What Does This Team Need Most?

[The_Jamal]

Apparently the coaches who voted him an all star a wrong too huh

Correct. He was voted because HOU was the 2 seed and they didn't want to leave a 2 seed player off the roster. Domas was clearly better up to the all star break and still put a better season up, despite him essentially being hurt the rest of the year

 

[iowamcnabb]

With his contract, trading for Jrue Holiday is going to kill our salary cap for the next 3 years. At that point we're either somehow a playoff team or we're rebuilding. So he'd better be the final piece of the puzzle unless you're shedding huge chunks of salary elsewhere (ie unloading LaVine and/or Sabonis) as part of an overall roster churn.

I highly doubt Boston is trading Jrue Holiday for Malik Monk and also throwing in a pick unless it's a useless late second rounder. Boston already has too many guards and Al Horford is reaching retirement age soon so I expect their preference would be to target a frontcourt player.

I believe I already referenced your points 2 and 3 in my post. I agree with these points. If we can find a trade that Boston likes, I'd be happy to have Holiday on board as the tone setter and veteran voice in the locker room. Probably we'd be the ones sending out pick(s) though.

Naji Marshall is a shade under 6'7" and you've got him starting at PF next to Sabonis who is 6'10. I don't think that makes our size problem any better.

As to Holiday being an excellent fit next to LaVine... again this is just 180 degrees from how I see our current situation. I don't think we're trying to build a team around LaVine. Maybe Monte was but he just got fired. And even if we were, you don't bring in a guy who's got 4 or 5 years left in his NBA career and call that a backcourt. Holiday only makes sense as a stop-gap and culture builder while we look for a new PG.

And lastly, who is trading us a star player to get their hands on an overpaid perennial loser with an expiring contract? I guess Monte did that, but there were extenuating circumstances. If we throw in a massive haul of future picks and LaVine's negative value is just there to match salaries you might make a deal but then you're going all-in on a team with a 36 year old PG and a 30 year old undersized center (in 2026) as your foundation? This is how franchises stay bad for decades. We shouldn't fall into the same trap of selling out our future to chase after aging talent with name recognition that sinks multiple franchises every year. Just build a team of young players who fit together and play defense.

I’m not sure it’s fair to call Lavine a losing player. He has played for the Wolves, Bulls and Kings, three of the worst franchises when it comes to winning (outside of the Jordan era and post-Ant) a 23 points a game guy with 50/40/80+ shooting splits with elite athleticism is a very useful player even with the below average defense. Hes only a negative asset if he is on a long term 40 plus a year type of deal. If things work out over the next two years he’s prob going to get like a 3 for 100 type deal with someone. Maybe a bit more given guys like Booker will be getting 70.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

I’m not sure it’s fair to call Lavine a losing player. He has played for the Wolves, Bulls and Kings, three of the worst franchises when it comes to winning (outside of the Jordan era and pre-Ant) a 23 points a game guy with 50/40/80+ shooting splits with elite athleticism is a very useful player even with the below average defense. Hes only a negative asset if he is on a long term 40 plus a year type of deal. If things work out over the next two years he’s prob going to get like a 3 for 100 type deal with someone. Maybe a bit more given guys like Booker will be getting 70.

Yeah, I'm pretty convinced his next contract is going to revert downwards - given his production overall the last two years (though injury is involved) maybe even $30M a year is a bit high. But he's got two years to establish what the next free agent version of Zach is, because I can't see him declining the player option he's got next summer. That kind of money won't be available for him if he turns it down.

 

[Kingster]

TALENT. It needs a superstar. Secondarily, it needs players whose games are synchronous.

 

[twslam07]

With his contract, trading for Jrue Holiday is going to kill our salary cap for the next 3 years. At that point we're either somehow a playoff team or we're rebuilding. So he'd better be the final piece of the puzzle unless you're shedding huge chunks of salary elsewhere (ie unloading LaVine and/or Sabonis) as part of an overall roster churn.

I highly doubt Boston is trading Jrue Holiday for Malik Monk and also throwing in a pick unless it's a useless late second rounder. Boston already has too many guards and Al Horford is reaching retirement age soon so I expect their preference would be to target a frontcourt player.

I believe I already referenced your points 2 and 3 in my post. I agree with these points. If we can find a trade that Boston likes, I'd be happy to have Holiday on board as the tone setter and veteran voice in the locker room. Probably we'd be the ones sending out pick(s) though.

Naji Marshall is a shade under 6'7" and you've got him starting at PF next to Sabonis who is 6'10. I don't think that makes our size problem any better.

