What to do with Bagley?

What should we do with Bagley?

  • Give him big development minutes to best guide our course this summer

  • Play him in the hopes somebody will trade *something* for him

  • Give him minor rotation minutes, let him walk this summer

  • Bench him entirely, let him walk this summer

  • Just cut him now


Results are only viewable after voting.
#31
I was stepping on the Buddy thread (and I need to do better at not doing that, being a mod and all) so I'm going to move the "offending" material to its own thread...

I'm one of the few proponents of my unpopular position: the player we should be starting is Bagley. Not because Bagley is certain to make us better. But because we have, what, 64 games left to develop Bagley before we have to make a decision on his future with the team, and we need to get as much info on that situation as we can. I know most people here are convinced he's a bust, but his first three years in the league he has dealt with multiple injuries, and as best as we can tell, a coach who didn't like him and didn't care to develop him. He wasn't a consensus top-5 guy in his draft because he didn't have the talent and athleticism to succeed in the NBA - clearly he did. He hasn't REALIZED that talent, and he may not ever do so. But he's still only 22, and he's a metaphorical lottery scratcher. We've already scratched off a few of the fields, and nothing promising so far, but there are several left. And look, it's clear nobody is going to pay us even the dollar this would have cost at the store for a half-used scratcher. So we have to ask ourselves: do we scratch off the rest, or do we just toss it in the garbage? The answer is obvious. Scratch it off. See what you get.

If he starts consistently showing the promise we've been teased with, then great! We could have a young player that could help us get to the playoffs, maybe we'll be able to squint and see all-star potential, we give him the QO to make him an RFA and go from there. And if not, it's just a more effective tank to play him big minutes. Kind of a win-win, if you ask me.

But I'll likely just be screaming into the void about this and watch Bagley get < 12 minutes a game the rest of the way and not have any plays run for him, and then when we let him walk we'll get to be in the fun position of hoping he fails (because if we dump him and he blows up elsewhere, holy anti-Kings media sentiment fodder, Batman!)
I hate even talking about Bagley. He's just one more reminder of what could have been. But my approach to the situation is either play him or trade him. Letting him rot on the bench accomplishes nothing. I get that McNair would like to get back as much on the dollar as possible, so he doesn't just want to give him away. But its a sad state of affairs when you have to devalue the player so you can devalue his cap value so he becomes more tradable.

According to Amick there are teams that are interested in Bagley, but not at 11 mil a year. So the Kings are sort of in a catch 22 situation. Don't play him and he becomes more tradable. Play him and he's harder to trade. However, what if you play him and he suddenly has the lights go on and has a break out year? Hey, I can dream, can't I?
 
#32
I've already said that I'd start Marvin if only because Mo Harkless is slightly under 23% from three and averaging less than 5 rebounds per 36 minutes.

His defense is significantly better than Bagley's but considering how bad defensively Fox and Hield are I don't see how they can get a pass but Marvin can't.

Bagley would address the Kings rebounding woes, has shown in the past the ability to space the floor at least as well as Harkless, if not better, is a threat in transition (McNair wants more uptempo basketball, right?) and is probably the best iso scorer on the team other than Fox.

If he plays well then he's a potential trade asset or (probably most unlikely at this point) a candidate to be re-signed. If not, what has really been lost?

Why is this team even playing to win at this point? Can anyone really squint hard enough to envision this roster with minor tweaks being good enough to consistently make the playoffs? Barnes is a FA after next year. Buddy wants out. Fox has regressed. Mitchell, Haliburton and Holmes look like good complimentary players but this team needs a true star player. Someone that makes Fox (who hopefully finds his game again) option B.

