Letting Holmes walk.

Even though I wasn’t thrilled with losing those second rounders initially because there are a bunch of prospects I like this year, it sure looks like Monte nailed it with those trades
I guess it depends on how the FO feels about the previous regime developmental guys (James, Guy), but having a bunch of 2nd rounders lose value if you have a bunch in consecutive years because you just run out of developmental spots to keep them. Kings obviously want to hold on to Woodard/Ramsey, the team (although not the McNair regime) has invested 2 years into Guy/James. Metu and James both showed really good signs last year and IMO are worth continuing to develop as 4th/5th bigs. So even if you cut bait with "not your guys", we still have 4 spots tied up to pretty good developmental spots. Not much room to add many more developmental guys with a 1st rounder coming and trying to field a competitive team.
 
In order to sign any player you have to either have salary cap room, or you need to use an exception. The exception that we could use to sign Holmes that would provide salary that we expect is at least close to the salary Holmes will command is the Early Bird exception, which applies to only our own players, and only players who have been with the team for two years. The Early Bird exception, in Holmes' case, could be worth as much as about 4y/$47M. Even if we had kept CoJo instead of trading for Delon, we could not have offered Holmes more than that without renouncing free agents (all of them), because we still would not have had enough cap room to provide any value above and beyond the Early Bird exception. The Early Bird exception CANNOT be combined with cap space. You can use one, or you can use the other. Had we kept Cojo instead of Delon, AND renounced all of our free agents AND cut all of our unguaranteed money we would have been able to offer Holmes about 4y/$58M - but that would have come at the expense of at least 5 bench players and if rumors that Charlotte may offer Holmes $20M to start are true, wouldn't have come close to sealing the deal anyway.

So, Delon's money by itself could have given us enough head room under the cap to make a difference. Delon plus basically every bench player we control? Yes, a little, but at a pretty high cost.



No, if we had cap space we would not be constrained by the Early Bird amount. But as above, it would have been very difficult to get enough cap space to exceed the Early Bird value, and it would not have been exceeded by very much.



If we didn't trade for Delon, he would still be under contract to the Pistons. He would not be a free agent this offseason.
I’m aware of Delon’s status.

thank you for clarifying if cap space could have been used in conjunction with the early bird exception. I am assuming as a restricted free agent it doesn’t matter where you stand relative to the cap assuming the luxury tax is not a problem.
 
I guess it depends on how the FO feels about the previous regime developmental guys (James, Guy), but having a bunch of 2nd rounders lose value if you have a bunch in consecutive years because you just run out of developmental spots to keep them. Kings obviously want to hold on to Woodard/Ramsey, the team (although not the McNair regime) has invested 2 years into Guy/James. Metu and James both showed really good signs last year and IMO are worth continuing to develop as 4th/5th bigs. So even if you cut bait with "not your guys", we still have 4 spots tied up to pretty good developmental spots. Not much room to add many more developmental guys with a 1st rounder coming and trying to field a competitive team.
you can do quite a bit with 2nd round picks if they agree not to come into camp. They can sign with your G league team and then come back and sign with your main team.
 

Tetsujin

The Game Thread Dude
Latest mocks have Charlotte taking a big with their pick which would be good for us because that would take one potential Holmes suitor off the playing field but bad for us because I think Isaiah Jackson or Kai would be great fits next to Ball or Bridges.
 
If we were a good team, we would need to look into retaining him. We are not a good team, so we need to keep the core in place and find new pieces to surround it with. I'm assuming we dont consider Holmes to be a part of the core, so he must go fourth. I dont think he is valuable in a sign&trade as to sign him would be to pay him close to the top of his market value. I liked him, but we didn't win and our defense mostly sucked.
 
I don't see how we don't offer him the full Early Bird no matter what the plan is. It's not a lot of money and we'll be over the cap whether we sign him or chase a replacement. So the question is whether someone thinks he is worth more than 10-12 million per over the life of the contract (I think the projection was 44-46 million after annual raises on a 4 year starting at 10.x).
 
