Welcome to 20Q, a variation on our usual 30Q series. With the abbreviated time until the season begins, we’ll just do 20 questions this season finishing up right before the season begins on December 22nd.
After five years of watching Vlade Divac scramble to overpay middling veterans as soon as free agency opened, Monte McNair’s first offseason in Sacramento has felt oddly docile. While De’Aaron Fox’s five-year max rookie-scale extension has been universally praised, McNair’s other priorities and motivations have felt rather tepid, or even shortsighted.
The first controversial call was allowing Bogdan Bogdanovic, the team’s most versatile player, to join the Atlanta Hawks for no compensation after the Donte DiVincenzo trade fell through. Instead of matching Bogi’s offer and dealing him in a year or two for some sort of value, the Kings cited one of Vlade Divac’s favorite catchphrases when justifying the decision: financial flexibility – not exactly the most inspiring game plan for a fan base wallowing in a 14-year playoff drought.
From there, the only new players who have been brought into the fold have been draft picks and low-level veterans, despite the team having access to the non-taxpayer mid-level exception, a spending tool worth about $9.3 million. Last year, the Kings snagged Richaun Holmes with a similar exception. In 2020, they’ve refrained from using the MLE. Outside of re-signing DaQuan Jeffries, the team hasn’t exactly gotten younger either, bringing in the 31-year old Hassan Whiteside, 27-year old Frank Kaminsky, about to be 27-year old Glenn Robinson III, and a project big in the 23-year old Chimezie Metu. For a team that’s unlikely to battle for a playoff spot, bringing in a coterie of in-prime players has been a bit head-scratching.
Despite the discomfort of some of these moves, they begin to make some sense when viewed through the lens of a quick reset around De’Aaron Fox. If the Kings are actually going to try to win games and push for the playoffs this year, they likely wouldn’t have let Bogdanovic walk. At $18 million per year, his production would have been well worth the price, especially when considering the Kings wouldn’t be over the luxury tax, and Bogi would be a tradeable asset down the line. However, if Sacramento is planning on shedding overpaid veterans, acquiring young players, and earning a high draft pick in the stacked 2021 class, moving on from Bogdanovic begins to click. Not only would Bogdan make the team a little too good on the court for a top-5 selection, but taking on his salary would also force Monte McNair to try and move three highly paid contracts in a few short months. Bogdan Bogdanovic, Harrison Barnes, and Buddy Hield would have combined to make over $65 million, and that’s not even considering the additional $25 million in salary for Cory Joseph, Nemanja Bjelica, and Richaun Holmes. No matter what sort of value some of those players carried, moving $90 million worth of contracts in a year or two would have been almost impossible.
Following the same train of thought, if McNair is planning on ditching a failed playoff run for a quick roster turnaround, his offseason signings also begin to transform from frustrating to potentially intelligent. Each of the players who were brought into the fold can replace more highly paid, valuable guys in front of them. Glen Robinson III, a wing who can defend and reliably knock down shots from beyond the arc, can slot in for Harrison Barnes. Frank Kaminsky, a stretch-big (okay, a sorta, kinda stretch big), can try to take on Nemanja Bjelica’s role if the Serbian sharpshooter is moved. Hassan Whiteside, a rim protector and rebounding machine, is a potential substitute for Richaun Holmes. Some may be frustrated by giving theoretical future minutes to unexciting veterans rather than throwing a bunch of young projects on the floor at the same time, but bringing in competent if unimpressive contributors will help to bridge the development gap for De’Aaron Fox, Tyrese Haliburton, and Marvin Bagley. Haliburton throwing lobs to Hassan Whiteside is a much more sure bet for his development than throwing them to Thon Maker or Justin Patton. Complete chaos and fringe or non-NBA talent wouldn’t provide nearly the same on-court education.
Even the terms of the free agent deals handed out by Sacramento point toward a mini-rebuild. Every contract is either for one year or has some sort of non-guarantee in future seasons. Furthermore, Kaminsky, Metu, and Robinson are all non-guaranteed or partially guaranteed for the coming season, providing the Kings both flexibility during the 2020 campaign and a potential, small trade chip for teams looking to shed salary when the deadline rolls around. Looking to future seasons, Sacramento currently holds more than $40 million in expiring contracts, and if McNair is able to move Barnes and Hield by next summer, the only guaranteed contracts for the Kings in 2021 will be De’Aaron Fox, Marvin Bagley, Tyrese Haliburton, and Robert Woodard. That’s about as complete and quick of a reset as a team can hope to obtain in a single season.
Of course, it’s entirely possible that these moves have been nothing more than the sum of another crappy offseason in Sacramento. The Kings may have looked at the raw numbers of Hassan Whiteside, who also registers well in most defensive analytics, and believed he was the solution at center as a rim protector. Glen Robinson III may be viewed as a younger, cheaper upgrade to Kent Bazemore. Maybe the Kings let Bogdanovic walk because they wanted to give all of his minutes to Tyrese Haliburton anyway and refused to pay big money for another wing. All things are possible when it comes to the Sacramento Kings. These next few months will prove whether Monte McNair has a grand plan to reset around De’Aaron Fox, or if Kings fans are in for another disappointing, failed push for the last playoff spot, followed by a late lottery pick.
Seems like a team that not built to legitimately compete (either now or in the next few years). And also not a team that will likely secure a very high draft pick in the next couple of stacked drafts.
It’s a bold strategy. Let’s see if it pays off.
Yeah, it smells of a compromise (with Vivek?) or a straddling the fence direction. If the quick reset is the plan I have my doubts.
In principle I am happy with not throwing money at underperforming vets, if that is indeed the plan. If it’s lack of money, i am less happy.
