[News] Scott Perry is the new GM of Sacramento Kings

[Caccia]

I think that given we're mostly vets at this point, we're more likely headed in the stagnation direction than the grown direction with the current roster. If the team could win, why didn't they do it last year, when Zach was as healthy as he's ever been?

I will let Lakers GM Rob Pelinka answer that: “When you make a seismic trade at the deadline, it’s kind of like trying to build an airplane in the sky. Now we have a chance to land the plane, put it in the hangar and really try and figure out what we need to retrofit and change."

 

[dude12]

That’s nice and all but he ain’t an all star player he ain’t getting you buckets when needed he’s a good player but we’re screwed if he’s our best or second best player

Good player who makes a boat load of money and needs specific players around him to cover his defensive deficiencies if you want this team to make a deeper/any type of playoff run. I’m still waiting for this last part to happen. Maybe Scott Perry can deliver this. Maybe he deals Domas. Everything should be on the table.

 

[Padrino]

If we want to trade Zach for Zion as some kind of boom or bust move sure whatever but the minute you include two FRPs and you bust, that ain't looking too great.

Yeah, I'm not seeing a Zion trade that doesn't include firsts. And I'm out on any Zion trade that does. But if you could, as you say, dump LaVine for Zion in an All-Disappointment Team™ swap of sorts, I'd certainly entertain it.

 

[Warhawk]

If you're shooting down other people's ideas, and not providing some of your own, you're effectively arguing for the status quo. Which brings me back to my earlier question.

You couldn't be more wrong and logically inept with this argument. You're arguing that we should upgrade a functional Corvette ZR1 for a Ferrari to drive tomorrow. OK, sure. I'm just saying maybe not this one. It is NOT my job to go hunt down other Ferraris for you to look at.

I've never said don't trade Sabonis. But not for a player that most season never breaks 30 games played. No way. That is insane.

 

[Warhawk]

My point is that you're overvaluing reliability.

Um, you can't overvalue reliability (within certain limits). That's what makes you valuable if you have a skill. You can be the best at whatever you do, but if you don't/can't show up all that talent means exactly zilch when you need it most.

 

[Insomniacal Fan]

You couldn't be more wrong and logically inept with this argument. You're arguing that we should upgrade a functional Corvette ZR1 for a Ferrari to drive tomorrow. OK, sure. I'm just saying maybe not this one. It is NOT my job to go hunt down other Ferraris for you to look at.

I've never said don't trade Sabonis. But not for a player that most season never breaks 30 games played. No way. That is insane.

I'm advocating for rebuilding the team, because I think making the cut for the playoffs is the bare minimum for acceptability. If we're below the cut, we better have a plan for getting better.

I think you're being cagey here by not expressing your success and failure criteria. If we're going to have a logical argument, it's important that we set the goalposts down.

Rebuilding requires some short term pain, but building on a bad foundation is what leads to 15 year playoff droughts.

Post in thread 'Domas is who they thought he was.'

Apr 18, 2025

3) Get rid of Domas and tank for at least 5 years. It'll be 5 years before we see .500 again, at the minimum.

Sorry for only responding to the part of your post that I disagree with; but 5 years of tanking to rebuild is unlikely. Of the current teams in the playoffs, only New York and Detroit took longer than 4 years to complete a rebuild.

Leaving out the Clippers, Celtics, and effing Lakers (edge case for 2020 Warriors); every other team in the playoffs this year has tanked in the past 15 years, and rebuilt within 4 years.

The way I count it, the Kings have done two rebuilds...

• Insomniacal Fan

• 

Zion wouldn't be my choice for franchise player long-term, but at least he provides a fig leaf of having a high ceiling, (maybe that's enough to hawk season tickets. Some people might think that's what the ultimate purpose of professional sports is, even if they don't outright say it. ).

I think we're probably screwed for the next couple of years in any case, so we should probably at least make the pain productive.

 

[Insomniacal Fan]

Um, you can't overvalue reliability (within certain limits). That's what makes you valuable if you have a skill. You can be the best at whatever you do, but if you don't/can't show up all that talent means exactly zilch when you need it most.

