Letting Holmes walk.

SLAB

Hall of Famer
Doesn’t help that the guy who’s (in theory) much more important to the future of this team is an oil and water match with him when they play together.

I don’t like Bagley (shocking, I know) but if I’m choosing one limited guy to put a complimentary piece next to and build from there, it’s the 22 year old.
 
So many strange assessments of players. Claiming Barnes is an average at best SF while boston is trying to give up Nesmith and a 1st for him. Putting down holmes while other teams are salivating to sign him. Being happy to let Bogi walk while literally all of Atlanta laughed at the stupidity of our choices, all the way deep into the playoffs with him as their 2nd best player. Letting Isaiah Thomas walk for nothing and he turns into an MVP candidate. The takes here are funny to me. The rest of the league must know something we dont about players, including the ones we want to chase and those we let walk.
you left out the substantial addition by subtraction crowd.

In fairness, Bogi in Sac got much fewer weakside catch and shoot opportunities. Whether you want to place the blame on Luke for not forcing it or Fox for being too focused on his own scoring is a reasonable debate.
 
Doesn’t help that the guy who’s (in theory) much more important to the future of this team is an oil and water match with him when they play together.

I don’t like Bagley (shocking, I know) but if I’m choosing one limited guy to put a complimentary piece next to and build from there, it’s the 22 year old.
context? Names versus pronouns? Quote something? ........
 
Cute. I expect better.

Do the math, factor in inflation, adjust for the cap increase between 2002 to 2021, bring it back 19 years, and how much would $10m today be in 2002?
Hmm I'm curious.

Ok back in 2003-2004 the salary cap was $43,840,000

https://www.eskimo.com/~pbender/misc/salaries04.txt

Funderburke made 3.6 million or 8.21% of the cap

This years cap is $109.1 million

So 8.21% of that is pretty close to 9 million today. $8,957,110
 
Hmm I'm curious.

Ok back in 2003-2004 the salary cap was $43,840,000

https://www.eskimo.com/~pbender/misc/salaries04.txt

Funderburke made 3.6 million or 8.21% of the cap

This years cap is $109.1 million

So 8.21% of that is pretty close to 9 million today. $8,957,110
It's more than $8.957M when we factor in inflation, but keeping it simple works for me. $9M is fair value for Funderburke today.

People underrate Funderburke, because he played on a ton of loaded teams. But if he was playing today, he'd be rated in the same category as Montrezell and Richaun. Dude's per 36 numbers were legit during his prime.

Look at the per 36 between Funderburke and Holmes: https://stathead.com/basketball/pcm...m=0&player_id1=fundela01&player_id2=holmeri01
 
Last edited:

Capt. Factorial

This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things
Staff member
It's more than $8.957M when we factor in inflation, but keeping it simple works for me. $9M is fair value for Funderburke today.
I don't think there's any reason to account for inflation. Inflation is covered by the change in the salary cap. Of course, the cap has grown even more than the dollar, but the rise in the cap is basically due to two factors: 1) Increases in revenue due to inflation, and 2) increases in revenue due to increased fan base engagement. Inflation is factored in to the salary cap already, so accounting for it again is double-counting.
 
I don't think there's any reason to account for inflation. Inflation is covered by the change in the salary cap. Of course, the cap has grown even more than the dollar, but the rise in the cap is basically due to two factors: 1) Increases in revenue due to inflation, and 2) increases in revenue due to increased fan base engagement. Inflation is factored in to the salary cap already, so accounting for it again is double-counting.
Those are fair points. $9m is fair value for Funderburke. And, as I’ve said, if Holmes gets more than $10m per year, let him walk.
 
It's more than $8.957M when we factor in inflation, but keeping it simple works for me. $9M is fair value for Funderburke today.

People underrate Funderburke, because he played on a ton of loaded teams. But if he was playing today, he'd be rated in the same category as Montrezell and Richaun. Dude's per 36 numbers were legit during his prime.