It’s a nice vision that Haliburton would improve from throwing lobs to Whiteside, but would not be halted in his development by the low effort, low BBIQ and me-first approach of Whiteside.
My hope is that the right deals didn’t materialize, Monte stays patient but rids the team of non-core players (to me, Fox and the rookies) for a decent return at the trade deadline.
I don’t see the moves as some effort to save money. McNair is proceeding as one would when directing a rebuild, and tying your cap sheet into knots to acquire players that aren’t likely to be a part of the long-term goal would be imprudent. Of course, the result is that the payroll is likely to be lower, but it’s justified.
As a fan, throwing piles of money at players that aren’t likely to be key guys going forward doesn’t make sense. The time to spend will come, and when it does, I don’t think McNair will be wearing handcuffs.
I don’t believe we are ever going to sign a top tier FA, not anytime, not ever – McNair is undoubtedly better at this job than Vlade but IMO he has not been good so far as the Kings GM. He hasn’t sucked either which is probably makes him the best GM since Petrie.
He made a gamble with letting BB8 go for nothing and if he doesn’t use that cap space for something tangible over the next 2 years, it becomes a super stupid move instead of just a bad one. If he manages to pull something out of the hat with the available space, he can redeem himself and put the rebuild back on track.
I do feel better about the direction of the franchise for no other reason than we have a competent GM, but it still feels direction-less and so far his moves have been…um, okay??
I don’t really get the redeem himself part. He said he didn’t retain Bogi to have the flexibility to make future moves. If he makes future moves then that’s not redemption. It’s just following the plan you had all along.
Letting Bogi go without compensation is a ridiculous fail if nothing else happens with the space that would’ve been used to retain him. Even if Bogi is not in the long term plans, you simply cannot waste assets in the NBA.
Maybe you don’t understand my redemption comment because you believe that not retaining Bogi for financial flexibility was fine. I know you said you’d have retained him if it were up to you, but you also supported MMc’s decision if that is what he thinks is best for his plan…I don’t think it was okay at all. I think he clammed up when plan A fell through.
IMO, he is on the negative side of the ledger for the Bogi decision. I hate the idea of letting go of a valuable player “to keep your powder dry” for some hypothetical potential maybe opportunity when Bogi was a bird in the hand.
If MMc uses the space for something equal or better, then he is has redeemed himself in my eyes because his plan worked. If he doesn’t use the space, then he simply wasted assets and made it more difficult for the team to become a contender and his plan failed.
At this point in time, the only tangible outcome we can point to from the Bogi decision is that the Kings lost their 2nd best player in exchange for literally nothing [space].
I think justifying my opinion on the Bogi thing would probably require complex spreadsheets and math skills I simply don’t have. Really what it boils down to is that I just don’t think it’s a good idea to pay $72 million for an asset that will most likely provide less than $72 million in on-court value over the next 4 years.
And you have to think McNair has considered all the risks and rewards with Bogi-it’s not like he’s so durable over his career. If he gets injured next season then you really dig a hole for yourself to climb out. Risky moves like this for small market teams like us just don’t make sense.
I think you would look at his plan differently if you believed Fox is the level of talent that is worthy of building around. You don’t believe the basic premise, so the moves made in an attempt to build Fox-centric team will always be wrong.
To be clear, I have some concerns about Fox, primarily his shooting and not really being an alpha dog, but I still think the plan could work with a little luck. They already got lucky (or made their own luck) by landing Haliburton. I think he’s as close to a perfect complimentary player for Fox as you can get. Now they need to get a little ping pong ball luck in next year’s draft, and wait until an opportunity presents itself to trade for a second star.
Obviously, this plan may not actually work, but you could say the same about tanking for high draft picks since each plan requires a bit of luck to succeed. My point is just that if you don’t think step 1 is the correct first step, then it makes sense that you would oppose each subsequent step along the way.
That’s fair. I think Fox is fine, although not on the same level as other players from his draft that were given max contracts such as Mitchell and Tatum.
But even if he is, I just don’t see any way to become relevant without a legit star alongside him. We already know free agency is not an option. And what trades with our limited assets would return anything remotely approaching an all-star player (or a high draft pick for that matter). If you trade for bad contracts, you might get a late lottery pick… but then you have a horrendous contract on your books.
Which means the only likely way we can have a player that can match or hopefully exceed Fox’s talent is by getting a top 4 pick in the next two drafts.
And this might be another fundamental point of disagreement… I don’t think McNair has done enough to either make the team better, or to drop significantly in the lottery. Sure other teams have gotten better… but we should be about the same as our 11th or 12th worst record last year.
So that was the original point of my comment. We’re not built to contend anytime soon, and we’re not built to bank very good odds in the lottery.
So I feel like our ceiling right now is mediocrity.
If we can move Buddy, Barnes, Holmes, and Bjelica for whatever pick/overpriced close to expiring bad players value we can get, we can significantly lower the ceiling for this roster. I think we’re much closer to being a bottom 5 team than we realize.
Depends on how close to the deadline we’re talking when he makes these deals.
For me, I’d say either way. I don’t see this roster, paired with this coaching staff, being much better than a 7th or 8th spot. Drop those 4 and it should fall off a cliff from there, because then you’re sitting with Fox as being your only halfway decent player.
I think McNair has been ok so far, but there’s nothing he’s done here that’s really earthshattering.
Maxing Fox? Sure. Drafting Haliburton? Of course. Taking the option on Nemanja’s deal? No brainer. These smaller FA deals are fine, but there’s really nothing that stands out to me. The second round picks are fine, but as with all second rounders, the players may well be gone in a year or two.
