Sacramento Kings GM Monte McNair met with media following Thursday’s NBA Draft. You can watch the full press conference below.
A few key takeaways:
- Monte McNair and his staff felt Keegan Murray was the best player available with the fourth pick. I have no doubt that this was their belief. McNair talked about how the scouting department and analytics departments were in alignment on Murray.
- McNair laughed at the idea of Murray having a low ceiling. He cited Murray’s performance as one of the best players in the country last season.
- “There is no mandate.” Monte said that while the playoffs are the goal, there is no mandate to do so.
- McNair spoke highly of Sasha Vezenkov. He was non-committal about Vezenkov coming over this season, but it certainly sounded like the Kings were hopeful he would.
- They felt Keegan Murray was the best player available. I’m repeating this point because Monte repeated it many times throughout his press conference, and I believe him. Time will tell if the Kings were right about picking Murray over Jaden Ivey, but I absolutely believe that the Kings evaluated Murray higher than Ivey.
You know who also believed they picked the best player available and said it at their press conference?
*(I am happy with the selection. Just wanted to be fair to non-Keeganites/Murray-stans)
In terms of results (the W/L column), not much of difference between Vlade and Monte thus far.
That is a great simple post and very true.
Once again, the completely submissive and non-confrontational Sacramento media refuse to challenge the Kings brass in any press conference.
Okay, fine, this is the guy then wanted to take. And he might be good.
But you can’t let Monte off the hook for failing to take advantage of any leverage with the No. 4 pick after months of bullshit. Q for Monte: A lot of NBA experts are shaking their heads about why it was it so hard to take advantage of such a valuable asset. Why don’t the Kings ever seem to make impressive deals?
You can’t let an organization off the hook for giving away two second-round picks when it desperately needs more talent and its main lower rung competitors – OKC and Houston – just keep bankrolling players. Why would a team hungry for better players seem so disinterested in taking on new young talent?
You can’t just ignore the fact that Monte has been here for two years and the roster is still one of the worst in the league. How is it possible that the current Kings team lacks so much talent and has so little cap space How much responsibility do you take for the current roster construction and state of team?
Instead, blather.
They wanted Murray. That means that the only team they could have had leverage with was Detroit, and if Detroit was happy with either Ivey or Murray, there was no real leverage there.
Trading down further or out would have meant no Murray. It is quite possible that the front office overvalued Murray, and as a result no reasonable deal could be put together. Time will tell on that one.
I’m not sold on this front office, and I sure wouldn’t bet money that this is even a play-in team right now, much less a playoff team. And I would sure call last night anti-climactic after all of the noise. But I don’t think that there was a silver bullet offer on the table for the #4 pick, and I can’t lay the blame for that at the feet of the front office.
This.
It was pretty simple and easy to discern
Not the point. Every other team in the same situation – okc, detroit, Houston – is collecting young talent and has a bunch of cap room. Monte has done zip. The team might actually be in worse shape than when he took over. Frittering away second rounders? Unable to trade back into the late first round or make some kind of interesting move.
Sorry. Unimpressed
C-MINUS…. AT BEST
Agree. It’s amazing how that post has gotten 7 thumps up. We constantly hear why something can’t be done. Anybody with an IQ above 10 could have done what Monte did. You are also correct, what in the hell were the second round moves all about.
Yeah that was a simpletons draft performance. Nothing imaginative.
Big difference though is Bagley was very raw and while he has some tools, if he didn’t really really develop, he was going to be a rim running big man who didn’t really protect the hoop – which simply isn’t a very valuable NBA archetype.
Murray is a high feel, high skill player who scores well in analytical models and who has shown massive improvement and growth in his game the past couple of years. Which on some level has to speak to his work ethic (part of why I like high skill players is I have no idea which players are really hard working and a player can be born with athletic gifts, but it’s really hard to be born with a lethal shot, great handles, etc.).
And Murray plays a critical NBA role as a SF-PF, multi-positional, two level defensive wing who can shoot. Even if Murray does have a lower ceiling, his value on the floor basically gets a boost from how important his role is.
So look, I picked Ivey for us. Ivey probably has a higher ceiling and perhaps in 2-3 years we look back with regret. But Murray is nothing like Bagley. And we are going to love having Murray in a Kings uniform for years. We just got a lot better.
Bagley was as raw as a Safeway chicken.
.
.
.
And as talented.
The chicken has value.
In fact, Ivey is a lot more analogous to Bagley than Murray is.
Agree – now I very much want to avoid that comparison because I think Ivey has more basketball skills and more functional athleticism than Bagley did. But 100%, this is a weird role reversal in terms of the choice the front office made. The antithesis of 2018.
I think Ivey will be in a much better position to succeed than Bagley was, though. That’s a big difference right there.
Murray is likely to be better than Ivey now and in 5 years . Kings likely got the right but if this is all than move up from 12 to 11 .
