Kings trade rumor SZN 2023-2024 edition!

[The_Jamal]

Why potentially break one of the few things working though? Monk has been a great 6th man. I posted the iso stats above, and while that could certainly change with Monk as a starter, LaVine has a proven track record of being a true all star level starter in the exact ways the Kings need some help in. Heck, we know Brown loves his G lineups so who knows, you might end up with Fox, Monk, and LaVine starting in a super gimmicky nuclear lineup, haha.

What's the sample on those "ISO" stats. And what exactly is it measuring? Forgive me if you spelled this out, but a lot of Monk's creation ends in a pass to a rolling big or on a kickout. Is that measured?

Also, I think it's a pretty silly premise to indicate that Lavine is any sort of offensive grade over Monk. ISO possessions are generally very very bad and you actually only want a handful of guys in the NBA consistently taking them.

 

[ShastaKingsFan]

True, but you have to lay it out in terms of what actually might happen once you have a player that you can rely on for 33-36 mpg and what the traded players shots being redistributed looks like.

A huge chunk of LaVine's shots already come from Kevin Huerter. Per 36 Huerter is taking between 13-14 shots per game on the Kings. LaVine hovers around 18-19 most years and one would assume that probably goes down a bit on the Kings. If you put a role guy next to Keegan you're likely getting a few from there as well.

A trade like this is basically just about condensing what's already there into something more meaningful individually. The salary is already there, the shots are there, they're just going to 2-3 different players who seem to be losing footing within the team's structure offensively anyway.

Yes. This is why I think it's worth trying Monk with the starters...and moving Barnes to the second unit

 

[Noble]

Thoughts on Nikola Jovic? Idk, I'm looking at the Heat for some options. Mitchell and Duarte for Jovic and Richardson works, but not sure if that really helps us too much.

 

[Makaveli]

Yes. This is why I think it's worth trying Monk with the starters...and moving Barnes to the second unit

so monk replaces Kevin and Kessler over Barnes. then Barnes can actually have plays called for him with bench and kevin can do whatever he is gonna do.

 

[ick300]

so monk replaces Kevin and Kessler over Barnes. then Barnes can actually have plays called for him with bench and kevin can do whatever he is gonna do.

With keegan and Kessler both in starting you risk not to have a scoring forward on the floor … when Murray is cold , he is cold for 18/20 min , Kessler is party time when scores at all ….

 

[ShastaKingsFan]

so monk replaces Kevin and Kessler over Barnes. then Barnes can actually have plays called for him with bench and kevin can do whatever he is gonna do.

Lyles replaces Barnes in starting unit for now, until they can find someone better. Edwards should be used in spots for defensive matchups

 

[Srzly]

With keegan and Kessler both in starting you risk not to have a scoring forward on the floor … when Murray is cold , he is cold for 18/20 min , Kessler is party time when scores at all ….

Keegan has had 1 bad game since seeming to get over the injuries from earlier… I think we will be fine relying on him for scoring going forward when healthy. Every player has bad games. Even Steph was like 0/8 from 3 a few weeks ago and he’s the best shooter of all time.

The problem is there is no one other than monk on the bench that has proven they can be a reliable scorer for us so far.

I say replace Kevin with defense like Keon or even Kessler and let Kevin see if he can be a scorer on the 2nd unit with monk since that unit desperately needs scoring at this point and the starting unit needs help on defense.

I personally don’t see Barnes as a big issue most night. Not as down on him as others but maybe he would bring a boost on the 2nd unit.

 

[twslam07]

True, but you have to lay it out in terms of what actually might happen once you have a player that you can rely on for 33-36 mpg and what the traded players shots being redistributed looks like.

A huge chunk of LaVine's shots already come from Kevin Huerter. Per 36 Huerter is taking between 13-14 shots per game on the Kings. LaVine hovers around 18-19 most years and one would assume that probably goes down a bit on the Kings. If you put a role guy next to Keegan you're likely getting a few from there as well.

A trade like this is basically just about condensing what's already there into something more meaningful individually. The salary is already there, the shots are there, they're just going to 2-3 different players who seem to be losing footing within the team's structure offensively anyway.

I think my response to your general take is why would you prefer someone like LaVine when we could target Jerami Grant?

• Grant is only a year older
• Grant makes $13-15 mil less per year
• Grant is under contract 1 more year (4+1 vs. 3+1)
• Grant would probably cost similar in a trade
• Grant would improve our defense

If the emphasis from your POV is to find another scoring option that won’t cost us a lot in a trade, Grant seems to be the better target. His ability to play defense, protect the rim, and give us some much needed length in the frontcourt (7’2.75” wingspan & 8’11” standing reach) allows him to still impact the game even if he’s having an off night scoring, if others have a hot hand, etc.

