The Athletic’s Sam Amick provided a lengthy update on Zach LaVine’s status and the trade rumors that have surrounded him for the last several weeks. Amidst the talk of the Lakers pursuit of LaVine, a Kings nugget popped up:
For all the public focus on the prospect of James and Davis teaming up with LaVine with the Lakers, the overlooked part is that Kings star De’Aaron Fox is a major priority for Klutch Sports these days as well. Per league sources, LaVine would be very amenable to a Sacramento move that would make him Fox’s backcourt mate.
The article also addresses Sacramento’s dealings with the Toronto Raptors regarding OG Anunoby and Pascal Siakam, where it sounds like little is happening at the moment:
Those two particular prospects appear unlikely at the moment, but we still have a long way to go for the market to evolve. Anunoby, more specifically, does not appear to be of significant interest to the Kings.
Amick also reiterates that Keegan Murray is unlikely to be traded, saying that it was already unlikely before Keegan’s 47-point game, and is even more unlikely now.
What I find most interesting about Amick’s article is that we have fully entered posturing season in the NBA trade market. We know the Kings have pursued Anunoby and Siakam in the past, but are now said to be uninterested because of the costs of those players’ upcoming contracts. Zach LaVine is almost surely going to end up in Los Angeles, but he’s “very amenable” to coming to the Kings! All of it just reads to me like teams negotiating. I believe the Kings are not currently interested in Anunoby, but I believe it has everything to do with Toronto’s current asking price, and very little to do with Sacramento focusing on adding more offense rather than defense, as Amick suggests.
Even if we take it at face value, LaVine is an odd fit for the Kings as a trade target. He’s a high-usage creator who needs the ball in his hands. How does that fit with De’Aaron Fox, Domantas Sabonis, and Malik Monk? The Kings would need to send back multiple players just to match LaVine’s salary, before even getting to an offer that Chicago would be enticed by. I’ll be shocked if LaVine becomes a King.
NBA trade season unofficially kicked off on December 15th, and even more players become trade-eligible on January 15th. We’ll likely see a lot more rumors in the months to come.
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOP
I’m sorry, I should have said “NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOP, thank you.”
LOL, hard NO. LaVine is not what the Kings need, just as Greg alludes to in the article. He is a high usage and ball dominant player.
The Kings have their big 3 and one of the is still on the rookie scale for at least two more seasons. IMO, if any changes are to be made, it should be ancillary role pieces the fit Brown’s system that is built around Sabonis, Fox and Keegan.
Go let the Lakers get LaVine so we can all sit back and watch that dumpster fire.
IMO M0nk should be included making it 4 pieces.
“This is not the NBA star you are looking for.”
I’m in the minority in thinking that the Lavine fit is actually not terrible. We’re underestimating the strength of Kings culture and Mike Brown’s ability of getting guys to buy in. The “ball dominant” narrative surrounding Lavine is a bit overblown — the Bulls are bad and lack any real point guard production, which means a lot of the playmaking falls on his and DeRozan’s shoulders. He would be a very good tertiary ball handler, as he was during the Bulls strongest stretch before Ball went down.
I would be okay getting Lavine for a deal centered around Barnes and Huerter, since he basically provides what those two provide with more consistency. His career spot up numbers are better than Huerter’s, and he’s got more isolation skill than Barnes, which can be useful in spots. He also is no worse of a defender than either of them.
However, I would not do the trade if it means giving up any picks, or any of Monk, Murray, or Ellis.
So you’d give up 2 starters, and likely a third role player to make salaries work, for one player in LaVine who turns 29 in the spring, has regressed across the board, and is slated to make an additional $90M over the next two seasons? Who then fills the hole left behind by Barnes?
I sure would, given those two starters have also regressed this season (noting Huerter’s improved effort). I also wouldn’t do it if the 3rd role player being given up is Lyles, or Jones.
I’m not clammering for the man by any means, but the fit on paper does make sense. It still does not address our biggest need, which is an effective defensive 4 who can play next to Sabonis — I’d rather pursue Naz Reid
I’d argue that by trading 3 reasonable contracts for one large one in LaVine greatly hurts the ability to address the biggest need, which is that effective 3/4 next to Sabonis. The Kings would be stuck with a LaVine, Fox, and Saboinis for a very long time eating up cap space, and that doesn’t take into account in trying to keep Monk this summer or extending Keegan after next season.
Fair enough!
All of this may or may not be true, but the Bulls sure became competitive when LaVine sat down. Someone on that team was getting the ball to the right hands, point guard or no.
If another scorer is the main goal (and I think Amick is way off in making the assertion), there is no shortage of cheaper guys who can get you 15+ ppg without costing important assets, whatever their form.
theres a farcry between 15 ppg and 20+ ppg.
i do agree that another scorer should not be THE priority, but making Sabonis a #3 scoring option would definitely improve this team, and give Murray time to continue his development with less pressure
Not to mention, Lavine simply isn’t a very good ball-handler/facilitator. As seen by their play without him
Pass on all three players mentioned. OG and Pascal seem to fit better, but the cost to get them and then retain them in the future is high and unlikely.
