Should the Kings blow it up and retool?

Should the Kings blow it up?


  • Total voters
    53
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
#1
Do you think the Kings should look to restart and rebuild? If so, who do you want to keep around? Who has positive value? What should we try to get?

I'm hearing the upcoming draft may be weak, but I'm sure there is something there available that could help us.

For positive value contracts that could land an asset I have.

Holmes
Bogi
Bjelica

Probably better to keep because of potential vs return value
Bagley

Building block
Fox

Questionable because of contract
Buddy

Overpaid & negative value
Barnes
Dedmon
Ariza
CoJo

So if you want to hold the cards together explain how the Kings are going to get out of this rut, if you want to move on and try to get assets, who are you willing to move?
Who do you think we can get assets for?
 

pdxKingsFan

Hall of Famer
#2
A bit premature for me. Aside from Dedmon if we can get anything of value for him. The team was playing well before Bagley and Fox returned and those two should be our best players. So I think with time we'll be in the playoff picture. This year is probably a total loss though and that's unfortunate as it seems to be a chemistry killer and may mandate some moves.
 
#4
A bit premature for me. Aside from Dedmon if we can get anything of value for him. The team was playing well before Bagley and Fox returned and those two should be our best players. So I think with time we'll be in the playoff picture. This year is probably a total loss though and that's unfortunate as it seems to be a chemistry killer and may mandate some moves.
I think we do have time to sneak into playoffs as last team are the Spurs at 14-18 so there is a small chance (it needs to start tonight against Grizzlies with a win, our next 4 games Grizzlies, Pelicans, Warriors, Suns all winnable games which put at us 16-22.), but we have to keep up with the spurs and beat them when we meet them 3 more times. We meet the Spurs again on February 8th, March 31st, and April 7th.
 
Last edited:
#5
I’d move Bogi by the deadline and plan for an overhaul in the offseason. I know a lot of people won’t like this but I get rid of the front office and start fresh. With a new FO Kings would probably get a new coach too. Not fair to Walton but it is what it is. The new FO would be a fresh set of eyes with no ties to the players already here.
 
#6
I think we do have time to sneak into playoffs as last team are the Spurs at 14-18 so there is a small chance (it needs to start tonight against Grizzlies with a win, our next 4 games Grizzlies, Pelicans, Warriors, Suns all winnable games which put at us 16-22.), but we have to keep up with the spurs and beat them when we meet them 3 more times. We meet the Spurs again on February 8th, March 31st, and April 7th.
That's a good point the next 4 games. Should be able to see soon if there is any hope to salvage the season and try and make a run.
 
#7
I’d move Bogi by the deadline and plan for an overhaul in the offseason. I know a lot of people won’t like this but I get rid of the front office and start fresh. With a new FO Kings would probably get a new coach too. Not fair to Walton but it is what it is. The new FO would be a fresh set of eyes with no ties to the players already here.
The good thing about waiting until the off season is some of our negative value contracts get easier to move, or possibly move for worse money + asset of some sort, or just different fitting pieces.

But when you say you want to move Bogi, is it because you are not interested in paying him what it may cost?

Figure we can't match in RFA and better get something before he walks for nothing?
 
#8
The good thing about waiting until the off season is some of our negative value contracts get easier to move, or possibly move for worse money + asset of some sort, or just different fitting pieces.

But when you say you want to move Bogi, is it because you are not interested in paying him what it may cost?

Figure we can't match in RFA and better get something before he walks for nothing?
Yes the reason I want to move Bogi is because I think he will walk in the offseason. Can’t let him walk for nothing I’m return
 
#10
I’d move Bogi by the deadline and plan for an overhaul in the offseason. I know a lot of people won’t like this but I get rid of the front office and start fresh. With a new FO Kings would probably get a new coach too. Not fair to Walton but it is what it is. The new FO would be a fresh set of eyes with no ties to the players already here.
Yeah it sucks to say and it makes my stomach ache, but Vlade's impatience is hurting us.

He went all in thinking Fox & Bagley were going to be legit #1 & #2 stars and that's not looking good at the moment. Then you have the fact that the supporting cast of these potential stars are 26-31 years old when Fox & Bagley are 20 & 22 years old. Not the same timeline.