We've missed the playoffs 2 years in a row. If you want to make the playoffs with this team, at this point variance is our only hope.

 

[Warhawk]

You can advocate for rebuilding all you want. I'm not even disagreeing with you on that.

The choice to send assets to get Zion is, not to put too fine a point on it, insane at this point. Because he can't play consistently. Most years he plays less than 30 games. It's like Ben Simmons, or Greg Oden, or lots of other players that have huge red flags pop up with availability and/or precipitous performance drop. Even with all their talent, they aren't worth the obvious cost and risk. There's a risk-reward balance. The annual cost and assets required to get him would far outweigh the risks involved. You obviously don't care about that for the exceedingly slim possibility that "all of a sudden" he's just fine.

Do you honestly see any competent GM going all in on Zion (because that is what you would need to do at that cost) and when he's benched for 2/3 of the year come out and just say, "oops, my bad"? These people have jobs they need to keep. Not just theirs, but the coaches, training staff, arena employees, etc.

Just curious - do you also take your life savings and go bet it all on, say, red 32 in roulette and then when you lose it all on the first spin you think to yourself, "Well, at least I went for the high ceiling?"

 

[Warhawk]

In my "Own Personal Record Book" . I will only count the statistical achievements of players that are on playoff teams. (avoids the good player on bad team conundrum)

You mean like Zion?

 

[Warhawk]

We've missed the playoffs 2 years in a row. If you want to make the playoffs with this team, at this point variance is our only hope.

Zion has not played in a playoff game his entire career. What are we talking about here? At least Sabonis has let his team to game 7 of the first round, even with a broken hand and a chest stomp.

 

[Spike]

Yeah, but if you hit on red 32...

Honestly, I get the allure of Zion. He's an absolute beast when healthy. He's a wrecking ball, and it's not just bulldozing - he does have elite basketball skills. That said, dude is broken down more than he isn't. We absolutely can't have that if we want to compete, and we can't mortgage a long future (you think this is bad? Look at before 2001, and more recently) on a maybe. Zion is a maybe, and that's the absolute bottom line. He hasn't been healthy - he has a contract with health stipulations, some of which are related to effort!

If the guy cared enough, he wouldn't be in this situation. If he does indeed care, then his body is in the way of success. Either answer is not worth gambling the Kings future on.

 

[Warhawk]

I think you're being cagey here by not expressing your success and failure criteria. If we're going to have a logical argument, it's important that we set the goalposts down.

Why do I need "success and failure criteria" to say "don't trade for the always-injured player making $40 million a year for the next few years that has never sniffed a play-in or playoff game"? Frankly, I question your "success criteria" that thinks that is a good bet. Any success criteria that pins our success on trading for Zion is not fully developed, to put it kindly.

 

[Warhawk]

Yeah, but if you hit on red 32...

Honestly, I get the allure of Zion. He's an absolute beast when healthy. He's a wrecking ball, and it's not just bulldozing - he does have elite basketball skills. That said, dude is broken down more than he isn't. We absolutely can't have that if we want to compete, and we can't mortgage a long future (you think this is bad? Look at before 2001, and more recently) on a maybe. Zion is a maybe, and that's the absolute bottom line. He hasn't been healthy - he has a contract with health stipulations, some of which are related to effort!

If the guy cared enough, he wouldn't be in this situation. If he does indeed care, then his body is in the way of success. Either answer is not worth gambling the Kings future on.

I've never questioned his talent. I've stated that repeatedly. But if the talent is rooted to the bench it does you worse than no good, it drains resources that could be spent on other talent.

 

[Insomniacal Fan]

You can advocate for rebuilding all you want. I'm not even disagreeing with you on that.

The choice to send assets to get Zion is, not to put too fine a point on it, insane at this point. Because he can't play consistently. Most years he plays less than 30 games. It's like Ben Simmons, or Greg Oden, or lots of other players that have huge red flags pop up with availability and/or precipitous performance drop. Even with all their talent, they aren't worth the obvious cost and risk. There's a risk-reward balance. The annual cost and assets required to get him would far outweigh the risks involved. You obviously don't care about that for the exceedingly slim possibility that "all of a sudden" he's just fine.

