Thoughts on next year's roster if we're able to trade Buddy for Myles Turner

#1
PG: Fox. All day. Plus we need to find a quality backup PG who is a playmaker (not Joseph). Might be willing to keep Guy around as our 3rd PG and/or pencil in a rookie.

SG: Bogi w/ a new contract (assuming we don't overpay). Baze, if we can sign him for a reasonable/team-friendly deal, and Justin James, both for depth at the 2 and 3.

SF: Here I'm perhaps taking my biggest risk by making Jeffries our starting 3 and moving Barnes to our starting stretch 4. And yet, I just don't see Jeffries making many mistakes. Barnes, Baze and James all provide depth at the 3.

PF: Barnes is our starting stretch 4 until Bagley is ready. Pencil in a rookie for depth at the 4. If we luck out and can sign Giles for 4 bucks, sign him up now! We'll eventually figure out where and when to play him. I hope.

C: Turner and Holmes split the minutes at the 5 (more or less), with Bagley and/or a rookie as depth. Turner would normally play with Bagley, while Holmes would normally play with Barnes.

Bjelica has his moments, but he's too slow for the modern NBA. Sorry my friend.

This is not a bad roster IMO - assuming that Bagley becomes valueable and Turner doesn't become Dedmon.

What I really like about this roster is that everyone - except possibly Baze - has a reasonable chance of getting better each of the next few seasons.
 
#2
That looks like a team that will contend for a top 3 pick, which may not be a bad thing.

I prefer starting Belly and adjusting his minutes based on matchups.

While I see the benefits of Barnes at the 4, the potential gain on defense doesn't balance the loss on offense. Belly is a much better shooter, passer, and rebounder than Jeffries and Barnes. While they move better on the perimeter, they aren't exactly one on one stoppers, and provide zero in the steals and blocks departments. If Jeffries were a knock down shooter or defender, I could see the move. But he is an ok shooter for even a 4, and his defense is still to be proven.



If Jeffries were a to earn a spot, I would dump Barnes and keep Belly as Bagley insurance.
 
#4
That looks like a team that will contend for a top 3 pick, which may not be a bad thing.

I prefer starting Belly and adjusting his minutes based on matchups.

While I see the benefits of Barnes at the 4, the potential gain on defense doesn't balance the loss on offense. Belly is a much better shooter, passer, and rebounder than Jeffries and Barnes. While they move better on the perimeter, they aren't exactly one on one stoppers, and provide zero in the steals and blocks departments. If Jeffries were a knock down shooter or defender, I could see the move. But he is an ok shooter for even a 4, and his defense is still to be proven.



If Jeffries were a to earn a spot, I would dump Barnes and keep Belly as Bagley insurance.
Dumping Barnes may be an impossible task at this stage of his contract.
Top 3 pick? Meaning 3rd worst team in the league? Uh, ok.
I think this roster may or may not get us into the playoffs next year, but it would be competitive, young and improving. Giving minutes to Beli gets us where?
 
#5
It’s hard for me to run with the premise here, since I think that Bagley is likely to be more effective long term as a 5 than a 4. If we’re trading Buddy, I’d rather see it be for a wing or combo forward than another big.
 
#6
Bagley need to play center for us to be successful but the only way he can play PF and is being successful would be to have a Turner at Center. Also trading buddy for Turner we’d have a young center with all star potential in case Bagley is a busy or Bagley is just mediocre. If Bagley is just an empty stats guy 17/10 but no impact or no defense we could trade him and go with Turner. So yes we should get Turner, however I don’t see Indiana does it unless we include our 1st round pick which is worth it anyways
 
#9
We’ll need to add Bjlecia and 12 which I easily do, but I think there moving on from Oladipo
After very light research, it appears that Bleacher Report’s Eric Pincus said "I bet they trade him." That's not a very credible source/statement. Is there another report that you have seen that talks about Oladipo being traded?


Having said that, I don't think Hield, Bjelica, & #12 is enough for Turner.
 
#11
After very light research, it appears that Bleacher Report’s Eric Pincus said "I bet they trade him." That's not a very credible source/statement. Is there another report that you have seen that talks about Oladipo being traded?


Having said that, I don't think Hield, Bjelica, & #12 is enough for Turner.
Our 2 best shooters, one of which was a lottery pick, our first round lottery pick this year and what?

Is Turner that good?
 
