Thank you all for the kind words regarding Greg’s life story! You also happened to ask quite a few questions, so let’s dive right in!
From scottyprimus:
Would you rather miss the playoffs and have the luck of getting the fourth pick in this year’s lottery or take a first round series to 7 games and lose?
Tim: I would unquestionably rather miss the playoffs and keep the pick, even without the chances of a top-4 selection. The Kings are old, expensive, and bad, which is the worst combination in the NBA. They need to get younger (lottery pick), cheaper (lottery pick), and they need to get smarter (fire the front office). The quickest way to both of those paths is losing miserably for the reset of the season.
Greg: I’d rather miss the playoffs and have a lottery pick, mostly because I don’t want Vivek or the front office to feel encouraged by any level of success. A 7-game series would be seen within the Kings as validation, even if the goal was making the second round. “Well, we didn’t get past the first round, but the record since Doug took over, and the record since the trade deadline is really encouraging. With another year together, this team will be great”. Cue the team not making any notable improvements over the summer, and not having a draft pick since it would convey to Atlanta in that scenario. No thank you.
From Hobby916
Rank the assets the Kings have (players + contracts, and draft capital) from best to worst.
Tim: To clarify the terms below, several top value assets could be combined to acquire a star player, mid-value players could be used to acquire a quality contributor, and some value players could be used for a role player or to shed a contract. Negative value is self-explanatory.
Top Value
Domantas Sabonis
Malik Monk
2031 MIN first rounder
Unprotected Kings future first rounders
Keegan Murray
Mid Value
Keon Ellis
Devin Carter
Some Value
DeMar DeRozan
Jonas Valanciunas
Trey Lyles
Future second rounders
Negative Value
Zach LaVine
Greg: While I mostly agree with Tim’s list, he and I differ in a few key areas. I think Keon’s value would be higher if he was on the trade market, due to his low salary, team control, and production. I also think Tim is way too low on DeRozan. Despite his flaws, and his poor fit on this roster, DeRozan is a known veteran who is efficiently averaging 20 points per game and is on a really reasonable salary. I think he would be more valuable on the market than Tim thinks.
From outrider
What teams WOULDN’T you do a straight roster swap with right now?
Tim: I’m going to up the ante a little bit and add in future assets as well. In that case, and partly depending on lottery luck, I wouldn’t swap entire situations with the Pelicans, Clippers, Wizards, Hornets, or Raptors. That puts the Kings 25th in asset accumulation!
Greg: I agree with the teams on Tim’s list, and would add the Bulls, Hawks, and 76ers.
From 1951
Tim: Once we were pretty certain that De’Aaron Fox was gone, I would have bet the farm that Sabonis would not ask out of Sacramento. In theory, this was going to become his team.
From Carl
How much “success” (regular season wins, play-in, etc.) do the Kings need this season for Monte McNair to keep his job? If McNair is fired, do they replace him with Wes Wilcox?
I was ready to throw the Negative Nancy label on Tim and suggest he look at the sunshine (this is a .500 team, not a cellar dweller, and in relation to the last 19 seasons, one of the more successful ones in Sacramento Kings history) until I read this gem:
and I just had to stop and laugh. And realize I agree with him much more than I care to admit. And then cry.
So Tim, other than that things are great in Kingsland, wouldn’t you agree?
Thanks for taking my question guys!
My take on Monte’s job is that he’s VERY likely to be gone by the end of next season, if not before. It seems likely that the team treads water through the end of next season due to having so much of the cap committed to Domas, LaVine, DDR and Monk. They won’t trade Domas, can’t trade LaVine and won’t get enough for DDR to push the team into true playoff contention.
I think Monk has real value, but you have to get someone back who is a LOT better than Monk to meaningfully improve. Seems unlikely, and this front office (whether it’s Vivek or not) seems to have issues with talent valuation. I worry about a DDR and Monk plus picks deal for Trae Young. He’s exactly the type of undersized, offense first, high volume guard this front office keeps quadrupling down on.
I think if the team gets dumped out of the play-in again next season, or gets smoked in the first round, Monte is gone. (That might happen this season as well). Vivek seems to have a history of replacing a guy with a guy who is already there, so I wouldn’t be surprised to see Wilcox take over, and it would be pretty pointless, since Monte’s failure is also Wilcox’s failure, not that that ever stopped Vivek before.
I think we have a bunch of players that have a good amount of value if the FO ever decided to blow it up. But after seeing the Fox return I wouldn’t trust Vivek or any GM he chooses to oversee rebuild type trades. And any non-rebuild trades would be trash trades like we saw for Fox where it’s a sideways move.
I just have no faith in the ownership or FO.