Additionally, there were some similarities to the Divac free agency era – plenty of business being done around the league during the offseason, and instead of involving himself, he filled up the saved cap space with odds and ends. I remember one of the annual rites of passage at StR was to criticize Vlade’s free agent signings, but find the silver lining that he rarely tied up long term cap (team options, reducing salaries over time, etc) which “maintained flexibility”.
I’m not entirely sure what McNair has done to this point is significantly different, but that remains to be seen with his follow-up moves. Maybe there was really nothing he could (or should have) gotten involved in, but at best I think we can be neutral about his offseason moves.
He does have a tiny bit of cap space left (I think), but not enough to really be considered a factor for absorbing a great deal of (at least first-year) salary. We’ll see if he can make hay out of the longer term cap space and the smaller contracts (like Holmes/Bjelica)/spare parts he signed.
I just want to point out that I always thought the “Catanella Special” was really the “Vlade Tax.” If we all knew Vlade was more than willing to tack on a partial guarantee at the end of the deal, then agents knew that as well. Why wouldn’t they counter Vlade’s offer with a partial guaranteed extra year to pocket a couple extra million?
I honestly don’t get this sentiment that McNair hasn’t done anything special this off-season. That’s not to say I disagree but what moves could he had made to not be lackluster? I think time will tell but for this season I see plenty of encouraging signs that he can actually steer this team into relevancy.
The thing is right now there are too many variables. What Monte has done is he has made safe chess moves with an aggressive view in the future once youve gathered more information on the status of your team. He has brilliantly prepared for both instances, 1) Fox improves but margianally making him a fringe star in this league, Bagley stays healthier but missed some games and remains a high energy rebounding rim running big and Hali is nice but doesnt show immediate star quality. If this happens its blow it up time and this article is right on the money and Monte has prepared for that. 2) If Fox makes a leap into legit stardom averaging 25 and 7 and Buddy breaks out into a consistent sniper, Bagley stays healthy and shows promise as a double double machine and get better on defense, and Hali shows off his brilliance art in passing and making winning plays in the running for rookie of the year, Barnes stays steady as a legit 3 and D compliment then this changes everything since we will be fighting for the playoffs. In this case we keep our roster other then sending out a few expiring contracts for picks and in the off-season we have some money to upgrade accordingly to make the next step. By trade deadline we’ll know where we are and Monte will have much more information to lean on moving forward
I see us getting top 3-6 in the 2021 Draft if the tank goes smoothly (ie Vivek letting Monte do his thing rather than forcing a playoff run this year).
Sactown’s going to Tanktown this year for that sweet, sweet 2021 draft class. Also, lots of free agents available in 2021 so Monte’s been gearing up for that one.
Well, at least it is something different. He is bringing in FAs at a much lower cost than Vlade did, and will probably produce near the same level as Hill, Rondo, M. Barnes, CoJo, Kosta (I miss Kosta), Dedmon etc. I am okay to wait and see what the next moves will be to improve the team which may take a year or two.
All in all, I am okay with what he has done thus far.
I’m a little surprised that Kosta isn’t in the league somewhere. I mean, the Pistons just gave Mason Plumlee $25M over 3 years and he is a year younger than Kosta. Hell, Nemanja is a year older than Kosta. I’d think he is at least worth the minimum to a contender who needs a big body.
Isn’t Kosta part of the forum?
/stickers-british-gray-cat-on-a-white-banner.jpg.jpg)
I still think that citing Kosta as a bad signing is odd. He averaged about $8 mil per season over four years, and generally played solidly, if not spectacularly. He was a good citizen while here, and didn’t break the bank.
I like to criticize VD as much as anyone, but the Koufos deal doesn’t make the top ten of Divac’s greatest (s)hits.
I am not criticizing the Kosta signing, I liked having him on the team. I just think that it was a lot for a team that had no real chances of making the playoffs. His production probably could have been worth a lot less than he was signed for. Over the past several years, I think Kosta was near the top of my list of Kings that I liked.
Because the Kings already had Cousins and Willie at center when they signed Kosta. There was no reason to sign an additional center to a 4 year deal.
They signed KK in 2015, and traded Cousins at the start of 2017. With Willie still on his rookie deal, eight mil for a guy whose skillset is very different than your other centers isn’t a backbreaker.
It’s not a backbreaker. It’s just dumb to commit $32 million to a center when you don’t need any additional centers.
The list of head scratching moves is long but at least we had this.
I’m giving Monte one year to do whatever the F he thinks is right. I don’t totally get all the decisions, but I think Tim does a great job laying out Monte’s likely thought process. I was pretty relieved to have an off-season where we didn’t overpay middling vets to under-perform here for a a year, only to get traded for pennies on the dollar. Thanks Monte!
this is where I am at for the most part, less optimistic though because I don’t believe we are committed to the tank and IMO, that is what we should be doing.
I like Monte’s attempt at finding value whereever he can get it. A bigger way of this is the contract terms for Woodard and especially that guaranteed 5th year for De’Aaron Fox. That’s serious value if it plays anywhere near what we hope in both players cases.
The Bogi thing is a perception of value, but I don’t think he’s as valuable as Buddy Hield optics be damned. And, while I wouldn’t be upset if the Kings trades Barnes or Hield, I think getting back competent veteran talent for them is more important than getting an ‘asset’. You don’t need to have 800 draft picks to rebuild. You still need NBA players to be competitive whenever that window is. And certainly keeping Hield and Barnes this year doesn’t make you competitive enough to take you out of the running for a top draft pick. Especially when you could easily be 8-10 games under 500 in your division.