Murray was his BPA. It begins and ends there. Any armchair GM’s or click bait talking heads that thought Ivey was BPA may have a bone to pick, but Monte is the only real GM among us. He’s also 2 for 2 in his last two drafts.
Time will tell. Go Keegan and go Kings!
Well said Adam
What do you mean with “time will tell”, Adam?
I guess I mean we won’t know if Monte was correct for a season or three.
Personally, I felt Keegan was BPA, but I don’t have the credentials of Monte.
I also think it should be stressed that he didn’t make the pick for fit. I was one of those guys who felt that if Ivey and Murray were on Monte’s same tier then fit should be a consideration.
Monte’s statements tonight take that notion out of the decision making.
Yup. I agree about the 3 year timeline, with a few rare exceptions (Luka).
But then is my question, how can we reasonable claim already that Monte was 2 for 2 in his last two drafts?
I like Davion a lot; and there’s no way that he is bust. But can we already tell that he was the right pick at that spot, or will several other players picked behind him overtake him (down the line)?
I think the picture is already more clear on Tyrese, but that book isn’t completely written either. And although Monte deseerves credit for picking Tyrese, he needed to have the luck of several other GM’s passing him by to snatch him up.
So Monte may be 2 for 2, but there is context and nuance and still time for that statement to change.
While I like Davion, I think it’s too early to say that he was the BPA. However, I think Hali was clearly the BPA when he was drafted & I don’t expect that to change.
Although I agree, the point is that we couldn’t have known at the time of the draft.
Tyrese could have been a falling knife. Two seasons in, we can say with quite a bit of certainty that he turned out to be BPA.
I like Murray; I think he has upside. Perhaps more than Ivey, perhaps less. We’ll see.
It seems to me, based on a SSS, that Monte likes to draft players with some established track record in college, good fundamentals and skills, high BBIQ and good work ethic. Guys with a high floor and maybe a perceived lower ceiling than others. Whether that is true remains to be seen.
Certainly seems like Monte has a certain type of player he likes to draft. At the end of the day, talent trumps all and that’s where there is potential for this decision to take Murray over Ivey to be an epic fail like so many King’s picks through the years. Of course, time will tell.
Really well said Rik.
But then is my question, how can we reasonable claim already that Monte was 2 for 2 in his last two drafts?
Nice touché.
The other variable that I believe GM McNair takes into account is the honesty that Sacramento has had a poor history of developing prospects.
The carousel of coaches, the influence of King Vivek & Co.(Aneel, Matina now Anjeli – having Joe Dumars and whoever else), the waste of having a G-League team and not ever seeing the growth of a G-League prospect – Sac has much to be embarrassed by on so many levels.
Choosing a mature, self driven draft prospect should be the Kings choice for the present time until the achieve some modicum of success.
Keegan Murray, IMO, is the smart choice. Seeing if Jaden Ivey develops outside of Sacramento is a big ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ to me.
Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.
New hashtag: #KangzFanz
I trust McNair. He’s seemed like a real GM from the jump. He has a system in place and has made good decisions. He’s legit.
First legit GM of Vivek era. McNair has a system and a group he listens to, not Vivek. He seems to have placated Vivek, tolerating the owner being present and voicing his opinion on personnel but giving Vivek’s words zero credence.
I agree with everything you said, but at the end of the day, we’ve sucked under Monte and we are unlikely to be a playoff team this season. So not sure how much Monte’s system matters if it doesn’t result in winning.
The Kings’ problems during Monte’s tenure are the consequence of the actions of prior GMs, not Monte.
Ever notice how, when you first start cleaning/organizing a really messy room, it actually looks messier for a little while? That’s what’s been going on here, IMHO. Vlade and Pete D trashed the Kangzs’ room, and Monte is slowly but surely cleaning it up. To me, sustainable winning is a long-term byproduct of a good process. I like Monte’s process so far. YMMV.
I think Monte has generally made some good decisions so far. That said, I think the “mess” left behind is overstated and Monte took his sweet time getting started in cleaning it up. GM’s have walked into worse situations and started making meaningful changes much more quickly than Monte. Overall, based on his decision-making so far, I just think he’s a conservative GM. Which can work well if the ownership gives it time and space to play out. But at some point he’s probably going to have to take a few bigger cuts.
He has certainly been…deliberate.
FTFY
He has certainly been…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..…deliberate.
I agree that he’s definitely conservative, perhaps overly so. I’ll take conservative over Pete D’s pointless tinkering and Vlade’s mindless shoot-from-the-hipping 7 days a week and twice on Sunday. Being great definitely requires taking bigger cuts now and then, but (IMHO) being average-to-good is mostly about not shooting yourself in the foot. Monte’s style definitely lends itself to healthy feet, and that in and of itself is big progress in Kangzland.