At least trading off pieces and rebuilding would be a strategy. This current tact of treading water and hoping for things to break just right for the 10th seed is exactly why the Kings have been so terrible for so long. And why we'll likely see teams like OKC and Houston bounce back and be good again while we're still frustrated and watching subpar basketball.
I don't think rebuilding with draft picks is any more likely to work now than it has (not) over the last 15 years. Fox, Barnes, Holmes etc. are not perfect but they're the closest we've been to fielding a respectable team that plays like a team since Mike Malone's short tenure (when we had Collison, Rudy, Omri, and DeMarcus). Fox would be better as a second option but how are we going to get a true #1 option? We would need to draft one and we have drafted one (Cousins) and then wasted him for six and a half seasons because we blew all of our subsequent draft picks while he was here.

I'd rather we work with what we have and try to fill holes with specific players rather than shopping for bargains or stockpiling ill-fitting talent. For instance, we need an interior defensive presence and we need another floor spacer. Indiana has been shopping Myles Turner as recently as this past off-season to get out of his $18 million dollar contract. Tell me they wouldn't jump at the chance to have Richaun Holmes at $12 million a year instead. Is that a lateral move for us? Maybe. But Holmes and Turner bring very different skill sets and having Turner at the C position would allow us to bring in a defensive specialist non-shooter like Ben Simmons without seriously compromising our offense. A Simmons deal may not be realistic but it's not like a non-shooting defensive specialist wing is going to be hard to find or afford with the current focus on shooting league-wide.

One of the recent articles about the coaching change said that the front office's goal this season was to improve the defense to top 15 in the league. We're not going to improve from bottom 5 to top 15 without significant personnel changes. Mitchell was a good start but he's one player. We still need a shot blocker (I have no idea why we made no attempt to keep Whiteside) and we need a full-size wing who can close out on shooters without fouling. These should not be difficult pieces to obtain. Guys fitting that description are available as free agents right now.
 
Last edited:
#33
[/QUOTE[/QUOTE]
I don't think rebuilding with draft picks is any more likely to work now than it is over the last 15 years. Fox, Barnes, Holmes etc. are not perfect but they're the closest we've been to fielding a respectable team that plays like a team since Mike Malone's short tenure (when we had Collison, Rudy, Omri, and DeMarcus). Fox would be better as a second option but how are we going to get a true #1 option? We would need to draft one and we have drafted one (Cousins) and then wasted him for six and a half seasons because we blew all of our subsequent draft picks while he was here.

I'd rather we work with what we have and try to fill holes with specific players rather than shopping for bargains or stockpiling ill-fitting talent. For instance, we need an interior defensive presence and we need another floor spacer. Indiana has been shopping Myles Turner as recently as this past off-season to get out of his $18 million dollar contract. Tell me they wouldn't jump at the chance to have Richaun Holmes at $12 million a year instead. Is that a lateral move for us? Maybe. But Holmes and Turner bring very different skill sets and having Turner at the C position would allow us to bring in a defensive specialist non-shooter like Ben Simmons without seriously compromising our offense. A Simmons deal may not be realistic but it's not like a non-shooting defensive specialist wing is going to be hard to find or afford with the current focus on shooting league-wide.

One of the recent articles about the coaching change said that the front office's goal this season was to improve the defense to top 15 in the league. We're not going to improve from bottom 5 to top 15 without significant personnel changes. Mitchell was a good start but he's one player. We still need a shot blocker (I have no idea why we made no attempt to keep Whiteside) and we need a full-size wing who can close out on shooters without fouling. These should not be difficult pieces to obtain. Guys fitting that description are available as free agents right now.
Really like who?
 
#34
I hate even talking about Bagley. He's just one more reminder of what could have been. But my approach to the situation is either play him or trade him. Letting him rot on the bench accomplishes nothing. I get that McNair would like to get back as much on the dollar as possible, so he doesn't just want to give him away. But its a sad state of affairs when you have to devalue the player so you can devalue his cap value so he becomes more tradable.

According to Amick there are teams that are interested in Bagley, but not at 11 mil a year. So the Kings are sort of in a catch 22 situation. Don't play him and he becomes more tradable. Play him and he's harder to trade. However, what if you play him and he suddenly has the lights go on and has a break out year? Hey, I can dream, can't I?
I agree with Bajaden here. I am for playing Bagley more and getting him more time to develop in the next 60 some games. The whole situation with Bagley and the organization was already getting close to the Sixers and Ben Simmons, whichever side you're on with that, it just looks really really bad on Morey, Doc, and the Sixers organization. And IMO, the absolute worst way you can deal with a free agent in any realm not only sports.

