Letting Holmes walk.

#31
So I went to Spotrac and for 2021-22 season and it shows the following:
Sacramento Kings 2021-22 Salary Cap Table | Spotrac

Non-Taxpayer Mid-Level Exception$9,535,740
($7,915,176)Chimezie Metu ($1,620,564)

Does this mean we can only offer Holmes 7.9 Mil if we have no cap space?

I have seen posted we can offer Holmes a little over 10Mil

Capt Factorial can you clarify what we can offer?
 
#32
I really wish we would have traded him. I hate letting him walk for nothing, but tying a lot of money into a role-guy who helps you win 30 games a season is silly. I’m not downplaying Holmes, I like Holmes, Holmes could be a great help on a team who’s already there. But we’re not even close.
That comes from not having a plan and “keeping all options open”. We shall see if we make it into the play-in game. I’m not sure you can call it improvement as we were 12th last year but it appears most Kings fans would be happy about it.
 
#33
I admit there is a difficult decision whether to keep Holmes or not(in my view mostly tied to how you see Bagleys future with the Kings), even if the price is good.

however, some of the comparisons and examples I’m seeing in this thread shows me that once again Kings fans are vastly undervaluing a player.

JT? Hayes? K9? Landry? BROCKMAN? I don’t know who watches Holmes the last two years and think “it would be like JT” lol

Homes is on a much different level than these players and also a lot more than an energy player, which he was in Phoenix..he’s a lot more polished here and his push shot is the most automatic shot on the Kings.

It’s also not good policy to keep letting starters walk for nothing. That would make it two off seasons where Monte has done that. Unless another suitor makes it impossible. I see Holmes being retained at around the 10 million mentioned.
 
#34
I admit there is a difficult decision whether to keep Holmes or not(in my view mostly tied to how you see Bagleys future with the Kings), even if the price is good.

however, some of the comparisons and examples I’m seeing in this thread shows me that once again Kings fans are vastly undervaluing a player.

JT? Hayes? K9? Landry? BROCKMAN? I don’t know who watches Holmes the last two years and think “it would be like JT” lol

Homes is on a much different level than these players and also a lot more than an energy player, which he was in Phoenix..he’s a lot more polished here and his push shot is the most automatic shot on the Kings.

It’s also not good policy to keep letting starters walk for nothing. That would make it two off seasons where Monte has done that. Unless another suitor makes it impossible. I see Holmes being retained at around the 10 million mentioned.
He's easily replaceable but Maxi Kleber who is on a similar level (but imo is a better defender overall and easily a better shooter he was over 40% most the year (41.5%) from 3) signed 4 years 35 million is a good gauge what Holmes should get and probably a bit less than that since he can't space the floor. 5-8 million per season is what he should be getting. You can always find energy C's to fill in even guys in the draft this year I think could come in and produce at a similar level.

I said in the game thread I rather give Goga Bitadze a shot here after the incident today than overpay.

Would Kings fans be willing to eat Horfords massive contracts if the Thunder send the Kings 1st round picks or some of there young talent? Like Horford for Barnes swap plus 1sts? (Not saying I'm for this just an idea)
 
Last edited:

Capt. Factorial

This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things
Staff member
#35
So I went to Spotrac and for 2021-22 season and it shows the following:
Sacramento Kings 2021-22 Salary Cap Table | Spotrac

Non-Taxpayer Mid-Level Exception$9,535,740
($7,915,176)Chimezie Metu ($1,620,564)

Does this mean we can only offer Holmes 7.9 Mil if we have no cap space?

I have seen posted we can offer Holmes a little over 10Mil

Capt Factorial can you clarify what we can offer?
If we don't have cap space, we can offer either the MLE, as you listed above, or we can use his Early Bird rights, which will allow us to offer 105% of the average salary this year. I don't know what the average salary is exactly, but the MLE is designed to be close, so...yeah, probably a bit over $10M.
 

dude12

Hall of Famer
#36
At some price point, Holmes is not worth a salary. That is the question. Personally, I look at his defense and I don’t think Kings fans would come to a consensus on his defense. Offensively, I think we could replace what he does or come close to it at a significantly lower salary.

Say what you want but Damian Jones’ defense is at least as good if not better but we take a hit offensively there. But would they need him in pick and roll if Bagley is matched up with him. Metu offensively can pick and roll but can also stretch it out a bit. Don’t think he’s defensively as good as Holmes though.......he’s not.

Holmes at 7M? Heck yeah.
10M? Maybe
13-15? Just don’t know about that.
 
