Welcome back to Chainmail! A hearty thank you to everyone who submitted a question! This week, we welcome special guest, and Rajon Rondo superfan, Brenden Nunes to the mailbag!
From HongKongKingsFan:
If Bagley keep playing like this, would the Pistons trade Bey for this Bagley?
Tim: This may sound harsh, but at some point, we probably need to stop having the “if Marvin Bagley played like this every game” conversation, because he never plays like that every game. I’m not trying to throw the guy under the bus, but at some point potential has to become reality, and playing well once every three games just doesn’t do it for me. Let’s look at Bagley’s four games since returning from injury:
Lakers: 20 minutes, 11 points, 4 rebounds, 1 assist, 3 turnovers, 44% FG, 1/1 3P
Mavericks: 34 minutes, 23 points! 9 rebounds!, 3 assists! 2 turnovers, 63% FG!, 1/3 3P
Thunder: 31 minutes, 13 points, 7 rebounds, 1 assists, 2 turnovers, 33% FG, 1/5 3P
Pacers: 35 minutes, 31 points! 12 rebounds!, 0 assists, 1 turnover, 59% FG!, 0/1 3P
That feels about right for Bagley’s career. We often discuss him as a potential 20 and 10 guy, a feat that he’s accomplished just 12 times in three seasons of play. The Pistons wouldn’t trade Bey for Bagley, even if Bagley plays well for the next half-dozen games, because the league understands who Marvin is at this point in his career. He’s a gifted rebounder and offensive player who unfortunately struggles with availability and attention to detail on the floor. Marvin Bagley can still be a successful player in this league, and he’s shown some real improvement this year when’s he’s managed to find his way to the floor, but I don’t believe he’ll find that success in Sacramento, both due to his wishes and his in-game limitations.
Will: To answer your question specifically, yes, I think that if Bagley consistently dropped these kinds of offensive outputs over the course of, oh I don’t know, however many games till next year’s trade deadline, I think they probably trade for Bagley. I still have a certain level of confidence that he’s going to find his way to being a good-to-damn-good player in the league, I also don’t see that happening with Sacramento. If it does somehow happen to be with Sacramento, I don’t foresee he or his camp wanting to be here long term (or at least past a second contract).
Brenden: I think Tim is spot on with this one (for once). Bagley has had breakout games before where he looks like the player we all expected him to be coming out of Duke, the issue with his value revolves around consistency and, obviously, health.
Bagley will carry some value this offseason because he is barely 22 years old and a team focused on development could attempt to coach the Kangz out of him. I would be shocked if that value is enough for Detroit to even consider moving on from their most recent first round pick who has outperformed expectations in his rookie campaign. Bey appears a lock to be an NBA rotation player for a long time, with a high likelihood he does that at a starting caliber, while Marvin Bagley’s role in the association is still a major question.
From GregoryI:
What is the trade market going to be like for Buddy this summer?
Tim: Virtually non-existent. I don’t remember his exact phrasing, but in a podcast near the trade deadline, Sam Amick of The Athletic described Buddy’s market as dead, due to his level of play, lack of defense, and massive contract. I believe his exact phrasing was something like “expect Buddy to be in a Kings uniform for awhile”.
It’s likely that Sacramento could split Buddy’s deal into two smaller contracts from a couple of okay players, but I’m not sure how much that helps the Kings.
Will: I still have a bit of confidence that Buddy will have a trade market out there for GM’s and coaches that think they could rescue him from the career meatgrinder that is the Sacramento Kings, but I wouldn’t expect a ton of value in return for Chavano. There aren’t any Matisse Thybulle’s or even Tyrese Maxey’s coming through the door, but that doesn’t mean they couldn’t get a couple of underwhelming younger guys on bloated contracts looking for a fresh start or a protected first rounder or two. No major hauls, but something that you could shrug at and say, “oh alright that’s fine I guess.”
Right now, I think the best route for Monte McNair in the off-season is have a sit down with Buddy, explain to him that he’s getting 30 minutes next season as a 6MotY candidate. It’s the best way to rebuild his value, it’s the best way to utilize Buddy as a player in general and if the Kings can make a playoff push in the first half of next season with Buddy averaging twenty off the bench, that value is going to be restored rather quickly. If it doesn’t, the Kings have an overpriced bench scorer that they can try again next off-season with.
Brenden: It only takes one team to look at Hield’s situation and believe that he is being extremely misused in Sacramento’s system (which he probably is), and have enough faith and trust in their coaching staff to not allow that to be the case again. Buddy is still an elite shooter, no questions asked, averaging 39.3 percent from deep on 10.2 (!!) attempts per game this season. Yet, he is in the conversation for worst defender in the league that is not under six feet tall and still has 3-years $60.8-million remaining on his contract.
I doubt any non-desperate franchise is going to believe that deal is fair value for a player who would likely be played off the floor in any playoff series. Again, it would only take one team but I would be shocked if the Kings were able to get anything more than a very late first rounder or end of bench youth talent.
From Peja:
Since we do not know how the ping pong balls will fall, let’s exclude the draft for now. What would be your top 3 priorities of the off season if you are McNair?
Tim: Monte McNair needs to figure out what the hell the plan is for this roster at a very basic level. We didn’t shed salaries or tank this year, nor did we try to win. We stayed neutral and lost a bunch of games (but not enough games) with a bad coach and a below-average depth chart. Are the Kings going to run it back with small additions, are they going to focus on getting rid of bad money and getting a good draft pick next year, or are they going to try and push for wins with a big move?
Once that’s decided upon, the Richaun Holmes situation needs to be resolved, which will likely be impacted by the decision above. Personally, I think it would be foolish to pay him over his early bird rights possibility.
Finally, and probably most importantly, is the next coach needs to be hired, assuming we actually fire Walton at this point. This will be the decision that either leads to a long contract for Monte McNair or for the Kings to be seeking their fourth GM of Vivek’s ownership tenure.
Will: First and foremost is coaching. Awkwardly built rosters with little depth can still make the playoffs with the right coaching staff and right now I think we see that with a different coaching staff, with defense that was 25th in the league rather than worst all-time, this Kings squad, even with its fatal flaws, probably could have had a shot at the 8th seed. Now, that isn’t what I personally would have wanted for this thin ass squad, but if both of those 9 game losing streaks were each just 3-6 instead, the Kings would be the eighth seed in the Western Conference. Find a coach that can actually get these guys to take pride in themselves during bad stretches and that does a lot for the Kings.