How do you make meaningful changes without attractive assets? Let’s assume that Fox was the most attractive asset he had back in 2020. Was ownership going to let McNair trade Fox? I doubt it. And did ownership have an appetite for a long term rebuild like so many have wanted for many years? Probably not to that point, either.
I think Sabonis was one of those cuts, personally.
He walked into a team with Fox (pre-extension), Bogdanovich, Barnes, and,sadly, Bagley as potentially valuable trade pieces, a team without any really bad contracts (Hield and Barnes were roughly market rate), and all their future picks plus a handful of extra 2nds. Obviously, what ownership would or wouldn’t allow plays a big role, but it’s also unknowable to us. I don’t think that’s a uniquely bad situation for a GM to walk into.
As for the Sabonis trade, I actually think that was pretty conservative as big name trades go. He traded present quality and upside, for a bit more present quality and a bit less upside without having to include any future assets. Don’t get me wrong, it was a big name move, but a pretty safe one and not, IMO, one likely to be a big needle mover without additional moves/acquisitions.
There might not be a perception of difference in value, but I think Sabonis is a lot better today than Haliburton. But that’s just my opinion, and I wasn’t quite as high as others on what Tyrese’s ceiling is.
That said, I think it’s an aggressive trade because of the sped up TL it created.
I think Monte was ready to start cleaning that first year, yet Vivek thought the mess could win. Then we had the lateral “win now” TD and Wright moves.
The process was slowed by the Kang of shortcuts…🤙🏽.
This is a great analogy AN.
Love this analogy too.
Me too. And man was this a mess to clean up. With very little to work with at the beginning.
Name one really clever move that he’s made in two years.
Turning Marvin Bagley into Donte DiVincenzo and Trey Lyles while also dumping Hield’s contract, and spinning a #12 pick into a young, two-time all-star seems pretty clever to me.
But McNair probably won’t land Kyrie Irving, so he’s a moron.
After giving this a day to percolate, I like the Murray pick. Not only was he the BPA IMO, but also a good fit to fill one of the King’s glaring weaknesses. The Kings are in desperate need of some decent wing players, so hopefully he steps in right away and starts producing.
Looking forward to his debut.
It’s so weird listening to all the experts out there. Everyone talks about how much they love Murray, how solid he is, how great he was in college. Yet, laugh at the Kings for passing on Ivey, who gets tagged with that “boom or bust” label. So people like Ivey’s “ceiling” over Murray’s, even though Murray is a better player right now? I feel like a lot of the experts are just killing the Kings cause they’re the Kings.
Like I heard comparisions about the Luka/Bagley and Lillard/Robinson picks to this …. and I think that’s just WAY off base. If anything, Ivey could be the bigger bust here. Maybe I’m just not seeing it right, but I feel pretty comfortable with Murray in a Kings uni right now.
Jay Bills felt Murray was most NBA ready of all draftees . Thought Kings made a great and right pick !
Personally, I think it has much less to do with Murray, and everything to do with a, IMO, really over-inflated opinion of Ivey.
I really don’t get the Ivey hype. He’s an interesting prospect, but I don’t see any justification for him being elevated to a tier above the 5 or so players taken just after him.
Seriously, what makes Ivey a better prospect than Mathurin?
There is a draw to the unknown / unseen. The Morant comps (which I don’t agree with) is the crux of the Ivey hype. Shaedon Sharpe is the biggest example of this – his unknown >>>>> Hardy’s known, for example.
I probably would have taken Ivey. I would probably have been wrong in doing that. My guess is that there will be a player or two (or three or…) taken after Murray and Ivey that wind up being better than either one, though I don’t have a flying fart of an idea of who those players might be.
I’d guess that every fan base sets the talent level in the draft based on where they pick. Top three team fan bases saw this as a three player draft, while SA fans probably saw it as a 9-10 player draft, and Cavs fans saw the pool as being at least 14 players deep (with a tier or two, of course). We tried to talk ourselves into this being a 4-5 player draft. And while I’m fine with Murray, I’d trade him for any of the top three players in this draft…and I will eventually be proven wrong about that as well.
The “ceiling” talk is so interesting. “Ivey has a higher ceiling!” Maybe, but if you want to talk about ceilings, you have to discuss the odds of the player actually reaching that ceiling. Ivey has a higher ceiling than Murray b/c he’s more athletic. Okay. Does he have the BBIQ, work ethic, focus, and track record of improvement to suggest he will reach it? From what I’ve seen, one of the concerns some evaluators have about Ivey concerns his drive and determination. If so, wouldn’t that make his “ceiling” much harder to reach?