Welp. Monk is my favorite King, and although he is on a team devoid of any true “leader”, he still displays the highest vocal and non-vocal leadership of anyone on the team. His consistent year-to-year improvement on the team may propel him into being the best guard on the roster as early as next year, and he still is only 27. Losing him would be the most disappointing thing to happen since not resigning Isaiah Thomas in terms of where it hits you in the heart. Frankly put, Domas is great – but outside of being a consistently great passing and rebounding big – he more often than not tends to disappear when it matters most (at the end of the game).
We do not want Wes. He has been front and center at much of the behind the scenes “stuff” that the local media is only able to hint at but not fully report.
Right there with you.
100%
There is so much of that we don’t know and can’t know. Maybe this guy is great at his job – he evaluates talent and fit like a Jerry West savant, and can wheel and deal like a plaid blazered used car (aka pre-owned vehicle) Sam Presti doppelganger but is shackled by Monte, Vlade, Alvin Gentry, Matina and Vivek.
More likely, he is part and parcel of what we see and have seen today and yesterseasons. His ability to be an acceptable cog in the franchise machine – aiding as a sounding board and phone screener for Monte, and a head nodder and ear whisperer to Matina/Vivek – which has kept him in the backseat of the Kings clown car.
Bob Myers? He has to know of the Kings and Vivek intimately as he had to deal with them often. How he speaks of the Kings as a commentator loudly describes his disdain and their insignificance. He left his mostly successful last venture to retire to the broadcast booth. I can’t imagine, even with the most fitful bouts of boredom that working with Sad Sac would be in the least bit attractive. And that is ultimately my worry. Whomever they replace Monte with would have to be a desperado: a downed cast off or an extremely eager upstart. They might get lucky, but lottery luck lucky is needed.
At the rate we’re going, we’ll wind up with Arturas Karnisovas as soon as he is cast off by the Bulls!
The Teddy Roosevelt Sacramento Kings!
Bully, I say. Bully for you!
(now that is old Old Skool)
I don’t see how this hamster wheel stops as long as Ranadive owns the team.
Sell the team!
I appreciate Tim’s pessimism regarding the current state of the Kings and the roster and assets. Most fans seem to have a naievty that this is a good team with potential. I guess sustained borderline mediocrity can have that affect on the mind.
There is nothing to be excited about, especially after the uninspiring return from the Fox trade.
But would they be BAD if this situation occurred? Say they go 16-11 to finish season (prolly needed to make playoffs or 7/8 seed) and win 1-2 play in games to get in. They then take OKC or Denver who are figured to be championship contenders to 7 games without home court. Do BAD basketball teams do that?
So in this scenario the Kings under Doug go 31-20 to finish the season and seriously challenge an NBA contender to a 7 game series. Say they run it back without modifications and continue pace. They already did a 50 win pace over 2/3 of a season. We aren’t signing up for a 50 win season next year? Last year and this year only 7-8 teams each year win at a 50 game pace. I’ve said here before but there are multiple ways to build a contender. For every team that tanks and bottoms out and rises back up there are plenty of teams that work their roster without bottoming out and become contenders.
Do I think all this happens? Of course not. Do I totally trust this front office/ownership group? No, but I probably mildly lean more favorably to Monte than some others on here. Am I against tanking this season out if the first 5-7 games after the break don’t go well? No.
But if the original posters scenario did happen and things did really click/gel, I think it’s silly to throw away actual quality and presumably entertaining basketball (for this year and maybe next year?) for the chance at something good at 4. Convey the pick and move on unhindered at that point.
Now if it was the #1-2 pick, you probably got my attention.
I have to agree that if you think it through like that, winning at a high-rate (against a tough schedule) the remainder of the season and taking a likely 2025 NBA finals team to 7 games, it would be easy to convince yourself that you have a good team. And maybe you do … have a team that just peaked before your eyes and is then starting its steady descent back to mediocrity …
Agree. For every Oklahoma City, there are several Detroit Pistons and Philadelphia 76ers. A 43 win NBA team is NOT the worst thing in the world. That’s a better record than all of about, what, 5 Kings teams since they moved to Sacramento. The Oklahoma City team of 10 years ago never won an NBA championship, but they did establish the team in Oklahoma City, and gave their fans the expectations that they could be winners (looking at you Charlotte Hornets).
Fantasy scenario: Maquelle Fultz finally realizes his NBA potential at age 26. Has that ever happened with a comparable player? Grant Hill maybe?
Grant Hill was ROY, so not him.
A 43 win team on the upswing, or with young players who will get better or with a high lottery pick incoming isn’t the worst thing in the world.
A 43 win team that is old relative to the rest of the league, with all their cap space tied up in players who have hit their ceilings, without much in near term draft capital, and with a passive front office, who are stuck at 43 wins, is just hopeless.