#12
After very light research, it appears that Bleacher Report’s Eric Pincus said "I bet they trade him." That's not a very credible source/statement. Is there another report that you have seen that talks about Oladipo being traded?
Having said that, I don't think Hield, Bjelica, & #12 is enough for Turner.
I think you may have missed the title for this thread. ;) But if you just want to know if Hield for Turner has really been discussed before now, yes it has. In at least three places that I've seen, including the recent Kings Mailbag. But no one is saying that the teams are there. Yet. It's just speculation. Even so, I find it compelling to think that Turner paired with Bagley in the front court could be lethal. Hopefully not lethal to the Kings or their long-suffering fans.
 
#13
I think you may have missed the title for this thread. ;) But if you just want to know if Hield for Turner has really been discussed before now, yes it has. In at least three places that I've seen, including the recent Kings Mailbag. But no one is saying that the teams are there. Yet. It's just speculation. Even so, I find it compelling to think that Turner paired with Bagley in the front court could be lethal. Hopefully not lethal to the Kings or their long-suffering fans.
I actually didn't miss the title of the thread. What am I missing?
 
#16
If we're accepting the premise that Hield is dealt for Turner then I'd trade Bagley too. Sure, Marvin and Sabonis are different players but if the Pacers couldn't get that pairing to work why would Bagley and Turner be any better.

As much as I like Turner's rim protection I just don't think this trade makes the Kings that much better even if Indiana would be interested which I doubt.

Turner put up 12 & 6 last year and shot 34% from three. Personally I'd play Bagley at the five and see what he can do and trade Hield for something else, preferably with a first rounder heading the Kings way.
 
#17
Our 2 best shooters, one of which was a lottery pick, our first round lottery pick this year and what?

Is Turner that good?
There's many things to consider:

Age
Turner = 24.4 years old
Hield = 27.7 years old

Contract $/Year
Turner = $18 mil (3 years left)
Hield = $22 mil (4 years left)

RAPM
Turner = +0.25
Hield = -0.60

PIPM
Turner = +1.29
Hield = -0.40

RPM
Turner = +0.70
Hield = +0.30


So Turner is younger, makes less per year, and has much better advanced impact stats than Hield. Then you have to consider the scarcity of the skillset. Do you think it's easier to find a replacement for a SG with...
  • average size/length for position (212 lbs, 6'5", 6'9.25" wingspan, 8'4" standing reach)
  • average athleticism for size
  • elite shooting skills for size
  • good rebounding skills for size
  • below average ball-handling skills for size
  • below average playmaking skills for size
  • below average defensive skill
...or do you think it's easier to find a replacement for a C with....
  • great size/length for position (239 lbs, 6'11.5", 7'4" wingspan, & 9'4" standing reach)
  • above average athleticism for size
  • great shooting skills for size
  • below average rebounding skills for size
  • average ball-handling skills for size
  • average playmaking skills for size
  • elite defensive skill
I think it's safe to say that Turner's skillset is much more unique & hard to find.


Considering the size of Hield's contract, his age, & his impact on the floor, his value is likely neutral at best and moderately negative at worst. Bjelica could maybe fetch a very late 1st (may require a 2nd with Bjelica to land that first), and then a late lottery pick.

In my best case scenario (if Hield is viewed as neutral value), you're sending a #12 & #28-#35 (Bjelica) for Turner. I don't think that's enough considering what I laid out above.
 
#20
Bagley needs to be our center. I think that is the position he will do best at. So if Hield is traded for a vet, I’d prefer a SF/PF type
 
#21
Bagley needs to be our center. I think that is the position he will do best at. So if Hield is traded for a vet, I’d prefer a SF/PF type
Well I'm sure Tobias Harris is gettable as your SF/PF ;)

But more realistically, you'd want a good defender coming back if you're putting Bagley at C. Porter, Gordon, Prince, & Finney-Smith seem like they would fit the mold and could be attainable in a trade.

I do think your recommendation is generally the wrong direction as continuing down this path will likely lead us to a mediocre team with little ways to improve (thus leading to another rebuild), but if the Kings are hell bent on still trying to win now I think they'd need to swing for the fences. LaVine (25) & Gordon (24) would be interesting fits. A starting lineup of...

Fox
LaVine
Barnes
Gordon
Bagley

...would be one of (if not the) fastest, most athletic teams in the league. LaVine, Gordon, & Bagley would be able to keep up with Fox and all of them would be lob threats for Fox as well.

I'm sure that team would top out too and we'd have to rebuild (and likely trade Fox in that rebuild as well), but guys like LaVine & Gordon have some upside with their age & athletic ability to potentially develop into a solid team. I wouldn't bet on it, but I wouldn't be horribly upset with a direction like this as I think it would at least be entertaining to see all that speed & athleticism on the court together.
 
#22
I wish people would realize that almost every advanced metric shows Bjelica as one of our best players.