I haven’t seen any concerns about Ivey’s intangibles. Personally, I just think the degree to which “upside” is often tied to athleticism is misled. Assuming NBA-level athleticism, I think ceiling is much more determined by BBIQ and skill level. If you look at the elite players in the NBA, the most common shared characteristic is elite BBIQ. Meanwhile, the level of athleticism is all over the place. Just looking at MVP vote getters, you have elite athletes (at one time or another) in Embiid, Giannis, Morant, and LeBron. Then guys that are more in the mid-range like Booker & Tatum. Then a handful of guys that entered the league with big athleticism questions like Jokic, Doncic, and Curry.
Some of these same experts discounted Damian Lillard because he played at Weber St and said that a small conference G wouldn’t make it in the NBA. Which was laughable then and now. If you want to compare a successful small conference G to Dame, compare Ja to Dame. Those numbers are similar. And if you wish to compare a really successful bigger conference G to Ivey, just compare Jaden Ivey to Trae Young. Those numbers don’t look very good by comparison either.
Luka is arguably the best 18 year old in the history of Europe, and accomplished things that typically even European stars didn’t do until they were 20/21 at the earliest. Look up the history of EuroLeague MVP’s for instance. Many of them don’t win MVP’s until their mid 20’s.
Me too.
Agreed. I’ve been pretty happy with Monte’s moves so far. Not feeling ecstatic like after the last 2 years first round picks, but still very happy. Good stuff so far Monte! 👊
He also hasn’t produced a winning season and I don’t see it happening soon.
Nice start with the Murray pick, Monte, but still work to be done.
Not sure about trading away the 2nd round pick, when you have a cheap shot at trying to luck into a first-round talent.
Would love to believe that there’s no play-offs mandate but words are like wind.
I would have asked about trading the higher of the two 2nd round picks. CBS Sports instantly gave us an “A+” for taking Jaden Hardy, then we turn that into two 2nd rounders with dubious value. Hardy was mostly projected as a FIRST round choice, so Dallas might have got a steal from us. We’ll see in a couple of years, but in any case, WHY?
I believe he was a top three high school recruit. To me you take a flyer on a talent like that. Perplexing move by Monte to say the least.
He was just SOOOOOOOOO bad in the G-League. Now, I agree that the 2nd round is a good place to take a chance on him just needing more adjustment and development time. But it’s hard to understate how bad he looked.
Here’re my takeaways:
Oh, discriminating again those across the pond who are gonna have a day, ha Kosta? Groupthink that, buster!
Yes, Denmark.
I hope your night will be as great as my day.
Great takeaways.
I agree w/this.
I agree with you, and I’ll tell you why:
Did someone say “batshit crazy”?
Agree and feel Kings got the best player . A bit upset they traded rights of Jaden Hardy and afraid this may be a Gary Trent type mistake .
Follow-up a solid with no flash night with some steady FA moves addressing wing/ forward depth and we are playoff bound.
Match whatever on Donte, he is a quality starting 2 guard that fits well next to Fox defensively and solid chance his 3 ball returns to form.
MLE to Kyle Anderson which is fair market for him so realistic.
Bi-annual to Otto Porter at just over 2yr/4mil per is 5 mil more than his last contract and sticks with a coach he is comfortable with continuing his resurgence.
Minutes distribution:
Fox 32, Davion 16
DD 24, Davion 12, TD 12
Barnes 24, Anderson 12, Porter 12
Murray 26, Barnes 10, Anderson 12
Sabonis 32, Holmes 16
That is a realistic, balanced and high quality 10 man rotation that is salary cap viable. I think it has us easily in serious position for 5/6 seed.
Depending on Barnes performance it’s an easy re-sign after he is a part of the energy and love for the team during the playoffs 💪
That’s a decent plan, but still not a playoff team. Just look at the teams in the West and how loaded it is. Highly unlikely we’re a top 8 seed, maybe a play-in if we have injury luck on our side.
I wholeheartedly disagree. That roster is legitimately 10 deep with NBA quality players, we’ll balanced with defenders, shooters, primary and smart off ball players
That roster is 10 deep in guys worthy of being part of a decent team’s rotation. The problem is 8 of them are 5-10 in the rotation types.
Fox, Barnes and Sabonis can start for a very large percentage of the league, Donte and Murray probably half.
Davion probably the only bench guy I listed that could be a starter for most of the league in the near future.
This. I’ve always liked Otto Porter, but he’s made of glass at this point. He’s a guy who you have to load limit or he’ll break, which the Warriors did well and had the luxury of doing this season. DiVincenzo is not a starting player. Too wild and has been an above average three point shooter one season out of four.
Love Davion, but he’s undersized to play two guard, and there are still serious questions about whether he can shoot.
Unless Murray is a borderline All Star, that roster isn’t getting close to the top half of the conference.
-I slated Otto for 12 min a night, that’s load limit.
-So weird to claim Donte isn’t a starting player at this point in his career.