Ideally, we sell off Bogdanovic, Barnes, Bjelica, & Holmes by the deadline for young assets/picks. This would likely result in our record taking a nose dive thus making our 2020 1st a very valuable pick. Then we look to move Hield in the offseason for young assets/picks and look to rebuild this thing around Fox, Bagley, James, 2020 SAC 1st, & the young assets/picks we received from trading our vets.

From a Boston's fan perspective, how do you feel about these types of deals?

BOS Gets: Richaun Holmes & Nemanja Bjelica
SAC Gets: Romeo Langford, Vincent Poirer, Semi Ojeleye, & 2020 BOS/MIL 1st (Least Favorable)
*SAC waives Swanigan

PG - Walker / Wanamaker / Edwards
SG - Brown / Smart / Green
SF - Hayward / G. Williams
PF - Tatum / Bjelica / Theis
C - Holmes / Kanter / R. Williams

OR

BOS Gets: Richaun Holmes & Nemanja Bjelica
SAC Gets: Vincent Poirer, Semi Ojeleye, Brad Wanamaker, Carsen Edwards, 2020 BOS 1st, & 2020 MIL 1st
*SAC waives Swanigan & Ferrell

PG - Walker / Smart
SG - Brown / Langford / Green
SF - Hayward / G. Williams
PF - Tatum / Bjelica / Theis
C - Holmes / Kanter / R. Williams


BOS Minute Rotation
PG - Walker (34 min) / Smart (14 min)
SG - Brown (32 min) / Smart (16 min)
SF - Hayward (30 min) / Tatum (18 min)
PF - Tatum (16 min) / Bjelica (20 min) / Theis (12 min)
C - Holmes (26 min) / Kanter (14 min) / Theis (8 min)

Walker - 34 min
Tatum - 34 min
Brown - 32 min
Smart - 30 min
Hayward - 30 min
Holmes - 26 min
Bjelica - 20 min
Theis - 20 min
Kanter - 14 min

I think Holmes & Bjelica would fit really well with the rest of Boston's roster and with paying $92 mil between Walker, Brown, & Hayward next season, Boston is going to need a couple of cheap but impactful vets to help the team. Holmes, Kanter, & Theis would be a pretty good C rotation from a matchup standpoint. You have a scoring C in Kanter, a defensive/rim protecting/lob threat C in Holmes, & a bit of a floor spacing C in Theis.
 
Last edited:
#11
We have RFA rights if I recall correctly (that was why he was signed to a 3 year deal) so he won't be walking for nothing.
While true, you sure we match? I mean have to make that believable for someone to offer incentive. Also, it does potentially delay us using our money in FA if the process ends up taking some time.
 
#13
While true, you sure we match? I mean have to make that believable for someone to offer incentive. Also, it does potentially delay us using our money in FA if the process ends up taking some time.
At this point he isn't likely to get a huge bank breaking deal is he? The only way I see that is if he quits playing summers with his national team, which I am not sure is likely - especially with 2020 being an olympic year (if they won gold I could see him packing it in after, but Olympics would be after he signs a new deal)
 
#14
The good thing about waiting until the off season is some of our negative value contracts get easier to move, or possibly move for worse money + asset of some sort, or just different fitting pieces.

But when you say you want to move Bogi, is it because you are not interested in paying him what it may cost?

Figure we can't match in RFA and better get something before he walks for nothing?
I think there will be a market for Bogi, I believe some team will overpay for him in the offseason. IMO he will want to go to a team he will start for. I think you get more for Bogi as a rental than as a sign and trade in the offseason.
 
#15
Yeah it sucks to say and it makes my stomach ache, but Vlade's impatience is hurting us.

He went all in thinking Fox & Bagley were going to be legit #1 & #2 stars and that's not looking good at the moment. Then you have the fact that the supporting cast of these potential stars are 26-31 years old when Fox & Bagley are 20 & 22 years old. Not the same timeline.

Ideally, we sell off Bogdanovic, Barnes, Bjelica, & Holmes by the deadline for young assets/picks. This would likely result in our record taking a nose dive thus making our 2020 1st a very valuable pick. Then we look to move Hield in the offseason for young assets/picks and look to rebuild this thing around Fox, Bagley, James, 2020 SAC 1st, & the young assets/picks we received from trading our vets.

From a Boston's fan perspective, how do you feel about these types of deals?