Then there’s the smaller value plays in the resigning of Daquan Jeffries and the draft invite to Chimezie Metu. And who knows what Jahmi’us Ramsey offers at this point, if anything at all. He’s probably not going to amount to anything in Sacramento, but maybe Justin James still has promise?
This off-season won’t be ultimately about the moves made other than the obvious one’s (drafting Halliburton, Woodard and Ramsey, extending Fox) and whether or not letting Bogdanovich go to Atlanta ends up with the Kings in a better spot long term. But you need to put yourself in the right spot to better place yourself to take advantage of opportunities that come up and it made little sense that Monte McNair would come in and just continue Vlade Divac’s vision of the roster. Which means doing things that frustrate in the interim for hopefully a better long term outcome.
Will it work? Who knows. But the process seems infinitely better than the process in the previous regime(s) and that in of itself is a significant improvement. So in that regard, I’m quite happy with the off-season as a whole even if I don’t love every part on it’s own individual merit.
I thought we sent out Justin James on draft night.
He was to be part of the Bogi trade.
Ah, okay, thank you. I lost track of that with everything going on.
And good! James seems like he could develop into an asset, although more likely as a trade piece.
As BTB said, he was part of the Bogi S&T with Milwaukee.
Get rid of Walton and upgrade Gentry to head coach while we find a better one to push this franchise to contention is my wishlist for the coming year.
New crew who dis?
‘Comrade Monte reporting for tank duty, SIR!!!’
“Hinkie,
Monte so far seems to be abiding by three principles:
1) Clean the cap sheet (this and the next principle are all about Monte’s favorite word, flexibility).
2)Abolish the Sacramento tax (only make positive value signings).
3) Build around Fox (and maybe Bagley).
That’s it. It doesn’t have to be complicated.
I’m so glad it appears we’re getting rid of that “Sacramento tax” nonsense. Yes, if your plan is to bring in some past-their-prime vets with name recognition, then you’ll have to overpay to do it. But that’s been more of a self-imposed penalty than some sort of unspoken location-based tariff. There will come a time in which the Kings will need to convince a max-level player to take the same amount of money to play here versus some other more marketable location, but the Kings aren’t there yet.
Yeah, that’s always been a ridiculous approach. And a ridiculous cop out for fans wanting to give the FO a pass. Intentionally overpaying players (without at least getting additional assets for your trouble) is a terrible approach no matter where you play.
And it was win win for the players. Agents knew they could get an inflated offer from Sacramento then take that offer to other teams. The player could then sign for more, maybe, with another team. If no other team matched the offer the player then signs with the king’s knowing they could be traded by the trade deadline.
I know I’m just repeating what we’ve talked about as nauseum when it came to free agents.
Building through the draft and trades eliminates the Sacramento tax.
Great article, and even better picture for the headline!
I think this is just a transitional year. I think there’s going to be A LOT of movement in the NBA between whenever new signings can be traded, through the trade deadline, and next offseason. So I think Monte is pretty much just sitting back and “keeping his powder dry” at the moment.
This explanation makes the most sense to me.
Agreed.
Question: How will you feel if Hield and Barnes are still on the roster come the start of the 21-22 season?
Crushed
Without knowing what other moves WERE made and what else has happened between now and then? Basically, nothing happened but the passage of time? I wouldn’t like it. Hield wouldn’t be so bad assuming he acts as a decent team player and plays his role, since I think his contract is close to market. I haven’t liked having Barnes on the team since he re-signed, so I probably wouldn’t be tooooo happy about that.
I’m generally in favor of trading Hield because I think he has value to other teams and a trade is the best route to acquiring impact talent. And I think they can replace Hield’s overall impact (not his shooting, but his overall impact) at a lower rate. But if they’re otherwise able to acquire high level front court playermakers/defenders to enable Hield to just be an elite marksman, then I’m fine with keeping him.
To be perfectly honest (and this is a reply to both you and Zebra BHE), I expect Hield and Barnes to be here the next 2 years. The only real way to move on from deals that other teams want is to let the passage of time do it’s duty.
I have a feeling a ton of people are going to be pissed off at Monte McNair in a way they wouldn’t have bothered with Vlade Divac due to it being an exercise in futility that doesn’t apply to Monte McNair.
This is certainly going to be an interesting 2 years.
100% agree, I could definitely see 2 years with both, especially Barnes. With that in mind, if these players aren’t moved, its likely cause they aren’t moveable. Im repeating myself but functionally making a Buddy trade isnt easy. And the suitors I return to tend to be who I think are the leagues worst front offices, more so than sensible in relation to fit. That in itself demonstrates the problem I think.
I mean does anyone think that Monte doesn’t want to trade them? Such being the case I think if deals don’t materialize the most logical explanation is the deals don’t exist.
It only takes one right, so I could be surprised but the assumption should be that they will be here for the course of the season at least.
I think us as fans collectively should expect as much. I dont see either realistically moveable until next offseason.
I expect teams to avoid Buddy’s inflated first year, and wait to till Barnes is on the back end of that deal and thus subsequently moveable as an expiring over their acquisition
Just functionally, for Buddy specifically finding trades is not easy booth in fit and movability. Once this offseasons signings are tradable possibly more options might present themselves, but such deals would mean likely taking on some inflated deals in their own right.
Maybe some catastrophic injuries to title chasing teams with an exceptionally small window to win might offer some more options. But that aside I think fans should expect them to be here come next summer as more likely than not.
I agree with you. If both are around at the start of ’21-’22, the only downside is that you still have a couple of pretty good players on your roster. They aren’t a part of the long-term plan, but on a young roster, you could do a hell of a lot worse than having Harrison Barnes as a mentor.