-Davion is not too undersized to play the two guard, his defensive skills, strength and mentality allow him to easily guard 1 or 2s. The shooting questions are fair but he improved last year and no reason with his reported work ethic it doesn’t continue.
Donte is a conditional starting player. Like the majority of NBA players. In the right situation with the right personnel around him, he can absolutely be a passable starter for a good team. The question is if the Kings present the right situation with the right personnel around him.
Instead of acquiring Anderson and Porter for depth, why not Metu and Lyles?
and possibly the lefty shooter they just acquired the rights to.
I mean, if healthy (big IF for Porter) Anderson and Porter are both more proven, better NBA players than Metu and Lyles.
Yeah health is why porter only got the bi annual.
Because Anderson is better than both of them at the 4, and porter can play the SF well (metu and lyles can’t play sf) for spot 10-15 min
Okay, slow-mo Anderson is not bad. But there’s also TD, Harkless and Holiday competing for rotational minutes at the wing. All in the last year of their contract. That’s at least 6 guys who can play wing or pf in the last year of their contract. That competition might be a good thing if all we’re looking for is one or two guys to crack the rotation. Perhaps show that they are serviceable players who can be included in a trade. And possibly an opportunity for someone to have a breakout year. Metu is a guy who I think might have a breakout year. We’ve always seen his flashes. At the end of the year he played with more consistency.
I don’t want to see holiday or harkless get a single minute for the kings and I’m over the hope for a breakout year.
I do think that Lyles is a terrific player, especially for what he’s making. Ideally, you don’t need him to start, but he does a lot of things well at both ends.
I agree and for that money we keep him and he plays when there are eventual injuries.
Agree Mike. Every team needs players who can just swallow minutes without being awful when fouls and injuries happen. The Kings these last few years have had horrid players at the end of the bench, who were borderline NBA players. Lyles is seemingly capable of 1500 minutes a year of average production.
Good plan but disagree on DDV . Feel he is a 4th guard at best .
Fox needs someone like that next to him to handle the defensive load, and he screams Mike Brown guy. I think Davion will pass him this year but he will be too valuable running the floor when fox isn’t on it.
Donte was a starting 2 on a championship team…let’s not raise our noses at him because he got hurt. Dudes a player, especially when surrounded by quality players and can just be a 3 and d sg
Of course, if you’re surrounded by Jrue, Middleton, and Giannis a whole lot of NBA players could be the starting 2 on a championship team. JR Smith was also a starting 2 on a championship team. Mario Chalmers was (arguably) the starting 2 on a championship team. The probably with the Kings is that the roster is full of guys that could feasibly be acceptable starters on a good team IF they had stars around them, but very few guys who are no doubt NBA quality starters.
I think we have 3 right now in Fox, Barnes and Sabonis, and within a year I think Murray will be a legit NBA starter.
Fox and Sabonis would start for anybody. Barnes is a fringe starter. Perfectly acceptable as a starter if they players around him are great. Same for guys like DD & Holmes. But without those 2-4 excellent-to-elite guys, a team starting Barnes isn’t likely to be very good. And a team with ambition is always going to be looking to upgrade from him.
Barnes is the classic solid vet fringe starter. A guy who isn’t going to lose you games, but he also isn’t going to win many for you either.
Barnes is this Kings version of Rudy Gay. Solid starters. Guys who make the TeamUSA roster or invite list, IMO.
Barnes is a “do all” – but not consistently enough to be considered an All-Star. There is a reason Dallas paid HB the big contract but also a reason they found out that he is not an Alpha star, just a solid starter, he is not a fringe starter. Is he a Top 30 for his position (or top 60 if you make him a SF/P)? I’d say, clearly, he is.
It helps that he appears to be a solid citizen as well. As he has a history with Coach Brown, his input as to trading or keeping Barnes should be the advice the Kings follow.
As you infer – he is neither great asset nor liability. For a team like Sac, he is their 3rd best player. And that, as you also infer, is why this team needs more talent.
Good thoughts on potential avenues going forward. I’d still see if there’s anything we can do to get Portis, but Anderson would be a nice roster addition.
I’m still convinced that KA couldn’t stop me from getting to the rim, but I wouldn’t base any future moves on that.
I’d throw all my plans out if we could get Portis, just don’t see how we make it happen without a s&t for him.
Portis scares me. I feel like he is as productive as he is because he is on the Bucks, with a Coach who uses him correctly, and Jrue, Giannis, Khris, and Lopez to keep him in line.
I feel he would Dedmon-ize on another team.
We’d also, of course, be buying extremely high on him. The chances that he produces up to his Kings contract would be extremely slim.
Always a possibility, almost everyone looks better when surrounded by great players. Still, Portis goes hard at all times, and that always manages to translate.
I still think Dedmon was a good signing when it happened, but his performance was truly awful. He wasn’t the first to go tits up as a Kings player (George Hill, JJ Hickson, Ostertag), but it’d be great to have a guy come in and break the streak.