BOS Gets: Richaun Holmes & Nemanja Bjelica
SAC Gets: Romeo Langford, Vincent Poirer, Semi Ojeleye, & 2020 BOS/MIL 1st (Least Favorable)
*SAC waives Swanigan

PG - Walker / Wanamaker / Edwards
SG - Brown / Smart / Green
SF - Hayward / G. Williams
PF - Tatum / Bjelica / Theis
C - Holmes / Kanter / R. Williams

OR

BOS Gets: Richaun Holmes & Nemanja Bjelica
SAC Gets: Vincent Poirer, Semi Ojeleye, Brad Wanamaker, Carsen Edwards, 2020 BOS 1st, & 2020 MIL 1st
*SAC waives Swanigan & Ferrell

PG - Walker / Smart
SG - Brown / Langford / Green
SF - Hayward / G. Williams
PF - Tatum / Bjelica / Theis
C - Holmes / Kanter / R. Williams


BOS Minute Rotation
PG - Walker (34 min) / Smart (14 min)
SG - Brown (32 min) / Smart (16 min)
SF - Hayward (30 min) / Tatum (18 min)
PF - Tatum (16 min) / Bjelica (20 min) / Theis (12 min)
C - Holmes (26 min) / Kanter (14 min) / Theis (8 min)

Walker - 34 min
Tatum - 34 min
Brown - 32 min
Smart - 30 min
Hayward - 30 min
Holmes - 26 min
Bjelica - 20 min
Theis - 20 min
Kanter - 14 min

I think Holmes & Bjelica would fit really well with the rest of Boston's roster and with paying $92 mil between Walker, Brown, & Hayward next season, Boston is going to need a couple of cheap but impactful vets to help the team. Holmes, Kanter, & Theis would be a pretty good C rotation from a matchup standpoint. You have a scoring C in Kanter, a defensive/rim protecting/lob threat C in Holmes, & a bit of a floor spacing C in Theis.
I think it's a fair trade but being a fan of both teams I would want the Celtics to pass. Holmes has been great in Sac just don't know how effective he would be on a winning team. I don't think he would be a big enough upgrade to give away Langford and a future pick
 
#16
I think it's a fair trade but being a fan of both teams I would want the Celtics to pass. Holmes has been great in Sac just don't know how effective he would be on a winning team. I don't think he would be a big enough upgrade to give away Langford and a future pick
Well it's not Holmes for Langford & a pick. It's Holmes & Bjelica for Langford & the 25th-30th pick (approximately). But I also gave you the option to keep Langford & instead give the Kings two picks in the 25-30 range (approximately).

As for you questioning Holmes ability to be effective on a winning team, why do you feel that way? That's an odd take to me. His USG% is only 15.9% this year, and is really just a screen setter & lob/PnR threat on offense. I'd hardly think that would somehow be ineffective on a winning team or that he would disrupt an offsense as he doesn't need touches. But the bulk of his value is his defense which again, why would this be ineffective on a winning team? His ability to switch onto perimeter players, defend the PnR, protect the rim, & clean the glass doesn't go away on a good team.

What's your reasoning for questioning Holmes effectiveness on a winning team?
 
#17
If we could get out of the Dedmon contract to make the Bogi situation better, or possibly use the cap in other ways in the off season would it be worth sending out a second or two?
 
#18
Well it's not Holmes for Langford & a pick. It's Holmes & Bjelica for Langford & the 25th-30th pick (approximately). But I also gave you the option to keep Langford & instead give the Kings two picks in the 25-30 range (approximately).

As for you questioning Holmes ability to be effective on a winning team, why do you feel that way? That's an odd take to me. His USG% is only 15.9% this year, and is really just a screen setter & lob/PnR threat on offense. I'd hardly think that would somehow be ineffective on a winning team or that he would disrupt an offsense as he doesn't need touches. But the bulk of his value is his defense which again, why would this be ineffective on a winning team? His ability to switch onto perimeter players, defend the PnR, protect the rim, & clean the glass doesn't go away on a good team.

What's your reasoning for questioning Holmes effectiveness on a winning team?
I'm questioning more why you would want to give away Holmes to roll the dice on players and picks that you wish could effectively be as good as Holmes at some point.

The odds of Langford and/or an end of the first round pick being as good as Holmes aren't very good. You've go the sure thing and he's cheap so why give it away?
 
#19
I'm questioning more why you would want to give away Holmes to roll the dice on players and picks that you wish could effectively be as good as Holmes at some point.

The odds of Langford and/or an end of the first round pick being as good as Holmes aren't very good. You've go the sure thing and he's cheap so why give it away?
First of all, it's not "giving away" if you're getting value back (which we are).