I can see a world where Grant is ahead of Murray in the offensive pecking order initially, but a couple years down the road, that order could flip. The plus side of having someone like Grant instead of LaVine is that even if his offensive role is diminished over time (due to the development of others), he can still fill that 3&D role and help the team win. If LaVine’s scoring role is diminished, you still have a defensive weakness out there.

Couple everything mentioned above with the fact that Grant is a really solid complement to Sabonis at PF (which is really hard to find) and it seems like a no brainer when deciding between LaVine and Grant so I’m curious to get your take on why you might prefer LaVine?






You could also expand the target to be both Grant & Thybulle (sending out Barnes & Huerter from a salary perspective and likely to a 3rd team) and have a rotation of…

PG - Fox / Ellis
SG - Thybulle / Monk
SF - Murray / Vezenkov
PF - Grant / Lyles
C - Sabonis / Len

• 4 plus defenders around Sabonis in the starting lineup
• A lot of length around Sabonis (Thybulle, Murray, & Grant all have 7’0”+ wingspans)
• A lot of weakside rim protection help for Sabonis (Thybulle, Murray, & Grant are all pretty solid shotblockers)
• 4 solid floor spacers around Sabonis with Murray being our elite movement shooter
• Many good go-to scoring options in Fox, Grant, Monk, Sabonis, & Murray
• Great 6th man option in Monk with Ellis, Vezenkov, Lyles, and Len being solid bench options.
• You have the option to close out games with Monk (more offense) or Thybulle (more defense) depending on the game/situation

There’s a lot to like about that team. Especially come playoff time.

 

[iowamcnabb]

I think my response to your general take is why would you prefer someone like LaVine when we could target Jerami Grant?

• Grant is only a year older
• Grant makes $13-15 mil less per year
• Grant is under contract 1 more year (4+1 vs. 3+1)
• Grant would probably cost similar in a trade
• Grant would improve our defense

If the emphasis from your POV is to find another scoring option that won’t cost us a lot in a trade, Grant seems to be the better target. His ability to play defense, protect the rim, and give us some much needed length in the frontcourt (7’2.75” wingspan & 8’11” standing reach) allows him to still impact the game even if he’s having an off night scoring, if others have a hot hand, etc.

I can see a world where Grant is ahead of Murray in the offensive pecking order initially, but a couple years down the road, that order could flip. The plus side of having someone like Grant instead of LaVine is that even if his offensive role is diminished over time (due to the development of others), he can still fill that 3&D role and help the team win. If LaVine’s scoring role is diminished, you still have a defensive weakness out there.

Couple everything mentioned above with the fact that Grant is a really solid complement to Sabonis at PF (which is really hard to find) and it seems like a no brainer when deciding between LaVine and Grant so I’m curious to get your take on why you might prefer LaVine?






You could also expand the target to be both Grant & Thybulle (sending out Barnes & Huerter from a salary perspective and likely to a 3rd team) and have a rotation of…

PG - Fox / Ellis
SG - Thybulle / Monk
SF - Murray / Vezenkov
PF - Grant / Lyles
C - Sabonis / Len

• 4 plus defenders around Sabonis in the starting lineup
• A lot of length around Sabonis (Thybulle, Murray, & Grant all have 7’0”+ wingspans)
• A lot of weakside rim protection help for Sabonis (Thybulle, Murray, & Grant are all pretty solid shotblockers)
• 4 solid floor spacers around Sabonis with Murray being our elite movement shooter
• Many good go-to scoring options in Fox, Grant, Monk, Sabonis, & Murray
• Great 6th man option in Monk with Ellis, Vezenkov, Lyles, and Len being solid bench options.
• You have the option to close out games with Monk (more offense) or Thybulle (more defense) depending on the game/situation

There’s a lot to like about that team. Especially come playoff time.

would you trade a ‘26 and ‘28 for that to happen? I think I probably would. I don’t know if HB/Huerter/Davuok 2 picks get it done though. I couldn’t go 3 firsts.

Edit: unintentional Davion Diss there

 

[twslam07]

would you trade a ‘26 and ‘28 for that to happen? I think I probably would. I don’t know if HB/Huerter/Davuok 2 picks get it done though. I couldn’t go 3 firsts.

