It make sense that there is a management change and other front offices want to test the water, see who is available. But please don't move Keegan.
Potential Free Agent/Trade/Sign Tracker, '25-'26 Season
- Thread starter twslam07
- Start date
It make sense that there is a management change and other front offices want to test the water, see who is available. But please don't move Keegan.
I’m in on Sexton. Would be much cheaper than Young or Garland, expiring, and he’s been about 50%FG and 40% from 3 the last 3 seasons. Extremely underrated.
"Teams have called about Keegan"
Of course they have. That doesn't mean we're listening all too intently. DDR and Monk are clearly the guys we are going to be dangling. Zach is possible, but probably doesn't net as good of a return because of his deal.
Joshyjosh31
Starter
Come on man
Not even worried about them moving Keegan even we’re not dumb enough to do that
Folsomkingsfan
Starter
I would do whatever it takes to bring in Garland. Looked like the next great PG before Mitchell came to town and still only 25.
SacTownKid
Hall of Famer
Taking calls and making calls is a different story. They should be taking calls but aggressively trying to do anything right now would be trying to find a light switch in the dark unless it's an out of this world why not kind of situation.
SacTownKid
Hall of Famer
There is a reason Garland is the odd man out with the Cavs. He can put up decent numbers but the question would be how much better is he than Monk really? Garland is kind like in between Monk and Fox level. If the Kings could add him for a DeRozan centric package fine, but they'd for sure want picks. No way can that be justified right now.
SacTownKid
Hall of Famer
And when a new GM comes aboard every team is going to see if they can fleece the Kings per usual, lol.
kingsboi
Hall of Famer
I don't see Garland getting much better than what he is right now. Go for lower hanging fruit
Garland is a better playmaker than both. Thats why cavs fans want a playmaker back if they are trading him and thats why our package probably would have to be Domas and Monk, which leads to me wanting Allen back with it.
Their offense looked way better when Garland was on the court.
He can score more efficiently on high volume than both, too, he is just not as shifty/explosive as fox and monk.
Folsomkingsfan
Starter
As a pg, a lot. Monk looked very uncomfortable as a lead guard whose role was to initiate the offense and get others involved. I was hoping he would settle in that role over time but he didn't. He's much better off the bench when you can tell him to just focus on getting his. Garland is actually a proper distributor who is also a 40% 3 point shooter. He was a 22/8 player before Mitchell arrived and made Garland play off ball more. Garland is probably one of the best players we could have a chance at with the assets we have. Assuming we aren't going to tear it down.
Garland is significantly better than Monk and tbh a decent bit better than Fox. He's just flat out better offensively and Fox only plays D when he feels like it
Depends what its for. And if it leads to a clear direction. Perry has no loyalty to anyone on the roster; he didnt sign or draft any of these guys. Like if the Sixers offered 3 for Keegan. Perry would have a chance to draft "his guy" while resetting the rookie clock on what we'll have to pay Keegan.
Or, if the Cavs said Garland for DDR and Keegan, no picks. Is that worth? Eh, possibly.
I would hope he's the one untouchable though, unless its just such a clear win in our direction. Whether we reset or retool, Keegan is way too valuable for both paths
Tetsujin
The Game Thread Dude
I think De’Aaron is more capable of randomly getting hot and turning into the second coming of Kobe for stretches at a time but Garland might be a better player overall if that makes any sense.
iowamcnabb
Hall of Famer
Garland vs Fox is interesting. Fox is the better scorer. Garland the better facilitator and shooter. Fox is the better defender but as mentioned it’s not consistent. If you needed a bucket to win a game you would likely feel better with Fox. It’s close, could probably go either way depending on team build.
Garland has also had to develop with Mitchell as his backcourt mate. He's become incredibly good off ball too and has really found a nice groove this season when to "go" and when to take that backseat to Mitchell.
Everything in his profile shows a guy who can be a 25+ PPG guy. In which case, it'll be too late to get him
thats something that only happens in dreams. In wet ones. LaVine is not gonna net us two 3 useful players PLUS TWO first round picks. Never.
Then again, the Luka trade happened, so....
Hard to imagine a better landing place for Zach than Orlando who were craving shooting last year, that seems like a huge payout but #16 isn't a thrilling draft pick and aspirationally that pick is in the 20s in 2029. They have to start paying guys when Zach expires too.
All FRP aren't created equal. To me, especially after watching them in the playoffs, they sorely lack someone like LaVine. Like really really badly. And they have the defensive infrastructure to maximize how good he is on offense.
Also who are what is the "better" player thst package gets you than LaVine? We can all agree he's somewhere in that top 50ish talent/fringe all star type. Does that get you Garland? Trae? Certainly not even close to KD or Giannis or even Domas
SacTownKid
Hall of Famer
Garland is far from a stopper. Garland isn't garbage by any means, but worth risking the future for considering where the Kings are at? Nope. That's superstar or bust stuff at least.
SacTownKid
Hall of Famer
I agree. Fox regardless of what people want to think right now can get to that highest level for stretches. Garland not as much. Fox also is someone that has been willing and able to play both sides of the floor. Garland is very much in the middle on defense. The Kings need to be thinking top rung ability if they are cashing in the future. Thinking anything less while potentially sending this team into a long term purgatory would be, well, Kangz.
I get what you are saying, and i agree that he is a good fit there, at least offensively, but we arent getting that package for him with that contract, and while nobody else is bidding for him.
On a 25 mil contract, he is worth that package.
The best we can get is the players without the first round picks, i guess, but i dont know if that fits into a win-now mode, as LaVine still is one of the more efficient scorers of the league.
The first round picks alone can get them people like Collin Sexton, Monk probably, etc.
Simons is realistic with that whole package, who fits their timeline better. They could try to get Norman Powell, who the Clippers wont be able to pay his next contract and plays a little defense.
There are some better option for them, where they dont have to trade the whole package, imo
SacTownKid
Hall of Famer
Even at"a lot", how much is the difference worth trade wise? That's the question. Not nearly enough considering the likely price tag. Monk certainly isn't the teams long term solution anywhere IMO, but that's largely due to his volume shooting style and his lack of defense. Garland has a higher usage than Monk and has like a higher assist percentage than Monk over the last two season of a non staggering 4-5%. Not enough of a difference. If Garland were a athletic lockdown defender it would be different, but he's not. He's a borderline offensive production All star type where it's question of having that extra gear. That perfectly describes LaVine and Domas already. Don't be same, be different. Same is same even if better than the same you already had to begin with.
Similar threads
- Associated Press
- Kings News Links