As to Holiday being an excellent fit next to LaVine... again this is just 180 degrees from how I see our current situation. I don't think we're trying to build a team around LaVine. Maybe Monte was but he just got fired. And even if we were, you don't bring in a guy who's got 4 or 5 years left in his NBA career and call that a backcourt. Holiday only makes sense as a stop-gap and culture builder while we look for a new PG.

And lastly, who is trading us a star player to get their hands on an overpaid perennial loser with an expiring contract? I guess Monte did that, but there were extenuating circumstances. If we throw in a massive haul of future picks and LaVine's negative value is just there to match salaries you might make a deal but then you're going all-in on a team with a 36 year old PG and a 30 year old undersized center (in 2026) as your foundation? This is how franchises stay bad for decades. We shouldn't fall into the same trap of selling out our future to chase after aging talent with name recognition that sinks multiple franchises every year. Just build a team of young players who fit together and play defense.

Bringing Holiday here doesn’t “kill” our salary cap because we’d either be looking to…

1.) Trade an expiring LaVine for a better star
2.) Allow LaVine to fall off the books and use that cap to sign a significant piece
3.) Extend LaVine for a much lower contract amount.

As for BOS’s preferences, you didn’t mention the cost savings benefit from doing such a trade and that’s a big reason as to why a pick is being attached. And if Monk doesn’t end up being a preference for them, he could be sent to a place like ORL who could send guys like KCP, Carter, Isaac, etc. that give them some more size vs. taking back Monk.

Marshall has a 7’0.75” wingspan and is over 230 lbs. He’s also a good defender who plays with great toughness. He would certainly help when playing against bigger frontcourts (especially since he’s replacing DeRozan in the frontcourt).

The fit of Holiday next to LaVine was the last thing I stated for a reason. It’s definitely an added bonus though.

The point of another team trading for an expiring LaVine next offseason (not this offseason) is not because they intend on using him long term. It’s to give that team immediate cap relief (along with picks/assets) to help them jump start a rebuild.

And we’re not falling into the “trap” of selling our future. The acquisition of Holiday is just the opposite. It comes along with…

1.) Another pick (good for our future)
2.) Help establish the identity & culture of the team (good for our future)
3.) Help mentor Carter & Ellis (good for our future)

 

[SacTownKid]

With his contract, trading for Jrue Holiday is going to kill our salary cap for the next 3 years. At that point we're either somehow a playoff team or we're rebuilding. So he'd better be the final piece of the puzzle unless you're shedding huge chunks of salary elsewhere (ie unloading LaVine and/or Sabonis) as part of an overall roster churn.

I highly doubt Boston is trading Jrue Holiday for Malik Monk and also throwing in a pick unless it's a useless late second rounder. Boston already has too many guards and Al Horford is reaching retirement age soon so I expect their preference would be to target a frontcourt player.

I believe I already referenced your points 2 and 3 in my post. I agree with these points. If we can find a trade that Boston likes, I'd be happy to have Holiday on board as the tone setter and veteran voice in the locker room. Probably we'd be the ones sending out pick(s) though.

Naji Marshall is a shade under 6'7" and you've got him starting at PF next to Sabonis who is 6'10. I don't think that makes our size problem any better.

As to Holiday being an excellent fit next to LaVine... again this is just 180 degrees from how I see our current situation. I don't think we're trying to build a team around LaVine. Maybe Monte was but he just got fired. And even if we were, you don't bring in a guy who's got 4 or 5 years left in his NBA career and call that a backcourt. Holiday only makes sense as a stop-gap and culture builder while we look for a new PG.

And lastly, who is trading us a star player to get their hands on an overpaid perennial loser with an expiring contract? I guess Monte did that, but there were extenuating circumstances. If we throw in a massive haul of future picks and LaVine's negative value is just there to match salaries you might make a deal but then you're going all-in on a team with a 36 year old PG and a 30 year old undersized center (in 2026) as your foundation? This is how franchises stay bad for decades. We shouldn't fall into the same trap of selling out our future to chase after aging talent with name recognition that sinks multiple franchises every year. Just build a team of young players who fit together and play defense.

Yeah paying Jrue nearly 40 million at age 37 is not a good idea. In fact, at this point a very, very bad one. Perry better not go all in here, the fork in the road will appear next season, just wait and see because the necessary direction taken once there will likely be quite clear and it's super unlikely that Jrue Holiday is the difference between any team truly mattering in the deep Western conference. At least one that pretty much wasn't already in the mix. Nobody even knows what the Kings are at this point and the only evidence is Bulls Jr. doesn't look right at all, haha.