Edit: unintentional Davion Diss there

I think Thybulle and Grant would probably return a 1st each so I think your offer that includes 2 1sts is too rich for me considering I have Huerter worth a 1st, Barnes worth a late 1st/early 2nd, and Davion worth a 2nd. I think an offer of…

Harrison Barnes
Kevin Huerter
Davion Mitchell
2026-28 SAC 1st

…is about equivalent value but we’d have to figure out a 3rd team to reroute some of these guys to as I would assume Portland wouldn’t want Barnes (& maybe Huerter). That would leave us with a depth chart of…

PG - Fox / Ellis / Jones
SG - Thybulle / Monk / Duarte
SF - Murray / Vezenkov / Edwards
PF - Grant / Lyles
C - Sabonis / Len / McGee

 

[SacTownKid]

What's the sample on those "ISO" stats. And what exactly is it measuring? Forgive me if you spelled this out, but a lot of Monk's creation ends in a pass to a rolling big or on a kickout. Is that measured?

Also, I think it's a pretty silly premise to indicate that Lavine is any sort of offensive grade over Monk. ISO possessions are generally very very bad and you actually only want a handful of guys in the NBA consistently taking them.

The iso stats are for this season so far. Last year He was less than 50th percentile too. If you look at the ISO stat you'll see one thing pretty much throughout if the possessions climb, franchise level talent. With a few exceptions of course.

https://www.nba.com/stats/players/isolation?dir=D&sort=POSS

In pick and roll stats Monk so far this season is actually pretty low as well, he's in the 24th percentile. Although, last season he was about 50th or so. Fox this season is 92th percentile, and Zach LaVine is around 67th.

 

[SacTownKid]

Yes. This is why I think it's worth trying Monk with the starters...and moving Barnes to the second unit

I personally don't think that will bring the Kings up to contender status but if they start falling it will probably be tried.

 

[SacTownKid]

I think my response to your general take is why would you prefer someone like LaVine when we could target Jerami Grant?

• Grant is only a year older
• Grant makes $13-15 mil less per year
• Grant is under contract 1 more year (4+1 vs. 3+1)
• Grant would probably cost similar in a trade
• Grant would improve our defense

If the emphasis from your POV is to find another scoring option that won’t cost us a lot in a trade, Grant seems to be the better target. His ability to play defense, protect the rim, and give us some much needed length in the frontcourt (7’2.75” wingspan & 8’11” standing reach) allows him to still impact the game even if he’s having an off night scoring, if others have a hot hand, etc.

I can see a world where Grant is ahead of Murray in the offensive pecking order initially, but a couple years down the road, that order could flip. The plus side of having someone like Grant instead of LaVine is that even if his offensive role is diminished over time (due to the development of others), he can still fill that 3&D role and help the team win. If LaVine’s scoring role is diminished, you still have a defensive weakness out there.

Couple everything mentioned above with the fact that Grant is a really solid complement to Sabonis at PF (which is really hard to find) and it seems like a no brainer when deciding between LaVine and Grant so I’m curious to get your take on why you might prefer LaVine?






You could also expand the target to be both Grant & Thybulle (sending out Barnes & Huerter from a salary perspective and likely to a 3rd team) and have a rotation of…

PG - Fox / Ellis
SG - Thybulle / Monk
SF - Murray / Vezenkov
PF - Grant / Lyles
C - Sabonis / Len

• 4 plus defenders around Sabonis in the starting lineup
• A lot of length around Sabonis (Thybulle, Murray, & Grant all have 7’0”+ wingspans)
• A lot of weakside rim protection help for Sabonis (Thybulle, Murray, & Grant are all pretty solid shotblockers)
• 4 solid floor spacers around Sabonis with Murray being our elite movement shooter
• Many good go-to scoring options in Fox, Grant, Monk, Sabonis, & Murray
• Great 6th man option in Monk with Ellis, Vezenkov, Lyles, and Len being solid bench options.
• You have the option to close out games with Monk (more offense) or Thybulle (more defense) depending on the game/situation

There’s a lot to like about that team. Especially come playoff time.

I would totally be OK with that if it's a giveaway like LaVine might be. This summer I was hoping Monte would go after Grant with his space. That said, Grant is not on the level LaVine is offensively and Grants contract could look a lot worse even if at a lesser amount if both play to their potential. He has other things that make him what he is but he's been rather low on FG% as a go to historically. However, it would be neck and neck for me with Grant and LaVine if the same packages were going the other way.