If we were a good team, we would need to look into retaining him. We are not a good team, so we need to keep the core in place and find new pieces to surround it with. I'm assuming we dont consider Holmes to be a part of the core, so he must go fourth. I dont think he is valuable in a sign&trade as to sign him would be to pay him close to the top of his market value. I liked him, but we didn't win and our defense mostly sucked.
I still don’t want to lose talent for nothing, and it makes it harder to swallow when you remember we also lost Bogie for nothing less than a year ago…but tying all our cap space up in a mediocre treadmill team is not smart either so I assume moves are coming to clear cap space soon if we are serious about retaining him. If not, he should not be expected to take less than his market value to come back to a losing team either
 
I still don’t want to lose talent for nothing, and it makes it harder to swallow when you remember we also lost Bogie for nothing less than a year ago…but tying all our cap space up in a mediocre treadmill team is not smart either so I assume moves are coming to clear cap space soon if we are serious about retaining him. If not, he should not be expected to take less than his market value to come back to a losing team either
It does suck but that mistake was made during Vlades last deadline when he didn't think ahead, and had they kept Bogdan it still wouldn't have worked (look at him prior to Nate getting the job) and they'd be that much farther back on a rebuild in a potential worst case. I think letting Bogdan go with the way things have turned out is one of the smarter things Monte has done. Someone blew it on a sign and trade but if you are going down a path, don't let something you can't control cause you to doubt it. And that same thing goes for Holmes. If they were looking for value then not moving at the deadline was a mistake that has already passed. Not letting "talent go for nothing" ends up getting you into a worse position if that talent isn't THE difference maker, your teams success isn't guaranteed, or their role conflicts with other potential difference makers or valuable assets on the roster.
 
I don't see how we don't offer him the full Early Bird no matter what the plan is. It's not a lot of money and we'll be over the cap whether we sign him or chase a replacement. So the question is whether someone thinks he is worth more than 10-12 million per over the life of the contract (I think the projection was 44-46 million after annual raises on a 4 year starting at 10.x).
Draft night is going to be interesting. Depending on what they do with Bagley will say a whole lot in terms of where they plan to head. Honestly, I'd rather the Kings pull a Vlade and massively overpay on a short deal if they can create cap. Adding 4 year contracts to a team that might need to look at creating a softer cap by the mid-point of next season is sketchy. My prediction is Monte wouldn't survive that. Somewhere in the middle Vivek and the owners will start getting ansy and knowing his history Dumars will probably step full on into the role of GM at that point.
 
It does suck but that mistake was made during Vlades last deadline when he didn't think ahead, and had they kept Bogdan it still wouldn't have worked (look at him prior to Nate getting the job) and they'd be that much farther back on a rebuild in a potential worst case. I think letting Bogdan go with the way things have turned out is one of the smarter things Monte has done. Someone blew it on a sign and trade but if you are going down a path, don't let something you can't control cause you to doubt it. And that same thing goes for Holmes. If they were looking for value then not moving at the deadline was a mistake that has already passed. Not letting "talent go for nothing" ends up getting you into a worse position if that talent isn't THE difference maker, your teams success isn't guaranteed, or their role conflicts with other potential difference makers or valuable assets on the roster.
Yeah, I still go back and forth on whether they should have kept Bodgan, and whether it's worth it to try to open up space to keep Holmes, for that matter. In either situation, though, Monte did not inherit ideal positioning from his predecessor. Even with Holmes, any team that would have traded for him at the 2021 deadline would also be limited in what they could pay him now, so I'm not sure his value would have been that much more than a rental (aside from teams with cap space this summer, but why would they trade for him if they could just sign him outright?). I remember reading relatively recently that the Hornets, who may have enough space to just sign Holmes, offered something like restricted-free-agent-to-be Malik Monk for Holmes at the deadline. At first I thought the Kings should have taken that deal, but since they got Terrence Davis for cheap, would they have wanted Monk, too?
 
Yeah, I still go back and forth on whether they should have kept Bodgan, and whether it's worth it to try to open up space to keep Holmes, for that matter. In either situation, though, Monte did not inherit ideal positioning from his predecessor. Even with Holmes, any team that would have traded for him at the 2021 deadline would also be limited in what they could pay him now, so I'm not sure his value would have been that much more than a rental (aside from teams with cap space this summer, but why would they trade for him if they could just sign him outright?). I remember reading relatively recently that the Hornets, who may have enough space to just sign Holmes, offered something like restricted-free-agent-to-be Malik Monk for Holmes at the deadline. At first I thought the Kings should have taken that deal, but since they got Terrence Davis for cheap, would they have wanted Monk, too?
Really? Never heard that. If so then that would have been something but the Kings were trying to have their cake and eat it too. That false hope of making a run at the 10th spot inevitably put them in a rough position. And to make matters worse (maybe) they held onto the coach that has yet to prove his value when the games matter most in 2 straight years. First in the bubble and then in those huge games at the end of this season like the Spurs game. Critical mistakes coaching wise that were plain as day and if the excuse of injuries meant anything then you have consider his abysmal win percentage at the start of the season when that wasn't a factor. Dude cleaned up on the back end in two straight years to almost indentical pre and post deadline records, period. Now this goes on Monte 100% win or fail. Honeymoons over.
 
