Happy Fourth of July!
For our American readers, we hope you get to enjoy a nice holiday weekend, have a barbeque, go camping, set off some small explosives (where allowed), or enjoy whatever other way you spend this time. We want everyone to be safe, don’t drink and drive. Also, I suppose I should I also say that it’s a bad idea to drink and then play with explosives.
For our readers outside the U.S., we’ll be back in full swing on Tuesday.
“Back in full swing on Tuesday”. So Kangz like. Just not putting in the work. Have a good 4th everyone!
Happy 4th everyone! Enjoy the time off!
Be safe out there!
This day can be ruff for some.
I feel bad for all the pets tonight.
meow too.
If you were my pet, I’d give you a cheezburger.
It was bad for pets last night!!
Down with the royals–happy Independence Day!
Yeah, take THAT! readers outside the U.S.! 😛
USA USA USA USA
Suns and Bucks in the Finals, who would’ve thunk it, especially the Suns.
Perhaps there’s hope yet for the Kangz.
An anniversary truly worth celebrating:
Centennial celebration!
Eh, Happy 4th y’all. If you’re into that sorta thing. I’m into baseball, so I have that going for me which is nice.
Who’s into independence day….weirdos I suppose
Happy 4th everyone
Happy Independence Day!
Buddy/Barnes/pick#9 For:
Wiggins/Wiseman/pick#7
No thanks. But out of curiosity, who are you targeting at 7 that you don’t think will be there at 9?
Moses Moody. And I don’t see who else in the 5-10 range really moves the needle for us. If he’s gone I would consider #9 for #16 & #18. Do you think the Warriors would do it? It would save Sac a couple mil this year (help sign Holmes?) and more down the road. It makes the Kings younger, more athletics and adds length, which I think would help them be better defensively.
What about Buddy/Barnes and #9 for Wiggins, #7 and #14?
I know of 2 players who will be there at 7, but not at 9.
Happy belated 4th y’all. Enjoy the time off.
For all you hungover Americans and for the international readers waiting for Tuesday, here’s an interesting read:
Will the Hawks Become the New Model for NBA Rebuilds? – The Ringer
Several Kings fans still trying to rationalize losing Bogi was smart !ð¤£ðð
Just wait until Holmes walks for nothing this offseason.
I’m not sure what McNair could do to remedy the negative opinion I will have of him if he lets both Bogi and Holmes walk for nothing in less than a year.
He’d have to pull a pretty big rabbit out his hat to make me forget that.
I’m curious, what is it that Monte should have pulled for Holmes at the deadline? (Assuming that’s the notion here)
The supposed interested teams were Hornets and Raptors. Lamelo broke hand right before deadline, likely reducing Hornets desire and Raptors traded Powell signaling their own tanking, so why would they want him?
What asset do we think the Kings missed out on here for 30 games of a Richaun Holmes rental? I can’t phathom it’s a first round pick…don’t gain any cap relief for 21-22 by trading him. What did Monte miss out on…another second round pick?
I’d rather have the Kings chase for the 9/10 spot for 30 games w/Holmes than gain another second round pick. Plus you keep his early bird rights and can give that offer of 4 for 47 if his market doesn’t develop or the Kings don’t clear any additional space.
I mean if the Kings missed on a first rounder or say Miles Bridges, Malik Monk (or comparable interesting young player), I get the complaint. I just find it unlikely those were on the table for Monte.
I know some wanted Holmes gone (Barnes too), just for tanking purposes this year, but I doubt Kings ever could have got below about 6/7 pick without just sitting Fox the second half of year.
I mean it sucks if he walks for nothing, but short of trading him prior to last season, I’m not sure what was to be done here.
Water and bridge.
Its July and weeks before the draft/free agency on a basketball message board…what else would you like to discuss?
If you intend to let him walk in the summer then you trade him for pennies on the dollar, simple as that. Get a return.
Fun fact, if the Kings had traded Holmes, they could theoretically offer him more in free agency this summer. Now, they are capped at 4 for $47M.
Now, if Monte can get him to take their offer, great! That being said, I think someone will offer holmes more that $12M per year. So again, if he walks for nothing, that is gross mismanagement of not one, but two sought after assets.
Well if they know they are going to let him walk and have no intention to resign then of course. Pennies it is…but Monte is probably not operating in an absolute known universe. What if there is a 25% chance you can get him for the 4-47? It’s possible he’s already expressed interest to that…Maybe Monte said he would try to clear additional space and knows he can move Marvin if needed and Holmes presents a better offer than that. Who knows…but I think even if the odds are less than 50% you get him, that edge of him staying on the team the second half of year and early bird rights is worth not getting the minor asset.
Also, how can they offer him more if they had traded him? Wouldn’t they still have the same amount of space since he is unrestricted? Or is some cap hold kind of thing? Just wondering.
I guess my concern is timing. Sure, they could potentially move Marvin or others to create space, but that would have to happen before free agency otherwise they don’t have the room.
When it comes down to you percentages idea, the Kings would need a lot of chance to happen their way. In order, they would need Holmes to want to return, move other contracts without taking other money back, the strike first in free agency.
To you question if they traded him, they would be bound by his contract status in the room exception if they retained him. If he were traded, he’d be a free and clear UFA and they’d have the right to pay him whatever they could into a possible created space.
To you point that if there was a 25% chance of keeping him on his bird rights deal at 4 at $47, they you don’t take that chance. IMO, Monte needs to be smarter than that. Sac is not a free agent destination. It just might be the worst market and destination for anyone right now.
Banking on 25% is like continually finishing in the mid-lottery and hoping to land the #1 pick to solve your problems… oh wait…
Thanks for clearing up the room exception. Good info.