 

[SacTownKid]

Bringing Holiday here doesn’t “kill” our salary cap because we’d either be looking to…

1.) Trade an expiring LaVine for a better star
2.) Allow LaVine to fall off the books and use that cap to sign a significant piece
3.) Extend LaVine for a much lower contract amount.

As for BOS’s preferences, you didn’t mention the cost savings benefit from doing such a trade and that’s a big reason as to why a pick is being attached. And if Monk doesn’t end up being a preference for them, he could be sent to a place like ORL who could send guys like KCP, Carter, Isaac, etc. that give them some more size vs. taking back Monk.

Marshall has a 7’0.75” wingspan and is over 230 lbs. He’s also a good defender who plays with great toughness. He would certainly help when playing against bigger frontcourts (especially since he’s replacing DeRozan in the frontcourt).

The fit of Holiday next to LaVine was the last thing I stated for a reason. It’s definitely an added bonus though.

The point of another team trading for an expiring LaVine next offseason (not this offseason) is not because they intend on using him long term. It’s to give that team immediate cap relief (along with picks/assets) to help them jump start a rebuild.

And we’re not falling into the “trap” of selling our future. The acquisition of Holiday is just the opposite. It comes along with…

1.) Another pick (good for our future)
2.) Help establish the identity & culture of the team (good for our future)
3.) Help mentor Carter & Ellis (good for our future)

It doesn't kill it but if the Kings end up flatlining it certainly makes a quick and efficient rebuild even tougher. The Celtics are already making noise they'll mostly want to just cut cap and TBH they might have to attach assets to Holiday if that's their desire.

 

[ShastaKingsFan]

I’m not sure it’s fair to call Lavine a losing player. He has played for the Wolves, Bulls and Kings, three of the worst franchises when it comes to winning (outside of the Jordan era and post-Ant) a 23 points a game guy with 50/40/80+ shooting splits with elite athleticism is a very useful player even with the below average defense. Hes only a negative asset if he is on a long term 40 plus a year type of deal. If things work out over the next two years he’s prob going to get like a 3 for 100 type deal with someone. Maybe a bit more given guys like Booker will be getting 70.

He's the type of highest paid player for a team that can hover somewhere around .500, or an 8-10 seed

 

[hrdboild]

I’m not sure it’s fair to call Lavine a losing player. He has played for the Wolves, Bulls and Kings, three of the worst franchises when it comes to winning (outside of the Jordan era and post-Ant) a 23 points a game guy with 50/40/80+ shooting splits with elite athleticism is a very useful player even with the below average defense. Hes only a negative asset if he is on a long term 40 plus a year type of deal. If things work out over the next two years he’s prob going to get like a 3 for 100 type deal with someone. Maybe a bit more given guys like Booker will be getting 70.

What we're talking about is trade value. What kind of a return can you get for Zach LaVine on an expiring contract at mid-season next year? And in that circumstance, he is a losing player unless/until he proves otherwise. It will be a factor in how much (if anything) a hypothetical team with a star player that fits our roster is going to ask for as a sweetener in order to add LaVine to their roster 3 months before he likely becomes a free agent anyway. Realistically, I personally think this is aiming for the moon. And assuming you'll be able to get a deal like this done is poor planning.

I would start planning my roster moves around the idea that LaVine will not be here after next season and hopefully I've already made my feelings about LaVine clear enough that I don't need to go into the reasons why. Again, just my preference.

Bringing Holiday here doesn’t “kill” our salary cap because we’d either be looking to…

1.) Trade an expiring LaVine for a better star
2.) Allow LaVine to fall off the books and use that cap to sign a significant piece
3.) Extend LaVine for a much lower contract amount.

As for BOS’s preferences, you didn’t mention the cost savings benefit from doing such a trade and that’s a big reason as to why a pick is being attached. And if Monk doesn’t end up being a preference for them, he could be sent to a place like ORL who could send guys like KCP, Carter, Isaac, etc. that give them some more size vs. taking back Monk.

Marshall has a 7’0.75” wingspan and is over 230 lbs. He’s also a good defender who plays with great toughness. He would certainly help when playing against bigger frontcourts (especially since he’s replacing DeRozan in the frontcourt).

The fit of Holiday next to LaVine was the last thing I stated for a reason. It’s definitely an added bonus though.

The point of another team trading for an expiring LaVine next offseason (not this offseason) is not because they intend on using him long term. It’s to give that team immediate cap relief (along with picks/assets) to help them jump start a rebuild.

