derrick White/Mikal Bridges/Lauri Markkanen type tier is pretty close to my cut-off as to what constitutes a "star".
With the way the new CBA has crushed roster-building opportunities, you're going to see a lot fewer "three star" teams around the NBA, and the franchises saddled with star-level contracts for talents with questionable impact on winning are going to regret those contracts as they butt up against or sail past the first and second aprons. It's why Monte is smart to demand additional assets if he were to take on LaVine's contract. Personally, I don't think it's wise to trade for LaVine after re-signing Monk. I don't really think it's wise to trade for LaVine at all, since there's no wiggle room left after that. You're pot committed and you'd better hope that LaVine can stay healthy and contribute like something more than Empty Stats Guy.
But since the Kings have fewer tradable assets than quite a few other teams at their level (which prevented them from landing talents like Anunoby, Siakam, and Caruso), grabbing future first rounders from Chicago wouldn't be the worst way to absorb the hit from a salary like LaVine's. I just don't think it's smart cap management to tie up so much cash in a trio of Fox/Sabonis/LaVine, with the newly re-signed Monk coming off the bench. There is, charitably, one impactful defender amongst them, and that's only when Fox is feeling particularly motivated. Hard to take the leap when all your money is going to offense-first talent.
But since the Kings have fewer tradable assets than quite a few other teams at their level (which prevented them from landing talents like Anunoby, Siakam, and Caruso), grabbing future first rounders from Chicago wouldn't be the worst way to absorb the hit from a salary like LaVine's. I just don't think it's smart cap management to tie up so much cash in a trio of Fox/Sabonis/LaVine, with the newly re-signed Monk coming off the bench. There is, charitably, one impactful defender amongst them, and that's only when Fox is feeling particularly motivated. Hard to take the leap when all your money is going to offense-first talent.
If they could get Bridges, sure, go for it. Doesn't sound likely and we are talking about that being it at that point because you probably just gave up ALL your draft assets Gobert/Mitchell style. Same for Markannen. The Kings in 2 years probably can't even make a trade like that. So Monte can wait, but if the fruit dies on the vine then what?
Absolutely. He's not a #1 or #2 option, but he's one of the best "Jack of all trades" players I've ever seen the past 2 years. Elite defender, elite shooter, secondary playmaker, incredibly efficient at an 18.6% USG rate. He wasn't the best player on the Celtics, but I feel very comfortable saying he was the most important in putting them over the top as a dominant title team. Take him off the Celts and plug him on any of the top 5-6 teams in the league and they'd be the instant favorites.
What's the insistence on making a bad trade for a flawed player and bad contract just to make one? And I'd much rather shove all in for an actual good/impactful player like a Lauri or Mikal, because at least I know they're giving me a shot to put us over the top.
Sure, maybe they missed their window to add another star to this core. It's now live or die with Fox/Domas/Monk/Keegan. I'm good with that. It's time to put the best possible ancillary core around those guys and see how far it goes.
Sure, maybe they missed their window to add another star to this core. It's now live or die with Fox/Domas/Monk/Keegan. I'm good with that. It's time to put the best possible ancillary core around those guys and see how far it goes.
I like Grant Williams as a target because…
- His contract is much lower than Kuzma’s (who a lot of people think is a good contract) and has 3 years left. In fact, it’s so low, we could even move him into a bench role down the road if we find an upgrade later.
- He’s much younger (25) than many of the targets thrown around here (Grant, LaVine, Kuzma, etc.)
- We shouldn’t have to surrender any 1sts to acquire him (vs. guys like Grant, Kuzma, etc.)
- He’s a low usage player which gives Murray another season to grow into that 3rd star player. If not, we have #13 and all of our future 1sts unlocked during the 2025 off-season to try and find that player.
People said the same thing about Irving. The results of the Kings plan vs. these other teams aren't totally in, but ignoring them likely isn't wise. I don't think a bad trade is moving two pieces not necessary any longer. Maybe a gamble but not necessarily bad. And you might like to shove in for that, but again, doesn't sound like it's doable. These current rumors sound doable. Siakam was doable. Beal was doable. OG was doable. The same names are coming up over and over for a reason and yes, that reason involves the Kings as well and their lack of assets or willing to move some of them. Monte tried and tried on all of those. If LaVine didn't work I don't see the major downside. The Kings have limited options to add to the roster moving forward anyway so you have the same basic roster without Huerter and Barnes. Meh. As I said before, much like the Suns it's much easier to keep players once you have them. The key is already having them. The name that bubbles up that might be doable is PG13. That would obviously require Monte to wait and potentially miss out on other things though and his contract will be an albatross too. If you look at the top of the NBA, you have to pay and pay big $$$. It's the way it is. If you aren't a contender the true gamble is keeping a roster together with needs because if it tops out, you're done. Look at the Bulls now. Look at the Kings in the mid 2000's and beyond. Now that's the true downside.
I watched Williams a lot in college and saw some of his highlights with the Hornets. The reason I wouldn't mind him is in college he actually looked a lot more offensively potent than what the C's turned him into. He looked kind of like Big Nasty reincarnated so there is some potential there.
That said, what does him having a lower contract do for the Kings long term in your mind?
That said, what does him having a lower contract do for the Kings long term in your mind?