#37
Holmes at 7M? Heck yeah.
10M? Maybe
13-15? Just don’t know about that.
We can't pay him the latter unless we cleared space just to sign him to more than we can pay. So whether it's 7 or 10, it's almost inconsequential to our cap situation since we're likely limited to the MLE and minimum level players in FA. I'd say it's best we keep him if we can because I'd rather use the MLE on another piece than replacing someone we already have (and it appears we've already committed a piece of it to Metu?)
 
#38
I don't want to pay for what he's probably worth. The only way I see them keeping him, in a manner I'd like to see , is if he's just a nice guy and doesn't want all those millions to play in <other more interesting and competing market>.
 

dude12

Hall of Famer
#39
The smarter guys with cap knowledge may know this better but my thinking going into this off-season was that Buddy may be moved as we are stacked with guards......and/or the possibility of Bagley being moved. I feel confidant that Monte and Catanella have multiple directions/plans they can go in. Much of this is going to be dependent on the ability to move one or both of these pieces.
 
#40
Monte was delt a curve ball and then got schooled on the Bogden fiasco and came away with nothing. Other teams are gonna be hunting Holmes the same way with aggressive stipulations on top of market value hoping we don't match.
 
#41
I’m cool with letting Holmes walk. Too expensive and not big enough for rim protecting. We can draft Kai Jones who is younger, taller, can hit the 3, and a good slasher for a big man. Will need to bulk up but that’s doable if he earns it
 
#42
Monte was delt a curve ball and then got schooled on the Bogden fiasco and came away with nothing. Other teams are gonna be hunting Holmes the same way with aggressive stipulations on top of market value hoping we don't match.
They won't need aggressive stipulations, they just need to go higher than the Kings can match. It is also quite possible that he has more value to the Kings than to most other teams. But there is plenty of money available this off-season and all it takes is one.
 

SacTownKid

Hall of Famer
#43
At some price point, Holmes is not worth a salary. That is the question. Personally, I look at his defense and I don’t think Kings fans would come to a consensus on his defense. Offensively, I think we could replace what he does or come close to it at a significantly lower salary.

Say what you want but Damian Jones’ defense is at least as good if not better but we take a hit offensively there. But would they need him in pick and roll if Bagley is matched up with him. Metu offensively can pick and roll but can also stretch it out a bit. Don’t think he’s defensively as good as Holmes though.......he’s not.

Holmes at 7M? Heck yeah.
10M? Maybe
13-15? Just don’t know about that.
Yeah, Monte has to consider at what point does the contract become an albatross in a worst case where Holmes assumes a bench role and/or his minutes are cut.
 
#44
There's something nagging me too about him. He's an undersized energy big who does basically everything through being scrappy. Is he really going to age all that gracefully? It feels like those guys always break down early.

But I'm not seeing any reliable options other than him, but the first priority in my mind is finding a second combo 3/4 in the Barnes mold. The second priority is upgrading the C position.

So to that end, I wish we had traded him and/or Bagley for Miles Bridges and called it a day. And then throw money at Nurk in 2022 provided his injury history checks out and tell Bagley to take a hike if he hadn't already been traded.
I think Holmes has transitioned from unskilled energy big to a very skilled, decent energy big. He used to beat the Kings up by being tough, scrappy, winning all the 50/50 balls and just generally out hustling the team.

These days he's very skilled but he's skilled within a limited box. He's our 2nd best finisher at the rim behind Fox and I'm not talking about throwing down lobs. He's developed a really good euro step and his shot within the paint is about as efficient as it gets in the NBA. He's also got a very high IQ offensively in the pick and roll and with his own spacing. There's a reason why he gets all the lobs on the team.

Now I do think they need an upgrade at starting center or at least a center that can come in against the bigger centers that Holmes struggles against but I have no problem if they throw some money at him to keep him. As long as they don't throw out a stupid contract, he will either be worth it value wise or he will have value on the trade market if they want to go in another direction.
 
#45
I really like Holmes. It seems like he disappears against opponents with Biggs that are bigger than him. I would keep him for sure if we have some other kryptonite for teams that rebound really well. We are worst in the league at rebounding. Worst in the league at points allowed. How do they improve that?
 
#46
If I’m the GM and I’ve got Fox and Hali as my cornerstones, there’s no more overpaying of role players. Having a contract like Buddy’s is a much bigger concern to me than potentially paying Holmes $10M a year. I love both players, but a successful GM needs to look at these guys without the emotion of a fan. Don’t overpay. Manage your assets.
Not overpaying doesn't work in SAC. It's the "basketball hell" tax. Yeah Buddy's contract is looking pretty bad for us right now, but realistically, do you think Buddy (although maybe we should have gone the RFA route) would have taken 10-15mil to play on the Kings? I love how many fans and media talk about how Buddy would look a lot better if he was only getting paid 10-15mil, as if 20 other, much better teams wouldn't want him at that price too.
 

dude12

Hall of Famer
#47
I don’t think anyone disputes Holmes ability on offense. I’m telling you right now, Charlotte is going to go after him.