Secondly, it’s the Richaun Holmes situation. Feels very much to me like someone is going to need to go in order for Richaun to stick around in a Kings uniform. McNair has gotten himself in a corner where he very well just might two assets go for nothing in subsequent years and that would be, well, pretty disastrous for any GM’s start in Sacramento. Now, will I blame him if Holmes gets 20 mil a year from the Hornets in the off-season? No, not really. I’ll harp a bit that he should have known the market better and traded him prior to the trade deadline but team’s make stupid big offers out of the blue every single year. If Holmes does leave, McNair is going to have to patch that hole QUICK, either through trade or free agency. Swinging for a John Collins or another big time starting center would be the only way to really deflect the vitriol coming from a fanbase who has seen every fan favorite in the prior 10 years leave and who wouldn’t be happy to see zero assets come back two years in a row.
Third, I mentioned this above, but Buddy needs to have a clearly defined role come next season and I don’t think “starting small forward” is really the answer in the long term. I mentioned above about my preference to have him moved to the bench as a super-sub, but that will take the new head coach and Monte being able to convince him that whether he wants to stay or move, that is the best move going forward for him.
Brenden: The clear and obvious most important move is finding a replacement for Luke Walton. Which means the Kings will actually need to go through a hiring process this time around and I personally would put an emphasis on player development when considering the candidates – I am a big advocate for Kenny Atkinson. If the Kings did not employ one of the worst coaches in the association, they likely would have been a play-in team this season or at least actually in the race.
Richaun Holmes is step number two. McNair would be reasonably questioned if he spent his first two offseasons letting starting level talent walk out the door in free agency with absolutely no return. If Richaun is willing to accept the four-year roughly $48-million early bird rights deal that the Kings can offer, then that solves that problem. That number feels more than reasonable to me, but it will only take one team to pry him away from this organization. Simultaneously, it would be a mistake to dump say Marvin Bagley for minimal return in order to clear space to offer Holmes upwards of $15-million annually.
Since I’m apparently not allowed to include the draft (even though it’s the second most important decision only behind the coaching change), I will go with how they use the MLE for the final decision. There needs to be a culture of accountability and toughness starting in Sacramento as soon as possible and the right personnel will certainly contribute to that. If they look towards wings with no character concerns with that MLE, it’s a win in my book.
From 1951:
Is Fox a superstar? (But seriously, this is a joke. What ever you do, DO NOT ANSWER THIS QUESTION!)
Tim: YOU PUT IT IN THE MAILBAG, SO WE’RE GOING TO ANSWER IT. I BLAME YOU, AND YOU ALONE, FOR THE IMMEDIAITE DEMISE OF THIS SITE AFTER WE PUBLISH THIS CHAINMAIL.
Okay, but for real, De’Aaron Fox isn’t a superstar…yet. Will he get there? I can’t confidently say yes, and I can’t confidently say no; he’s got a shot, that’s for sure. Here are the players 24-years or younger to average 25+ points and 7+ assists in the last 20 years: LeBron James, Derrick Rose, Luka Doncic, Trae Young, and De’Aaron Fox. That’s it. That’s the list. Fox and Young are also two of only four players in NBA history to put up those averages without appearing in an All-Star game in that season.
Now, those statistical comps don’t mean that Fox will become as good as pre-injury Rose or current Doncic, but his growth this season has been astronomical from an offensive perspective. Defensive intensity and overall consistency still need some work, but if Fox can keep growing at this rate, he has a shot to be the best Sacramento-era player of all time.
Will: This semantics conversation around star, superstar, megastar, All-Star is a fun one that really gets to some people when those click bait headlines show up like “Former NBA Star Builds Eco-Friendly Gelato Shop”… then you find out the player is like, Carlos Delfino. I think its pretty safe to say that if we’re writing a national headline about Fox, it would be appropriate to say that Fox is a budding superstar. He’s a star currently, certainly the main attraction in Sacramento and the guy most likely to get you highlights on SportsCenter. Toss whatever reductive wording you want in front of it to hedge what he currently is: young superstar, growing superstar, future superstar. He’s getting there, expected to get there just not their quite yet.
Brenden: Superstar is a very subjective term, but I fully believe that De’Aaron Fox can be the number one option on a playoff team. The jump he has taken this season in shooting comfort along with consistent clutch performances has fully convinced me as long as his free throw shooting reaches a level where the fanbase can feel comfortable with him at the line to close out games. I am confident that Fox will reach that point in the near future and be a viable number one option on a playoff team, which some people could consider a superstar, although I may just settle for star at the moment.
From jlandweh:
In the case that Luke Walton is fired-who would be on YOUR short list of Head Coaches? Why would these candidates be on your list? How would they facilitate the growth of Fox and Haliburton?
Tim: I’m not going to pretend to be an expert on head coaching candidates. I know that Jill Adge of BeHeard (and friend to the site) and Brett Huff (Canadian superhero) have both done a ton of research into possibilities, and they’re great follows on Twitter if you don’t already follow them.
That being said, as long as we A) fire Luke Walton and B) don’t hire a lame retread (Mark Jackson, Mike Brown, etc), I’ll be pretty satisfied. Vanterpool, Atkinson, Brett Brown, Unseld Jr., D’Antoni, and a host of other candidates would be cool with this long-necked galoof.
Will: I’m really glad Tim pointed out Jill and Brett’s work because they do a really good job and deserve more than our shoutouts. I’m also glad that Tim qualified his statement as “lame” retreads, because it sounds like more and more there’s going to be some damn good coaches getting canned this summer. Terry Stotts is a guy that could use a change of scenery who could do rather well here. I don’t see him taking the Kings to a championship but he would be a successful hire. Mike Budenholzer is obviously the same way. He gets clowned on a lot but he’s an incredible coach that’s been cursed with success, first in Atlanta coaching some amazing teams there and then in Milwaukee with Giannis. He’s never quite gotten over the hump but with the Kings he’d instantly be the best coach since Adelman, and it could be a fantastic fit with a few star players growing into their own, some intriguing vets and ZERO expectations for a championship. He wouldn’t have the pressure that comes with coaching a Giannis but wouldn’t be forced to rely on all five guys every night like he did with those amazing Hawks teams (yeah, that’s probably a hot take and not meant to be). That being said, I’m not sure he’d accept a job in Sacramento.
