Potential Free Agent/Trade/Sign Tracker, '25-'26 Season

Monte drafted Hali, not Vlade
I understand he did. But we had that draft pick leftover from the Vlade era. I don't think that was some diamond in the rough pick. Hali was top 5 and slipped for some weird reason. Maybe Vlade doesn't make that pick, but even take that away. Vlade left us with Fox + #11 pick + Buddy as our only bad contract.

Monte left us with Monk, Derozan, LaVine, Sabonis combining for 130-135 million a year. That is disgusting.
 
I'd say it was an easier path to building a real roster.
You had Fox/Tyrese as building blocks, and not much for bad contracts on the roster. Buddy was the worst, and he was making Monk money. Vlade had a lot of faults but he left us in a much better spot than we are now
Not only was Buddy making more than Monk, but the salary cap was lower. When we traded Buddy he was making 20% (exactly) of the salary cap. Monk is currently making 12.2% of the cap. Buddy was making the equivalent of $31M today. It was a bad contract, for sure.
 
Not only was Buddy making more than Monk, but the salary cap was lower. When we traded Buddy he was making 20% (exactly) of the salary cap. Monk is currently making 12.2% of the cap. Buddy was making the equivalent of $31M today. It was a bad contract, for sure.
To add to my point about how hes not even in the same realm as the trio we have today.
1. This was during a time when the 2nd apron did not exist. Teams like the Clippers, Warriors, Celtics, Lakers, etc disregarded the cap completely.
2. Buddy was fresh off near back to back 20ppg seasons shooting 40+% from 3.
3. Buddy was often rumored to be in trade talks. The near Lakers deal where we almost acquired a combo of Kuzma/Harrell and a pick before LA pivoted to Westbrook.

What we are hearing from Sac media right now is essentially that Monk at best had neutral value (det was willing to take him in exchange for no assets, are other teams?) and Demar/LaVine are not tradable without us attaching incentive.

Buddy the day Monte took over was a positive asset that teams were interested in trading for. Later he became a malcontent and it was clear the team was heading towards a breakup, and he became negative. But it's revisionist to pretend otherwise.
 
Find us a 4 with size that can defend. Trade a guard. Call it a day and see how the season goes. If things go bad, get that lottery pick right, take a swing in the second round with that Charlotte pick and then depending on how things go, make a move. That’s how I see it anyway.

What's the point really. See if Jones can be that guy. That's a much better call. If this team is trash it will be known by the deadline and then it's waiting out contracts or dumping time. The Kings have Saric, might as well just use him. He was somewhat decent with the Dubs recently.
 
Do not move the goalposts. You said Buddy was making "Monk money". He was not, he was making significantly more.
For that i was wrong. Relative to the cap, you are right it was significantly more. However the entire point still stands. Our cap sheet was far cleaner at that time, and buddy was viewed as a positive asset unlike these 3.
 
Monte left us with more talent on the roster I think the issue here is that the new CBA makes teams resistant to take on Monk or DDR and give anything back even though both signings appear very reasonable compared to many second contracts being handed out. Hopefully having a real PG on the team can showcase them for moves while also help the young guys learn to play correctly.

I would still feel a lot better winning 30 games with the young guys getting 10-20mpg than winning < 20 and giving them 24mpg and letting them develop bad habits, but we need to get some additional FRP from other teams for Monk and DDR later down the road to make that gamble pay off a bit.
 
Back
Top