But for $12-15M is his defense going to allow this team to be a playoff team who can win a first series. Because we we need to have a realistic goal and getting in and winning a series would be my goal.

I have doubts. Not that he’s terrible defensively, but with Fox being similar defensively, just ok, Hield and Marvin and possibly Halliburton as another just ok defensive guy. Where do we draw the line and which avg defensive guys are sticking and which lesser offensive oriented guys(Hield, Marvin) do we stick with or move. I’ve seen Holmes worthless against some matchups.

What does our healthy team or lineup do if we had a player like Damian Jones getting 24 minutes.....or for those who think he’s just a journeyman nobody, any other defensive center.
 
#48
Crazy theory I just thought of but I wonder if this could potentially be true.

The Kings are the worst defensive team this year. The starting lineup has been particularly bad

Fox - bad
Hield - bad
Barnes - below average
Bagley - bad
Holmes - average

Say you take out Barnes and replace him with Harkless, an above average defender depending on the year. Barnes has better metrics than Harkless but Harkless is a better defender. Defense is played every time down the court but only one guy normally gets to shoot the ball on offense. If a player's strength is their offense, yet they play 2nd, 3rd or 4th fiddle to other players on the court, then that makes their skill redundant and not used as much as it could be on another team. Defense is never redundant because it requires all 5 players to play it every time down the court.

Harkless gets to use his best skill on every defensive possession but Barnes only gets to use his offensive skill on some of the possessions. Does that potentially make Harkless a better winning player on this specific team because the skill he brings doesn't overlap with anyone else's and his weakness doesn't have to be used very often on offense?

I'm not saying it's particularly true in Harkless and Barnes' case but it could maybe be true if the Kings signed Noel over Holmes or replaced Buddy in the starting lineup with Wright. Ideally you want 2 way players at every position but if they can't do that then they need to balance the team out a bit. It may or may not work and it might look ugly but what they have going on with these players just simply doesn't work anyway so something has to change.
 
#49
This reminds me of when a lot of us thought Trill was going to get 12-15M/year. Rich Holmie Quan is better than Trill, but I don't think most teams will be willing to pay him more than 10M/year. Having a big that can't shoot and isn't a difference maker on defense just isn't that big of a luxury (and honestly, as others have mentioned, he's a liability on defense sometimes but it's hard to fully evaluate that with this team). My comp for him is Montrezl.
 

SLAB

Hall of Famer
#50
This reminds me of when a lot of us thought Trill was going to get 12-15M/year. Rich Holmie Quan is better than Trill, but I don't think most teams will be willing to pay him more than 10M/year. Having a big that can't shoot and isn't a difference maker on defense just isn't that big of a luxury (and honestly, as others have mentioned, he's a liability on defense sometimes but it's hard to fully evaluate that with this team). My comp for him is Montrezl.
Did a lot of us really think that or was it just Willie himself and also one or two very loud posters? It’s been a few years so my memory might be off.

Rashaun will def get a bigger bag than WC$. Just a matter of how much. Below 10 and no promises to remain the starter and I’m cool.

The most important part of this offseason should be finding a big that compliments Bags’ game. Even if he’s not technically as good as Rashaun, it would help immensely to have a guy who can cover for Bags’ weaknesses, then Rashaun can be Montrezl-like off the bench. Win win.
 

dude12

Hall of Famer
#51
I’ve already heard that Charlotte is going hard after a center. When a team feels they may be a piece from making a jump to the next level, guys get overpaid. Bogie, Hield, probably Holmes
 
#52
Did a lot of us really think that or was it just Willie himself and also one or two very loud posters? It’s been a few years so my memory might be off.

Rashaun will def get a bigger bag than WC$. Just a matter of how much. Below 10 and no promises to remain the starter and I’m cool.