And we’re not falling into the “trap” of selling our future. The acquisition of Holiday is just the opposite. It comes along with…

1.) Another pick (good for our future)
2.) Help establish the identity & culture of the team (good for our future)
3.) Help mentor Carter & Ellis (good for our future)

It doesn't kill it but if the Kings end up flatlining it certainly makes a quick and efficient rebuild even tougher. The Celtics are already making noise they'll mostly want to just cut cap and TBH they might have to attach assets to Holiday if that's their desire.

@SacTownKid made the exact point I was going to respond with. If this all doesn't work and we're still a 40 win team next year with Sabonis already on record as "considering his options" before outright demanding a trade and giving us a very short list of teams he's willing to re-sign with, now you're another 80 million in the hole on an aging player who has to be considered an injury risk purely because of the years and mileage on his knees/ankles/tendons.

And you're still assuming that Boston is giving us a pick and Jrue for Monk. If I'm Boston and I'm giving up one of the best defenders in the league over the past decade and a pick because of his huge contract, I'm asking for a lot more than Monk and I think at least one of the other 28 teams will give it to me. Jrue is a guy that contending teams will be interested in. The Lakers, the TWolves, the Clippers, the Rockets, the Warriors all appear to have a need for a backcourt player who ups their defensive floor. I make a deal for Jrue if we also move Sabonis and LaVine at the same time and start the Doug Christie era with a clean slate and a new defensive focus or I make it if he's the guy who makes me a contender for the next 3 years while he's still under contract. I don't make it to build a team around Holiday/LaVine/Sabonis and a supporting crew of young guys who will be forced to stand behind the 3pt line and wait for passes all game.

Marshall has length but that doesn't help with the league's 6'8" and bigger all-muscle freight trains of despair taking bodies and stealing souls in the paint. That's where our problem lies. There aren't as many players who fit that description in the current NBA as there were in decades past but all it takes is a couple of drafts to alter the math on that.

 

[twslam07]

It doesn't kill it but if the Kings end up flatlining it certainly makes a quick and efficient rebuild even tougher. The Celtics are already making noise they'll mostly want to just cut cap and TBH they might have to attach assets to Holiday if that's their desire.

Precisely my point as to why he’s a good target for us!

 

[iowamcnabb]

He's the type of highest paid player for a team that can hover somewhere around .500, or an 8-10 seed

The Bulls were on their way to being a good playoff tram and a top 10 defense before Ball went down with an injury.

 

[SacTownKid]

Precisely my point as to why he’s a good target for us!

The Kings have enough middling draft assets to move forward with haha. On paper he'd be a solid add, but that contract is not worth it. If the evidence right now didn't have the Kings being so in the middle and closer to out maybe they take the chance but this would be another example of gambling with no real reason to other than he fits. At this point I think even giving out a MLE sized deal this summer would be a huge mistake potentially. If they want to run it back? Run it back. Don't run it back with more anchors attached. This is the exact opposite of when Monte ran it back. Clearly that team had holes and we see how running it back hurt. Now, they have no evidence from which to work from to do anything other than run it back. They just changed out half the dang roster for fit, no more contractual landmines. Hold the position and if this team is a Jrue Holiday away they'll know it shortly after the season has started.

 

[twslam07]

What we're talking about is trade value. What kind of a return can you get for Zach LaVine on an expiring contract at mid-season next year? And in that circumstance, he is a losing player unless/until he proves otherwise. It will be a factor in how much (if anything) a hypothetical team with a star player that fits our roster is going to ask for as a sweetener in order to add LaVine to their roster 3 months before he likely becomes a free agent anyway. Realistically, I personally think this is aiming for the moon. And assuming you'll be able to get a deal like this done is poor planning.

I would start planning my roster moves around the idea that LaVine will not be here after next season and hopefully I've already made my feelings about LaVine clear enough that I don't need to go into the reasons why. Again, just my preference.




@SacTownKid made the exact point I was going to respond with. If this all doesn't work and we're still a 40 win team next year with Sabonis already on record as "considering his options" before outright demanding a trade and giving us a very short list of teams he's willing to re-sign with, now you're another 80 million in the hole on an aging player who has to be considered an injury risk purely because of the years and mileage on his knees/ankles/tendons.