Second of all, the fact that he's on a cheap contract really only helps if we're trying to win this year or next year. That cheap contract would allow us to add other talented/win now players with the rest of the cap space, but that's not the goal (or it shouldn't be the goal in my opinion).

The goal (my goal) is to rebuild the right way and that starts with collecting young assets & picks. Holmes is 26, we don't have his bird rights, & his next contract will be bigger if he keeps playing the way he's playing, and by then, why are we resigning a 28 year old C to an 8 figure contract when we're in the middle of a rebuild?
 

SacTownKid

Hall of Famer
#20
I’d move Bogi by the deadline and plan for an overhaul in the offseason. I know a lot of people won’t like this but I get rid of the front office and start fresh. With a new FO Kings would probably get a new coach too. Not fair to Walton but it is what it is. The new FO would be a fresh set of eyes with no ties to the players already here.
Right now, moving Bogdan has to be a consideration regardless of a rebuild scenario. If this situation gets any more dark then convincing him to stay might not be doable. I'm sure re-signing him, like many players in his situation, was always going to be based on the fact that the team was making waves and could be playing for a title in a few years with him as the hub of the bench. Not that it couldn't turn around or happen, but as the deadline approaches the picture looks a bit more and more murky each day.
 

SacTownKid

Hall of Famer
#21
I think there will be a market for Bogi, I believe some team will overpay for him in the offseason. IMO he will want to go to a team he will start for. I think you get more for Bogi as a rental than as a sign and trade in the offseason.
I'd start looking at some contenders needing an extra piece. Bogdans contract now makes him extremely movable as a piece to put a team over the top this year. If I were Vlade I'd call up the Knicks and see if they'd be interested in him for some of their young pieces that don't seem to be fitting in or are a ways away from being ready. Namely Kevin Knox and Ignas Brazdeikis.
 
#22
First of all, it's not "giving away" if you're getting value back (which we are).

Second of all, the fact that he's on a cheap contract really only helps if we're trying to win this year or next year. That cheap contract would allow us to add other talented/win now players with the rest of the cap space, but that's not the goal (or it shouldn't be the goal in my opinion).

The goal (my goal) is to rebuild the right way and that starts with collecting young assets & picks. Holmes is 26, we don't have his bird rights, & his next contract will be bigger if he keeps playing the way he's playing, and by then, why are we resigning a 28 year old C to an 8 figure contract when we're in the middle of a rebuild?
Yeah you're getting potential value back but to me that value more than like won't equal the value of Holmes, whether he's getting paid or not.

I'm all about collecting young assets and picks but to me Holmes is still a pretty young asset and a known positive player. Best on the team sadly. If he demanded an 8 figure contract, then I'd pay him because we're just going to go out and sign another Dedmon with those 8 figures. Might as well sign a guy we know can play well and play well for us even when the rest of the team sucks.

No team would do it, but I wouldn't give up Holmes for anything other than a lottery pick because you'd be hard pressed to find more than just a couple players that we've selected in the lottery that have been better than him.
 
#23
Well it's not Holmes for Langford & a pick. It's Holmes & Bjelica for Langford & the 25th-30th pick (approximately). But I also gave you the option to keep Langford & instead give the Kings two picks in the 25-30 range (approximately).

As for you questioning Holmes ability to be effective on a winning team, why do you feel that way? That's an odd take to me. His USG% is only 15.9% this year, and is really just a screen setter & lob/PnR threat on offense. I'd hardly think that would somehow be ineffective on a winning team or that he would disrupt an offsense as he doesn't need touches. But the bulk of his value is his defense which again, why would this be ineffective on a winning team? His ability to switch onto perimeter players, defend the PnR, protect the rim, & clean the glass doesn't go away on a good team.

What's your reasoning for questioning Holmes effectiveness on a winning team?
I probably put that the wrong way. I said I don't know how effective he would be on a winning team. I probably should have said I don't think he plays a big part on a team like the Celtics that are already winning. IMO the squeeze isn't worth the juice. Is he that much of an upgrade to give up on the potential of Langford and a pick? Would Holmes start over Theis? I can't say yes to that for sure, now take into effect that you are giving up pretty decent trade assets to get him. I think the assets could be used better. Is Holmes a piece that put the Celtics over the top? IMO no. Bjelica is nice but again there just isn't enough minutes to go around. Just my opinion.
 