TBH, I’m not even sure I understand what a long term plan in the NBA means with contracts being so short and the player empowerment era running supreme at the moment.
This is a really good point. It feels like you can get good or bad pretty quickly right now.
Do you think barnes or buddy could be traded to the warriors for Wiggins and next year’s first from the twolves?
Buddy, Barnes, AND Hassan for Wiggins and Wiseman. Somebody will need to step up and take that starting SG position though.
I’ve contemplated this move as well. But someone mentioned the salaries didn’t work out. Plus I would be VERY surprised if the Dubs would even consider it. Buddy + Barnes is about $16M more in guaranteed salary than Wiggins this year, and is still about $5M more than Wiggins in his final year. Plus Buddy has an additional year at $18M.
Yeah, I like that or next year’s pick.
I would think that on their current deals, you’re better off keeping either of them rather than taking on Wiggins’ $90 million over three years. His contract ankles you to a guy who isn’t going to a part of our rebuild, and will almost certainly force you to give up a first-rounder if you trade him.
Wiggins would be great for the tank though. Both this year and next. And then his contract is expiring.
I mean, sure, it doesn’t sound that bad when you put it that way, but the upcoming season is $29,542,010; the next is $31,579,390; and his expiring contract year is an additional $33,616,770.
Two years from now, should they still be here, I’d much rather have the flexibility in Barnes’ & Hield’s decreasing salaries than tied up in a big chunk as with Wiggins. Either of them would be easier to move than Wiggins.
I don’t think it will play out like that, down the line, but I don’t think that even if Golden State was willing to take Hield and Barnes that I’d want to take on Wiggins. Barnes will help the younger players, and if Buddy is right,he can still score in his sleep, rebounds at least as well as Wiggins, and is much better from three.
The two will combine for a little more than $43m on their decelerating contracts in 21-22. That’s probably an overage of roughly $15m (figuring that Hield is worth Bogi-type $$$). The two of them combine for around $39m the year after that, which may be the equivalent of one MLE overpay by then.
From a dollars standpoint, Barnes is the guy that really needs to be moved. In the right system, Hield could be at least close to a fair value player. That said, Barnes is also the Temple / Shumpert / Bazemore locker room presence on the current roster – that does not justify the investment in any way, shape or form, but there is at least a little intrinsic value there.
Given that the Kings would have to overpay in free agency anyway, I wouldn’t give Hield away – I’d have to be getting tangible players / picks back. Barnes for a future 2nd rounder or an expiring would be fine with me.
Your last paragraph is pretty much my position as well.
/seconded
/thirded
I think I may the only person on this site that thinks Barnes is a good player, just a solid all around, but not spectacular player
I don’t think you’d really get much argument that Barnes is a legitimate NBA player, but he is definitely overpaid which is why we always talk of getting rid of him.
Some might take exception to use of the term “good” but that’s subjective considering your last sentence added context of “not great, just average” which is I think where most people put Barnes talent level, average.
I actually believe Barnes will be traded first (between him and Buddy) because of the declining contract and a lack of glaring holes in his game.
I think the argument is less about whether he is a good, solid but not spectacular and more about his value to contract. He’s a solid MLE player, maybe slightly above that. So a $10m-$12m player, not a 4/$85m player (3/$61m remaining).
If you looked at all of the 3-4s and tallied either the guys that are better than Barnes or a better value contract, you probably get well past 20 names. And I think that’s the primary issue here – he’s not a top 15 talent at his position, and on this roster at this time he is a rather large and wasted expense, his locker room chops notwithstanding.
Good guy by all accounts and a great community guy. Just not what or where the Kings need to be investing their payroll dollars at the moment.
I’d be ok with it if they played amazing and above their contract value. Then maybe you trade then in the offseason for a first round pick.
Though if they both played amazing, the Kings would probably see some success, and you may rethink the desire to trade them.
Which, of course, would be a good problem to have.
Annoyed that the tweet I read stating ” no contract is untradable” was a lie.
We are going to know a lot about Monte after the trade deadline. A quiet trade deadline would not be good for this team.
Monte has to be very creative in how he packages players with large contracts, trade assets on nice contracts, and veterans on one year minimums. It is very doable but will take some creativity and active work on the phones.
Trade deadline with good moves > quiet deadline > Trade deadline with bad moves
I’ll take quiet over bad.
Eh, I’d rather they’re proactive. I’d rather they try and fail to make a leap rather than just sit on a roster with fringe 8th seed upside.
With the exception of Luka, the thing that has potentially driven me the most crazed in past Front Office blunders is compromising the cap. Often for inflated in or over their prime players, that despite being present focused dont change results. These have been players often only movable with a compromise in return, that rolled over muddying the timeline or expectations unreasonably year after year. In the gains 4 or 5 wins, not getting premium draft picks, or clarity in understanding potential cores. Decisions that were always at odds with our main priorities.
Bogi is a more quality player than those past blunders, but he among our other current most expensive players aren’t our priority. And a cap compromised can simply raise your problems to a more expensive echelon, regardless of some expirings, picks or flyers in hopeful returns.
As this article astutely points out we could have hovered close to the ceiling for a team not changing their win totals, or frankly should be trying to do so. That isn’t just on Bogi, but the context is what it is. And moving the level of money we hope to will come with less than ideal returns I assume as well as the things we will want. That is to say clearing that space or fetching logical returns isn’t done overnight or without some compromises. I expect Buddy and Barnes to demonstrate as much in time.
What I see with McNair is an acknowledgement of the context. Both from the Kings and league. Personally this offseason mirrors 16 with plenty of soon to be regrettable deals. Plenty of teams have made their bed for limited benefits IMO, or in the final push of trying to be competitive despite a limited ceiling.