I don’t want to be rude. But. What are you drinking? 5-6 seed.
Take a look at a Healthy Western Conference.
Dubs, Suns, Dallas, Denver, Grizz, Wolves, Clips, Pels, are all unequivocally more talented. It’s not even close or a conversation.
The others: Blazers, Lakers, Utah have a better shot at landing the prime free agents and trades over Sac over the next month
It will be take a miracle for the Kings to get into the playin with a healthy Western Conference:
Zion, George, Kawhi, Porter, Murray, Lebron, AD, and Dame all missed last year or a significant part of it injured.
A Sac starting 5 of Fox, DD, Murray, Barnes,‘and Sabonis will be fortunate to win 35-38 games. Fortunate. Not one of those aforementioned players is a 1A and probably not even 1b on a contending team.
I would also contend OKC and or Hou will pass the Kings in the standings within 2 years.
Dubs, Suns, Denver, Grizz are the only ones I think are clearly better than that roster.
I think Dallas way overachieved in the playoffs and will regress, Wolves not established in top tier, Clips are never going to be fully healthy and playing on all cylinders, Pels aren’t scary.
Those players you listed are all high injury risk players to miss significant time again except Dame. I wouldn’t count on any of them for more than 60 games.
OKC and Hou are far behind the Kings in current basketball talent, maybe not potential but that doesn’t win you games.
Good post. Some would like to live in blissful ignorance.
Invites for Hyunjung Lee (he’s got a foot injury, but worth keeping tabs on), Orlando Robinson and Tevin Brown. Kings need shooting as much as Walken needs more cowbell.
I like Hyungjung Lee, would love to see him get some run at Summer League and see what happens.
Big IF… but if they are able to get Sasha to come over, that makes the second round shenanigans make some more sense in already thinking of using him in roster spot. That could be a real feather in the cap if he had a Bogie type impact for a late second rounder.
Guy had a pretty accomplished season in a great league. Has a stand out skill in a position of need. Kind of joe ingles style with less playmaking. Watched an interview and seemed like he was frustrated at not getting opportunities earlier in career at Barcelona. Chance to show out this year.
It’s June…time to dream 😉
It’s quite possible that nobody at the 37th pick was willing to take a TWC from the Kings, too. That was supposedly what the Kings were aiming to do with those picks. Which makes sense why they traded them.
As usual, Monte didn’t say anything. Unless you count saying Murray is BPA multiple times. What was the most interesting was when he said fit wasn’t taken into account. That seemed to be the biggest issue of those preferring Ivey over Murray.
It seems pretty clear they looked at trades and didn’t get anything they wanted in return. Which is the way it should be.
I thought it was interesting that when directly asked about the playoff mandate, he said there wasn’t one.
I think this bears repeating but I think a sizable chunk of the fanbase has become accustomed to thinking they know more than the GM. And Monte McNair has proven, he’s not going to ask this fanbases opinion on how to run the Kings. That seems to bother people more than I think it would in other places due to the unique dynamics surrounding the Kings. Time will tell whether or not were these good decisions.
And Monte McNair has proven, he’s not going to ask this fanbases opinion on how to run the Kings.
Does any GM ask their fan’s opinions on how to run their franchise? I would hope not.
I can think of one…
I don’t see anyone mentioning the ‘as part of a larger trade’ with the 37th pick yet. That was the most interesting thing to me about the press conference. It sounds like there’s more to that trade than we know yet.
I like the pick. Feels like the Kings are building a good team.
We all look for something really eventful on draft night. We also look for something, anything that gives us some breadcrumbs about the team’s plans and intentions. We got neither. We did get a smart, talented player who should be a starter for years, so it’s hard to be upset about that. And they stopped the ‘point guards every year!’ thing. The generic ‘corporate PR platitude speak’ presser is disappointing, along with passing up on a possible project/steal at 37. I think those things cause most of the vague sense of missed opportunity. Since we got virtually nothing from Monte, the next three months of his actions will have to speak for him:
-He traded for Donte (twice) and he didn’t exactly overwhelm. Will he re-sign him?
-What happens to Richaun?
-Does last year’s BPA Mitchell start/fit with Untradable Fox?
-He clearly wants to get rid of Barnes. Who will he get for him (apparently not Collins).
If Monte really wanted to build interest, he could have hyped these upcoming issues. There’s even a corporate-bro-speak term for that: stay tuned…
His actions tell me he doesn’t clearly want to get rid of Barnes, weird take. It shows he is willing to for the right price, which should be any player. Don’t be shocked if Barnes is resigned and we just use our mle and biannual to fill in wing/forward depth
Agree, Barnes is plug-and-play for almost any team, and there’s no reason to take a loss by sending him out of town for what amounts to crap.
Sometimes no move is the best move.