#24
I'm questioning more why you would want to give away Holmes to roll the dice on players and picks that you wish could effectively be as good as Holmes at some point.

The odds of Langford and/or an end of the first round pick being as good as Holmes aren't very good. You've go the sure thing and he's cheap so why give it away?
Yeah, I'm very much in the boat of not sending out prime Tyson Chandler when we dont have to. He's just about everything you want in a playoff-caliber starting C and he's an absolute glove fit next to Fox as a long-term PnR partner. If he could shoot the 3, he'd be a 20+ million player. Still might get there if he keeps up his play the next year and a half.

I'm far more worried that Vlade screws up the payroll and we're in a situation that we can only offer him 8.75 mil/season because we're over the cap. That should be priority number 1; getting under the cap to comfortably resign Holmes to a long-term deal. And the frustrating part about the situation we're in is we could rebuild this so quickly with a firesale now (Bjelica,Bogi, Buddy, Barnes,Bagley, Dedmon), keep Fox and Holmes and have this thing rolling in 2 years with a core that actually compliments each other and has real staying power as a playoff team for Fox's prime.
 
#25
I probably put that the wrong way. I said I don't know how effective he would be on a winning team. I probably should have said I don't think he plays a big part on a team like the Celtics that are already winning. IMO the squeeze isn't worth the juice. Is he that much of an upgrade to give up on the potential of Langford and a pick? Would Holmes start over Theis? I can't say yes to that for sure, now take into effect that you are giving up pretty decent trade assets to get him. I think the assets could be used better. Is Holmes a piece that put the Celtics over the top? IMO no. Bjelica is nice but again there just isn't enough minutes to go around. Just my opinion.
What about Holmes game do you think wouldn't contribute to a winning team? If anything, he'd be even better on a team like the Lakers/Celtics/Clippers that already has an established winning culture because he's a guy who puts up tremendous impact without demanding high USG. His contributions almost single-handily have kept the Kings from the complete gutter this season and its through his efficiency, rim protection, hustle/energy and knowing his role on offense. Not him chucking up a bunch of shots and having good counting stats because of a high USG rate.
 
#26
Yeah you're getting potential value back but to me that value more than like won't equal the value of Holmes, whether he's getting paid or not.

I'm all about collecting young assets and picks but to me Holmes is still a pretty young asset and a known positive player. Best on the team sadly. If he demanded an 8 figure contract, then I'd pay him because we're just going to go out and sign another Dedmon with those 8 figures. Might as well sign a guy we know can play well and play well for us even when the rest of the team sucks.

No team would do it, but I wouldn't give up Holmes for anything other than a lottery pick because you'd be hard pressed to find more than just a couple players that we've selected in the lottery that have been better than him.
It could very well not result in a player as good as Holmes, you're right, but it could also result in a player better than Holmes. You never know.

You also need to consider the production per $ argument as well. If Holmes demands an 8 figure salary in the summer of 2021 (~$45 mil over 3 years) vs. the late 1st in the 2020 draft, you're talking about a $13 mil difference in salary between that rookie scale & Holmes. That extra $13 mil has value as well (e.g., salary dump trades for future assets).

You also need to consider that there is no guarantee that Holmes resigns with us. He's a UFA. He could easily walk for nothing, and if you are of the mindset that you're trying to rebuild (which it seems like you're in favor of), do you really think if he was offered $15 mil/year from the Kings vs. a playoff team that he'd choose the Kings? It's possible but he'll be 28 years old at that point, and I'm sure he would like to be a part of a winning team (not a rebuilding team).

You also need to consider the fact that keeping Holmes probably impacts our record more than any other player on the team right now. So by keeping him, you're not only missing out on a late 1st rounder, missing out on an extra ~$13 mil in cap space to use on salary dump trades later (if we can actually resign him which is a big IF), but you're also likely making our own 2020 (and 2021) 1st round pick less valuable. People like to say trading Cousins got us Fox because it tanked our record. It's a similar argument but likely not on the same scale as Cousins.

You also mentioned "If he demanded an 8 figure contract, then I'd pay him because we're just going to go out and sign another Dedmon with those 8 figures." What makes you think I would be going out & signing players like Dedmon in this rebuild? Well I actually might sign a guy like Dedmon, but it would be for a 1 year deal only if there weren't any more salary dump trades to be made.

My opinion is based on how we should operate. Not how I think Vlade will & does operate. The quote above by no means should be an argument used against my point of view.
 