The Kings for once have stood pat, allowed competitors to rush for marginal gains in wins, but casualties in their books and assets longterm. And with so many teams prioritizing gaining some wins, taking scope with the looming Fox max is an admittance of what is most possible and important. This team has blunders, and puddles to mop that wont be done overnight. That is enough to deal with in their own right as again they are at odds with whats crucial longterm. Scaling the problems to manageable levels, with benefits of admitting the correct priorities is the start of not having decisions very reliant on specific hypotheticals. And the current signings personally mirror many a past offseason but for 1/8th the price.
We are a rebuilding team, have been. The decisions made like them or not admit that. Considering the precedence I cant help but feel a little hopeful about that.
Don’t know about you Zebra, but one thing that has generally pissed me off about the Vivek era is the insistence on stretching waived players. When you are so far under the cap, waiving Matt Barnes and having his money eat into the cap isn’t that big of a deal.
I’m hoping we don’t see a repeat with Jabari Parker in that regard.
Yeah, two things the Kings shouldn’t have been doing the past few years. Stretching players and paying to unload contracts.
The irony is that the Kings did the exact opposite at the very beginning of Vlade’s tenure. I’m so glad Vlade the GM is over with. Now if only ownership would cooperate with Monte……that would be something.
“Complete chaos and fringe or non-NBA talent wouldn’t provide nearly the same on-court education.”
When and how did the giraffe become the most reasonable writer on KH? By the way, ol’ zippy is right behind him. Has everyone else succumbed to kangz-itis or have these two become more reasonable? What happened to Bad Food Takes & Beno???
I don’t know what it means, but it scares me too.
If you told me in 2019 we’d have a pandemic in 2020, I’d be horrified but not surprised. The giraffe taking the top of the mountain? I’m surprised, should I be horrified? This is all very confusing.
I know I am getting a little too ahead of myself, but lets say the Kings get the number 1 pick next year, who do you choose?
Right now Cade C. is the projected #1 pick followed by other PG/SG type players. Do you think Monte goes for the 6’8 PG or goes another direction?
Once again, way ahead of myself. I should probably wait until the Kings jump 4 spots to get that #1 pick next year.
Yeah, I think Cade is the clear #1 and he’s a perfect fit (for pretty much every team in the league.). The real fight is going to be for the 2-8 slots.
Monte has a plan. He did mention how the Rockets obtained Harden by having the principles he is trying to implement here, flexibility to move on a big target. I think he will be big game hunting in the future for a potential break out player that is on the verge of stradom to match Fox’s timeline, ie Michael Porter Jr. type of player.
My three cents.
Are we getting Harden??
𤣠𤣠𤣠ð¤£
I’m confused.
To begin with, I’m not clear as to what the offseason being deemed “lackluster” means. If that’s due to not signing any big free agents, when I think that most people agree that doing so would have been counterproductive to the near-long-term plans, which includes getting younger and adding talent via the draft and by having high-upside guys in Stockton.
The piece continues, citing the signings of Whiteside, Robinson, (and to a lesser degree) Kaminsky as “in their prime” players. Given that they’re all signed on minimums, are they not actually very good free agent signings, as cost-to-value? The addition of Whiteside in particular adds much-needed size to the roster, and Robinson also checks some boxes in mitigating some of Sacramento’s weaknesses. On one-year deals, I’m hard-pressed to understand how these aren’t very savvy moves by McNair. They aren’t splashy, but talent gaps were plugged without long-term commitments being made. I’m a fan of Jerami Grant, but with Sacramento rebuilding, I’m not too upset that Monte didn’t throw a four-year $90 million dollar offer at him. I’d give the moves a solid B+.
If the concern is that the free agents will cause the Kings to win too many games to have a high pick next year, well, they can always be benched for leg pain, crippling malaise, or some other made-up malady.
The concern about McNair’s mention of financial flexibility, due to VD having done so, should not trouble you for a couple of reasons.
The free agent additions also give our recent draftees the opportunity to not have their confidence destroyed by playing on an intolerably bad squad. Getting reps with established players will permit them to take chances and grow in a way that wouldn’t be possible without having some talent around, which Whiteside and Robinson bring. If everyone knows that garbage time begins at the opening tip, that’s going to wear on young guys who are used to winning the vast majority of games that they’ve ever played. As it seems to be a safe bet that Haliburton and Woodard are going to receive opportunities to play substantial minutes, they’ll need the other guys on the floor to bring out their best.
Regardless of whether Hield and/or Barnes are moved (with Bjelica and Holmes also possible), the Kings will have a lot of good options available to them in the summer of 2021. Signing a big free agent will always be tough, but with at least $40 million to play with, the possibility is far more likely.
Additionally, should Hield be moved, making a reasonable offer to Robinson to replace him might make sense. At 26, he’d still fit with a youthful core, and would either back up Haliburton, or eventually be supplanted by the rookie. If he meshes with our young guys, you could do a lot worse, but that’s mere speculation. As ever, having more options is always better.
As to the Bobo fiasco, it’s pretty clear that the blame lies outside of the Kings organization. The deal that was in play had the potential to be incredibly good for Sacramento, but we all know what happened. I also think that the right move was made in not matching Bobo, given who’s in-house at shooting guard.
Between the draft and the targeted, economical free agent signings, I truly feel that McNair had an impressive offseason. As ever, opinions may vary.
Specifically pertaining the FA additions, the gap between Kaminsky, Whiteside and Robinson, is marginal compared not only many signed in this poor FA market, but plenty of past Kings off-seasons. These tend to be or are close to the average options we tend to garner as is. The crucial difference being these players collectively don’t add up to the MLE.