 

[ShastaKingsFan]

I would totally be OK with that if it's a giveaway like LaVine might be. This summer I was hoping Monte would go after Grant with his space. That said, Grant is not on the level LaVine is offensively and Grants contract could look a lot worse even if at a lesser amount if both play to their potential. He has other things that make him what he is but he's been rather low on FG% as a go to historically.

His role would be like it was when he played for Denver. He did play solid defense for them

 

[SacTownKid]

would you trade a ‘26 and ‘28 for that to happen? I think I probably would. I don’t know if HB/Huerter/Davuok 2 picks get it done though. I couldn’t go 3 firsts.

Edit: unintentional Davion Diss there

Has Grant climbed to two pick level? I somehow doubt that. The Blazers have one huge problem and that's paying him that money to keep losing. Unless the win against the Kings convinced them otherwise, the Blazers are looking at a return that's not so great at some point.

 

[ick300]

Keegan has had 1 bad game since seeming to get over the injuries from earlier… I think we will be fine relying on him for scoring going forward when healthy. Every player has bad games. Even Steph was like 0/8 from 3 a few weeks ago and he’s the best shooter of all time.

The problem is there is no one other than monk on the bench that has proven they can be a reliable scorer for us so far.

I say replace Kevin with defense like Keon or even Kessler and let Kevin see if he can be a scorer on the 2nd unit with monk since that unit desperately needs scoring at this point and the starting unit needs help on defense.

I personally don’t see Barnes as a big issue most night. Not as down on him as others but maybe he would bring a boost on the 2nd unit.

Mate , i understand Keegan is something like the golden boy of Kings at the moment and we as fans love hi, , but we have to take off the pink glases while speaking about him as well as for rest of the teams ... Scoring wize he had at much more bad games , then good ones so far in the season , not even to mention that away from home he is Sibir cold especially frome the 3 points ... .

 

[iowamcnabb]

Has Grant climbed to two pick level? I somehow doubt that. The Blazers have one huge problem and that's paying him that money to keep losing. Unless the win against the Kings convinced them otherwise, the Blazers are looking at a return that's not so great at some point.

He had Thybulle in there too unless I misunderstood

 

[iowamcnabb]

Mate , i understand Keegan is something like the golden boy of Kings at the moment and we as fans love hi, , but we have to take off the pink glases while speaking about him as well as for rest of the teams ... Scoring wize he had at much more bad games , then good ones so far in the season , not even to mention that away from home he is Sibir cold especially frome the 3 points ... .

he gets a pass because of the stellar rookie year and the fact that the slow start at least came with elite defense ( 70 percent of the time)

 

[hrdboild]

The improvements have to come on the defensive end. Sabonis, Fox, Murray, and Monk give us a baseline as a team that can put up points in a hurry. On any given night those 4 players are going to account for 70-90 points. For this team to take the next step, everyone around those 4 needs to be a plus defender.

So from my point of view (and this goes back to last off-season) there's no point trading for more offense. We already have Mitchell and Ellis at the guard spots and I don't care if they don't score a point, they both need to be playing. Giving up 130 to Portland and not bringing Davion into the game is ridiculous imo. Sasha grabs rebounds in addition to his shooting game. He's the stretch 4 off the bench. I think we're looking for a starting SG, starting PF, backup SF, and backup C and ALL of them better be elite at some defensive skill. Everything else is just stalling and wasting an elite offensive core (4) that just need better pieces around them.

 

[ick300]

he gets a pass because of the stellar rookie year and the fact that the slow start at least came with elite defense ( 70 percent of the time)

Yeah man , i understand and i see all of this ... Man crowd loves the guy and most probably he will become one of the best to have played for Kings , why not a All-star member in few years , my only point was that shooting wize so far in the season he is having more downs then ups ... Not questioning hiw role at all ...

 

[iowamcnabb]

On JJs podcast he was listing starting units with the best net rating/ defensive rating. The kings were near the top with Bucks, Sixers etc. Net rating for the starters is +13.3 and the defensive rating is 105.8. I wonder if staggering Fox and Domas is the right move then? Maybe we need to figure out how to keep that unit out on the court at the same time as much as possible.

 

[LPKingsFan]

On JJs podcast he was listing starting units with the best net rating/ defensive rating. The kings were near the top with Bucks, Sixers etc. Net rating for the starters is +13.3 and the defensive rating is 105.8. I wonder if staggering Fox and Domas is the right move then? Maybe we need to figure out how to keep that unit out on the court at the same time as much as possible.