Atkinson is a fantastic choice, Vanterpool is someone we’ve cried for for a good amount of time. I’d rather have D’Antoni’s greatest disciple than D’Antoni just due to his age/shelf life as a coach. Monte McNair has to get this one right and Mike is probably just a bit too old. Other names to watch: Wes Unseld Jr. and Sam Cassell. This was a fantastic question and I might have to write an article on it as soon as the season is over.
Brenden: Kenny Atkinson, Becky Hammon, and maybe Terry Stotts if he in fact fired. Atkinson is my number one because he showed an ability to develop young talent during his time and Brooklyn and had that team playing with an intensity.
For Hammon what it comes down to is that if Popovich trusts her, then I absolutely trust her. Regarding Stotts, I think he has shown an ability to be consistently successful in Portland for a good stretch of time with the roster he’s had. If he is let go, I think it would be more for the sake of changing something rather than him doing a poor job over the years.
From Kingsguru21
Kings end up with the 8th pick in the draft. The Kings trade the pick, Buddy Hield and Marvin Bagley for Pascal Siakam. Who says no?
Tim: The Raptors. Siakam is certainly not who the Raptors hoped he would be, but I imagine another team with more available assets would be willing to offer more for his services. Buddy Hield is a negative asset when compared to his contract. Marvin Bagley is a neutral to negative asset when compared to his contract and injury history. The eighth pick in a solid draft is nice, but imagine what the Thunder or Pelicans could offer to immediately boost their rosters, alongside other teams with other, better assets. If the Kings want to get a difference-maker on draft night this year, they need to be willing to part with multiple first round picks.
Will: The Raptors. They’re the best worst team ever, having to play away from their home city all season and dealing with a myriad of problems that come with that. I think they know this was a punted season and are going to come back next season with renewed vigor. Now, that being said, NEXT off-season comes around and the Raptor are in the lotto again? There might be some interest in shaking things up. This trade is a little to light on assets and probably a year too soon.
Brenden: The Raptors are laughing at that offer and hanging up the phone. Buddy Hield is a negative asset on that contract that Toronto would have to believe that Nick Nurse could significantly increase his value with proper utilization. Marvin Bagley is going to be due for a payday in the near future and still holds very questionable value, the 8th overall pick would be the primary asset heading out. Teams hope that the 8th overall pick in a draft turns into Pascal Siakam.
From Rob Hessing:
Give me your Kings projected win totals for this season (end) under the following coaches:
Luke Walton
Dave Joerger
Michael Malone
Gregg Popovich
Tom Thibodeau
Monty Williams
Quin Snyder
Terry Stotts
Tim:
Luke Walton: 30
Dave Joerger: 28 (team would have quit on him)
Michael Malone: 36
Gregg Popovich: 35
Tom Thibodeau: 38
Monty Williams: 38
Quin Snyder: 39
Terry Stotts: 35
Will:
Walton: Like 31-ish now if things hold?
Joerger: Same as Walton, just better looking product.
Malone: First year Malone? 33. Same years as Walton? 40
Popovich: 38
Thibs: 24, this team would quit on him so damn quick.
Williams: 32
Snyder: 37
Stotts: 34
Brenden:
Brenden: Walton – 33-39
Joeger – 37-35
Malone – 40-32
Popovich – 41-31
Thibodeau – 38-34
Williams – 37-35
Snyder – 39-33
Stotts – 38-34
From Marty:
Your spouse is making you choose between two holiday parties and you must attend one. Each party is three hours long and will include group photos. Which one do you choose to attend?
a. Spouse’s office is full of GSW season ticket holders who all live and grew up in Sacramento. They are gathering at the bosses house to watch a 90 minute look back film about the GSW most recent runs, and GSW attire is mandatory.
b. Spouse’s boss is president of the Sacramento Area Lakers Fan Club, and he’s rented the paddlewheel in old sac for a three hour Lakers River cruise to throw down and celebrate the Lakers franchise. A Lakers booze cruise.
Tim: I’m going to the Warriors party. I want nothing to do with the Lakers, ever. Sorry, Sanjesh.
Will: A booze cruise with Lakers fans is literally a dream “fish in a barrel” situation. I can ruin a night for an entire boat’s worth of people AND drink on top of it? Sign me up for three hours of that fight.
Brenden: I mean, you never pick the option with the Lakers. I will just wear some old We Believe Warriors gear and enjoy watching a film about one of the best NBA teams of all that had some reported locker room turmoil.
Seems like a pretty easy choice, and if anyone picks the Lakers option then they deserve to be kicked off the site.
Boy are you guys going to be upset when Walton doesn’t loose his job this summer.
*boy are you guys ever happy about anything?
I’m happy every time the Kings make the playoffs!
« And the drought will go on and on «
A fair thing to do when evaluating Walton is to first ask the question where the current roster ranks relative to every other team and then compare performance to that ranking. I don’t think there are 5 rosters worse than the Kings right now. Also keep in mind going into the season, the over and under win total on the Kings was 28. Lastly, to me a coaching change only makes sense if you can bring in someone new and with some fresh ideas. Another coaching retread makes no sense. I saw Dana Altman, Mark Few and Lindsay Gottleib get proposed and those are the type of candidates I would like to see. The game is always evolving and someone new and innovative is all that makes sense to me.
While I hear this a lot and understand the urge to go there, I still need an explanation as to how you could justify keeping Walton for failing to exceed roster expectations when the team is performing worse than it did two years ago under Joerger when it had all the same (and actually worse over under win predictions) roster flaws.
How is that 39 win season not all the evidence you need to confirm that just replacing Walton with even a mediocre level NBA coach would improve the team’s performance?
For a guy with a 98 and 148 record Joerger sure gets a lot of pats on the back. I also remember this group wanting Joerger’s head a year earlier with the bogus analysis that the team plays too slow of course most not knowing when contributes to pace. We also need to remember what happened at the end of that 39 win season. Joerger was given Barnes with the team one game above 500, the so called 3 we needed (that’s another story) for basically nothing and the team went on to finish 4 games under 500. So maybe the buffoon Vlade thought he gave Joerger the final piece to get the job done and he failed. That’s certainly debatable.
