Instant Reaction: What Do The Kings Do This Off-Season?

[SNPA]

Obviously I'm biased because I want Monk to stay in Sac but I truly think a team overpaying (I see 4/100 as an overpay for Monk) to be a starter would regret the decision. He is in the absolute perfect situation here as a sixth man that fits well with our two stars. As soon as you put him into the starting lineup and given a bigger role, you are going to see his weaknesses and limitation magnified.

I just look at the deal for his biggest 6MOY competition, Naz Reid. Is he really worth $10m more annually than Naz? I personally don't think so.

Spurs coverup most of his weaknesses and accentuate his strengths. Magic not so much.

[Texas Chuck]

Plus, Monk for 4 years isn’t locking VW’s career into a single course. There would be plenty of time to adjust if needed.

Way too many posters are willing to just waste early years of players's careers in ways I don't get. If the belief is Wemby is going to be ready to win by next year, and I assume that's the belief, and we know players of his size tend to have short shelf lives, why sign the wrong player to a big deal just to do something? Every Wemby year moving forward should be seen as precious. Doesn't mean they need to panic push in for veterans next year, but it does mean not just going and signing Malik Monk type players to the overpaid deals you have to give out in free agency and lock yourselves into a deal that becomes difficult to move if he's not everything you hoped.

Monk would crush as a starter with VW. He’d play up to the contract (assuming it’s 4/100’ish). I’d predict the Spurs to make the play-in next year. Monk is a great fit for them. I don’t understand where the idea he’d be a bad contact comes from.

Oh we love our guys. But he's been a negative on court the past 2 years on a good team(really good last year). His main contribution is scoring, but he's not really above average at scoring efficiency. These are your classic bench guard characteristics. Doesn't offer enough as an all-around player to be a starter, so needs to be a bench guard. Don't want to be paying good starter money to your 3rd guard with more important holes to fill first.

IF you can't be super efficient playing off Sabonis, you aren't going to be super efficient playing off a worse offensive player in Wemby especially since Wemby isn't going to create the quality of shots Sabonis does.

[Skybox]

Obviously I'm biased because I want Monk to stay in Sac but I truly think a team overpaying (I see 4/100 as an overpay for Monk) to be a starter would regret the decision. He is in the absolute perfect situation here as a sixth man that fits well with our two stars. As soon as you put him into the starting lineup and given a bigger role, you are going to see his weaknesses and limitation magnified.

I just look at the deal for his biggest 6MOY competition, Naz Reid. Is he really worth $10m more annually than Naz? I personally don't think so.

Spurs coverup most of his weaknesses and accentuate his strengths. Magic not so much.

I think you have it backwards...ORL would sic Suggs on the tougher backcourt assignment. I get that Wemby is an eraser, but ORL has a much better team defense. Wemby can't cover everyone.

He's not my first choice for ORL...but he's "out there" with such a tough contract situation that he's likely very "gettable" if ORL or another team with cap space wants him. Personally, I'd much prefer a trade for Dejounte or Simons.

[SNPA]

Way too many posters are willing to just waste early years of players's careers in ways I don't get. If the belief is Wemby is going to be ready to win by next year, and I assume that's the belief, and we know players of his size tend to have short shelf lives, why sign the wrong player to a big deal just to do something? Every Wemby year moving forward should be seen as precious. Doesn't mean they need to panic push in for veterans next year, but it does mean not just going and signing Malik Monk type players to the overpaid deals you have to give out in free agency and lock yourselves into a deal that becomes difficult to move if he's not everything you hoped.

Monk would crush as a starter with VW. He’d play up to the contract (assuming it’s 4/100’ish). I’d predict the Spurs to make the play-in next year. Monk is a great fit for them. I don’t understand where the idea he’d be a bad contact comes from.

Oh we love our guys. But he's been a negative on court the past 2 years on a good team(really good last year). His main contribution is scoring, but he's not really above average at scoring efficiency. These are your classic bench guard characteristics. Doesn't offer enough as an all-around player to be a starter, so needs to be a bench guard. Don't want to be paying good starter money to your 3rd guard with more important holes to fill first.

IF you can't be super efficient playing off Sabonis, you aren't going to be super efficient playing off a worse offensive player in Wemby especially since Wemby isn't going to create the quality of shots Sabonis does.

The whole post is flawed. It’s his playmaking that would be the big factor for the Spurs. Watch his PnRs with grandpa McGee, then imagine it with baby VW. It’d be one of, if not the, toughest things to guard in the league. He’d unlock so much for that team.