This is actually a big deal. The starters last year were only plus 2.2. That inspired a lot of the “maybe they were just healthy and not actually that good” talk over the offseason. That the starters are performing even better this year is a good sign if they can stay healthy.

One item to note, given some of the ideas being discussed in this thread, is that this year the starting group but subbing Monk for Huerter is -14.5.

 

[See_Hanks]

Yeah man , i understand and i see all of this ... Man crowd loves the guy and most probably he will become one of the best to have played for Kings , why not a All-star member in few years , my only point was that shooting wize so far in the season he is having more downs then ups ... Not questioning hiw role at all ...

He's actually turned it around. 18.5 ppg // 4.7 rpg // 1.4 apg // 50.6% FG // 45.7 3pt%

At this point though I am ready at looking for another scoring option with Barnes or Huerter up for trade. Let's face it, we either suck pretty bad or we're not seeing them playing their best, like they are not motivated to play their best. We beat the best teams in the league on a regular basis whether it be home or away (gave 3 upper echelon teams their first home losses), but then we come out the next day of a back to back against a lower echelon team and lose by 30. I don't know if that's lack of motivation, or if they are doing this on purpose, because I have never seen a team so bad on a second night of a back to back as this team is.. How can we beat the best only to lay an egg against a crappy team the next night?

I really hope someone on the team reads posts here because if they do I have one message.... STOP SUCKING ON SECOND NIGHT OF BACK TO BACKS!" People pay a lot of money to see you give 50% effort and losing by 30 at home to a crap team. Knock that crap off. You're better than that!

 

[ick300]

This thread is like everyone state your opinion then come back in 3 days and state it again ... It's Tuesday: Kings must need LaVine!

I don't think most of the guys here wants LaVine in general ... Even more if you put a poll Lavine yes or no , no will win higher % ...
The points is that the team needs better option for starter thne KH and that is obvious .... Just LaVine is the ''hot'' name now cause he will be sold in next month or so , the question is only where

 

[The_Jamal]

This is actually a big deal. The starters last year were only plus 2.2. That inspired a lot of the “maybe they were just healthy and not actually that good” talk over the offseason. That the starters are performing even better this year is a good sign if they can stay healthy.

One item to note, given some of the ideas being discussed in this thread, is that this year the starting group but subbing Monk for Huerter is -14.5.

Interesting. What's the minute distribution there? Can't honestly remember us just subbing Monk for Huerter very often.

 

[Joshoua]

I think my response to your general take is why would you prefer someone like LaVine when we could target Jerami Grant?

• Grant is only a year older
• Grant makes $13-15 mil less per year
• Grant is under contract 1 more year (4+1 vs. 3+1)
• Grant would probably cost similar in a trade
• Grant would improve our defense

If the emphasis from your POV is to find another scoring option that won’t cost us a lot in a trade, Grant seems to be the better target. His ability to play defense, protect the rim, and give us some much needed length in the frontcourt (7’2.75” wingspan & 8’11” standing reach) allows him to still impact the game even if he’s having an off night scoring, if others have a hot hand, etc.

I can see a world where Grant is ahead of Murray in the offensive pecking order initially, but a couple years down the road, that order could flip. The plus side of having someone like Grant instead of LaVine is that even if his offensive role is diminished over time (due to the development of others), he can still fill that 3&D role and help the team win. If LaVine’s scoring role is diminished, you still have a defensive weakness out there.

Couple everything mentioned above with the fact that Grant is a really solid complement to Sabonis at PF (which is really hard to find) and it seems like a no brainer when deciding between LaVine and Grant so I’m curious to get your take on why you might prefer LaVine?






You could also expand the target to be both Grant & Thybulle (sending out Barnes & Huerter from a salary perspective and likely to a 3rd team) and have a rotation of…

PG - Fox / Ellis
SG - Thybulle / Monk
SF - Murray / Vezenkov
PF - Grant / Lyles
C - Sabonis / Len

• 4 plus defenders around Sabonis in the starting lineup
• A lot of length around Sabonis (Thybulle, Murray, & Grant all have 7’0”+ wingspans)
• A lot of weakside rim protection help for Sabonis (Thybulle, Murray, & Grant are all pretty solid shotblockers)
• 4 solid floor spacers around Sabonis with Murray being our elite movement shooter
• Many good go-to scoring options in Fox, Grant, Monk, Sabonis, & Murray
• Great 6th man option in Monk with Ellis, Vezenkov, Lyles, and Len being solid bench options.
• You have the option to close out games with Monk (more offense) or Thybulle (more defense) depending on the game/situation

There’s a lot to like about that team. Especially come playoff time.