Funny thing is, between the fans who like him/want him to play more to see if he can prove himself, and the fans who want to rid of him, we are actually much more alike than we are different. Our goals actually align. If you want to see what Bagley's worth, you'd let him play more; alternatively, if you want to rid of him, you'd let him play more so his value will be defined, one way or another. Nothing worse than letting him rot on the bench, you are taking the emotional approach in a business setting. Even if he comes out and exposes his weakness, at least he is in game shape. I absolutely disagree with sitting a prospect (whether you like him or not, you can't disagree that a 22-year-old, 6'11" number 2 overall draft who at times shown he's capable at certain things is still a prospect to the league).
 
#35
Really like who?
Shot-blockers:

Bismack Biyombo
Jordan Bell
John Henson

Defensive wing non-shooters:

Al-Farouq Aminu
Rondae Hollis-Jefferson
Stanley Johnson
Iman Shumpert

Are they great options? No. There's a reason they're available. Every one of these guys would help us defensively though. As of right now we are currently ranked 14th in offensive rating as a team and 25th in defensive rating. There's a rather simple formula for making the playoffs: score more points per game (on average) than you give up (on average). It would be very hard not to make the top 10 teams in the conference if we're able to do that. The problem is obvious to everyone and there are (potential) solutions available. Why not audition every single one of these guys until you find one who will stick in the rotation?
 
#36
Shot-blockers:

Bismack Biyombo
Jordan Bell
John Henson

Defensive wing non-shooters:

Al-Farouq Aminu
Rondae Hollis-Jefferson
Stanley Johnson
Iman Shumpert
Hey! It's NBA champion and the winner of Dancing with the Stars, Iman Shumpert to you. :p

Joking aside, Rondae Hollis-Jefferson is still a free agent? Whatever happened to him? I thought he was coming up back when he was with the Nets with his speed and defense?
 
#37
I was stepping on the Buddy thread (and I need to do better at not doing that, being a mod and all) so I'm going to move the "offending" material to its own thread...

I'm one of the few proponents of my unpopular position: the player we should be starting is Bagley. Not because Bagley is certain to make us better. But because we have, what, 64 games left to develop Bagley before we have to make a decision on his future with the team, and we need to get as much info on that situation as we can. I know most people here are convinced he's a bust, but his first three years in the league he has dealt with multiple injuries, and as best as we can tell, a coach who didn't like him and didn't care to develop him. He wasn't a consensus top-5 guy in his draft because he didn't have the talent and athleticism to succeed in the NBA - clearly he did. He hasn't REALIZED that talent, and he may not ever do so. But he's still only 22, and he's a metaphorical lottery scratcher. We've already scratched off a few of the fields, and nothing promising so far, but there are several left. And look, it's clear nobody is going to pay us even the dollar this would have cost at the store for a half-used scratcher. So we have to ask ourselves: do we scratch off the rest, or do we just toss it in the garbage? The answer is obvious. Scratch it off. See what you get.

If he starts consistently showing the promise we've been teased with, then great! We could have a young player that could help us get to the playoffs, maybe we'll be able to squint and see all-star potential, we give him the QO to make him an RFA and go from there. And if not, it's just a more effective tank to play him big minutes. Kind of a win-win, if you ask me.

But I'll likely just be screaming into the void about this and watch Bagley get < 12 minutes a game the rest of the way and not have any plays run for him, and then when we let him walk we'll get to be in the fun position of hoping he fails (because if we dump him and he blows up elsewhere, holy anti-Kings media sentiment fodder, Batman!)
I actually still believe there is potential. After his rookie year, I had picked him to be our future star above Fox, since while Luka clearly showed that he should have been picked first, Bagley wasn't a dud.