Draft night is going to be interesting. Depending on what they do with Bagley will say a whole lot in terms of where they plan to head. Honestly, I'd rather the Kings pull a Vlade and massively overpay on a short deal if they can create cap. Adding 4 year contracts to a team that might need to look at creating a softer cap by the mid-point of next season is sketchy. My prediction is Monte wouldn't survive that. Somewhere in the middle Vivek and the owners will start getting ansy and knowing his history Dumars will probably step full on into the role of GM at that point.
Are you talking Bagley? Because we can't "overpay" a shorter deal with Holmes, or even do the descending salary magic we have done with other signings because we're constrained by the rules of the early-Bird. I don't even think we realistically can clear cap space to sign him without using early-Bird or an exception because most certainly we'd want something equal in value if we ship any of the 3 B's.

I feel like we offer Holmes the deal and if he takes it he takes it and if someone offers him more he goes. I would not mind if it was only a 2 year deal instead of 4, or maybe there's a player option after 2 years. I dunno. I don't think his salary moves the needle either way. It will not put us into luxury tax and nor will it prevent future signings. Only concerns are it blocking Bagley's development. I feel like if we could ship Bagley to OKC for their two picks, or better yet work out a deal that gets us the two Warriors picks we should go all in on trying to get 3 picks in this draft and resetting the timeline to Fox as the vet and everyone else around Hali's age. MAYBE we get one more crack at a lotto pick next season and then take flight with a new coach.

In that case we could ship Holmes in the next two years if he is a reasonable asset, but he keeps his current job for now.
 
Are you talking Bagley? Because we can't "overpay" a shorter deal with Holmes, or even do the descending salary magic we have done with other signings because we're constrained by the rules of the early-Bird. I don't even think we realistically can clear cap space to sign him without using early-Bird or an exception because most certainly we'd want something equal in value if we ship any of the 3 B's.

I feel like we offer Holmes the deal and if he takes it he takes it and if someone offers him more he goes. I would not mind if it was only a 2 year deal instead of 4, or maybe there's a player option after 2 years. I dunno. I don't think his salary moves the needle either way. It will not put us into luxury tax and nor will it prevent future signings. Only concerns are it blocking Bagley's development. I feel like if we could ship Bagley to OKC for their two picks, or better yet work out a deal that gets us the two Warriors picks we should go all in on trying to get 3 picks in this draft and resetting the timeline to Fox as the vet and everyone else around Hali's age. MAYBE we get one more crack at a lotto pick next season and then take flight with a new coach.

In that case we could ship Holmes in the next two years if he is a reasonable asset, but he keeps his current job for now.
I'm saying if they created enough room under the cap to overpay like any other FA. My concerns heading into this offseason is they were or are planning on using Bagley to do that.
 
I'm saying if they created enough room under the cap to overpay like any other FA. My concerns heading into this offseason is they were or are planning on using Bagley to do that.
They'd basically have to find a team with room and give him for free to add any real room, I can't get down with that. Even draft picks would count towards the cap.
 
I read somewhere (think it was Hollinger) one way the Kings could keep Holmes w/o creating more cap space would be to sign him to a 2 year deal for around $20 million. Have the second year be a player option. When he opts out, the Kings would then have full Bird rights to re-sign him.
yeh that was him. He said it was a wink wink type of thing that isn’t legal but happens around the league.
 
It's wink wink that carries a ton of risk for the player so it's not exactly Joe Smith.
Frankly, I'm not sure I like it if it commits us to overpaying down the road. If a 4 year deal with the regular percent raises make the deal average out to ~12m per that sounds about right to me.
 

Capt. Factorial

This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things
Staff member
It's wink wink that carries a ton of risk for the player so it's not exactly Joe Smith.
Frankly, I'm not sure I like it if it commits us to overpaying down the road. If a 4 year deal with the regular percent raises make the deal average out to ~12m per that sounds about right to me.
I think that's about what a 4-year deal with full raises came to, when I looked at it. Perhaps even a tiny bit more. I'm not the best judge of market value, but that feels in the ballpark for Holmes. Could we nudge-nudge-wink-wink a 2/$20M total deal with a player option to get full Bird and then jump up to $20M per year? Yes, but is that even wise? Is Holmes impactful enough to be worth almost 20% of the salary cap? Is anybody else (Knicks/Hornets/???) with cap space willing to go there?
 