I noticed you wouldn’t touch roster evaluation when performing your fire Walton analysis. Let’s also wait and see how the last 6 games go. If the Kings somehow win 5 of their remaining games and finish with 34 wins which extrapolates to 38 wins then they’ve exceeded expectations from every knowledgeable analyst out there. In fact they would exceed expectations by 20 percent. Lastly, I’ve given a fair analysis of Walton’s performance and have broken down the specific deficiencies on defense which I find troubling. I’m looking at guys failing to force players to the proper side, poor switching up top, guys hugging their man more than one pass away, help defense being out of position and arriving late or not at all, and several other things. Those failures have to fall on Walton in large part. Having said that, some of the criticism is outright ridiculous like blaming Buddy’s offensive performance on him. I’ll give you a specific example of how ridiculous some of the criticism is. Against, the Pelicans the Kings are playing catch-up and they intentionally foul Adams 2 times a less than 50 percent foul shooter. Absolutely the right and obvious thing to do, it’s not an opinion it’s a fact. When Adams defies statistics and makes all four free throws, the site goes bat shit crazy at Walton. I wonder what those same Monday morning people were saying prior to us fouling Adams. So that’s why I dismiss most of the noise because many criticizing don’t have a clue and that’s proof. They are just pack followers without a thought of their own. I went through this when I criticized the Hill and Demon signings and built up Jeremy Grant when he was a backup with OKC. Of course when I point that out, those who have been wrong so often start making the know it all accusations and a whole bunch of other excuses.
I can tell Grand Funk, BHE, want to be gm, Carl and a few others know the game and have provocative input that I don’t always agree with but can respect.
So in conclusion, I’m not on the Walton bandwagon but am happy to level set the criticism in a balanced way despite how many thumbs down the echo bloggers what to provide. It’s Bagley, my friend and teammate Kayte, and Walton the mob loves to beat up but I see very little analysis on why they feel the way they do. Bagley sucks is not analysis. As far as a mediocre coach being better than Walton, I really think your talking about a non existent marginal difference. We tried 9 different coaches and none of them succeeded including Joerger whose record was worse than most. Successful coaches have come in here and failed and coaches who have failed here have had subsequent success elsewhere. When the roster gets to a top 15 level and we are playing below 500 basketball I’ll jump on the fire the coach bandwagon but until then I’m not too interested. That’s not to say I’m going to have any angst if they do decide to fire Walton but it has to be someone new and fresh or it’s the same exercise we’ve performed 9 previous times.
I call Joerger a mediocre coach and this is your response? I agree with you about Bagley in multiple threads and this is your response to a specific question about the coach?
Okay then.
Is that all you got.
What do you think is happening here?
I’m sorry but this is a really lame response to a well thought out point of view. This kings herald member who is a fan of the team like you is passionate enough to write an interesting comment with unique observations and you dismiss it in a really flippant way. Time was put in to that response to you and your response is frankly, rude.
I’m not a fan of that,
I don’t know the full history you two seem to have going on but this is just how I read this response and I didn’t like it. I’m a huge fan of this site and I just don’t like seeing that stuff in here.
I think it might have something to do with the tone of the response.
Bagley’s game has been thoroughly analyzed. People are free to have their opinion. Most here are watching the damn games.
You ride an awfully high horse due to your college experience. I know you played college basketball because you’ve told us a million times.
Lost in A World of Being Right checking in this morning I see.
Technically that was yesterday Marty. LOL
Yeah, barring a new assault scandal, 25 game losing streak, or a team mutiny, Luke is likely here for the length of his contract. Which is ultimately an unfortunate and cringeworthy thought those who were hopeful we might get to see some good basketball sometime in the near future.
So you’re saying it’s about 50/50.
The Bagley solution is easy right now. It’s next year when it’s gets really difficult. You have a young guy with an impressive tool set that has underperformed. For now however it’s easy, you proceed with the premise that every player on the roster is tradeable for the right compensation. So entertain offers for Bagley and set a firm minimum compensation level you would accept. Continue to play the hell out of him this season and continue to gather data. Next season, have him earn his place on the roster and plan him accordingly. Continue gathering more data and then near the trade deadline reassess his trade value and entertain offers accordingly. If he’s still on the roster at the end of next season, hope you now have enough data to make an informed decision. Right now there’s no reason to make a hasty decision. I like what I’ve seen on and off this season but I’m not ready to give up on him or sign him to an extended contract. It’s wait and see and be patient.
Yeah, I am good keeping him next year, assuming no other team is willing to give up good value on return.
Stated another way, he is nowhere near untradeable but also still valuable enough to see more.
I’m fine keeping him next season too, but I think this current stretch for MBIII can be attributed more to the Jerry Reynolds saying of “someone has to lead every team in scoring and rebounds” than some major shift for Marvin.
I think there’s some truth to that, but there’s also truth to the fact that Marvin is a better basketball player generally than he was at the start of this season.
Meanwhile, some radio show hosts are adamant that games like last night are why the organization simply can’t afford to trade Bagley.
CD
KC said the other day he’s fine running this roster out again next year. That’s next-level Fear Change shit right there.
That is exactly what I’m afraid this current run will lead to…the classic “they were really hitting their stride at the end of the year, lets give it another season.”
BTW, I have just started listening to that show in the last couple weeks, really enjoying some legit Kings talk on local radio.
They do a good job of having a conversation versus all the zany morning show stuff on CD’s show. I also like that D-Lo and KC seem to enjoy providing a platform for the local “Kings Twitter” types as well. CD seems to kinda just like to make fun of everybody, then (begrudgingly) complement them, but never actually has them on his show. I’m sure he’d say it’s a ratings thing, but to me it’s more of a interview dynamics thing. CD just seems to do better with famous guests.
Their use of local talent is great too with Mo/Deuce, Marshall from CBS 13, Kyle Madson abt the Niners, etc.. Plus, I can’t help but feel that CD has the fear of pissing off the Kings always creeping up…1320 has none of that,
They’re great, I like them both very much. I have a TON of respect for Damien for sure.
Yeah, I don’t always agree but I really enjoy their show!
Yep. He gives Walton a pass due to the roster and blames the players. So, we should keep the coach cuz the roster sucks.
Then when evaluating the players individually:
Fox is a star.
Can’t lose Barnes.
can’t lose Holmes.
Cant give up on Bagley.
Hali is part of the core core.
Gotta keep Metu, Jones, Moe, Wright, and Davis.