Lavine at his price would deplete the team as currently constructed. At least Huerter and Barnes plus other players to make the contracts match. Then maybe even picks too? No thanks.
Find some peripheral pieces now to fill in the gaps, unless someone comes available that is realistically gettable.
I’m probably a “no” on LaVine. Depends on what we give back. After tonight, we could very well be 16-9. That’s a .640 winning percentage. That projects to 52-53 wins on the season. I’ll take that and keep the chemistry we have. Kings have still only lost to 4 different teams so far. And did you know Malik means King in Arabic?
And “Malik Monk” will translate roughly to “Kings ransom” when it comes to signing him going forward!
Not particularly interested in Lavine at the price he would command, both in terms of trade capital and ongoing salary.
But what I am interested in is more Gru in the postgame show.
I think the Kings probably have one big move available, and I don’t think Zach Levine is it. Improving the other 3/4 position next to Keegan seems like the most impactful play, if such a move is available. I’m curious what anyone thinks of going after Jerami Grant (after 1/15) for a package of Barnes + Mitchell + picks: would the Blazers consider this, how many picks would it take, and would that raise the Kings’ ceiling enough to justify the picks required? I’m thinking 3 firsts might get that done, and that it would be worth it. Any thoughts?
also, does anyone know, if the Kings basically stand pat during the season, do they have the ability to offer a big contract to a target free agent in the offseason? I know they are near the cap, but I don’t know exactly the rules for when they can go over the cap into the first or second apron. Would it be possible in a sign-and trade scenario? OG or Siakam might be the perfect offseason upgrade, but would that even be possible under the CBA?
I don’t believe they are going to have any significant space if they are to re-sign Monk. Likely just some vet-minimum deals and an exception.
I still think a Tari Eason would fit what we are all looking for and won’t cost us a King’s ransom( pun not intended). He fills all the requirements Monty is looking for. He can defend the perimeter, shoot the 3, defend the weakside rim, rebound and loves to run.
You’ve named a number of great reasons why his team isn’t in a hurry to trade him.
Agree. Why trade a 6’8 guy that defend a couple positions, is hitting his 3s, and on a rookie scale contract, for possibly Davion and some meddling picks?
I think it’s false argument is that the Kings can only offer Davion and some 2nd rounders. They have enough draft assets to get a deal done if they want to.
I believe it would be a decent deal for Houston to get Davion and an unprotected FRP (2025) for the backup to one of their core franchise players in Jabari Smith Jr., a position where they are currently have two other young players (Jae’Sean Tate & Amen Thompson) that need development mins and that doesn’t even take into account the 15mins a game that Jeff Green is getting (most at C, but some at PF).
Eason has more value to HOU to be used for a trade asset than he does as a player on the floor. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think the HOU FO wants to trade him, but I think they would for a reasonable price.
The Kings can’t trade their 2025 first. The earliest they could trade unprotected at this time is their 2028 first. I don’t think the Houston front office is interested in getting a pick they may not be around to use.
PS Barnes probably would not be involved so Monty can look elsewheres and maybe pick up another player to help. Maybe a Hachamura if the Lakers are so inclined which I think they might.
Best to keep Kings own free agent named Monk . May need to overpay to keep but little choice .
Big No on Levine . Bad contract .stat guy and ball stopper .
Why have LaVine when you have Monk already?
And despite the sub-par play of Huerter, I’d still prefer him over LaVine.
I don’t know, I don’t dislike LaVine, but I just find it hard to root for the guy and his style of play.
If only Duarte would be playing better, then the backup 3 minutes would be solid. I don’t know what’s up with him, but I hope he figures it out and can contribute soon.
It’s not the best talent you put on the court, it’s the best team.
Zach Lavine is an amazing athlete and a solid talent. I think the Kings can field a better team with a player other than what he delivers.
Let’s be real, when is the last time a Monte trade was in the headlines and everyone saw it coming? The most likely thing to happen if a significant trade happens is something we aren’t talking about.
This is a hard no . .. the salary, the decreased chemistry, the ball no in the hands of Fox and Sabonis, the average defense, the loss of first round picks. This is what would happen.
I would like Patrick Williams for a fair price. Caruso seems like he would be too expensive (he’s not worth a first round pick). Here’s a list of players that would be worth trading for (beyond the Bulls):
These players should not require more than 1 pick and do not have a high annual salary. Most of these players will add defense. The goal is not to swing for the fences, but to add good minutes in the defensive side (some points of course).
I’d have DFS higher on my list and LeVert off my list, but overall I like your list of targets and I agree that these are the types of players the Kings should (and likely will) target.
Jalen Johnson would be interesting but with him being on his rookie deal and John Collins gone, I definitely see it not happening.
This feels similar to the run up before the Haloburton trade. As I recall, Haloburton was having some big games right before he was traded. The difference is we had two great PGs and needed a big man. This time we have Keegan who is playing our much needed SF position who is becoming an elite defender. Do we desperately need a SG or a PF? Nice to have, but not really. SF is probably the most important position in today’s NBA and we have a future superstar on a rookie contract. Unless they’re willing to take on Barnes/whoever else and picks, it’s a pass.
Ugh, stupid phone autocorrect.
Badge Legend