I think that's about what a 4-year deal with full raises came to, when I looked at it. Perhaps even a tiny bit more. I'm not the best judge of market value, but that feels in the ballpark for Holmes. Could we nudge-nudge-wink-wink a 2/$20M total deal with a player option to get full Bird and then jump up to $20M per year? Yes, but is that even wise? Is Holmes impactful enough to be worth almost 20% of the salary cap? Is anybody else (Knicks/Hornets/???) with cap space willing to go there?
And if the Kings make that promise and can't follow through then Vivek better start wearing a mask and pretend he sold the team because what little rep this franchise had left is GONE.
 

Capt. Factorial

This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things
Staff member
And if the Kings make that promise and can't follow through then Vivek better start wearing a mask and pretend he sold the team because what little rep this franchise had left is GONE.
OK, but maybe let's not compound a hypothetical nudge-nudge-wink-wink agreement with a hypothetical failure to honor said hypothetical agreement. I'm as down on Vivek as the next guy, but there's plenty of real reasons to not like him without blaming him in advance for our pretend scenarios.
 
I think that's about what a 4-year deal with full raises came to, when I looked at it. Perhaps even a tiny bit more. I'm not the best judge of market value, but that feels in the ballpark for Holmes. Could we nudge-nudge-wink-wink a 2/$20M total deal with a player option to get full Bird and then jump up to $20M per year? Yes, but is that even wise? Is Holmes impactful enough to be worth almost 20% of the salary cap? Is anybody else (Knicks/Hornets/???) with cap space willing to go there?
Carlos Boozer and his agent kinda killed those nudge, nudge, wink, wink deals. No?
 
Boozer's deal was a totally different scenario because the team held the option at below market value and he talked them into declining so he could re-sign a long term deal only to sign with another club. And for those who don't recall Joe Smith, he joined the T-Wolves on a series of 1 year deals after refusing an 80 million dollar extension by the Warriors as he had been promised a 100 million contract in return - incidentally, the only reason this blew up was because Smith's agents had a falling out over the course of the 3 years this plan took to execute and one of them narc'd. (A funny footnote/warning to this story is that Smith ultimately signed a 6 year deal in Minnesota after a year in Detroit and was traded 3 times over the length of that contract).

In this scenario Holmes would be re-signing with his current team but hoping a shorter length contract would pay off in a year or two. Since there is no player movement happening here it's not going to draw much attention. For the Kings they get to retain their player, for Holmes he gets a decent raise today (~6 mil first year vs. ~10.5 on the first year) with a crack at an even larger deal in 1-2 years. The only way it would be illegal or raise eyes would be if they pre-agreed to terms and say he missed the full season due to injury, opted out, and we still gave him a huge deal. I imagine that's also why the option is there in the first place, insurance against that event happening and Holmes being forced to sign his next contract at a loss?

An alternative here could be to give him the 4 year but an option after year 1 or year 2?
 
It does suck but that mistake was made during Vlades last deadline when he didn't think ahead, and had they kept Bogdan it still wouldn't have worked (look at him prior to Nate getting the job) and they'd be that much farther back on a rebuild in a potential worst case. I think letting Bogdan go with the way things have turned out is one of the smarter things Monte has done. Someone blew it on a sign and trade but if you are going down a path, don't let something you can't control cause you to doubt it. And that same thing goes for Holmes. If they were looking for value then not moving at the deadline was a mistake that has already passed. Not letting "talent go for nothing" ends up getting you into a worse position if that talent isn't THE difference maker, your teams success isn't guaranteed, or their role conflicts with other potential difference makers or valuable assets on the roster.
it would have been a lot smarter if we had a trade exception we could now use to acquire a player that you might need for a play-off push.
 
OK, but maybe let's not compound a hypothetical nudge-nudge-wink-wink agreement with a hypothetical failure to honor said hypothetical agreement. I'm as down on Vivek as the next guy, but there's plenty of real reasons to not like him without blaming him in advance for our pretend scenarios.
How can you not? If this team is still stagnant the team would be setting itself back huge by giving out a deal like that to a role player. And look at this franchises track record! There have been nothing but PR messes since Vivek took over. Agents and players clearly understand and look at things like reputation. Not thinking or looking ahead at the worst case is exactly why this franchise is at where it's at.