We can’t change the roster save Buddy because they all have too much value.
so, I guess it’s all Buddy’s fault when blaming the roster? ð
Because I see a lot of this style analysis and the two opinions don’t add up too well!
Yeah, I often have a hard time reconciling the “we have to keep the perpetually sub-.500 band together” talk.
Q: Even if the team makes the play-in, and makes a little run in the playoffs, do you think that if a coach like Budenholzer, Stotts, or even Scotty Brooks becomes available, every effort should be made to land one?
I legit worry that Walton is going to be around next season, no matter what happens.
Maybe Vivek can do what he do: Ask Walton if he’s okay with Terry Stotts or whoever coming in to be coach, but Walton can stick around.
(Like when he told Vlade, I’m bringing in Joe Dumars but you can stick around)
https://nba.nbcsports.com/2020/08/20/report-joe-dumars-wont-be-kings-long-term-general-manager/
Why would Stotts (or whichever head coaching candidate) agree to that?
It would be The Hunger Games of assistant coaches: Stotts, Gentry, Brooks, Atkinson, Budenholzer.
I’d say no on Brooks.
I say no. If the Kings make the playoffs, what more would you have wanted from the team this season? Firing the second winningest coach in Sacramento history the year after finally taking the Kings back to the playoffs would be the most Kangz.
Making the playoffs would likely mean running the table then beating one or both of the Lakers and Warriors. If that somehow happens, Luke can stay.
See you’re willing to think for yourself and keep an open mind and see how things play out. That’s fair and logical.
“Yay, someone agrees with me!”
I need to be right. I mean I REALLY need to be right.
Just answering a hypothetical.
There is probably no playoffs and Walton should be fired.
Another name to add to the coaching list could be Steve Clifford.
If choose the Lakers cruise am I allowed to sink the boat?
Is the type of boat a clipper?
Do I get to party with this guy?
Oh man, that’s the dude from the GIF, isn’t it? Same necklace.
Sorry mate…. I had to log in five times to comment… Yes this is our boy… Vice president of civilian relation-ships.. He’s on deck. Like a shipmate of sorts. Go Clippers!
While equally insufferable, at least the Lakers party would be high on comedy value.
See for me the ability to hide or escape is a big factor. I think on the cruise I could find a quiet corner to chill by myself and alter my condition in a somewhat appropriate manner.
Since you answered the question, it begs the follow up:
Better superstar in Kings history: DeMarcus Cousins or De’Aaron Fox?
🙂
Both haven’t won anything. Cuz had 2 All Star Appearances. So right now, Cuz has the edge.
Mitch Richmond was better than both by a mile.
In Fact. Mitch Richmond was a 6 time All Star for the Kings. 6x.
And that’s why there are different words for “better” and “best.”
The Timeline is not good for this team. That’s why resigning Holmes makes Zero sense. Holmes will be 28 next year. Esp, since his game relies on athleticism. If some team want to pay him 15 mil, have at it. You could probably get Enes Kanter for half the price and Kanter is a much better rebounder.
2021-22 Season
Barnes: 29
Hield: 29
Wright: 29
Harkless: 28
If you pay more than 12 mil for Holmes, this team goes over the cap. With Zero playoff appearances.
Barnes and Hield are contracts difficult to move. Barnes value will not be any higher than it was this season. Hield has played better in some areas and worse in others.
Hali: 22
Fox:24
Davis:24
Bagley: 23
Bagley is difficult to move because of Injuries and inconsistency.
If everyone stays healthy the entire next season, I still don’t think this is a playoff team.
38-40 wins, yes. Playin, Probably.
Utah, Lakers, Clips, Denver, Dubs(Klay back and Minny’s pick), Suns, and Blazers all have better rosters.
That leaves 1 playoff spot and 2 playin spots for:
Minny, Sac, Spurs, Pels, Grizz, Hous, OKC, and Dallas
OKC and Houston will be bottom feeders for awhile.
I see Dallas falling out if they don’t get any help for Doncic
Minny: Should improve with another high pick, a full season of Russell, Edwards and KAT
Pels: Need more help for Zion
Spurs: Won’t be terrible. If they let DDR go, They can trade for a star.
Grizz: Will be a lower seed playoff team or a playin. Especially if Jackson and Morant take another step.
Sac: Hali will need to make a big jump. Fox will need to improve his 3’s, FT’s and start taking over against top flight competition. In this best case scenario, the Kings are no better than 7-8. But, more likely a playin team. This team as currently constructed would get smoked in a first round matchup and probably couldn’t win a playin series of 2 games. I just don’t see it.
Unless Mcnair has some magic trick to trade for a star… This team will remain in purgatory. Too mediocre for a high lottery pick. Too mediocre to be a real playoff threat.
Same as it ever was…
If we can find some ping pong magic, everything could change!
(not getting my hopes up, though)
The Kings are a couple of shrewd moves away along with a little luck from being a lower level playoff team. You can however say that with most of the bottom dwellers. I don’t necessary agree OKC will be a bottom dweller for a long time with their young talent and draft capital. Current managements performance should be benchmarked against many of the teams you mentioned. It wasn’t too long ago Sacramento was far ahead of Charlotte in terms of current roster, draft capital, and cap space and yet we now find ourselves looking up at that team. That’s a clear indication of underperformance by the front office. There are several other examples like that.
Vlade is the gag gift that keeps on giving.
Yeah, aside from a neat push shot and cool parents, not much else about Holmes excites me enough to lament not keeping him.
i think some teams will make an offer for Bagley. He’d be okay in a role off the bench scoring in the post. He’ll be playing for his second contract.
Fox isn’t a superstar, perhaps will be one day. Let him make an all star team and lead the team to the playoffs before putting the words superstar and Fox together.
To be real, I think Hali has more superstar potential at this time than Fox.
Neither will be a superstar because I don’t see either winning the NBA MVP or make an All-NBA team. Hali’s ceiling IMO is CJ McCollum- which is still pretty damn good but probably won’t make an All-Star team. I’m still giving Fox the edge to make an All-Star appearance because he’s shown he can put up numbers. I see him as Lillard-lite and Hali as a CJ type.
So by this standard, all star team and lead to playoffs…Zion Williamson NOT a superstar, Zach Lavine NOT a superstar and Karl-Anthony Towns and Bradley Beal barely qualify as the 1-2 play teams they got in, they arguably weren’t the driving force/best player on the team. Since they have become the clear number 1 option the last few years, their teams have stunk.