[Texas Chuck]

Monk would crush as a starter with VW. He’d play up to the contract (assuming it’s 4/100’ish). I’d predict the Spurs to make the play-in next year. Monk is a great fit for them. I don’t understand where the idea he’d be a bad contact comes from.

Oh we love our guys. But he's been a negative on court the past 2 years on a good team(really good last year). His main contribution is scoring, but he's not really above average at scoring efficiency. These are your classic bench guard characteristics. Doesn't offer enough as an all-around player to be a starter, so needs to be a bench guard. Don't want to be paying good starter money to your 3rd guard with more important holes to fill first.

IF you can't be super efficient playing off Sabonis, you aren't going to be super efficient playing off a worse offensive player in Wemby especially since Wemby isn't going to create the quality of shots Sabonis does.

The whole post is flawed. It’s his playmaking that would be the big factor for the Spurs. Watch his PnRs with grandpa McGee, then imagine it with baby VW. It’d be one of, if not the, toughest things to guard in the league. He’d unlock so much for that team.

Tons of guards can throw lobs to Wemby. Doesn't mean you should pay $25M a year for this specific one.

I mean old man JJ Barea wrecked teams playing with lowly Dwight Powell. Was he worth $100m? Of course not. There is more to basketball than lobs and kicking to the corner.

[Godaddycurse]

I just wouldn't commit 4 years to Monk. My philosophy on NBA contracts is approaching a something like this.

End of Bench: 1 year
Role Player/Non-Star: 2 year
Low-End Starter: 3 year
High-End Starter/Star+: 4 year

Malik Monk has 27 Million in career earnings. He is going to be searching for the largest contract he possibly can, because this is likely his first and last big pay day of his career.

Looking back at what Monk is, he has had career high usage rates the past 2 seasons in Sacramento and has been good as a playmaker/scorer with his usage. He fits into that Tyler Herro mold where he has a high usage, isn't very efficient [but still around league average] and could easily be more efficient if his usage were to drop.

Maybe Sacramento see's him as a good fit for the next 3-4 years at a high number but I don't think he is giving any kind of discount to San Antonio because of Wemby.

My expectation is he demands something like the Dejounte Murray and Anfernee Simons contracts [4/114 and 4/100 respectively].

i think a 2+1 FVV like contract could make sense (obv not at max though) for both parties

Why would Monk agree to that? the whole point is he wants more money than SAC can give him...the only reason to do a one year or a 1 with a 2nd player option, would be to come back next year, probably with a handshake wink wink to get his real payday next summer...but that's risky, he could get hurt or, more likely, revert to his former level of play - which wasn't that great. 2 Years below what he could've gotten is a lot to give up. On the other hand, If I'm SAC, I'm resistant to promise anything - the future is unclear.

This is his summer to cash in on his performance, but only a small group of teams can afford him (without the possibility of a SnT). I don't think he's a Pop guy, DET has too many similar young guys to add him, ORL would offer a plug and play situation, where his defensive weaknesses could be somewhat hidden and he could be a designated scorer and offensive inititator, with the opportunity to show off his Lead Guard chops.

BUT...ORL isn't likely bidding very much higher than $20 per if no one else is involved in the auction...so my initial question was: Could he take an underpay of the most SAC could pay for one year and then cash out next summer to stay with SAC?

If I'm him, I take ORL's bigger, guaranteed deal and play it safe. He was on a vet min with LAL just a couple of years ago, so the money security thing is real...next question is whether ORL FO even wants him...I like the fit, but they seem enamored with long, defensive-minded guys that can't throw a ball in the ocean.

to make money? he can get much higher annual term. something like 2/60 or more which would let him get another big contract before age 30. SAS get him off their books before Wemby gets his supermax

[slick_watts]

i thought for sure someone would pony up for austin reaves last year and no one did. maybe it was his rfa status, or not wanting to mess with lebron and the lakers. i don't think it's certain monk's pricetag will exceed the maximum the kings can offer, though.

[toooskies]

Obviously I'm biased because I want Monk to stay in Sac but I truly think a team overpaying (I see 4/100 as an overpay for Monk) to be a starter would regret the decision. He is in the absolute perfect situation here as a sixth man that fits well with our two stars. As soon as you put him into the starting lineup and given a bigger role, you are going to see his weaknesses and limitation magnified.

I just look at the deal for his biggest 6MOY competition, Naz Reid. Is he really worth $10m more annually than Naz? I personally don't think so.