Yeah I don’t know if it’s banking on keeping him at the percentage chance, but considering it an option and vs the cost of a minor asset. Maybe it’s better than 25% chance? Looking at all recent free agent center signings/extensions, 4-47 doesn’t seem out of line to me…I tried to choose players that I thought were in the realm of Holmes (little better, little worse) not total stars or duds.
Probably Better
Capela 5-90 mill
Sabonis 4-77 (Ext)
Turner 4-72 (Ext)
Valanciunas 3-45
C Wood 3-41
Sameish Tier
Holmes – ?
B Lopez 4-52
Ibaka 2-19
Zubac 4-28
M Plumblee 3-25
Harrell 2-19
Probably Worse, but not Bums
T Thompson 2-19
Favors 3-30
Poetl 3-27
Kanter 2-10
R Lopez 1-7
Noel 1-5
Len 1-2
He’s almost 28, so not likely to get tons better. Maybe a bit with outside shooting. Not like a rookie extension with Turner where a team is banking on improvement from a 23 year old and probably drives up cost a bit.
I don’t see him as demonstrably better than B Lopez, Harell, Zubac etc…so maybe Monte doesn’t think he is going to get an offer above those type of contracts. Maybe he is equating that % chance he can get him for Early Bird vs the value of said minor asset gotten at deadline?
Guess in a month we will know : )
I think you take what you can get for Holmes at the deadline. If he’s too expensive in free agency, that’s fine. He’s a nice player but not irreplaceable.
I think that’s a fair take about replaceability, I guess my question is would you trade him for whatever asset you could get at deadline and then try to resign in free agency at a fair deal? Or just cut ties altogether?
I guess my thought is if you trade him, then you are likely ending the experiment altogether and you don’t get to find out if he is too expensive in free agency. Seems unlikely he comes back and resigns after trading. Not impossible, but less likely than a resign I would say.
Every player is replaceable the question is who and are they better ! My guess is Holmes will be lost for nothing and replaced by a worse player ! Kangz way and some saying it was too much to pay !
Yeah of course. I’m not even advocating not trying to resign Holmes. Just not going to be up in arms and preemptively being pissed at Monte over something that hasn’t happened yet.
I don’t see a minor asset doing much of anything. But that’s me. A 2nd rd pick isn’t worth much and the Kings have those. They even traded them away.
I don’t really see any concept of actual value being put out there, just the idea that there should be. Bjelica’s option was easily the most questionable decision Monte McNair made IMO, and that was just picking up his option. And perhaps there were other factors there we aren’t aware of.
But to the topic at hand: It seems that you, and others, want to see the Kings behaving in a way that respected franchises do. More than you care what the results of those actions ended up becoming. Except you would have likely slammed McNair for not getting enough in return, too.
But I’m not worried if Holmes walks in FA. I’m concerned they’ll overpay for no especially good reason other than kowtowing to pressure from the fanbase. 4/53 is the most I’d pay for Holmes. Which isn’t that much more than the EBR’s the Kings can pay now (or based on what we presume the average salary to be).
My issue is twofold: How do you get reasonable value in return when Holmes salary was so low with so little time left on the contract? And how does a minor asset improve the Kings ability to win more than potentially resigning Holmes at a fair value contract?
Answer me those things and I’m inclined to agree that not trading Holmes was a mistake. Until then, it mostly seems like you’re trying to shoehorn Monte NcNair into the shadows of Vlade Divac and Pete D’Alessandro despite no evidence. Par for the course for you, really. But until you can show your work, which you can’t, you just want your cake and eat it too. Same as it ever was.
I don’t see the fact that Holmes stayed on the roster past the trade deadline as any big deal. And I’m not anti-McNair. That’s a lazy assumption on your part.
For me, the bigger issue I have than the lack of return (such as it could have been) is the reasoning – if McNair took his guys off the market so he could chase the play-in game, he’s either unqualified for his job, or his sphincter smells suspiciously of Vivek’s hand and wrist.
No, I didn’t claim that. Wasn’t intending to, either. But you said this:
Then in this comment you said this:
Evidence please.
Then right after that you said this:
This type of comment doesn’t scream the idea you think McNair is competent. Which is fine if you aren’t a fan of the decisions so far. That’s your right to disagree. This summer will go a long way to determining that for me, we’ll see how it goes.
Ah yes, here we agree! Reasoning matters!
I would like reasoning as to how trading Holmes would be beneficial. Like say the players and/or assets you would be getting in return? Surely this couldn’t be that hard for someone who has been commenting on these types of websites for 15 years.
But I know better than to expect anything. You haven’t offered anything other than your typical hyperbole regarding this topic yet, I won’t be holding my breathe waiting for a well reasoned argument why trading Holmes really makes sense now.
Same as it ever was.
You seem really worked up about a short throwaway comment. But I’m the one with the predetermined, inflexible position (and why don’t we have a sarcasm font yet?)
I did use the word “if”, I didn’t state it was fact. There were rumblings around the local media that he took Barnes off the market to chase the play-in, and that could have been truth or maybe it was convenient spin to cover up his inability to close a deal. No clue.
I’m not worked up at all. I’m bored at work with literally nothing better to do. Doesn’t hurt me any to waste a few minutes on replying to you. It either produces an interesting conversation, or doesn’t.
The play in game is a red herring. It’s why I’m not mentioning it. My question is what could the Kings have gotten in trade for Holmes and Barnes? And how does that compare to keeping them? This question seems to be the elephant in the room but one that noone can answer at the same time. Which makes evaluation hard.
Same as it ever was.
Are you asking me to tell you the entire market for Holmes and Barnes at the deadline?
Of course evaluation is hard, since we’re trying to read the tea leaves.
If you’re going to be critical of McNair for non moves, yes, I think it’s a reasonable way to evaluate someone in his position.
Badge Legend