How can I not blame somebody in advance for a particular imaginary scenario that not only hasn't happened but that we have no good reason to believe will ever happen?
Does anybody want to take this one for me?
Letting Holmes walk.
- Thread starter upinsmoke
- Start date
How can I not blame somebody in advance for a particular imaginary scenario that not only hasn't happened but that we have no good reason to believe will ever happen?
Does anybody want to take this one for me?
SacTownKid
Hall of Famer
True and if he just shut it all down I honestly don't get it.
SacTownKid
Hall of Famer
Or does someone want to quote the rest of my post? haha. Vivek going back on his word? Gee, ask Vlade about that Dumars hire? Wonder what some coaches have to say about that. Let's put it this way. Lets say they just dug up ten bodies a few houses away from a supossedly reformed Gacy. You think the investigation might lead somewhere particular or no? lol. When you've developed a reputation it follows you and right now, Vivek, right, wrong, or indifferent is primarily known as a bumble****. In some ways likely unfair, in others, he's a PR disaster so you get what you get.
sactowndog
All-Star
he wasn’t prepared for the obvious and froze when he got the Atlanta offer. If any team should hire Ainge as an advisor/mentor it is the Kings.
Section 101
All-Star
Easy! Drop the mod title and put him on ignore like me.
I'd be happy for Holmes if he gets a big payday, but not sad for our team. Too many times players look completely lost on offense to give the ball to Holmes, who most frquently makes a push-shot. That's just it, these players need to figure out the offense, where to be, and how to make a bucket w/o being bailed out.
Holmes is really good, but not a really good fit. Our perimeter defense is atrocious, which allows dribble pentration way too frequently and Holmes is not the defensive-oriented big we need down low to erase those mistakes.
Holmes is undersized and Bagley is to weak to guard many centers. Neither of them compliment our guards and wings.
Holmes is really good, but not a really good fit. Our perimeter defense is atrocious, which allows dribble pentration way too frequently and Holmes is not the defensive-oriented big we need down low to erase those mistakes.
Holmes is undersized and Bagley is to weak to guard many centers. Neither of them compliment our guards and wings.
Volblorx8634
Bench
Interest from Dallas and Charlotte make all but certain we will lose him, which really disappoints me. Maybe not from a roster management perspective, but definitely from a fan perspective. Someone will offer him a big payday. I hope we keep him, but if he leaves it means his last two years have earned him more than we are willing to pay, and I'll be so happy for him cuz he deserves it.
Section 101
All-Star
Early bird contracts are a minimum of 2 years.
Is it allowed to make the second year an option?
If Dallas wants to throw 20 million at him good for him,
It looks like no. The two-year minimum is specifically designed to prevent a team from going one year and then using Bird Rights.
Section 101
All-Star
Nope.
I'd be down to offer 4 years of early Bird with the annual raise and an option after year 2 so that we could pay him more if it was all working out.
I would not be down to trade away assets just to increase our starting bid. I'm still of the mind that if we can't move Bagley and have to try to make next year work and maybe salvage it, we should sign a more complementary player than Holmes. Holmes was meant to be the third big and became the primary big by default.
I would not be down to trade away assets just to increase our starting bid. I'm still of the mind that if we can't move Bagley and have to try to make next year work and maybe salvage it, we should sign a more complementary player than Holmes. Holmes was meant to be the third big and became the primary big by default.
ockingsfan
Starter
Agreed. I would offer Holmes the highest contract we are allowed, but I wouldn't trade assets to make a bigger offer to Holmes.
If we lose Holmes and are able to sign or trade for a defensive big like Nerlens Noel or Steven Adams (i.e. Buddy for Adams and N.O. #10 pick trade), we may wind up being in a better position, team make up and roster wise.
While I loved Holmes heart and hustle, he was not a defensive stopper we needed at center. A defensive stopper at Center like Noel or Adams all of the sudden makes Bagley a viable option at Power Forward.
On a website where there is nearly universal disagreement on nearly everything, I think this is weirdly the only consensus view basically everybody shares.
I feel like there are a few holdouts on this one.
*I'm just going to take this opportunity to thank whichever mod deleted that ludicrous trade proposal from the other sites newsfeed this morning that would free up a whopping 4 million.
If there are, they aren't super vocal about it. Perhaps a few think starting a contract at $11M is too high. I'm not sure any have advocated freeing up money to offer more than that, though.
I honestly have no idea who Matt George is - apparently he is on the radio? Is he associated with STR or whatever it is the STR core went off to?
SacTownKid
Hall of Famer
Yeah it sucks but Luka and Holmes would hurt worse since it will make Luka that much more effective. Marvin, you better be on your game pal! haha.
No clue on Matt George. I do feel like I had a debate with someone here thinking we should free up enough to get to 16 million per which I think is crazytown.
Telemachus
Starter
He is the host of Locked on Kings podcast.
Tetsujin
The Game Thread Dude
Wouldn’t really help the Mavs all that much though since I think that contract would take up so much money that they wouldn’t be able to bring in a secondary creator, which is their biggest need.
SacTownKid
Hall of Famer
Yeah they'd still have holes that might be hard to fill, but I think a Luka/Holmes pairing is a really good start to something interesting. Maybe it would allow KP to be the big soft stretch PF he is and flourish next to him.
bajaden
Hall of Famer
All I know about him is that he has a podcast that is I believe called Locked on Kings. I've listened to him a few times, and while I do like some of his guests, I think he's a borderline idiot. My opinion on the Holmes situation is simple. It is what it is, and were likely to lose him. It's not McNair's fault. If fault is to assigned, it's on Vlade, who could have added an insurance year to the original deal with a team option. If he had done that we would have had full Bird rights. It still would have cost us money, but at least we would have been involved in the decision.
jcassio
Starter
I think the writing is on the wall: We’ll offer what we can, but Homes will have other and better offers. Now that Holmes is talking about “taking care of my family,” that’s code for “I’m looking elsewhere.”
Unfortunately, if Holmes signs elsewhere, we’ll need to use our mid-level exception on a replacement center. That won't leave us enough to bring back Terrance Davis, who I think could become a more important player for us than Buddy.
Unfortunately, if Holmes signs elsewhere, we’ll need to use our mid-level exception on a replacement center. That won't leave us enough to bring back Terrance Davis, who I think could become a more important player for us than Buddy.
Last edited:
Assuming we give (gave already?) him the QO, we can match any offer for Terrance Davis. no matter our cap situation.
Jkbiker
Starter
I thought that if kings used our MLE to sign a C that if that signing puts us over the Cap, we could still match any offer sheet TD received even if we had no Cap Space left. And we can sign our Draft picks and any min Vet contracts even if over the Cap. Well there is a Cap hold of $4.6M for #9 Pick
Which reduces our cap space before using the MLE?
Last edited:
Similar threads