Naz had the same choice as Monk last year. Reid agreed to an extension with Minnesota before hitting the market, but the Cavs were reported to be looking to sign him in a similar way that Strus was acquired and possibly that salary slot. Naz just gave Minnesota a discount for getting him where he is-- they weren't limited by actual cap rules as much as by having too many big contracts already, but Minnesota couldn't go matching the biggest offer.

Monk effectively the same choice-- stay on a reasonable contract or leave and get a raise.

[Colbinii]

i thought for sure someone would pony up for austin reaves last year and no one did. maybe it was his rfa status, or not wanting to mess with lebron and the lakers. i don't think it's certain monk's pricetag will exceed the maximum the kings can offer, though.

It's going to be exactly this, which is hilarious.

Step 1: Kings fan hype up Monk, selling the idea they "can't afford him"

Step 2: Kings fans start selling Monk on defensive teams, knowing his defense is terrible (Spurs and Magic)

Step 3: Monk resigns in Sacramento at less than Kings fans thought he would sign for

Step 4: Kings fans telling everyone how much of a discount Monk took and how good of a deal he took, ignoring how multiple teams could pay Monk as much as they want and decided not to

[codydaze]

Obviously I'm biased because I want Monk to stay in Sac but I truly think a team overpaying (I see 4/100 as an overpay for Monk) to be a starter would regret the decision. He is in the absolute perfect situation here as a sixth man that fits well with our two stars. As soon as you put him into the starting lineup and given a bigger role, you are going to see his weaknesses and limitation magnified.

I just look at the deal for his biggest 6MOY competition, Naz Reid. Is he really worth $10m more annually than Naz? I personally don't think so.

Naz had the same choice as Monk last year. Reid agreed to an extension with Minnesota before hitting the market, but the Cavs were reported to be looking to sign him in a similar way that Strus was acquired and possibly that salary slot. Naz just gave Minnesota a discount for getting him where he is-- they weren't limited by actual cap rules as much as by having too many big contracts already, but Minnesota couldn't go matching the biggest offer.

Monk effectively the same choice-- stay on a reasonable contract or leave and get a raise.

Minnesota had the benefit of restricted free agency with Naz too though so they at least had the threat of matching an offer. Monk being unrestricted means that if a team wants him, they can get him, albeit with needing to probably overpay a bit.

[toooskies]

Obviously I'm biased because I want Monk to stay in Sac but I truly think a team overpaying (I see 4/100 as an overpay for Monk) to be a starter would regret the decision. He is in the absolute perfect situation here as a sixth man that fits well with our two stars. As soon as you put him into the starting lineup and given a bigger role, you are going to see his weaknesses and limitation magnified.

I just look at the deal for his biggest 6MOY competition, Naz Reid. Is he really worth $10m more annually than Naz? I personally don't think so.

Naz had the same choice as Monk last year. Reid agreed to an extension with Minnesota before hitting the market, but the Cavs were reported to be looking to sign him in a similar way that Strus was acquired and possibly that salary slot. Naz just gave Minnesota a discount for getting him where he is-- they weren't limited by actual cap rules as much as by having too many big contracts already, but Minnesota couldn't go matching the biggest offer.

Monk effectively the same choice-- stay on a reasonable contract or leave and get a raise.

Minnesota had the benefit of restricted free agency with Naz too though so they at least had the threat of matching an offer. Monk being unrestricted means that if a team wants him, they can get him, albeit with needing to probably overpay a bit.

Unless Minnesota was going to pull their deal, Reid was going to get an offer for at least the MLE. The Cavs' back channels were buzzing.

[pillwenney]

i thought for sure someone would pony up for austin reaves last year and no one did. maybe it was his rfa status, or not wanting to mess with lebron and the lakers. i don't think it's certain monk's pricetag will exceed the maximum the kings can offer, though.

It's going to be exactly this, which is hilarious.

Step 1: Kings fan hype up Monk, selling the idea they "can't afford him"

Step 2: Kings fans start selling Monk on defensive teams, knowing his defense is terrible (Spurs and Magic)

Step 3: Monk resigns in Sacramento at less than Kings fans thought he would sign for

Step 4: Kings fans telling everyone how much of a discount Monk took and how good of a deal he took, ignoring how multiple teams could pay Monk as much as they want and decided not to

I sure hope you're right.

[pillwenney]

In the event that Monk does leave, the deal I'm looking hard at is looking to acquire both Grant and Brogdon from Portland.