Depends on the asset we're giving up; if it's multiple FRPs, then the upside goes away, and I'm not interested, better to just wait our contracts out. If it's just vets, then absolutely. If it's something in between, then we weigh it carefully.

Zion is a rebuilding strategy that gives the season ticket holders... something. (I'm not very sympathetic to their plight, but eh, you're welcome anyway)

Do you honestly see any competent GM going all in on Zion (because that is what you would need to do at that cost) and when he's benched for 2/3 of the year come out and just say, "oops, my bad"? These people have jobs they need to keep. Not just theirs, but the coaches, training staff, arena employees, etc.

The currently longest tenured GM in the NBA is Sam Presti with the Thunder. The Thunder happen to be the best team in the league this year. Their current roster is based on 2 years of < 25 wins. GMs are supposed to be able to think a few years ahead. And if you value job security above all, NBA coaching is definitively not the right job for you.

Just curious - do you also take your life savings and go bet it all on, say, red 32 in roulette and then when you lose it all on the first spin you think to yourself, "Well, at least I went for the high ceiling?"

When I've been to casinos, I go for the entertainment. I certainly do not go to casinos to hang out; because being a regular at a casino is not something I consider to be aspirational (I think it's actually the opposite, I think the people who spend all day putting nickels into slot machines and pulling the lever have a disease). The rules are set up so that The House always wins in the long run. But in the NBA, The House is refilling teams' cups when they bust out (with revenue sharing and the draft.) With those rules in place, it's foolish not to make the big bets.

 

[Insomniacal Fan]

Zion has not played in a playoff game his entire career. What are we talking about here? At least Sabonis has let his team to game 7 of the first round, even with a broken hand and a chest stomp.

Hmm, "led"

Again, I don't think Zion will succeed. I think if the deal is right, he will fail in a way that will benefit the team.

 

[Insomniacal Fan]

Why do I need "success and failure criteria" to say "don't trade for the always-injured player making $40 million a year for the next few years that has never sniffed a play-in or playoff game"? Frankly, I question your "success criteria" that thinks that is a good bet. Any success criteria that pins our success on trading for Zion is not fully developed, to put it kindly.

I'm just probing to see if this disagreement comes down to a difference in values. Do you not value competitiveness on the season level? Do you think the team will grow organically? Do you think we can improve the team through red paperclip moves?

 

[Joshyjosh31]

Zion has not played in a playoff game his entire career. What are we talking about here? At least Sabonis has let his team to game 7 of the first round, even with a broken hand and a chest stomp.

Sabonis was there for the ride getting punked by Looney smh if he put up a fight we’d have made the second round

 

[Joshyjosh31]

Yeah, but if you hit on red 32...

Honestly, I get the allure of Zion. He's an absolute beast when healthy. He's a wrecking ball, and it's not just bulldozing - he does have elite basketball skills. That said, dude is broken down more than he isn't. We absolutely can't have that if we want to compete, and we can't mortgage a long future (you think this is bad? Look at before 2001, and more recently) on a maybe. Zion is a maybe, and that's the absolute bottom line. He hasn't been healthy - he has a contract with health stipulations, some of which are related to effort!

If the guy cared enough, he wouldn't be in this situation. If he does indeed care, then his body is in the way of success. Either answer is not worth gambling the Kings future on.

We’re staring the 11-13 seed in the face if we don’t take a gamble on a Zion like talent next 2-4 years. Spurs will most likely be better than us and if AD plays 55+ games dallas will be better. If the plan is competing and we keep the same best players we’re not gonna be competitive

 

[Joshyjosh31]

We have no good assets to get a star we should poach Zion while everyone if waiting and fighting for Giannis. The Giannis losers will fall back on Morant Young, and KD

 

[Insomniacal Fan]

You mean like Zion?