Tough qualifications, but if those are your superstar qualifications, so be it. It’s semantics arguing between star and superstar. All just a subjective label
Fox can’t do it by himself and with a garbage ownership that we have we will never reach the upper echelons of the NBA. 8 years of dog shit performance sides with my statement. All Kings fans should accept what has been laid in front of us.
If ya can’t do it by yourself to some extent, ya ain’t a superstar.
Of current players, other than Lebron, who would you say qualifies for superstar status under that condition?
Off the top of my head, Curry comes to mind, but with all of his success, he’s not willed the Warriors to their success without assistance from other All-Star players. That’s not a dig on him, but having Klay and Draymond isn’t the same as Fox having Hield and Barnes.
AD has the same issues. He’s as good a big as there is in the game, but he couldn’t get the Pels to the playoffs some years, and never got to the highest reaches until he was paired with a better player.
I imagine there are a dozen other players that would be precluded from superstar status by that metric.
Fair to ask for details on such a broad statement. No player, even LeBron, can get a team to the title by himself (although he’s probably come closest in recent history).
For me, I tend to look at the specifics for the player. Fox isn’t a superstar, since his team has a -4.5 net rating vs. the opposition when he’s on the floor. You can have a superstar on a poor team, IMO. As we’re seeing now, the roster surrounding him isn’t as bad as it seems popular to believe, or at least they are good enough to win more consistently, if they had a “superstar” on the roster.
Luka is a superstar already. The statistics show it, and that roster stinks and is ten games over .500. Curry is clearly a superstar based on his statistics alone, but that roster is similarly sad. Giannis/Embiid/Harden/KD/Butler/CP3/Jokic/Lillard? I think these are easy calls.
Dunno, guess it’s a “preponderance of the evidence” thing for me.
That seems reasonable, but as always, I live in the grey areas. From the description of the players you mentioned, it seems like adding the word “killer” to the superstar criteria makes sense. Your list is loaded with them, and rightfully so.
3 thoughts about this comment.
One, I wonder what De’Aaron’s Net Rtg would be if this were the roster the Kings had for the entire season. I know that’s not the case and we won’t know the answer, but it does make me wonder. I’ve also looked at De’Aaron’s Net Rtg over month long increments and it’s interesting to note a few things for me. One is the Net Rtg’s by month: Dec 22nd to Jan 21st: -8.6 Net Rtg Jan 22nd to Feb 21st: -4.4 Net Rtg Feb 22nd to Mar 21st: -0.2 Net Rtg, Mar 22nd to Apr 22nd: -3.6
The other part is the Kings ORtg vs De’Aaron’s. Dec 22nd to Jan 21st: Kings ORtg: 110.4 De’Aaron’s ORtg: 109.2 Jan 22nd to Feb 21st: Kings ORtg: 114.2 De’Aaron’s ORtg: 111.3 Feb 22nd to Mar 21st: Kings ORtg: 115 De’Aaron’s ORtg: 120.3 Mar 22nd to Apr 22nd: Kings ORtg: 113.7 De’Aaron’s ORtg: 113.8
Two, Tyrese Haliburton’s Net Rtg is worse somehow. I suppose your thoughts could apply to Haliburton, but I realize rookie’s and 4 year players are evaluated differently, rightfully so. I am wondering if this continues during Tyrese’s career would that criteria apply to him?
Three, Buddy Hield has a Net Rtg of 2 points better than De’Aaron Fox. How is that possible?
To answer your first, I’m not sure – but I don’t think Kings’ roster issues have been significantly worse than (generally) the rest of the league. To answer your second, I don’t think anyone would call Tyrese a superstar at this point.
Your third question probably has to do with the vagaries of lineups, but perhaps Buddy’s not the primary issue with this roster currently. Regardless, De’Aaron, Tyrese and Buddy aren’t superstars right now, and I can only see Tyrese possibly getting to that point. Maybe De’Aaron if he learns to shoot.
At this point, I think it would be fair to say that you expect De’Aaron to make up for the other deficiencies on the roster, and for the sins of roster construction in Vlade days past.
At this point, I see De’Aaron’s main flaw as not being a great 3pt% shooter consistently. You can win a lot of games in the regular season, at least, with him as your 1st option.
I doubt either of us will change each other’s mind, not anytime soon anyway.
Do we even have one player that “plays like that every game” ? I don’t think we do.
Tim I asked a serious question …. can Vivek be arrested and sent to prison for abusing the fans for over 8 years and none of you answered it. ð¡ð¡ð¡ð¡ð¡ð¡ Dont ignore us !!!!
Richaun Holmes has gotten better every year of his career. He’s easily the team’s best on-ball defender, he plays hard every minute and his offensive game is actually pretty impressive.
And people are ready to let him walk for nothing.
The idea that he doesn’t fit into the team’s future is crap. He has very few miles on him in terms of minutes because of being a role player for many years. The team isn’t on the cusp of anything. No free agents are coming here.
Keep the guy that sets the tone and never quits. He loves playing here.
Pay him. $15 mill would be a bargain, in my opinion.
If there were a financially viable way for Holmes to stay, then I’d love to have him back. Unfortunately, if he is re-signed, you’re right at the cap, and ultimately, all you have is more or less the same roster as you have now. It would play out like this:
Holmes re-signed! Woo-hoo!
(Two months later)
Why does the roster look almost exactly the same as it did at the end of ’20-’21?
Before all of that, there could be trades that completely rearrange the calculus, but barring that, it may be necessary for Holmes to go. Honestly, I think Holmes is likely to get a better offer than Sacramento is able to give, and that will be that. I wouldn’t even be mad, he’s had to work a lot harder than most players to get to the point where a big contract is possible. I’ll miss him, but will be very happy for him and his family.
Agreed that Holmes has earned it, and I would be happy for him. Good guy who plays hard and maximizes his talent. You can’t ask for more than that.
But if he walks, it’s a piss poor failure by McNair. There is zero sense in holding on to a guy for three months on a bad team to then let him walk for nothing.
I give McNair a pass on Bogi because he wasn’t here in Bogi’s final season to move him. Should the same thing happen with Holmes, McNair deserves all the criticism coming to him.
I’d imagine that there was some interest in Holmes at the deadline, but other than a quick blip about Charlotte, I don’t recall hearing anything else. That makes sense, given that he’d be wide open for plucking after the season, and giving up assets for what could have been a two-month rental probably doesn’t sit well.