I’m personally past the point where I’m just happy to win more than 29 games. If a team isn’t clearly on the rise, I’d rather win 29 than 43 because at least there’s some hope of drafting game changing talent.
I’m sort of along the same lines. I want compelling basketball, and I think that a team that can sniff 50 wins (.600 winning percentage) is compelling. Absent of that, I’d rather see picks and prospects. That’s where the Fox deal left me flat, as I don’t think that it accomplished either.
Yup, the Kings, roster wise, are like poor man’s version (pun intended) of the Clippers. They are a team built to win now with no real future beyond their aging stars.
I’d be happy if Fultz proved to be a solid backup/spot starter as Dante Exum (a #5 pick back in 2014) has become for the Mavs.
Fultz looked really good on Orlando just last year. My last drop of hope for this season is somehow he miraculously is the glue for a 48 win campaign.
The problem with this argument is that it’s highly unlikely. Perhaps they sneak in to the playoffs, but I have a hard time seeing them win more than a game against OKC or DEN. There’s a big deficit in high end talent between those teams and ours. None of our core (Zach, MM, Domas, DDR) has ever experienced playoff success in their respective careers, so color me dubious until I see it.
Devil is in the details given this is a completely hypothetical scenario (e.g., did we take OKC 7 because Shai and Chet had season ending injuries). But I would agree that if we end the season on fire and take a #1 seed having a historic season 7 games, it probably saves everyone’s job and gives us some hope.
I agree highly unlikely. But original poster laid this out as the scenario the TKH fellas answered too.
The scenario you describe would save jobs and definitely have the fan base buzzing in a good way.
But top 4 pick is still probably better for the team’s long term fortunes.
Devil is a bit in the details with how we win (i.e., is it because Keegan takes a leap forward into an All Star or because 35 year old DDR going on an absolute heater).
But I think adding a potential home run piece like Edgecomb at 4 probably does more to lift our ceiling than a first round exit with an aging team, even based on a strong finish.
I hear you. Yes if you are talking about which option gives you the best opportunity to be a really good team in 4-5 years then yeah the pick. Does having the number 4 pick give you a good probability of that? Looking at history I would say your chances still aren’t great but yes higher than running it back.
I think it does depend on what you want. Based on this scenario if you give a 1.5-2 years of 50 win basketball until Lavine and Sabonis contracts are running out but not being legit contenders, I would personally sign up for it. Entertain me for 7 months. Feel this way partly because a 4 pick certainly isn’t a sure thing. Mileage will vary and I think each position is reasonable.
100%. You have to nail the pick. Certainly far from a guarantee, but also think this is looking like a pretty decent draft and mostly would prefer a calculated risk on some upside than a first round exit and no real improvement.
With the prior caveat that the how matters a lot. If it’s driven by Keegan morphing into a star, then fantastic, that helps us a lot. If it’s DDR having one last great stretch that he’s unable to replicate at 36-37, then it’s not really something we can build on.
To add a bit of quantitative weight to this, right before the All Star Break, I did a quick and dirty analysis of just looking at player salaries versus Win Shares scaled up to 82 games to see $ per Win Share (not quite the same as Wins Added, but directionally works).
Based on this, Zach LaVine had the 28th worst contract in the NBA at least for this season.
Of the worse contracts, 10 of them were young players on rookie contracts, which are not necessarily bad, but are just young guys getting a lot of run who are not impactful yet. Arguably another 1-3 are basically injury driven (Dejounte Murray duh, Vassell coming back after missing the start of the season with a fractured foot, Lauri given he keeps missing games with recurring back issues).
Take out the rookies and Zach is the 18th worst value. Take out Murray, Vassell, and Lauri and he’s the 15th worst value.
Obviously the Bulls were bad with or without LaVine and with more familiarity with the Kings and more practice time could increase some of his various impact metrics, which can be a bit artificially increased or depressed by team quality (i.e., halo effect).
But yeah, while this wasn’t meant to be any definitive analysis and I wasn’t even going to share till I read this article (this starts to get outdated with the game tonight), LaVine isn’t a bad player, but he is arguably providing bad value for his contract and by the offseason will be 30 and makes $47M and $49M the next two seasons (versus $43M this season).
He was on the market for arguably 1-2 years before he was traded and there just weren’t a lot of great offers for the Bulls. I hope he can rehab his value here, but given his age and production, he seems more like a piece that a contender would want to add and we would probably have to take back some mediocre contracts to potentially get a mid to late first round pick.