Look at the per 36 between Funderburke and Holmes: https://stathead.com/basketball/pcm...m=0&player_id1=fundela01&player_id2=holmeri01
Comparing Funderburke vs Holmes' 6th years (which are both the final years they play on their contract), shows Holmes is quite significantly a better player than Funderburke.
https://stathead.com/basketball/pcm...rfrom=2003&player_id2=holmeri01&p2yrfrom=2021
It's closer if you compare them both at age 27 (Holmes' most recent year vs Funderburke's rookie year)
https://stathead.com/basketball/pcm...rfrom=1998&player_id2=holmeri01&p2yrfrom=2021

Funderburke's got better defense (fewer PFs), where Holmes has better Offense (Higher FG%)

Comparing relative salaries across eras is difficult; I think the best way to compare mid-level players is relative to the mid level exception, which is the largest market for Free agents under the CBA. The MLE was a brand new technology at the time Funderburke signed his first contract; I'm not sure if it was the mechanism by which he was signed. But his starting salary was pretty close to the MLE in any case (MLE was 2 million in 1999, Funderburke's salary started at 2.4 million ), so I think it's proper to put him in that bucket.

I think that Funderburke's contract was an overpay relative to his role on the team (though winning teams should have the luxury of overpaying their role players.) Holmes' offensive efficiency seems like it points to him getting a bit more than the MLE. His intangibles are unquestionable.
 
Comparing Funderburke vs Holmes' 6th years (which are both the final years they play on their contract), shows Holmes is quite significantly a better player than Funderburke.
https://stathead.com/basketball/pcm...rfrom=2003&player_id2=holmeri01&p2yrfrom=2021
It's closer if you compare them both at age 27 (Holmes' most recent year vs Funderburke's rookie year)
https://stathead.com/basketball/pcm...rfrom=1998&player_id2=holmeri01&p2yrfrom=2021

Funderburke's got better defense (fewer PFs), where Holmes has better Offense (Higher FG%)

Comparing relative salaries across eras is difficult; I think the best way to compare mid-level players is relative to the mid level exception, which is the largest market for Free agents under the CBA. The MLE was a brand new technology at the time Funderburke signed his first contract; I'm not sure if it was the mechanism by which he was signed. But his starting salary was pretty close to the MLE in any case (MLE was 2 million in 1999, Funderburke's salary started at 2.4 million ), so I think it's proper to put him in that bucket.

I think that Funderburke's contract was an overpay relative to his role on the team (though winning teams should have the luxury of overpaying their role players.) Holmes' offensive efficiency seems like it points to him getting a bit more than the MLE. His intangibles are unquestionable.
We could nitpick comparison years, ages, and particular stats for weeks. I’d rather not, since my key point is Holmes, like Funderburke, is a good player, who is limited on offense and defense, and is thus best suited for a bench big role. I place his value at less than $10m per year. He gets more than that, let him walk.
 
We could nitpick comparison years, ages, and particular stats for weeks. I’d rather not, since my key point is Holmes, like Funderburke, is a good player, who is limited on offense and defense, and is thus best suited for a bench big role. I place his value at less than $10m per year. He gets more than that, let him walk.
I'm not contradicting you (well, maybe I think you're overvaluing Funderburke a little.) I think your point was interesting enough to expand on.

His value is centered around the MLE (which is right around the $10m figure you're throwing out). Can he make the case that he significantly better than the MLE? In that case he'll probably end up for a team with cap space (like us). If not; he's covered by the MLE, and could end up playing whereever he prefers (maybe a contender, maybe somewhere with lower state income tax, maybe somewhere with a better community theatre scene... etc)
 
I'm not contradicting you (well, maybe I think you're overvaluing Funderburke a little.) I think your point was interesting enough to expand on.

His value is centered around the MLE (which is right around the $10m figure you're throwing out). Can he make the case that he significantly better than the MLE? In that case he'll probably end up for a team with cap space (like us). If not; he's covered by the MLE, and could end up playing whereever he prefers (maybe a contender, maybe somewhere with lower state income tax, maybe somewhere with a better community theatre scene... etc)
we have cap space?
 