That was clearly too optimistic, but I still believe that a properly motivated Bagley belongs in the league, even as a good player. Teams need to maximize their assets, and we can't afford to lose him for nothing.

My bigger issue with starting him is that it pushes Barnes to 3. I don't watch the games so this thought is purely second hand, but based on some comments (backed by stats), he's not a good fit there. When I was advocating starting Metu, I was hoping he will play the 3, but that's not what Luke tried. With Bagley, that option is not possible, so not sure if he will fit in the starting lineup.

It will also mean reduced minutes overall for our guards. While it will give us more length, rebounding, and traditional look, for all their warts, our guards have been better players than Bagley, so them losing time might also be a net loss. It might reduce some load from Barnes though.
 
#38
Hey! It's NBA champion and the winner of Dancing with the Stars, Iman Shumpert to you. :p

Joking aside, Rondae Hollis-Jefferson is still a free agent? Whatever happened to him? I thought he was coming up back when he was with the Nets with his speed and defense?
I think the huge influx of wings in the last draft and the guaranteed roster spots that come with them is what washed him out, for now anyway. And of course most teams are looking for 3 and D wings and the 3 part of that combo is typically the more important part.

I didn't mean to sidetrack the thread. I think Marvin should be starting regardless but if the issue with playing him is his defensive shortcomings, why not have him focus on the rebounding part where he does have a track record of success and bring in someone else to fill other needs? We need rebounding. We also need shot blocking and better perimeter defenders. So the team has some problems, obviously. I don't think throwing in the towel and tanking yet another season is the only option available to us. We could also work the problem and see where that gets us.
 
#39
Shot-blockers:

Bismack Biyombo
Jordan Bell
John Henson

Defensive wing non-shooters:

Al-Farouq Aminu
Rondae Hollis-Jefferson
Stanley Johnson
Iman Shumpert

Are they great options? No. There's a reason they're available. Every one of these guys would help us defensively though. As of right now we are currently ranked 14th in offensive rating as a team and 25th in defensive rating. There's a rather simple formula for making the playoffs: score more points per game (on average) than you give up (on average). It would be very hard not to make the top 10 teams in the conference if we're able to do that. The problem is obvious to everyone and there are (potential) solutions available. Why not audition every single one of these guys until you find one who will stick in the rotation?
EB7ECF84-B598-496D-B909-C389EE9E05C8.jpeg
None of those guys will get us more wins and I’m not even looking for more wins. Tankathon needs to continue. We literally missed out on Barnes or Wagner for winning meaningless games
 
#41
Shot-blockers:

Bismack Biyombo
Jordan Bell
John Henson

Defensive wing non-shooters:

Al-Farouq Aminu
Rondae Hollis-Jefferson
Stanley Johnson
Iman Shumpert

Are they great options? No. There's a reason they're available. Every one of these guys would help us defensively though. As of right now we are currently ranked 14th in offensive rating as a team and 25th in defensive rating. There's a rather simple formula for making the playoffs: score more points per game (on average) than you give up (on average). It would be very hard not to make the top 10 teams in the conference if we're able to do that. The problem is obvious to everyone and there are (potential) solutions available. Why not audition every single one of these guys until you find one who will stick in the rotation?
Just no bro. One of those guys just won dancing with the Stars. That's how trash that list is. And no it's not going to help us long term or short. I liked what coach said. We gonna light some fires!
 
#42
View attachment 10753
None of those guys will get us more wins and I’m not even looking for more wins. Tankathon needs to continue. We literally missed out on Barnes or Wagner for winning meaningless games
I guess I just look at it differently. I don't expect individual players to add wins. We're scoring 108.2 points per game and giving up 110.6 points per game. If some combination of players will help us give up 2.4 less points per game while still scoring the same 108.2, that gets us into the playoffs.
 