Completely agree. Yes we might be comparing to a means but such being the case not signing a high mid level is a market improvement. Especially when the talent disparity isn’t reflected in the quality of the players we did sign for the minimum. You can make a case all three are rotational and could have done better based on output or positional scarcity.
And to set that against a backdrop of a team admitting the correct priorities of not being presently focused, protecting cap flexibility while the league collectively is throwing around cash far past sensible evaluations the summary is a success.
Maybe some are just used to senseless mid levels coming through the door by the year. Those players tended not to match their contracts as well. The key difference of course is they were inflated instead of value.
Washington can have fun with Bertans at almost 20 per or Grant in Detroit for a Team without a compass or logical timeline. Even Atlanta who know might be in the luxury post an asssumed future Collins dea,l for a team with no ceiling better than a meddling 6th seed for next 5 years. Sure it has grounds for logic but I wouldn’t be jumping for joy for that reality. Let alone the plenty of 7 to 10 million per commitments that aren’t 8 million dollars better than Whiteside. Competence isnt judged by the sticker price. We should know that better than anyone.
I feel like that’s grading pretty heavily based on a curve set by Vlade. I’d say the offseason was a solid C. Smack in the average of the scale. Not pulling ahead, not falling behind. After years of D and F moves, that looks pretty darned good. The good news is he didn’t make any moves this term that will significantly hamper his future grades.
I remain unsure of what McNair’s grand plan is, and I’m OK with that uncertainty so long as the Kings get one of two results they need to succeed. In my opinion, those outcomes are a top-5 pick (possible but unlikely at this point) or a playoff spot (possibly but unlikely at this point).
Right now, I see the Kings stuck in the middle.
If De’Aaron Fox is incredible, and Marvin Bagley is good, and Buddy returns to form, and if all the other ifs break right for the Kings, and they stumble into a playoff spot in the West, I won’t complain. I think they need another top-5 pick more than anything, but if the young guys on this team drive a playoff run, I can’t complain about that. Possible but unlikely.
Long-term, another top-5 pick, ideally top-2 or top-3, is what this org really needs, but I don’t think they’re bad enough yet. Possible but unlikely.
So we’ll see what McNair, Walton, and the Kings do from here. I would have liked to see a greater tear down if they weren’t going to match Bogi, or a better build up if they were. Instead, we got this – somewhere in the middle, but it’s too early to call. If McNair trades off the remaining veterans by the deadline, I’ll be happy. If the Kings make the playoffs, I’ll be happy. If they end the season with another late lottery pick, it’ll be another meh result for a meh franchise.
They need to pick a direction and make sure the result is what they’re aiming for.
This whole post is completely spot-on IMO, Tony.
Obviously, McNair needs way more time to implement his overarching plan, but the league waits for no man. And I couldn’t disagree more with those who insist that he’s tanking. I think there’s a better chance they compete for the 8th spot than a bottom five finish.
I was reading Kevin Pelton’s RPM based projections the other day for the Kings, it was something like 35 wins and a 30% shot at the play-in. My initial reaction was ‘wow, that seems high’ then I thought about it a little more, and it’s entirely possible the Kings are actually better this season than last despite losing Bogi. Better in this case is a bad thing, because it’s still likely not good enough to be good.
But you look at the roster and… what if Fox is healthy all year, and plays like bubble Fox? if Bagley is healthy and good? If Hali is good? Buddy is back. Better depth across the board. And a competent front office? And a coaching staff that is dedicated to pushing the ball from day 1 instead of whatever the hell Walton did last season? This team might be better. In fact, the more I think about it, the more I talk myself into expecting them to be better. Yes, they lost Bogi. I love Bogi. I think he’s great. But we (I) forget just how injured the Kings were last season, or just how bad Walton was last season, or just how incompetently Vlade ran things. Or Dedmon minutes.
They will theoretically improve on multiple levels and lost one good player. Improvement, bad improvement in the grand scheme of things, is… likely?
Unless Monte moves more vets, but even that has to happen quickly, because if the Kings are in the mix by the deadline, will Vivek let him forfeit the playoff run and tank? I don’t know. Probably not?
Or maybe I’m crazy for thinking the Kings might be too… good.
I think the playmaking aspect is a huge question mark on offense, since a lot of that responsibility as a secondary playmaker is going to fall on the rookie.
But I would expect them to land (wins wise) between last year and the season prior. That 39 win team actually performed pretty close to that record based on the advanced metrics, and I think this roster is pretty similar – losing Bogi is an obvious downgrade, but I think the center position is improved from WCS.
So, I don’t think you’re crazy at all. And I agree, if he’s tanking, he needs to move some guys early, or he’s got to have a lame duck coach (who will likely prioritize wins) distribute the minutes to help him tank.
Yeah, the offense could be a mess. They needed more playmakers with Bogi, they got one in Hali, but it’s still not enough. And the frontcourt rotation is another potential mess. I have to believe Bagley is starting and playing 30, but with who? Likely one of Holmes or Whiteside, and that… isn’t very appealing. Or they go small with Barnes or Bjelica and Bagley at center, which I might even prefer, but that crew is going to get roasted defensively, so… they obviously have big questions marks going in the good direction too.
I think what Monte is trying to do is not completely bottom out while not taking the team completely out of lottery odds for a top 3 pick. Tough needle to thread but if you can pull it off it’s glorious. I’m not especially interested in watching The Process part II (or however much of it you can pull off) and I doubt anyone else is around here either.
