Yeah, this feels a bit like national sports media kicking the Kings because they're the Kings.
I didn't want to see Haliburton go at ALL. He was my favorite player on the team and would be a great fit on pretty much any roster. He was a guy I wanted to build around and my hope was that any Sabonis deal would be made to pair him WITH Tyrese. I'm gutted that he's not on the team anymore.
All that said, the Kings traded him for a 25 year old two time all-star without giving up any future draft capital. And the fact that there's already rumors that the Pacers might flip Buddy means that Tyrese was the main/only target for them in this trade. I get why a lot of us that love Haliburton are upset, but I don't understand this whole narrative that this was a horrible trade for Sacramento overall.
The Kings have consistently been one of the worst teams in the NBA for 16 years. Other than maybe Fox (whose regression and massive contract seemed to have tanked his value) who else were the Kings going to trade to bring back an impact player? Or should they have stood pat with a 20-36 team? I'm not sure what the talking heads think the Kings could do to change their fortunes at this point.
Will the Kings regret this trade? Maybe. I'm not sure what Haliburton's ceiling is. I don't know that Sabonis is a good fit with Fox. We don't know that he won't force a trade after one year in Sacramento. I don't know if McNair will be able to reshape the roster to maximize the Fox/Sabonis core. And neither to any of them.
This feels like the opposite of when during the Spurs run (or in football, say the Patriots before Brady left) would make a slightly head scratching move and the media would give them the benefit of the doubt and try to see the positive side because those teams had a track record of good moves and reporters didn't want to end up being wrong later. So with the Kings it's obviously a terrible move from moment one because the Kings only make terrible moves I guess.
I didn't want to see Haliburton go at ALL. He was my favorite player on the team and would be a great fit on pretty much any roster. He was a guy I wanted to build around and my hope was that any Sabonis deal would be made to pair him WITH Tyrese. I'm gutted that he's not on the team anymore.
All that said, the Kings traded him for a 25 year old two time all-star without giving up any future draft capital. And the fact that there's already rumors that the Pacers might flip Buddy means that Tyrese was the main/only target for them in this trade. I get why a lot of us that love Haliburton are upset, but I don't understand this whole narrative that this was a horrible trade for Sacramento overall.
The Kings have consistently been one of the worst teams in the NBA for 16 years. Other than maybe Fox (whose regression and massive contract seemed to have tanked his value) who else were the Kings going to trade to bring back an impact player? Or should they have stood pat with a 20-36 team? I'm not sure what the talking heads think the Kings could do to change their fortunes at this point.
Will the Kings regret this trade? Maybe. I'm not sure what Haliburton's ceiling is. I don't know that Sabonis is a good fit with Fox. We don't know that he won't force a trade after one year in Sacramento. I don't know if McNair will be able to reshape the roster to maximize the Fox/Sabonis core. And neither to any of them.
This feels like the opposite of when during the Spurs run (or in football, say the Patriots before Brady left) would make a slightly head scratching move and the media would give them the benefit of the doubt and try to see the positive side because those teams had a track record of good moves and reporters didn't want to end up being wrong later. So with the Kings it's obviously a terrible move from moment one because the Kings only make terrible moves I guess.