Playoff contenders may have looked at Holmes, but decided that he wouldn’t likely have been a difference-maker worth giving up assets for. The kid’s a monster, but undersized, and doesn’t stretch the floor.
I will miss him. He’s so easy to root for, but unless an expensive asset can be flipped for something that ultimately lowers payroll, the cap situation being what it is, the market is going to set Holmes’ price, and it’s likely to be beyond what Sacramento can offer.
I agree that there weren’t going to be any great rewards for Holmes. But should Holmes walk for nothing, it calls into question either the basic comptence of the front office (Did they not know any better?) or grows rumors about Vivek meddling (They did know better, but Vivek wouldn’t let them act because he had delusions of being a playoff team.) Both are bad. There’s no way to spin the easily forseeable loss of an asset for nothing as anything but negative.
I don’t want to keep harping on this, but I think it’s important that assume that some outcomes can just be calculated risks that didn’t work out.
If Holmes signs a deal for $15-20 million per year, then McNair 100% fucked up for not trading Holmes. If Holmes signs with another team for less than what the Kings can sign him for, then I’d have a similar feeling. But, if he signs with the Hornets for $12 million, then I believe that’s an indication that it was a reasonable assumption that McNair wanted to re-signing Holmes, and he knew he had a good chance of doing so.
Or to put it another way, would you believe McNair fucked up even more if he received a marginal asset in a Holmes trade, then the team he traded Holmes to signed Holmes for less than what the Kings could’ve afforded to pay? Because it seems to me like people aren’t considering that as one of the theoretical outcomes.
Carl, I’m having a hard time seeing how you get value for a player making as little as Holmes is this season. It’s always been a problem, outside of it being a huge bargain for the team employing that player that season.
This is probably not the right way to look at it:
If they Kings re-sign him, then they’ll do so using his early bird rights. They will not be using open cap space because they won’t have any for all intents and purposes. So, if he goes away, then the ability to go over the cap to sign multiple players of his caliber goes away. They would then need to use the other way (NT-MLE) to sign a solid player to replace Holmes. Bobby Marks does a good job of breaking this stuff down, but here’s a really simplified version of how the Kings can maximize their talent under the their current cap situation without big trades or getting anywhere near the luxury tax line:
Players on fully guaranteed contracts for next season:
Players with contracts that could be guaranteed for next season:
free agents that can be signed with various exceptions
Additional tools to add talent:
So if you scratch out Holmes because you don’t want the roster to look the same, then you have to replace Holmes with one of the additional tools. If you keep Holmes, then you can use one of the additional tools to increase the overall talent level versus this season. To me, this team isn’t that far off, so maybe that causes me to look at it different, but I think this team would be much more talented than the roster at the beginning of this season:
Guards: Fox, Haliburton, Wright, Buddy, Davis (early bird), Ramsey
Forwards: Barnes, Jarred Vanderbilt (MLE), Franz Wagner (14th Pick), Harkless (non-bird), Woodard
Bigs: Holmes (early bird), Bagley, Jones, Metu
It’s not flashy, but solid and deep. There’s obviously many ways to skin a cat, but this a straightforward way to keep Holmes while using the additional tools to fill in the gaps.
This is an excellent explanation about the options that may be available as things begin to shake out.
I do stand firmly against drafting Franz Wagner. Michigan hasn’t produced a starter-level player since Webber, and they paid through the nose for that privilege, monetarily and in forfeited games. They find good college players, but don’t produce NBA starters.
I also like your roster scenario, and agree that it’s solid. If we could get even a B/B+ center, the possibility of a jump is there. I don’t see how that step can happen with Walton in charge. I’m told that the players like him, but it doesn’t seem that they respect him. Either the players are ignoring his pleas to move on offense, press defensively when behind, etc., or he’s just not telling/reminding them to do so. I’d guess it’s the latter, and it’s the worse of the two.
This is a great breakdown. But it kinda begs the question of whether the $8.75MM-ish the Kings can offer Holmes as an Early Bird is enough to keep him. Personally, your roster looks like another 35-win season in the making to me, but it’s certainly reasonable. Especially if you think this team is just a couple minor tweaks and some individual development away.
Holmes’s contract can start at $10.5 million. Bobby Marks mentioned a 3rd party player valuation company (ProFitX) estimates his worth is $11 million. So theoretically they might not be that far off. If you look at the stuff that fivethirtyeight is doing with RAPTOR, they say the Kings are basically a 40-42 team as constructed. If they can add a couple of forwards that are plus defenders, then that could help balance out their lineup. I chose Vanderbilt because he’s young enough that they could still have some upside/value even if they have to overpay him a bit as a RFA. I don’t necessarily love Wagner, but he does seem like the type of player that can fill a low usage, swiss army knife role that this team needs.
My understanding is that they can only offer 175% of this seasons’ contract. Which I believe is just over $5MM.
As for the RAPTOR estimate, I don’t really believe in the ability to simply aggregate individual impacts to estimate team success. I think the Kings lack many of the team abilities and fits that help make groups of players to play up.
I like Vanderbilt as a target. Wagner I’m not huge on. But overall, it feels to me like you’re trying to build a team to make the playoffs. But it feels to me like a team with a 7th/8th seed ceiling. Which, as a Kings fan, is a dream. But I’d still like to see moves with a bit more upside in mind.
yeah like I said there’s many ways to skin a cat. The Kings would have 9 guys on the roster under the age of 25 (plus Jones who’ll be 26 I believe) though, so there’s theoretically multiple avenues for future upside.
This part is true. Or you can offer the average salary, which has been estimated at 10.5 million. Link from that Larry guy.
The higher number is the maximum you can offer, which in this case is the 10.5 million number.
Got it. Thanks.
Also, I do want to add one thing about RAPTOR. I agree that the NBA is not the same as the MLB in which you can just add up WAR to come up with a projection. I do think you can simplify things though and just say “if you have 10 players in your core rotation that all have a positive impact on winning, then you should be a playoff caliber team; assuming average health and well thought out roster construction.”
The Kings currently have 6/10 players with a positive impact based on this year’s stats. They have this years FRP, the MLE, and internal development opps. from guys like Bagley, Davis, Metu, Jones, etc. to find the other 4.