He's slow but he's savvy. A below average defender at his position but a well above average offensive player. I bet if there was a stat that showed who attempts and makes the most 3 pointers from the furthest average distance, Bjelica would be top 3 in the NBA. No one on the team literally stretches the floor as well as Bjelica. He doesn't always jump out as one of the best players on the court but stat after stat says he's top 3 in most of the impact categories. Last year he was 1st or 2nd in all of them.

I know he's old and not here for the long haul but give credit where credit is due.
 
#23
I wish people would realize that almost every advanced metric shows Bjelica as one of our best players.

He's slow but he's savvy. A below average defender at his position but a well above average offensive player. I bet if there was a stat that showed who attempts and makes the most 3 pointers from the furthest average distance, Bjelica would be top 3 in the NBA. No one on the team literally stretches the floor as well as Bjelica. He doesn't always jump out as one of the best players on the court but stat after stat says he's top 3 in most of the impact categories. Last year he was 1st or 2nd in all of them.

I know he's old and not here for the long haul but give credit where credit is due.
My eye test says he is god awful on defense. Now if we had good defensive players around Him and could kind of hide him a bit on defense, then he really is valuable to us. Problem is we have a team of below average defenders and the ones who can defend (Cojo) kills us on offense.

I think Bjelica could bring back something in a minor deal....a younger prospect. Friendly contract means we could feasibly obtain a younger guy who a team is having trouble finding time for because they are farther along and in win mode. I don’t think he’s just filler for a deal, he has some value. I think he can help other teams more at this point because we just aren’t good enough.
 
#24
Well I'm sure Tobias Harris is gettable as your SF/PF ;)

But more realistically, you'd want a good defender coming back if you're putting Bagley at C. Porter, Gordon, Prince, & Finney-Smith seem like they would fit the mold and could be attainable in a trade.

I do think your recommendation is generally the wrong direction as continuing down this path will likely lead us to a mediocre team with little ways to improve (thus leading to another rebuild), but if the Kings are hell bent on still trying to win now I think they'd need to swing for the fences. LaVine (25) & Gordon (24) would be interesting fits. A starting lineup of...

Fox
LaVine
Barnes
Gordon
Bagley

...would be one of (if not the) fastest, most athletic teams in the league. LaVine, Gordon, & Bagley would be able to keep up with Fox and all of them would be lob threats for Fox as well.

I'm sure that team would top out too and we'd have to rebuild (and likely trade Fox in that rebuild as well), but guys like LaVine & Gordon have some upside with their age & athletic ability to potentially develop into a solid team. I wouldn't bet on it, but I wouldn't be horribly upset with a direction like this as I think it would at least be entertaining to see all that speed & athleticism on the court together.
I don’t know if I’d watch a game with that lineup and you might as well put 120 on the board for opposing teams before the game even starts
 
#25
Well I'm sure Tobias Harris is gettable as your SF/PF ;)

But more realistically, you'd want a good defender coming back if you're putting Bagley at C. Porter, Gordon, Prince, & Finney-Smith seem like they would fit the mold and could be attainable in a trade.

I do think your recommendation is generally the wrong direction as continuing down this path will likely lead us to a mediocre team with little ways to improve (thus leading to another rebuild), but if the Kings are hell bent on still trying to win now I think they'd need to swing for the fences. LaVine (25) & Gordon (24) would be interesting fits. A starting lineup of...

Fox
LaVine
Barnes
Gordon
Bagley

...would be one of (if not the) fastest, most athletic teams in the league. LaVine, Gordon, & Bagley would be able to keep up with Fox and all of them would be lob threats for Fox as well.

I'm sure that team would top out too and we'd have to rebuild (and likely trade Fox in that rebuild as well), but guys like LaVine & Gordon have some upside with their age & athletic ability to potentially develop into a solid team. I wouldn't bet on it, but I wouldn't be horribly upset with a direction like this as I think it would at least be entertaining to see all that speed & athleticism on the court together.
I figured, given his previous move for LaVine and emphasis on surrounding Fox with even more athleticism, that Vlade had something like this scenario in mind. Hard to say at this point what his successor will envision, but chasing 23/24/25 year olds that may still have untapped upside and star potential is a reasonable alternative to the tear down for draft picks rebuild.
 
#26
I don’t know if I’d watch a game with that lineup and you might as well put 120 on the board for opposing teams before the game even starts
As long as we score 121 ;)
  • LaVine & Bagley would obviously be the weak spots defensively.
  • Gordon is a very good defender.
  • Barnes is average to maybe slightly above average defensively.
  • Fox can be good if he commits himself but he’s had to carry such an offensive load.
That teams defensive potential lies with how Fox and Bagley develop on that side of the ball.