The most important part of this offseason should be finding a big that compliments Bags’ game. Even if he’s not technically as good as Rashaun, it would help immensely to have a guy who can cover for Bags’ weaknesses, then Rashaun can be Montrezl-like off the bench. Win win.
I really can't remember, my memory says that we had threads just like this one but maybe it was just a few that thought he'd get 12-15 (this was also during the era where mahinmi and biyombo were getting 18 per so it might have been based on that). I agree Richaun is better than Willie, and the majority of your post. Interested to see what happens in the offseason
 

Capt. Factorial

This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things
Staff member
#53
I really can't remember, my memory says that we had threads just like this one but maybe it was just a few that thought he'd get 12-15 (this was also during the era where mahinmi and biyombo were getting 18 per so it might have been based on that). I agree Richaun is better than Willie, and the majority of your post. Interested to see what happens in the offseason
There were certainly people, myself included, who argued that the market for WCS-type players was in the $12-15M range. What ultimately happened with WCS was baffling, but I don't think the estimate was ridiculous. Just the year before, Jusuf Nurkic had put up a similar season to WCS's 2019 season with worse offensive advanced numbers and gotten 4 years at $12M. That offseason, we gave DeWayne Dedmon $13.3M per year and his stats weren't any better than Willie's, though he (allegedly, no proof provided in Sacramento) could shoot the three. Valanciunas, coming off a slightly better season, got $15M per year. Even Zubac, who was on the court 10 MPG less than WCS got $7M.

It seems like WCS didn't take free agency (and perhaps his basketball game) seriously enough, and he took a basically min-level offer to go to try and poach a ring with the Warriors (obviously that didn't work out because the Warriors imploded due to injury). Still, his on-court value - were he to keep it up, which he didn't - was worth that kind of a contract.

As far as Richaun goes, his numbers definitely hold up to WCS' numbers when he hit the market, and his shooting efficiency is better. And he has shown that he can put up that kind of shooting efficiency over nearly 30 minutes a game, it's not like he's getting bunnies in garbage time. But I think there are some questions about his size - he leaves it all out on the court, but he's not really the guy you want defending the bigger centers in this league, which I think limits the market demand for him a bit. $10M seems about right, and that's about what we can offer.
 
#54
Crazy theory I just thought of but I wonder if this could potentially be true.

The Kings are the worst defensive team this year. The starting lineup has been particularly bad

Fox - bad
Hield - bad
Barnes - below average
Bagley - bad
Holmes - average

Say you take out Barnes and replace him with Harkless, an above average defender depending on the year. Barnes has better metrics than Harkless but Harkless is a better defender. Defense is played every time down the court but only one guy normally gets to shoot the ball on offense. If a player's strength is their offense, yet they play 2nd, 3rd or 4th fiddle to other players on the court, then that makes their skill redundant and not used as much as it could be on another team. Defense is never redundant because it requires all 5 players to play it every time down the court.

Harkless gets to use his best skill on every defensive possession but Barnes only gets to use his offensive skill on some of the possessions. Does that potentially make Harkless a better winning player on this specific team because the skill he brings doesn't overlap with anyone else's and his weakness doesn't have to be used very often on offense?

I'm not saying it's particularly true in Harkless and Barnes' case but it could maybe be true if the Kings signed Noel over Holmes or replaced Buddy in the starting lineup with Wright. Ideally you want 2 way players at every position but if they can't do that then they need to balance the team out a bit. It may or may not work and it might look ugly but what they have going on with these players just simply doesn't work anyway so something has to change.
I don't think taking out Barnes for Harkless is the answer to their defensive woes since he's the least of their problems with that starting lineup. I'd categorize it more like this; I take issue with putting Fox on the same level as Buddy/Bagley, two of the worst defensive players in the league.

Fox- below average
Hield- abysmal
Barnes- average
Bagley- abysmal
Holmes- below average

The issue I feel has always been Buddy and Bagley being there which then gets exacerbated by Holmes' below-averageness. Playing the C position, even being below average or average can be a killer to your whole defense, and that's before you realize he's sharing the frontcourt with someone like Bagley.
 
#55
I have no idea what happened with WCS but I think he earned a rep as a guy who didn't care or at least couldn't perform at the same level on a consistent night in-night out basis. Holmes is classic lunchbox guy so that isn't a concern, it's just that it's easy to get enamored with those players when they are on a value contract and when you start paying them buckets of cash suddenly their deficiencies hit the spotlight. With our cap situation though - I think we have to give him the early-Bird offer and hope he takes it.
 
#56
Having a contract like Buddy’s is a much bigger concern to me than potentially paying Holmes $10M a year..
Yep.

And Holmes provides the team a much bigger “kick“ most games than Buddy does. Buddy clearly is a much more prolific scorer, but he doesn’t play with the anywhere near the energy, passion, or hustle that Holmes does.

And Holmes plays defense. Not at an all-star level, of course, but he plays hard on that end and within a team concept.

Richaun Holmes is exactly the type of player the KINGS should be collecting.

Good players with a strong passion for the game that hate losing, buy into the team concept, and want to play hard on both ends of the court.