#44
Bagley played against G leaguers last night. Who the hell cares that he got 5 rebounds against them? Those are empty stats. He had no impact on game whatsoever. He played with no force whatsoever. If he played against somebody like Tobias Harris, Harris would have him doing menial chores for him before the end of the game. Does Bagley ever set a screen without slipping it??? I've never seen any defender ever run into him because he always shies from contact. Have you ever seen a defender get "rocked" by a Bagley screen? Wussy, wussy, wussy. Personally, I'd get him out on the football field and have him slam into the sled twenty times to understand what contact is. Better yet, put him in some pads and go one on one with a linebacker. Now that would be entertaining.
I just need to say, that having seen you post for over a decade, you're well on track to sounding like the stereotypical old guy on his lawn yelling at the kids.
 

Warhawk

The cake is a lie.
Staff member
#46
Yet the poll currently shows that 50% of the people who have voted (who aren't me) agree with my position!
I voted for the second option, but not because I necessarily disagree with your point.

Quote from Bobby Marks Twitter:
"If Bagley does not start 41 games or plays 2000 minutes this season, his Qualifying Offer for next offseason will drop from $14.8M to $7.3M."

So whether Kings trade him at deadline or keep him, playing Bagley 30 min a game as a non-starter will maximize his value to the Kings
I agree with this. I think the more likely possibility is that he plays well enough to help get some kind of trade offer (w/o the starter QO). He'd seriously have to ball out to likely be considered to be brought back here at either QO amount, and if he can stay healthy that is a remote, but possible option. More likely he can help raise his trade value by playing and staying healthy. And I'm fine with that if that's what it comes to. I just don't think at this point he's got it in him to be able to stay on the floor and play both sides of the ball well enough to cause the Kings to extend the offer (after the injuries and everything his "team" has pulled so far).

So yes, play him, but not enough for the "starter/2000 minute" QO. See if he can work his value up enough for us to consider the lower QO or to see if he can be of value in a trade.

And if we start playing him some healthy minutes and he doesn't show enough? You can always cut them back later.
 
#47
I didn't vote in the poll since I don't entirely agree with any of the options, but the first one comes closest to what I think. I wouldn't call them development minutes at this point but I think we should play him because a healthy and engaged Bagley gives us a better chance to win then if he's rooted to the bench. He's got some significant flaws as a player but I think he's still a net positive, especially when we have such a strong need for better rebounding. I don't know that he has a future with this team or that his trade value can be improved right now with his contract expiring but I don't think benching him or cutting him is helping us accomplish anything. And if we put him in the rotation and give him significant minutes and he's still not able to stay healthy or help the team win, then at least we'll know that he was given a legit shot to prove himself and best of luck to him in figuring out his career somewhere else.
 
#50
Edit: Actually I'm not going to beat a dead horse anymore. All I'm gonna say is please just tank for the love of god and play Bagley big minutes. Play Bagley, either trade expensive vets or play them less and let young guys determine the win total. Hopefully you end up with a top 4 pick and some additional future assets
We both know that ain't gonna happen. Monte will make some moves to try and salvage the season. They'll finish in the same spot as always and wind up with the same draft pick as always. He'll wind up getting fired when they suck again next year and the next guy will come in and inherit the 10th pick in the draft and enough money to sign a couple of downward trending vets at the end of their careers to keep the carousel of insanity going.
 
#56
I don't think rebuilding with draft picks is any more likely to work now than it has (not) over the last 15 years. Fox, Barnes, Holmes etc. are not perfect but they're the closest we've been to fielding a respectable team that plays like a team since Mike Malone's short tenure (when we had Collison, Rudy, Omri, and DeMarcus). Fox would be better as a second option but how are we going to get a true #1 option? We would need to draft one and we have drafted one (Cousins) and then wasted him for six and a half seasons because we blew all of our subsequent draft picks while he was here.

I'd rather we work with what we have and try to fill holes with specific players rather than shopping for bargains or stockpiling ill-fitting talent. For instance, we need an interior defensive presence and we need another floor spacer. Indiana has been shopping Myles Turner as recently as this past off-season to get out of his $18 million dollar contract. Tell me they wouldn't jump at the chance to have Richaun Holmes at $12 million a year instead. Is that a lateral move for us? Maybe. But Holmes and Turner bring very different skill sets and having Turner at the C position would allow us to bring in a defensive specialist non-shooter like Ben Simmons without seriously compromising our offense. A Simmons deal may not be realistic but it's not like a non-shooting defensive specialist wing is going to be hard to find or afford with the current focus on shooting league-wide.

