SacTownKid
Hall of Famer
did it. Siakim personally cost them 2 games.
And yet was arguably the best player on a team that made it to the ECF. I think the trade off was worth it in their minds.
did it. Siakim personally cost them 2 games.
you don’t have tracking stats but his C&S 3 percentage is what matters. He may be acceptable in that regard. Assuming he falls to us.
That's the thing though, I'm looking at it like this, if Keegan pans out AND you added a star? Really, you don't want that? People didn't want Siakam either. While nothing is ever definitive I mean, really? The Suns, Lakers, Pacers, all made deals, Kings stood pat. They rose, Kings didn't. The great thing about true talent is that if a coach uses it right it's always going to have some type of value. Signing guys like Bruce Brown, overpaying for a DFS, Grant Williams. As seen on TV, that's how you can get into trouble if they aren't your final piece.
An actual star? Suure
LaVine/Beal/Jerami Grant aren't stars though.
Did you consider my trade proposal for Grant Williams in the other thread an overpay?That's the thing though, I'm looking at it like this, if Keegan pans out AND you added a star? Really, you don't want that? People didn't want Siakam either. While nothing is ever definitive I mean, really? The Suns, Lakers, Pacers, all made deals, Kings stood pat. They rose, Kings didn't. The great thing about true talent is that if a coach uses it right it's always going to have some type of value. Signing guys like Bruce Brown, overpaying for a DFS, Grant Williams. As seen on TV, that's how you can get into trouble if they aren't your final piece.
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.
Did you consider my trade proposal for Grant Williams in the other thread an overpay?
An actual star? Suure
LaVine/Beal/Jerami Grant aren't stars though.
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".
You've got Derrick White about them as a star?
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?
I like Grant Williams as a target because…I'm talking in general. No, I'd do any deal if any deal if it out ancillary pieces like Huerter and Barnes and the Kings condense that into a better fit, that's not a total whiff in my book.
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.
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.
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.
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.
If you want a star you have to give up multiple firsts and either Barnes, Huerter or Keon. And I disagree I think da Silva is going to have an instant impact on ball movement and decision making much like Vlade did.What if you do though? No cap, no real assets outside of those 3. It's pretty much over at that point. Adding a star to that unit if Keegan rises probably makes you an instant contender. That's how it's done. This draft isn't the place to be looking for one though. Da Silva wouldn't add anything the Kings don't already have but would have a great chance to do well with this team for sure.
If you want a star you have to give up multiple firsts and either Barnes, Huerter or Keon. And I disagree I think da Silva is going to have an instant impact on ball movement and decision making much like Vlade did.
Well I think his contract is low enough to move to the bench if we find another upgrade at forward down the road. Whereas, it may be difficult to make that work if he was making similar money to Kuzma.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?
From your lips to gods ears! I’ve been clamoring for him since last year when there was some smoke about him potentially being moved. He would fit us like a glove, at least offensively. Would need Keegan to take another leap defensively. I’d welcome that with open arms.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
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.
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.just curious if a sign and trade is structurally impossible.
I could see the following scenario being possible, not going to comment on probability
kings: S&T Monk and 13
Pels: Ingram and 17
I mean, the entire conference was injured but they did make it there, so credit for thatAnd yet was arguably the best player on a team that made it to the ECF. I think the trade off was worth it in their minds.