So that’s really the thing: how do you surround Fox, Haliburton, Buddy, Delon, Barnes and Holmes with 4 players that fit and positively impact winning? If you figure that out, then you’ve got playoff level roster. It’s not necessarily that simple, but it’s not really that much more complicated either.
This. That’s effectively the same roster as this season. Going nowhere.
Anything can happen, obviously, but I think that’s a really pessimistic look at things. Fox, Haliburton and Bagley theoretically still have plenty of room to grow. There isn’t any reason to believe that the current production of guys like Buddy, Barnes and Holmes is due for major regression. The team, as constructed, is on pace for 36 wins, and that includes a good chunk of the season in which they had no depth whatsoever.
You can disagree with the stay the course approach, and I’m not necessarily even advocating for it, but I think the “that’s a 35 win team” thing is more reflective of your disagreement with the approach than a realistic view of the median outcome of this particular fake plan.
I think this is a pretty optimistic take, but I’m all or optimism. Personally, I like a little more ambition.
It’s optimistic to think a team that’s on pace for 36 wins can improve to at or above .500 based on marginal internal development and adding a lottery pick and a player on the MLE? I think we’ll have to respectively agree to disagree on that (as you already did obviously).
That leaves out the possibility that the record is a bit inflated. It seems that this team is outperforming its metrics record-wise, most likely because it’s just a weird injury/COVID season around the league.
Seems like the better way to argue it is that they are currently around the 25th best team in the league, and probably 11th or 12th in the West. Do your proposed moves get them to the top-8 in a more normal season? It’s certainly arguable without knowing what the rest of the league does, but it seems unlikely.
This team has had two nine game losing streaks this season, and are still the worst defensive team in the league by margin. That stands out to me when talking about how close they are to being competitive.
There is no way of knowing how these abnormal times have impacted each team. All I know is that this team was a 35-win team last season, and is projected to be a 36 win team this season. I do not think it is that unreasonable to assume they can to turn this team into a .500 team utilizing the free agency tools at their disposal, and assuming some level of internal net improvement.
I’m not saying it’s unreasonable, just saying that going strictly by their record and not looking at the underlying issues feels specious.
This team went from a 39 win team to a 35 win team, and there’s still the possibility they end up under your 36 win projection this season.
It’s not unreasonable to think they lose Holmes, trade Barnes, maybe integrate a coach and struggle to hit the same win total next season.
I get that. This was always based on a theoretical question that I’ve been curious about for a while now. Can a competent GM build a playoff team around the current core using the tools that will be available in free agency?
Something that’s bothered me about the discourse around this team is the conventional wisdom that the Kings “didn’t pick a direction,” or made some sort of course correction at the behest of Vivek. I think it’s entirely possible that the front office just determined that this team did not need to do a massive rebuild in order to have sustained playoff success starting next season.
Tim instantly loses credibility predicting DJ would have a worse record with this team… C’mon man!
Here’s an interesting question (thought experiment) IMO to ponder for everyone: if the Kings somehow do make the play in’s with these makeshift lineups…and Fox and Barnes come back right as we make the play in tourney. What is their role? Do they automatically get their starting roles and/or minutes? What is the effect on the synergy and rhythm the Kings built to make the play ins?
If I am the coach, I will definitely keep rolling with the current guys, i.e. Wright, Hield, Harkless, Bagley, Holmes…
but I would insert Fox and Barnes as the 2nd unit..together with Davis and D. Jones..
(pull Ramsey, Guy and JJ out of that rotation)…
In that circumstance, it’s the starters ( i.e. Wright, Hield, Harkless, Bagley, Holmes) bring this team to the play-in game, they definitely should be rewarded adequate playing time, and keep the starting roles.
This thought experiment for me was about 10 seconds to come to a conclusion. Might be wrong, but feels no brainer to me. First off Fox should be back before the play in as I believe he is eligible at any time. If he doesn’t come back before a play in game, he’s probably not coming back if the effects are that bad.
If those two are healthy and capable they are starting, especially Fox. If beating the collapsing Spurs, quitting Pacers and 3 times against the tanking Thunder convinces McNair and Walton that in the biggest game in franchise history for the past 15 years (which is sad) to not put your best players on the floor as much as possible then we have bigger issues. That’s means McNair is an idiot (which I don’t think he is) and Walton is a bigger moron than I already guessed (entirely possible).
Beating the crap teams remaining on their schedule with this set of current line ups is a big difference than going into a one and done situation against a better team.
I suppose I could be persuaded if you told me they won out and beat the Grizz twice and a not resting Jazz team while riding a 10 game win streak.
All that said…it’s the Kangz. They probably lose tonight on a last second turnaround three by Poeltl and then lose by 35 to the Thunder ; )
Not by shooting threes, but Poeltl killed us twice this season. To me, the lowest point as a Kings’ fan was weeks ago when Doug said that Ish Smith is the “Kings’ Killer”. Come on, at some point it took efforts from Shaq, Kobe, Duncan, KG (and refs) to stop us
I gotta believe Fox and Barnes are starting if they are back and healthy. With that said, it’s been nice to see what is essentially our second unit going out and competing and playing well.
Not overthinking it, Fox and Barnes get the call.
I’m for once watching a kings game this year I actually care about, and I’m not overthinking that either. Breaking out the pretzels and peanuts and moving the chair closer with no expectations.
Becky Hammon? Would you really be keen on seeing her struggling here? It will be a very important step for women if she manages to secure a headcoaching gig. I would love to see her succeed. Not only because she appears to be a decent person, but also for all those stupid machos who claim women can’t be successful in this environment. The West will continue to be a nightmare going forward. Utah, Nuggets, Clippers, Warriors with a healthy Klay, Lakers – all in a very different tier than the Kings. Not sure if the Suns’ season will turn out to be a fluke (probably if CP3 sustains another injury).The Grizzlies seem to be on a similar timeline as the Kings – but are far better managed. The Mavs will be good as long as Luka remains engaged. Same for Portland with Dame. I have my doubts that the Kings as currently constructed will be able to get past those teams even if they are well coached. It would be unfair to throw Becky in such a situation, with Vivek meddling and all.
I agree with you, that is an important consideration. Still, if a change is to be made, and Hammon is as good or better than the other candidates, I hope that an offer is extended. Then it’s up to her, and she may have similar reservations.
It may need to happen this way. Successful coaches don’t step aside very often and leave a plum gig up for grabs.
Badge Legend