Capt. Factorial

This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things
Staff member
I think misread our cap table, thinking we'd be able to get under by renouncing our cap holds on our various free agents, but I guess that's not a thing of we're over the cap ‍
Yeah, given all the players we have right now, and our pick (at #9), and mandatory roster charges for empty roster spots...if we clear out every penny of unguaranteed money and free agent cap holds we'll be at $107M on a cap of $112.4M.

Basically there's no way for us to use cap room to sign Holmes without clearing salary, and since we can assume that won't be Fox, it would mean we would have to trade away Buddy, Barnes, Bagley, or Wright while getting back at least $7M less to allow us to use cap room to sign Holmes. That's not something I would recommend as a strategy. Now, maybe something comes along and there's a team that wants to send us a couple of future firsts for Buddy and eat some of his money and we decide it's a good deal, and incidentally it gives us the ability to go after Holmes with cap room, that's OK. But we shouldn't be chasing after bad deal to dump salary so that we can give Holmes a tad more than $10M per year.

The best we can likely offer is four years at the Early Bird exception with 8% annual raises. Since the Early Bird came in at $10.05M last year, we can probably assume that it will come in at the top end around $10.5M this year. We can give an 8% annual raise with Early Bird, if we gave a four-year deal with a full 8% raise, that contract would come out to 4 years $47M, so $11.75M per year.

Another team with cap room would only be able to give Holmes 5% raises per year, so they would basically have to start at $11M per year to match that (they would actually beat it by a few hundred K).

Bottom line is that any team with $11M in cap room will be able to offer Holmes a bigger contract than we can, unless we clear salary. But I would think that my following take is in general agreement with several posters on this thread in spirit, if not in specifics:
1) The maximum Early Bird contract that we can offer Holmes (4y/$47M) is likely to slightly exceed his expected value over the duration of the contract. If we have to go that high to sign him it would likely be OK, but letting him walk (or a sign-and-trade) is also an option to consider.
2) Aggressively clearing salary in order to sign Holmes at a higher rate than this using cap space is a bad idea. If Holmes is offered a contract from another team starting at $12M+ and asks us to match (and we haven't independently cleared salary) then we should thank him for his time and wish him the best.
2a) If we have already independently cleared salary in a trade that was beneficial for us, and the market dictates that Holmes will be getting more than the Early Bird, we could consider giving him an overpay starting at $12-13M. I would lean against it, but going that high is probably not a disaster. However, there are probably going to be ways to spend that money that would help us more than Holmes.
3) If we can start Holmes on the Early Bird at $9M (so, 4y/$39M) or less, we should do it.
 
I am sure Holmes and his agent will wait out the FA period hoping a big time 20M per year offer does show up.
But because there may be a lot of potential big FA names (Leonard,Collins,Conley,Oladipo,Paul,Lowry) just to name a few
It could be possible that the cap space out there dries up before Holmes gets a big offer

Therefore, I think the Kings should let Holmes know early in FA that they are prepared to offer the Max Early Bird if he wants it
This would let him know that we want him to stay, Holmes loves it here, but we will not stand in his way of a big payday
I would not insult him with a 9 mil vs a 10.5 starting , that could decrease our chance at a hometown discount at 10.5 vs a slightly
higher offer of 11-12m from another team

Since a early bird contract can go over the cap, we do not have to trade assets to clear space, we can work on TD RFA while we wait it out
As long as we reserve our MLE to sign a #2 Center option (Noel, Theis) we can afford to be patient or pursue other Trade possibilities (Buddy,Bagley)
 
Last edited:
It's more than $8.957M when we factor in inflation, but keeping it simple works for me. $9M is fair value for Funderburke today.

People underrate Funderburke, because he played on a ton of loaded teams. But if he was playing today, he'd be rated in the same category as Montrezell and Richaun. Dude's per 36 numbers were legit during his prime.

Look at the per 36 between Funderburke and Holmes: https://stathead.com/basketball/pcm...m=0&player_id1=fundela01&player_id2=holmeri01
Per 36 doesn't mean what you think it means. Holmes is significantly better on both ends and its not close. Just a bad take, they happen from time to time!
 