One of the recent articles about the coaching change said that the front office's goal this season was to improve the defense to top 15 in the league. We're not going to improve from bottom 5 to top 15 without significant personnel changes. Mitchell was a good start but he's one player. We still need a shot blocker (I have no idea why we made no attempt to keep Whiteside) and we need a full-size wing who can close out on shooters without fouling. These should not be difficult pieces to obtain. Guys fitting that description are available as free agents right now.
Rebuilding with draft picks is pretty much the only way a small market team has a chance. The problems for the Kings are that (1) they've blown far too many picks and other than Bagley (another blown pick) they haven't been bad enough to have any other top 3 picks despite being awful for over a decade and a half.

If the Kings could trade Fox for Simmons and Holmes for Turner I'd be on board with it. You'd need more team focus on rebounding but

C Turner
PF Simmons
SF Barnes
SG Hali
PG Mitchell

is a strong defensive team with enough shooting to make up for Simmons. Swap Mitchell for Buddy if you need additional spacing/shooting.

But I don't know that either of those trades is realistic. Fox's value has dropped with his poor play to start this season and I'm not sure why Indiana would want a center that's a worse fit next to Sabonis, even if the price tag is cheaper.

Either way, this team needs to increase the overall talent level. Whether they can do that through trades and FA signings I don't know. They certainly should be able to do it through the draft (who wouldn't want Evan Mobley or Scottie Barnes right now - and the Kings were only a few more losses or lottery luck from having either) but that requires not just getting high picks, but making the right ones.
 
#57
Na, he’s totally going to explode just like Willie Cauley-Stein did, just you watch.
I wouldn't think Bagley on his baseline skill alone can sink to Cauley-Stein's level, with all the things he and his agent/dad entourage had said and done, everything just points to the fact that Bagley thinks he is better than how he's shown and that this team's staffs do not know how to utilize him. That tells me Bagley is still hungry to prove himself and just that alone will be a much different scenario than Willie "MetGALA-going" Cauley-Stein.
 

Mr. S£im Citrus

Doryphore of KingsFans.com
Staff member
#58
Bagley will go down as one of the worst draft picks in NBA history..
One of the worst draft picks in NBA history? If Bagley announced his retirement, tonight, he wouldn't even make the Top 5 worst #2 picks of the lottery era, let alone one of the worst draft picks in NBA history. He might not crack the Top 5 worst #2 picks of the 21st century.

EDIT - And, just in case you were unsure, the 1984 draft predates the lottery.
 
#59
Rebuilding with draft picks is pretty much the only way a small market team has a chance. The problems for the Kings are that (1) they've blown far too many picks and other than Bagley (another blown pick) they haven't been bad enough to have any other top 3 picks despite being awful for over a decade and a half.

If the Kings could trade Fox for Simmons and Holmes for Turner I'd be on board with it. You'd need more team focus on rebounding but

C Turner
PF Simmons
SF Barnes
SG Hali
PG Mitchell

is a strong defensive team with enough shooting to make up for Simmons. Swap Mitchell for Buddy if you need additional spacing/shooting.

But I don't know that either of those trades is realistic. Fox's value has dropped with his poor play to start this season and I'm not sure why Indiana would want a center that's a worse fit next to Sabonis, even if the price tag is cheaper.

Either way, this team needs to increase the overall talent level. Whether they can do that through trades and FA signings I don't know. They certainly should be able to do it through the draft (who wouldn't want Evan Mobley or Scottie Barnes right now - and the Kings were only a few more losses or lottery luck from having either) but that requires not just getting high picks, but making the right ones.
Think that ship has sailed. Philly isn't trading Simmons for fox.