IMO, they have a few of those guys in Swipa, Hali, Holmes, and Barnes.

And possibly Wright, Davis and Metu.

Circling back to the point, this team needs to find a way to keep Holmes, without drastically overpaying, and not over pay for guys like Buddy that don’t fit into the same category.

Of course that wasn’t Monte McNair’s fault.
 
#57
I don't think taking out Barnes for Harkless is the answer to their defensive woes since he's the least of their problems with that starting lineup. I'd categorize it more like this; I take issue with putting Fox on the same level as Buddy/Bagley, two of the worst defensive players in the league.

Fox- below average
Hield- abysmal
Barnes- average
Bagley- abysmal
Holmes- below average

The issue I feel has always been Buddy and Bagley being there which then gets exacerbated by Holmes' below-averageness. Playing the C position, even being below average or average can be a killer to your whole defense, and that's before you realize he's sharing the frontcourt with someone like Bagley.
The metrics don't really back up Barnes as being average on defense though. He passes the eye test but continually has poor metrics compared to how he is viewed by fans and other players around the league. I think he's our best trade piece because his impact doesn't match how highly he's valued. Fox is closer to Hield than he is to Holmes on defense IMO. He's really bad overall and the numbers say the same thing.

I agree that Holmes is not the right center for a team with terrible perimeter defense. Noel has some of the best defensive metrics for a center and needs to be seriously considered this off season. It was stupid to not consider him last off season at the price he came at.

At minimum, they need to get Hield and Bagley out of the starting lineup and replace them with defensive minded players. Wright and Harkless are the best options that are currently on the team but they can't go into next year hoping they magically develop on defense with essentially the same players or just a minor change.
 
#58
I don't think taking out Barnes for Harkless is the answer to their defensive woes since he's the least of their problems with that starting lineup. I'd categorize it more like this; I take issue with putting Fox on the same level as Buddy/Bagley, two of the worst defensive players in the league.

Fox- below average
Hield- abysmal
Barnes- average
Bagley- abysmal
Holmes- below average

The issue I feel has always been Buddy and Bagley being there which then gets exacerbated by Holmes' below-averageness. Playing the C position, even being below average or average can be a killer to your whole defense, and that's before you realize he's sharing the frontcourt with someone like Bagley.
That Fox, Hield, Barnes, Bagley and Holmes lineup is actually ok defensively and excellent offensively.

The issue was the lack of quality rotation players or the lack of the right mix of players defensively. Fox likes to gamble so he needs a center with length and mobility to cover for him (someone like WCS).

It is not that easy to come up with explanations why this team is very bad defensively this year. They were slightly below average last year and the year before, and these are almost the same core of players. Nevertheless, there are 2 obvious explanations I can see:
  • Backup SF. We had GR3 as the backup SF before the trade deadline and he was truly one of the worst defensive players that I have seen. Compared to what we had last year which were Ariza/Bazemore, it is night and day. Ariza/Bazemore were excellent rebounders with high steal rate.
  • Walton likes to play small. Defensive rebounding is important in playing small and from guards to wings (except Buddy and Barnes), they are all bad defensive rebounders.
 
#59
The metrics don't really back up Barnes as being average on defense though. He passes the eye test but continually has poor metrics compared to how he is viewed by fans and other players around the league. I think he's our best trade piece because his impact doesn't match how highly he's valued. Fox is closer to Hield than he is to Holmes on defense IMO. He's really bad overall and the numbers say the same thing.

I agree that Holmes is not the right center for a team with terrible perimeter defense. Noel has some of the best defensive metrics for a center and needs to be seriously considered this off season. It was stupid to not consider him last off season at the price he came at.

At minimum, they need to get Hield and Bagley out of the starting lineup and replace them with defensive minded players. Wright and Harkless are the best options that are currently on the team but they can't go into next year hoping they magically develop on defense with essentially the same players or just a minor change.
I agree with a lot of this. One thing to consider is that Hield and Bagley are two of the team's best rebounders. Another is that Fox and Hield are excellent together in transition. Something would have to give.
 
#60
The metrics don't really back up Barnes as being average on defense though. He passes the eye test but continually has poor metrics compared to how he is viewed by fans and other players around the league.

Fox is closer to Hield than he is to Holmes on defense IMO. He's really bad overall and the numbers say the same thing.
.
”Metrics“ with regard to defense are very flawed. Because they are quite subjective and also very dependent upon interpretation.

HB is a good defensive player on the whole. Doesn’t matter what the subjective metrics say.
Fox needs to be a lot more consistent, no doubt, but he’s a capable defender when he wants to be too.
Same goes for Hali and Holmes.