BTW, if anyone is interested in the list, here is the list excluding rookie contracts stating from the least efficient with Kuzma who right now is generating -3.0 win shares per 8s games and being paid $23M. At this rate, he’ll almost certainly be a King by next season:
Kyle Kuzma
Patrick Williams
Dejounte Murray
Paul George
Jordan Poole
Kevin Huerter
Terry Rozier
Bradley Beal
Devin Vassell
CJ McCollum
Gabe Vincent
Ben Simmons
Jerami Grant
Trae Young
RJ Barrett
Lauri Markkanen
Cole Anthony
Zach LaVine
Again, this isn’t a list of bad or unplayable players. Just guys who are getting a lot of money for the value they are delivering to the franchise.
That’s the annual offseason celebration!
When the Kings hand you lemons, slash your wrists!
So Huerter (6th worst) for LaVine (15th worst) was a great trade!!!
Had that same thought. It’s funny seeing two Kings on this list. At least in Huerter’s case, he just never really seemed to come back from his injury issues a couple of years ago. Not sure he ever will at this point.
I believe he was all but traded to the Pistons and then elected to have season ending surgery? But all your points remain
I’m all for Greg being the next GM. We should crowdfund his bid.
my suggestion for a slogan: “Greg ruined my marriage. It’s only fitting that he’ll ruin my franchise too!”
But this is also sort of like Seinfeld and George in The Opposite. If every decision the franchise makes is poor, then would Greg ruining it be exactly the opposite?
He’d ruin us into a contender!
Lucking into success despite my best efforts, the story of my life!
To the point of making the playoffs vs keeping the pick, I’m not sure the later is even in the cards anymore. After looking at the current standings I count 11 teams that the Kings will struggle to “catch” in the lottery standings. From bottom to top:
The 6 teams of Wiz, Pels Jazz, Hornets, Raps, and Nets are outright tanking and won’t be caught.
The 3 of Sixers, Bulls and Blazers are pretenders that would have to dramatically turn things around.
The 2 of Spurs and Hawks have been hit with injuries and will fall like stones in the standings.
We know for a fact that the Kings are actively trying to win, so the only thing slowing them down is a massive set of injures. I think Monte’s chips and future are all in on making the playoffs, and I think most of us realize they are, at best, a first round exit. Good times…sigh.
Along those lines, was looking at our incoming versus outgoing draft picks and still can’t believe we have another unprotected pick swap outstanding with the Spurs in 2031.
I realize the FO logic is probably that either we turn thing around and become contenders or they are unlikely to be here once that swap conveys, so it’s sort of playing with House money.
But depending on if/when we rip the Band-Aid off and start over, we could be a lottery team in 2031 handing over a top 5 pick to a contending Spurs team at that point. Really should have at least added some top 5-10 protections for the swap.
Not getting the swap back in the Fox trade is pretty wild. /sad face
Just guessing:
maybe it was an either/or
Unprotected 2027 Spurs (or Minnesota 2031) OR your pick swap back – your choice
Could be. If so, I still prefer the bird in hand unprotected pick to the reversal of the pick swap.
My response would be, “do you really want fox? Not asking for the Atl picks or any of your young players. Throw in my swap back or go eff yourself!”
😉
I recently went down the metal rabbit hole that if the Spurs had known about the Wemby blood clot prior to the deadline, do they make the trade for Fox? Right now, Fox is the one thing likely hurting their new tanking effort. From all that, I wonder if they convince Fox to shut it down and have surgery on his finger.
TKH writing/editorial stall openly admitting they are hoping for the team to fail, (miss the playoffs) is sad opprobrium. SMH.
To tank or not to tank, that’s the question.
An NBA Championship by any other name is NOT as sweet!
I wonder if they watched the recent game where Domas dove to the floor to get a loose ball in the last two minutes. Then fouled out after some questionable calls, shook his head while walking to the bench and then cheered on his countryman Jonas while he finished off the win for the Kings.
Or it’s as simple some folks here see the writing on the wall of the 27th oldest team in the league and prefer the long game instead of short sightedness. It’s not like swapping out Fox for LaVine is akin to the Raps swapping out Poeltl for Kawhai to make a title run.
I mean, it’s closer to swapping Kawhai for Poeltl…
Kawhai for George?
Assuming you mean DDR, but yeah, apt with both being better than Fox and LaVine.
I’d say it’s a requirement for the broadcast team to be optimistic and defend the team’s moves.
That is absolutely not a requirement for in independent King’s Blog. We’re all fans and want the team to do well, but we can all prioritize doing well in the short term at the expense of the long term or visa versa as we see fit.
These differing opinions are what makes this a great place to be a King’s fan IMO.
All we have left are jokes around here, and there are some good ones in these responses! Being a Kings fan requires massive amounts of humor and ridiculousness, born to be stand-up comics. Such a great fan-base honestly, we delusionally support this team and still show up when they have sucked for 90 % of their time in Sac. I don’t even want a contender, I just want a pretty good team, like a 4-6 seed would be great, jeez.
Badge Legend