LaVine isn't close to Kyrie's talent and never has been. Kyrie has never been bad or non-impactful towards winning. He was just a bit cocoo for coco puffs, but it's worked out in his situation for Dallas. The reason Kyrie always got another opportunity is because he's so damn good when he's actually on the basketball floor. If LaVine were viewed in a similar light, there would be teams lining up to trade for him.
How do you not see the horrible downside if LaVine busts? You just have an immovable contract with no means to upgrade the team because of the contracts we already have. That's the truly hitting the middle.
How do you not see the horrible downside if LaVine busts? You just have an immovable contract with no means to upgrade the team because of the contracts we already have. That's the truly hitting the middle.
But isn't that kind of reflected in their respective trade values? If the Bulls are asking for future picks they can kick rocks lol.
No, I don't see the total downside although I certainly see reasons why other options should be higher up the list. Unless you think the Kings are a contender as they currently sit and just need time then the downside doesn't mean much. Even if it messed up your chemistry, which with LaVine, I don't see happening largely because Domas as the glue can make almost anything work IMO. In the end, you are either in contention or not and any steps towards getting there as long as they make some degree of sense isn't a total loss. If LaVine were Davion sized I think it would be harder. If he were a PG, eh, bad fit. He's not a perfect fit, but not a terrible one either. I see him has a vast upgrade in talent to Huerter, that's all.
Those that thought the Kings just needed time had their chance, and while as I've said, it's not the end of the road for any run it back agains, those results shouldn't just be ignored because then you are just working on faith. Which is a way to go, but considering the pieces going out in a trade like this I think letting loose of pieces that aren't doing much anyway wouldn't change much in a worst case. The upside has more potential I think. If the Kings slide, Huerter and Barnes likely weren't stopping it to begin with so what's the difference. The Kings will probably have Fox on a super max, Domas on a max, Keegan on a rookie max, Monk making 20+ a year, keeping Huerter, Lyles, Barnes, Davion types, draft picks, the youth, etc. The Kings are in cap hell anyway so... what's the difference? Also, it's not like LaVine has an eternity left on his deal. For a rebuilding team it is, but the Kings right now are looking at probably a 2-3 year window before the cap hits the fan so... what's the difference? haha.
No, I don't see the total downside although I certainly see reasons why other options should be higher up the list. Unless you think the Kings are a contender as they currently sit and just need time then the downside doesn't mean much. Even if it messed up your chemistry, which with LaVine, I don't see happening largely because Domas as the glue can make almost anything work IMO. In the end, you are either in contention or not and any steps towards getting there as long as they make some degree of sense isn't a total loss. If LaVine were Davion sized I think it would be harder. If he were a PG, eh, bad fit. He's not a perfect fit, but not a terrible one either. I see him has a vast upgrade in talent to Huerter, that's all.
Those that thought the Kings just needed time had their chance, and while as I've said, it's not the end of the road for any run it back agains, those results shouldn't just be ignored because then you are just working on faith. Which is a way to go, but considering the pieces going out in a trade like this I think letting loose of pieces that aren't doing much anyway wouldn't change much in a worst case. The upside has more potential I think. If the Kings slide, Huerter and Barnes likely weren't stopping it to begin with so what's the difference. The Kings will probably have Fox on a super max, Domas on a max, Keegan on a rookie max, Monk making 20+ a year, keeping Huerter, Lyles, Barnes, Davion types, draft picks, the youth, etc. The Kings are in cap hell anyway so... what's the difference? Also, it's not like LaVine has an eternity left on his deal. For a rebuilding team it is, but the Kings right now are looking at probably a 2-3 year window before the cap hits the fan so... what's the difference? haha.
Last edited:
Saw some tweets by some fairly well known Kings fans accounts….these are just fans…..who say they are sitting on inside information of a move that Kings fans are going to love. Actually was said by several people. Of course, I could go on X and do the same thing but it does make things interesting.
Laurin Markkanen incoming
Laurin Markkanen incoming
Yeah, and I'm choosing to look at the two teams who made it to the Finals as worthy models for roster construction. They both have two clear stars, and they both are mightily optimized around those two stars with complementary role players who can defend and stretch the floor. As a pair, I don't know that Fox/Sabonis are good enough to compete with the likes of Luka/Irving or Tatum/Brown. But I do think you have to roll with Fox/Sabonis/Murray/Monk and see if you can optimize the roster around them. A "third star" would be great, but the Kings aren't in a position to acquire one that's worth their contract. The "stars" who are gettable are no-impact fakers like LaVine and Kuzma. I just don't believe in either of them, and I'm not interested in the Kings sinking assets and money into reclamation projects like that.
You do that and you lose your WHOLE team. Not only that, free agents will never sign with your team. You don't resign a player that wants to be here and then immediately turn around and stab them in the back. Lol. Jesus.
Fox would demand a trade. Sabonis would be pissed. Keegan would look at you sideways. And the rest of the league would go full Kangz and for good reason.
That idea is ****ing retarded, to say the least.
Fox would demand a trade. Sabonis would be pissed. Keegan would look at you sideways. And the rest of the league would go full Kangz and for good reason.
That idea is ****ing retarded, to say the least.
- Status