Plus his game isn’t going to drop off any time soon, he already has that older vet smoothness to his game…he’ll be fine through his next contract
Keegan is good. But it feels like Kings are about to run it back with essentially the same roster. All the other west teams got better. Comparing this roster to those teams is sad.
If the Kings run it back with the same roster, we can reasonably expect the same results. Monte and this community knows the roster needs an extreme makeover, so I’m in the camp of what have you done for me lately. So far so good on the pick, but that’s it. So far.
I agree. I will add that if I squint hard and get as positive as possible:
I could see the Kings squeezing out an additional five wins with a full season of healthy Fox and Sabonis.
I could see another three wins if the team embraces Mike Brown’s defensive focus.
Maybe Murray’s worth a game or two?
So this team could get into the high 30s if everything goes right. That said, when you look at the WC and work your way down, it is really hard to project the Kings as a top 8 team, and maybe not even a top 10 team.
My fingers have been crossed for so long they are cramping – but we have to expect (yes, expect) that this is not the finished product as far as the roster is concerned.
GM McNair, I am guessing when I say this, has just as much to undo as to do. And he’s had two weird COVID assisted seasons to do it. Part of the undo is related to agents and other front offices dealing with Genius King Vivek and recent GM Divac and the reputation that has been associated with the franchise – Dysfunctional. Erratic. Dumb.
I appreciate that Monte has not just pulled the trigger to pull the trigger (though last Summer’s Alex Len, Delon Wright wasn’t so great) and that he has had some errant events – the Bogdanovich affair and then the Laker debacle. Maybe out of his control, but he was involved.
If GM McNair is going to make a difference, he is going to have “show it” this off season. Keegan Murray is a sensible first step, IMO.
Full off-season with Donte, Sabonis and Murray is likely 3 new starters…how is that the same roster? Haha what’s happening 🤣
Yep. IMO, the issue isn’t drafting Murray over Ivey. It’s thinking that’s going to be good enough to improve a ton. They’re better, but not by much and not as much as others teams got yesterday.
I’m not sure anyone thinks just drafting Murray is good enough to improve a ton, do they? I certainly haven’t heard anyone say that. There’s a lot of offseason to go. We’ll see where it all stands at that point.
Yep. There’s a big difference between Kings fans wanting to see a lot of action on draft day and improving your roster with the tools you have at your disposal to you over the entirety of the summertime.
It’s not finished and done, but I can’t imagine anyone in the FO really thought they could only get away with drafting a player in the 1st round and leave it at that. If they did, why continue to be in rumors for John Collins for instance? That’s not just by accident.
A few years ago I became indifferent to the team, when I realized I was too busy to give any of my time, money, or energy to a bad product. I thought to myself “I don’t walk into a grocery store and seek out shitty beer just because of the high school nostalgia that came with it. Why do I do this with the Kings?” My blind optimism for this team is gone, and I think it has allowed me to more objectively evaluate the Kings organization.
That said, Im not sure the hate for Monty at this point is warranted. As Ive watched him the past couple years, I have began to formulate the opinion that he might be OK at draft evaluations. I also think he is calculated in trades involving the few “assets” the Kings have on their roster.
For any GM, hitting on talent with the 9th and 12th picks in the draft isn’t like shooting fish in a barrel. He has hit on talent in the previous two drafts in those spots.
Monty probably couldve pulled the trigger last season and got fleeced for Ben Simmons. I think he is battling a league-wide perception that the Kings are a team you can manhandle in trades. For the last 15 years we’ve frequently traded every little piece of talent we’ve had for spare parts.
Lastly, I don’t think Mike Brown takes this job if he or Steve Kerr thought Monty was just another slap-d*** GM. Mike Brown has likely come into his last HC opportunity. It needs to go well for him, or this is probably it.
Im not asking anyone to get excited about the direction of this. But if Monty says Keegan was his BPA, 90% of me believes that’s true, and he’s got a track record to back that up.
I do trust Monte on drafts but not much else until record improves . No other moves have actually worked yet . Clock is ticking .
BB55 – we are kindred spirits. This team is easy to walk away from. This community brought me back – and that was after a few year hiatus.
GM McNair is simply a reasonable and acceptable GM who can now work with an reasonable and acceptable Head Coach in Mike Brown. This is a first in the Ranadive era. Mike Malone -yes! Pete D’Allesandro – No!, then it was George Karl – No! then Vlade Divac – Hell No! with Dave Joerger – Yes! and of course, to build a successful team you have to have consistency and stability – Big No and No.
Should King Vivek dismiss GM McNair – do it now and start anew with Coach Brown or extend Monte for another 4 years (I hope they do this).
I look forward to seeing you post more.
For sure. I lurked at STR for years and followed everyone over here. This fanbase has been abused in a way I didn’t think was even possible. Even bad franchises stumble into a little luck every now and again. The level of ineptitude within the organization has been astounding.