I am thinking the same thing. It will be interesting to see how they thread the needle. More minutes for young guys in a very tough pacific division could help a lot here.
I’ll call myself crazy. We may actually be better this year. More efficient and well rounded. We got bigger, which is a must in the West. We are crazy deep.
Fox, CoJo, Ramsey (2way) – Guy walks
Buddy, Hali, James
Barnes, GR3, DJ Jeffries
Kaminsky, Bjelly, Parker, Woodard II
Whiteside, Holmes, Bagley, Metu (2way)
This is not a bad team. I am legally insane as well.
I think you are dramatically underestimating A) how difficult overall the Pacific is which in turns puts the Kings in a massive hole they have to make up everywhere else and B) the flattening of the lottery odds means that being in the 7th slot for the lottery drawing isn’t as bad as it used to be.
I would love to believe that the Kings could skip straight to the playoff picture, but I just don’t believe it. They lost so many games where they couldn’t get guys on the same page when they were playing well in the last 20 games pre bubble. And they got smoked by the top teams in the league during that stretch too. And, the Kings went 8-5 last season in the Pacific. There’s no way in hell they do that again.
There’s enough flaws in enough area’s combined with enough strength in the Pacific/West to keep the Kings from getting quite there. Which is why they need to pick high in the draft, like everyone else.
The division is difficult and the schedule is going to get weird this year. You also have the impossible to predict COVID cases that will impact some teams more than others, so as far as schedule difficulty is concerned, there is a ton of uncertainty there.
To be clear I don’t think the Kings are going to make the playoffs. I’m worried they’ll be good enough to think they have a shot and will fall short again, leaving them somewhere in the 8-13 pick range instead of top-5.
You’re absolutely right about the lottery odds. Those could either save or hurt the Kings depending on where they finish, so we’ll see. There is just so much unknown going into this season across the board that for as much as we like to know things now, it’s going to take a while before we see what the clear path forward is.
This team ain’t stoppin’ nobody Tony. You can’t win games in the L if you can’t get stops. We all know that.
I just don’t think they’ll be historical levels of Process bad. But that won’t make them ready to win 50 games in a normal 82, either. Or even 37 games for that matter.
Well, they won’t win 37 in a 72 game season, certainly. But 30 to 32 (and around the 10th worst record in the league) sounds about right.
And this team was 20th in DRtg last season…are they going to be worse?
32 games ain’t happening unless all the stars start missing games against Sac.
I think 25 is pretty likely.
That’s the fun part, is seeing what happens. I just don’t see the dropoff of this roster, without some major injuries.
Honestly, I think letting Bogi go is likely that difference. There’s no way Halli, or GRIII or whomever makes it up. And I doubt Buddy will make this roster competitive even if he puts his mouthy voodoo doll on the sheld for the foreseeable future.
I do agree, it’ll be interesting to see where this roster ultimately lands.
If the loss of Bogi makes that much of a difference, maybe he was a significantly better asset than McNair thought. 🙂
I doubt the real issue was the quality of Bogi the player, just coming up with a trade that made matching a reasonable tact to take in that situation.
But that’s probably splitting hairs.
The most shocking part of 2020 is that Otis is now leading the charge in preseason optimism.
ð
Just imagine if we’d re-signed DeMarcus!
You are a horrible no good little man. That’s like saying Beetlejuice 3 times dude. Why would you do that to us? What did we do to you?
I don’t disagree but that’s not really what I’m proposing. Of course they aren’t winning 50. They probably aren’t winning 37. But 7 teams in the east had 25 wins or less at about 65 games played last season. The Kings, in my opinion, aren’t bad enough for sub-30 wins yet. Maybe I’ll be wrong, but I’m gonna need to see more talent loss trades before I feel comfortable about it.
This is a where a good GM that is making the calls on the direction of where the roster is headed should be able to tell the owner(s) , barring some miracle where the king’s find themselves as a top 2 seed, WE ARE NOT TRYING TO MAKE THE PLAYOFFS THIS YEAR.
Why?
I’m not saying I think they’ll make the playoffs, just that it’s a more likely scenario than them ending bottom five.
And they will be playing fewer games in the West, proportionally. They’ll still play every East team twice, with a max of three games against teams in the West.
Well said.
I suspect McNair isn’t terribly concerned about absolutely maximizing their chances of getting a top 5 pick. I do believe, and Barnes hinted at this during his press conference, that they will lean on the rookies more than a typical year, and that that will result in less wins than the projections indicate (Vegas has win total odds at ~29 wins FWIW). However, I don’t think they’re going to make trades simply to obtain a few more ping pong ball combos in the draft lottery.
Well put.
So Tim, you’re basically saying: best case scenario: the Kings suck this year and get a high draft pick. And then maybe they pick Luca Doncic instead of Marvin Bagley and we’ll finally have a good team two years down the road. Disagree: the Kings to me have a fairly solid starting line up: Fox, Hield, Barnes, Bagley and Holmes or Whiteside with Haliburton and Bjelica off the bench plus the best of Jeffries, Kaminsky, Parker… in the rotation or playing spot minutes. They can’t compete with the Lakers but they might be able to play in to a 7 or 8 spot this year. I’d rather pick 12 in the draft and get a decent player that falls than reach for a bust from a top five pick. Don’t rely on the lottery: it gives and it takes away. I think the Kings going to win some games this year.
Let’s be honest, Luke’s coaching will cost the Kings several games during the course of the season. Why is it acceptable for the Kings to keep the worst coach in the NBA when every other team in the league would have fired him? Also what is your opinion of Kenny Atkinson as his replacement?
Why is it acceptable for the Kings to keep the worst coach in the NBA when every other team in the league would have fired him?