Per 36 doesn't mean what you think it means. Holmes is significantly better on both ends and its not close. Just a bad take, they happen from time to time!
Per 36 is the only measurement with the same denominator. So I know exactly what it means. It wasn't cherry picked, so your take is off--it happens from time to time.
 
Per 36 is the only measurement with the same denominator. So I know exactly what it means. It wasn't cherry picked, so your take is off--it happens from time to time.
No he's right. The closer to 36 mins a player gets the more accurate they become. Just expanding someone's minutes doesnt guarantee the same production. And in many cases players will have more than 6 fould!
 
No he's right. The closer to 36 mins a player gets the more accurate they become. Just expanding someone's minutes doesnt guarantee the same production. And in many cases players will have more than 6 fould!
You can't compare stats unless they're normalized. You normalize stats by using the same denominator, which is what the per 36 does. And, no, it does not grant someone more than 6 fouls.
 
You can't compare stats unless they're normalized. You normalize stats by using the same denominator, which is what the per 36 does. And, no, it does not grant someone more than 6 fouls.
Your missing the point. Taking someone playing 12 mins and multiplying by 3 doesnt mean those will be their numbers. The numbera will be much lower.
 
You can't compare stats unless they're normalized. You normalize stats by using the same denominator, which is what the per 36 does. And, no, it does not grant someone more than 6 fouls.
Ok, ill bite. Per 36 isn't "normalized" in the slightest because it assumes the way a player generated his numbers will apply over 36 minutes of game time. Considering Funderburke played 8/319 career games above 30+ minutes, this is a really bad assumption to make that he all of a sudden could just continue that production. He was a bench player for a reason.

Holmes meanwhile, (even though you're just blatantly ignoring the fact that he's far superior in every facet of the game. It's literally not even close, but we'll move on) has just put together 2 seasons of quality starting Center production in 28 and 29 MPG. It's fairly reasonable to assume that if we added 4-6 minutes to Holmes a game, he'd be able produce roughly around the same rates as he has these past 2 seasons.

The stat just doesn't tell you anything. Lacks context, depth, really anything of value.
 
Ok, ill bite. Per 36 isn't "normalized" in the slightest because it assumes the way a player generated his numbers will apply over 36 minutes of game time. Considering Funderburke played 8/319 career games above 30+ minutes, this is a really bad assumption to make that he all of a sudden could just continue that production. He was a bench player for a reason.

Holmes meanwhile, (even though you're just blatantly ignoring the fact that he's far superior in every facet of the game. It's literally not even close, but we'll move on) has just put together 2 seasons of quality starting Center production in 28 and 29 MPG. It's fairly reasonable to assume that if we added 4-6 minutes to Holmes a game, he'd be able produce roughly around the same rates as he has these past 2 seasons.

The stat just doesn't tell you anything. Lacks context, depth, really anything of value.
Actually, the stat tells you everything. It is the only apples to apples comparison available. That is undeniable despite your rationalizations.

And if we're going to be fair, Holmes numbers would get adjusted down because of pace and a higher scoring NBA than when Funderburke played.

But, again, what's the point of getting into that when we're discussing two good, but limited bench bigs, who shouldn't be making more than $10M per year. You really going to try spin it so that Holmes is in a different category than Funderburke as a player? He's not.
 
Actually, the stat tells you everything. It is the only apples to apples comparison available. That is undeniable despite your rationalizations.

And if we're going to be fair, Holmes numbers would get adjusted down because of pace and a higher scoring NBA than when Funderburke played.

But, again, what's the point of getting into that when we're discussing two good, but limited bench bigs, who shouldn't be making more than $10M per year. You really going to try spin it so that Holmes is in a different category than Funderburke as a player? He's not.
Here are the bigs on that 2001 to 2002:

C: Vlade, Polllard, Keon Clark
PF: Cwebb, Funderburke

Where would Holmes fit in on that roster? He's not starting ahead of Vlade or Cwebb. He's not playing ahead of Pollard. He'd be competing for time with Clark and Funderburke.