Exactly, like Zion

 

[Spike]

We’re staring the 11-13 seed in the face if we don’t take a gamble on a Zion like talent next 2-4 years. Spurs will most likely be better than us and if AD plays 55+ games dallas will be better. If the plan is competing and we keep the same best players we’re not gonna be competitive

You gotta know when to hold 'em, and all that jazz.

This is not a winning bet to take. There's a greater than 60% chance Zion never plays a full season, and a non-zero chance he eats himself out of the league. You want to place the future of this franchise on those odds? That's not a gamble, that's flushing your chips down the toilet on a pair of 7s.

This team, as currently constructed, has shown the ability to punch above their weight class. I agree that DDR may need to be moved to maximize the potential in its current form, which is likely a 4/5 seed. Without dismantling everything, that's probably something most fans in Sacramento would love to have.

 

[Warhawk]

I'm just probing to see if this disagreement comes down to a difference in values. Do you not value competitiveness on the season level? Do you think the team will grow organically? Do you think we can improve the team through red paperclip moves?

What kind of competitiveness is there if he's sitting on the bench? Zion is a 0.509 player when he plays. The Pelicans, with Zion on the team, were 0.256 this year. Is that the competitiveness you speak of? Since he joined the team, they have been a 0.443 team overall.

Wow, that's a barnburner right there. Sign me up for that at $40 million a year so he can sit on the bench!!! Fantastic!

 

[Warhawk]

Depends on the asset we're giving up; if it's multiple FRPs, then the upside goes away, and I'm not interested, better to just wait our contracts out. If it's just vets, then absolutely. If it's something in between, then we weigh it carefully.

If he is the franchise changer you continue to insist he is, why wouldn't they demand multiple FRP in trade if we are including one of those "losers" (in your eyes) Sabonis or Lavine as the main return piece? How is that a fair trade without the FRPs if we are getting the "better talent" in return (that will apparently lift us to glory amongst the heavens immediately upon touching down in Sacramento)?

 

[Insomniacal Fan]

What kind of competitiveness is there if he's sitting on the bench? Zion is a 0.509 player when he plays. The Pelicans, with Zion on the team, were 0.256 this year. Is that the competitiveness you speak of? Since he joined the team, they have been a 0.443 team overall.

Wow, that's a barnburner right there. Sign me up for that at $40 million a year so he can sit on the bench!!! Fantastic!

I've already explained how I think this would work, but if you missed it, let me bold it for you.

With only passing knowledge of their roster; I think the Pelicans, a 21 win team, will make it to the playoffs as often or more than the Kings (a 40 win team) over the next 4 years. It's a much easier job being the GM over there now, they're in a far better position.

If he is the franchise changer you continue to insist he is, why wouldn't they demand multiple FRP in trade if we are including one of those "losers" (in your eyes) Sabonis or Lavine as the main return piece? How is that a fair trade without the FRPs if we are getting the "better talent" in return (that will apparently lift us to glory amongst the heavens immediately upon touching down in Sacramento)?

I don't think anybody in the league wants to build a franchise around Zion at this point, the goal is to get into the lottery and make your picks matter, without admitting publically that you are rebuilding. The Pelicans have the good lottery picks, at this point. They might want a media-trained, notable vet to be the face of the organization so their talented rookies don't go insane and turn the franchise into Lord of the Flies (the Demarcus Cousins experience)

You're still avoiding the questions about what you think the team should strive for. Do you just want to hang out at the casino?

 

[Capt. Factorial]

You're still avoiding the questions about what you think the team should strive for. Do you just want to hang out at the casino?

I think I can explain why you're not getting an answer to this question. From a certain point of view, this conversation looks like this:

"We should put one bullet in the gun, spin the chamber, put it up to our heads and pull the trigger!"

"No, we should not do that."

"Well, then, what SHOULD we do?"

"Definitely not shoot ourselves in the head."

"Then what's your bright idea?"

"Never said I had one, just know shooting ourselves in the head is a bad call."