Agreed!! Wow I had no idea Grant was shooting 40% frok three on 5 plus attempts the last two years that will be sustainable when he’s getting shots from fox/Sabonis. Thybull is also at 38% on 3.8 attempts would make us contenders if we can get them and integrate them by playoffs. Question is what would it take how many picks

 

[Joshoua]

His role would be like it was when he played for Denver. He did play solid defense for them

Ya he was better than solid that year so having him and Keegan with Keegan just focusing on being a 3D player and add Thybull would make us a good defensive team. I imagine Fox turning it up late on defense as well we’d really only be weak with Sabonis to close games. While teams deal with Fox/Sabonis on offense

 

[twslam07]

I’m the spirit of my Grant/Thybulle post, another SG/PF tandem we could target would be Alex Caruso and Patrick Williams.

That tandem doesn’t have the go-to scoring option like the aforementioned pairing, but both are really good defenders that would really raise our defensive floor.

The other attractive thing about going after those two would be that you only have to send out one of Huerter or Barnes to make the money work (allowing us to move one to the bench).

Lastly, Patrick Williams is a full year younger than Keegan. He still has plenty of time to develop his game further and grow with our young core as that “PF of the future.”


EDIT: Looking at the financials again, we could technically make the money work if we send out 3 of the following players…

• Lyles
• Vezenkov
• Mitchell
• Duarte

…which could leave us with a bench of Monk, Huerter, Barnes, & Lyles (for example). That would be a pretty incredible bench and quite an advantage each night.

 

[ESP47]

I’m the spirit of my Grant/Thybulle post, another SG/PF tandem we could target would be Alex Caruso and Patrick Williams.

That tandem doesn’t have the go-to scoring option like the aforementioned pairing, but both are really good defenders that would really raise our defensive floor.

The other attractive thing about going after those two would be that you only have to send out one of Huerter or Barnes to make the money work (allowing us to move one to the bench).

Lastly, Patrick Williams is a full year younger than Keegan. He still has plenty of time to develop his game further and grow with our young core as that “PF of the future.”


EDIT: Looking at the financials again, we could technically make the money work if we send out 3 of the following players…

• Lyles
• Vezenkov
• Mitchell
• Duarte

…which could leave us with a bench of Monk, Huerter, Barnes, & Lyles (for example). That would be a pretty incredible bench and quite an advantage each night.

Interesting thought but I don't see Chicago trading their guys for any mix of those 3 players unless we include a first rounder.

Williams is a weird case because he's as physically imposing as it gets but an anemic rebounder for his size. Good outside shooter on medium volume but the advanced stats I've seen aren't a big fan of his and he really hasn't improved much at all since his rookie season. His 4 year numbers are as consistent as you can get and that's not really a good thing if you're looking for him to develop into what he should be, which is an elite 3&D player.

Caruso is an interesting case because advanced stats seem to love him but his impact doesn't seem to match what the metrics say. He would be the Kings best defender by a long shot and is shooting 44% from deep this year. I think he would make a real solid impact on this team but I don't think they're giving up one of their better players for a package of our low tier players.

 

[twslam07]

Interesting thought but I don't see Chicago trading their guys for any mix of those 3 players unless we include a first rounder.

Williams is a weird case because he's as physically imposing as it gets but an anemic rebounder for his size. Good outside shooter on medium volume but the advanced stats I've seen aren't a big fan of his and he really hasn't improved much at all since his rookie season. His 4 year numbers are as consistent as you can get and that's not really a good thing if you're looking for him to develop into what he should be, which is an elite 3&D player.

Caruso is an interesting case because advanced stats seem to love him but his impact doesn't seem to match what the metrics say. He would be the Kings best defender by a long shot and is shooting 44% from deep this year. I think he would make a real solid impact on this team but I don't think they're giving up one of their better players for a package of our low tier players.

Oh yeah. We’d need to add at least one 1st rounder to even get the conversation started. I don’t think any of those guys have much value around the league at this point. They all are probably around neutral to 2nd rounder value.

Regarding Williams, it’s the defensive side of the ball where he’s made noticeable improvements. His DEF DPM is +0.70 and his DEF EPM is +1.6. DPM tends to be my go-to these days and it has some cool visuals that trend their performance over time to get a sense of how a player may be trending. Below is Patrick Williams' trend:




And this is his trend for DEF DPM:




It looks like he's on an upward trend and might be a good candidate to target before he becomes too expensive.