And you're still assuming that Boston is giving us a pick and Jrue for Monk. If I'm Boston and I'm giving up one of the best defenders in the league over the past decade and a pick because of his huge contract, I'm asking for a lot more than Monk and I think at least one of the other 28 teams will give it to me. Jrue is a guy that contending teams will be interested in. The Lakers, the TWolves, the Clippers, the Rockets, the Warriors all appear to have a need for a backcourt player who ups their defensive floor. I make a deal for Jrue if we also move Sabonis and LaVine at the same time and start the Doug Christie era with a clean slate and a new defensive focus or I make it if he's the guy who makes me a contender for the next 3 years while he's still under contract. I don't make it to build a team around Holiday/LaVine/Sabonis and a supporting crew of young guys who will be forced to stand behind the 3pt line and wait for passes all game.

Marshall has length but that doesn't help with the league's 6'8" and bigger all-muscle freight trains of despair taking bodies and stealing souls in the paint. That's where our problem lies. There aren't as many players who fit that description in the current NBA as there were in decades past but all it takes is a couple of drafts to alter the math on that.

Did I give any indication that LaVine has significant trade value on an expiring contract? I did not. The value would be the picks/assets and the fact that a team could shed $50 mil in cap the very next season (since LaVine would be an expiring). Most teams that are trading their star player are looking to rebuild. What better way to rebuild than cut cap and accumulate assets/picks.

And where is this “poor planning” comment coming from? You act as if me entire plan would be predicated on us trading for a hypothetical star that will be available next offseason. That’s not the case. The name of the game is to stay flexible and the trades I proposed…

1.) Keep our options open
2.) Improve our future
3.) Improve our team next year

…if that’s “poor planning” to you then I’d like to see what “good planning” looks like?


If all of this doesn’t work out and we’re still a 40 win team and Sabonis asks out, why is it a big concern that we have Holiday on our roster? Do you honestly think we’re trying to trade Sabonis for an equivalent star talent and push to be a playoff team? It’s more likely that we’d be shifting into a rebuild at that point which means who we’re paying with our cap is not as important as a contender who’s trying to optimize every dollar to put them over the edge. Can you be specific in how you think this hamstrings us in this scenario?

And it’s interesting how you now align yourself to this point from sactownkid when in the same post you say how we shouldn’t be planning our roster moves around LaVine. Well, if you don’t plan roster moves around LaVine for this upcoming season, you’re intentionally not trying to optimize the roster which could well lead to the very scenario you just referenced (40 win season). So with that in mind, are you saying that you’d prefer to build a temporarily ill fitting roster for next year (because LaVine is not a long term piece) which would then increases the chances of Sabonis asking out? Is your vision to move off both LaVine and Sabonis (that’s fine if it is)?

I assume that BOS would give us a pick because of conversations I’ve had about this very trade framework with BOS fans so yeah I don’t think it’s as unfathomable as you make it out to be.

I think you’re misunderstanding me yet again on building a team around Holiday, LaVine, and Sabonis. I’m not building a team around them. I’ve been very clear on my reasons for bringing Holiday aboard (we get a pick, he helps us establish the culture we want, he’s a great mentor for Ellis/Carter) and I’ve been very clear on my stance on LaVine (use him as a big expiring in a trade the following offseason for an upgrade, extend him for a much cheaper contract, let him expire and use the cap on another significant piece).

Marshall’s length and 230+ lb frame doesn’t help going against bigger/longer players? I’m not sure how you’ve arrive at that conclusion. I’d much rather have Marshall bodying those guys than DeRozan. We can at least find some middle ground on that point. Fair?

 

[twslam07]

The Kings have enough middling draft assets to move forward with haha. On paper he'd be a solid add, but that contract is not worth it. If the evidence right now didn't have the Kings being so in the middle and closer to out maybe they take the chance but this would be another example of gambling with no real reason to other than he fits. At this point I think even giving out a MLE sized deal this summer would be a huge mistake potentially. If they want to run it back? Run it back. Don't run it back with more anchors attached. This is the exact opposite of when Monte ran it back. Clearly that team had holes and we see how running it back hurt. Now, they have no evidence from which to work from to do anything other than run it back. They just changed out half the dang roster for fit, no more contractual landmines. Hold the position and if this team is a Jrue Holiday away they'll know it shortly after the season has started.

The team is not a Jrue Holiday away from being a contender. Nobody is saying that. And no, I’m not going to turn away a 1st round draft pick in a draft where we have no 1st round draft picks.

And just so we’re all clear here, I think a good majority of us agree that we should be rebuilding at this point. I could easily make every single one of my posts with that preferred vision in mind but it would be equivalent to me banging my head against a wall. The ideas and trades I come up with are now under the prerequisite that Vivek wants us to make the playoffs. With that in mind, I don’t think “running it back” is a realistic option for this organization (even if it might be the right thing to do).