I appreciate Vivek keeping the team here. But that’s it. He has been abysmal. His product (the Kings) do not deserve a dollar out of my pocket or a minute of my time. Ive literally declined to go to concerts at G1 and have never stepped inside that building because Im adament that he receives zero dollars from me. My protest will end when they finish with a winning record and land a spot in the 1-8 playoffs. Im not going to accept a Pelicans finish.
I totally understand why people still support the team, watch the team, buy tickets, get hopeful. It’s love. I knew that’d I never be able to really find a new favorite team, and even if I did, I’d be right back on the band wagon as soon as the Kings got good. But I cant support a bad product. So I opted out. It wasn’t cold turkey. It was gradual.
Ive enjoyed it. Ive been able to look at the Kings objectively, like I do with other teams, rather than with my heart. Monty, objectively appears worthy of keeping around a bit longer. I understand the frustration with the lack of trades/signings. But I also remember JJ Hickson, Carl Landry, Salmons (twice), Marcus Thronton, etc. All complimentary players that were never going to move the needle on these terrible rosters.
He flipped Haliburton a little earlier than I might have preferred, but landed an All-Star. In the past, we’ve held onto talent for too long and received diminished assets in return.
The only thing that still pisses me off is the national narrative surrounding Sacramento. Somehow NYK is the Mecca of basketball. They last won a championship 50 years ago. They aren’t landing any top FAs either. They can GTFOH with that.
This is yet another painful reminder that basketball (and the swirling mass of media and branding around it) is a business. NYK is still treated like a basketball Mecca because there’s a shit ton of money to be made on that narrative. There’s only national money to be made on Sacramento basketball when the Kings are good. Thus, until such time as the Kings are good, they aren’t going to bother much with us.
But they got CAA and that counts for a lot in this day and age.
It’s really easy to pick out all the Bagley defenders. Legit if you defended the Bagley pick, you should no longer be able to comment on this site. That’s a lot of the main people on here.
What does this even mean?
Good, I thought it was just me.
Your basketball takes make me cringe
That may be so, but they have the benefit of cogency.
I almost said “look it up,” but I’ll settle for you not demanding that a specific class of people ought to stay quiet forever.
The people who are so voraciously defending the Keegan pick are the same ones who did the same thing with the Bagley pick.
I’m gonna need names. Because I am defending the Keegan pick and absolutely lambasted the Bagley pick.
Of course, the two situations have nothing in common, so it’s complete nonsense either way. Bagley and Keegan have nothing in common as prospects. The other options available in 2018 have nothing in common with the other options available in 2022. The decision-makers in the FO are different.
Ultimately, I suspect you’re just making things up to support your personal narrative.
I straight up said that the Vlade FO had a lack of imagination by not taking Luka. Still believe that.
I’m absolutely happy with Keegan Murray and that the McNair FO believes in him.
Yeah that’s BS. I hated the Bagley pick and I like the Murray pick. You’re reaching awfully hard on that one.
Looks like school is out for summer.
After listening to James Ham on his pods, who has mentioned that Dave Joerger supposedly wanted in a couple of different draft years (Kuzma in 2017, Doncic in 2018), I wonder how much better the Kings would be if Joerger was running the drafts instead of Divac.
I’m not saying Dave Joerger is poised to be a FO guy or anything, but I wonder where the Kings would be at if the Kings had taken the players he preferred the years he was here.
You’re either comparing Ivey or Murray to Luka…hint, Murray is the closer comp
I think you’re doing this wrong
Looking back over the years from the point we drafted Marv to the point in his career where we traded Marv I can’t think of one poster here who consistently defended the pick. I’m sure there might be one……..maybe 2 but certainly not the main people on here, whoever they are. If you have a huge problem with the mysterious majority maybe you can find a site where this drivel would be accepted.
The pick was awful, but I took Bagley’s side against people who insisted that it was Bagley’s fault that we didn’t take Doncic. You go where you go, and that’s all there is to it.
The blame is on one person, and only that person.
I am hopeful this pick will work out and am not going to blast Monte on unknowns. If the pick fails, then obviously he should be held accountable.
But it does get me to potential Vlade quotes that could have been made:
“i had a better draft pick two days ago”
“Pappablah had a high floor too because he was really tall”
“i was concerned Ivey would be poisonous”
“Keegan was BPA because i had him higher on my list”
The term “consensus” is being overused.
It was consensus that Murray was the best player in CB last season, over Ivey
Doth our reputation precede us? After reading the post draft grades and criticism Kings received for picking Keegan at 4, I couldn’t help but wonder if a team like the spurs would have made the same move, would they have been praised instead for being smarter than others?
I’d say the likelihood of that hovers in the neighborhood of 99%.
at least.
Sacramento is the GOAT of scape
Badge Legend