Last edited:
#27
I probably put that the wrong way. I said I don't know how effective he would be on a winning team. I probably should have said I don't think he plays a big part on a team like the Celtics that are already winning. IMO the squeeze isn't worth the juice. Is he that much of an upgrade to give up on the potential of Langford and a pick? Would Holmes start over Theis? I can't say yes to that for sure, now take into effect that you are giving up pretty decent trade assets to get him. I think the assets could be used better. Is Holmes a piece that put the Celtics over the top? IMO no. Bjelica is nice but again there just isn't enough minutes to go around. Just my opinion.
I mean I broke out the minute distribution for you as well. Why do you say there aren't enough minutes to go around? That seems like a pretty healthy distribution and that is assuming every single one of these players are healthy.

BOS Minute Rotation
PG - Walker (34 min) / Smart (14 min)
SG - Brown (32 min) / Smart (16 min)
SF - Hayward (30 min) / Tatum (18 min)
PF - Tatum (16 min) / Bjelica (20 min) / Theis (12 min)
C - Holmes (26 min) / Kanter (14 min) / Theis (8 min)

Walker - 34 min
Tatum - 34 min
Brown - 32 min
Smart - 30 min
Hayward - 30 min
Holmes - 26 min
Bjelica - 20 min
Theis - 20 min
Kanter - 14 min
 
#28
What about Holmes game do you think wouldn't contribute to a winning team? If anything, he'd be even better on a team like the Lakers/Celtics/Clippers that already has an established winning culture because he's a guy who puts up tremendous impact without demanding high USG. His contributions almost single-handily have kept the Kings from the complete gutter this season and its through his efficiency, rim protection, hustle/energy and knowing his role on offense. Not him chucking up a bunch of shots and having good counting stats because of a high USG rate.
My example I used was the Celtics. Holmes isn't and most likely won't ever be an all star, he doesn't make a big enough impact on a team like the poster used as an example. Giving up a guy with a lot of potential and a pick isn't worth the risk for someone like Holmes IMO. It's not a big enough upgrade to give away assets and potentially disrupt team chemistry. I don't think Holmes is a big upgrade to what the Celtics currently have.
 
#29
I mean I broke out the minute distribution for you as well. Why do you say there aren't enough minutes to go around? That seems like a pretty healthy distribution and that is assuming every single one of these players are healthy.

BOS Minute Rotation
PG - Walker (34 min) / Smart (14 min)
SG - Brown (32 min) / Smart (16 min)
SF - Hayward (30 min) / Tatum (18 min)
PF - Tatum (16 min) / Bjelica (20 min) / Theis (12 min)
C - Holmes (26 min) / Kanter (14 min) / Theis (8 min)

Walker - 34 min
Tatum - 34 min
Brown - 32 min
Smart - 30 min
Hayward - 30 min
Holmes - 26 min
Bjelica - 20 min
Theis - 20 min
Kanter - 14 min
Also in the Celtics big man rotation you have Robert Williams and Grant Williams. Both are young guys that need minutes to grow, both currently have a roll on the team. Rob Will is only in his second year and Grant is a rookie. I can't imagine they want to give up developing these guys for a slight upgrade while giving away assets
 

SacTownKid

Hall of Famer
#30
I probably put that the wrong way. I said I don't know how effective he would be on a winning team. I probably should have said I don't think he plays a big part on a team like the Celtics that are already winning. IMO the squeeze isn't worth the juice. Is he that much of an upgrade to give up on the potential of Langford and a pick? Would Holmes start over Theis? I can't say yes to that for sure, now take into effect that you are giving up pretty decent trade assets to get him. I think the assets could be used better. Is Holmes a piece that put the Celtics over the top? IMO no. Bjelica is nice but again there just isn't enough minutes to go around. Just my opinion.
Holmes would certainly make them better and give them a huge boost. One thing that the Kings aren't taking advantage of is Holmes' ability to pressure the pick and roll and switch to the perimeter. Holmes is an incredible defender much in the same vein as Al Horford from what I've seen except a much better shotblocker. Very versatile. Offensively he's quite skilled as well. His ability to dribble drive is also underutilized.

That said, you can take that other trade right off the board. I like Langford as a prospect but I doubt the Kings are moving Holmes any time soon unless even he's like screw it. One thing of note is that Holmes is still pretty young. Younger than Buddy Hield and Bogdan in fact.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.