 

[Insomniacal Fan]

I think I can explain why you're not getting an answer to this question. From a certain point of view, this conversation looks like this:

"We should put one bullet in the gun, spin the chamber, put it up to our heads and pull the trigger!"

"No, we should not do that."

"Well, then, what SHOULD we do?"

"Definitely not shoot ourselves in the head."

"Then what's your bright idea?"

"Never said I had one, just know shooting ourselves in the head is a bad call."

Ok, we're on the third metaphor of this thread, and things are getting more morbid, so I think I'll take my turn.

Avoiding a rebuild is like being diagnosed with a chronic disease, and instead of taking your medicine, trying to cure yourself by eating fruit. It doesn't work, it prolongs the agony.

Maybe there's a compromise to be had in coating the medicine with some sugar. But you have to take the medicine to get better.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

Ok, we're on the third metaphor of this thread, and things are getting more morbid, so I think I'll take my turn.

 

[Joshyjosh31]

You gotta know when to hold 'em, and all that jazz.

This is not a winning bet to take. There's a greater than 60% chance Zion never plays a full season, and a non-zero chance he eats himself out of the league. You want to place the future of this franchise on those odds? That's not a gamble, that's flushing your chips down the toilet on a pair of 7s.

This team, as currently constructed, has shown the ability to punch above their weight class. I agree that DDR may need to be moved to maximize the potential in its current form, which is likely a 4/5 seed. Without dismantling everything, that's probably something most fans in Sacramento would love to have.

The ceiling is nowhere near 4-5 that’s pure fantasy is Sabonis/ lavine remain our top players we will never be above OKC, Houston, Minnesota, LAL, and San Antonio. This is before trading derozan for spare parts which putts more pressure on Sabonis to score

 

[Section 101]

Ok, we're on the third metaphor of this thread, and things are getting more morbid, so I think I'll take my turn.

Avoiding a rebuild is like being diagnosed with a chronic disease, and instead of taking your medicine, trying to cure yourself by eating fruit. It doesn't work, it prolongs the agony.

Maybe there's a compromise to be had in coating the medicine with some sugar. But you have to take the medicine to get better.

There's been 17 years of agony with 3 positive years for the past 3. Now you want agony again. Tell you what, people that have been paying 10-20k a year for tickets dont want more agony. And a rebuild at this point will lose season ticket holders.

 

[Warhawk]

Ok, we're on the third metaphor of this thread, and things are getting more morbid, so I think I'll take my turn.

Avoiding a rebuild is like being diagnosed with a chronic disease, and instead of taking your medicine, trying to cure yourself by eating fruit. It doesn't work, it prolongs the agony.

Maybe there's a compromise to be had in coating the medicine with some sugar. But you have to take the medicine to get better.

You REALLY are stuck on the Zion or bust train, aren't you? You do realize that there are well over 500 other players in the league, don't you? Find one of them to drool over, perhaps?

I've already explained how I think this would work, but if you missed it, let me bold it for you.

With only passing knowledge of their roster; I think the Pelicans, a 21 win team, will make it to the playoffs as often or more than the Kings (a 40 win team) over the next 4 years. It's a much easier job being the GM over there now, they're in a far better position.


I don't think anybody in the league wants to build a franchise around Zion at this point, the goal is to get into the lottery and make your picks matter, without admitting publically that you are rebuilding. The Pelicans have the good lottery picks, at this point. They might want a media-trained, notable vet to be the face of the organization so their talented rookies don't go insane and turn the franchise into Lord of the Flies (the Demarcus Cousins experience)

You're still avoiding the questions about what you think the team should strive for. Do you just want to hang out at the casino?

So, a 21-win team with Zion on the roster is the exciting "future" you want to part with our top 5-10 center in the league, plus likely picks, so we can spend $40 million for him to sit on the bench, and we can shoot for better lottery pick value?

You, who keep saying he's a game changer and the best option for us to turn our fortunes around, now say he's not that player and we'd excite our fans with a number of wins close to half of what we've had the past three years?

And I think the Captain summed up my feelings about this quite well. No need to reiterate yet again how dumb an idea this would be...