As I see it, it would look like this:

Kings trade
Barnes
Huerter
Mitchell
Vezenkov
#13 pick
2028 top 10 protected 1st
2 2nds

get
Grant
Brogdon

Huerter goes to a 3rd team for matching salary and hopefully a flier asset. Barnes provides vet leadership in Portland.

Kings move forward like:
Fox/Jones
Brogdon/Ellis
Murray/Duarte/Edwards
Grant/Lyles
Sabonis/Len

Might start Ellis over Brogdon just to give the bench some offensive juice.

[SNPA]

In the event that Monk does leave, the deal I'm looking hard at is looking to acquire both Grant and Brogdon from Portland.

As I see it, it would look like this:

Kings trade
Barnes
Huerter
Mitchell
Vezenkov
#13 pick
2028 top 10 protected 1st
2 2nds

get
Grant
Brogdon

Huerter goes to a 3rd team for matching salary and hopefully a flier asset. Barnes provides vet leadership in Portland.

Kings move forward like:
Fox/Jones
Brogdon/Ellis
Murray/Duarte/Edwards
Grant/Lyles
Sabonis/Len

Might start Ellis over Brogdon just to give the bench some offensive juice.

To rich. Doesn’t need the other first or Mitchell IMO.

[jayjaysee]

i think a 2+1 FVV like contract could make sense (obv not at max though) for both parties

Why would Monk agree to that? the whole point is he wants more money than SAC can give him...the only reason to do a one year or a 1 with a 2nd player option, would be to come back next year, probably with a handshake wink wink to get his real payday next summer...but that's risky, he could get hurt or, more likely, revert to his former level of play - which wasn't that great. 2 Years below what he could've gotten is a lot to give up. On the other hand, If I'm SAC, I'm resistant to promise anything - the future is unclear.

This is his summer to cash in on his performance, but only a small group of teams can afford him (without the possibility of a SnT). I don't think he's a Pop guy, DET has too many similar young guys to add him, ORL would offer a plug and play situation, where his defensive weaknesses could be somewhat hidden and he could be a designated scorer and offensive inititator, with the opportunity to show off his Lead Guard chops.

BUT...ORL isn't likely bidding very much higher than $20 per if no one else is involved in the auction...so my initial question was: Could he take an underpay of the most SAC could pay for one year and then cash out next summer to stay with SAC?

If I'm him, I take ORL's bigger, guaranteed deal and play it safe. He was on a vet min with LAL just a couple of years ago, so the money security thing is real...next question is whether ORL FO even wants him...I like the fit, but they seem enamored with long, defensive-minded guys that can't throw a ball in the ocean.

to make money? he can get much higher annual term. something like 2/60 or more which would let him get another big contract before age 30. SAS get him off their books before Wemby gets his supermax

With the raising cap, I don’t think I’m that afraid of giving Monk a front loaded deal starting between 24-27 mil.. which works out to be a lot more than Sac can offer anyways. Somewhere between 4yr88-100 million. Orlando looks really bad if they don’t front load it though..

I would probably be afraid of giving Monk a FVV deal and then you end up still giving him 22-24 mil a year in 2 years when the cap is over 160 and he’s worth 12-15% of it.. It’s just ownerships money, but that probably ends up just being 20ish million thrown away.

Stealing FVV was worth losing money in the deal.

I think Monk would easily take 2yr64-70 over 4yr80 and bet on himself at 29 to get another 20mil a year contract (only really needing to get 10mil per year to make more than staying in Sac).. So halfway agree with you. Just think the team would regret it when they pay him 3yr60-70 in 2026..

[wolves_89]

Obviously I'm biased because I want Monk to stay in Sac but I truly think a team overpaying (I see 4/100 as an overpay for Monk) to be a starter would regret the decision. He is in the absolute perfect situation here as a sixth man that fits well with our two stars. As soon as you put him into the starting lineup and given a bigger role, you are going to see his weaknesses and limitation magnified.

I just look at the deal for his biggest 6MOY competition, Naz Reid. Is he really worth $10m more annually than Naz? I personally don't think so.

Naz had the same choice as Monk last year. Reid agreed to an extension with Minnesota before hitting the market, but the Cavs were reported to be looking to sign him in a similar way that Strus was acquired and possibly that salary slot. Naz just gave Minnesota a discount for getting him where he is-- they weren't limited by actual cap rules as much as by having too many big contracts already, but Minnesota couldn't go matching the biggest offer.

Monk effectively the same choice-- stay on a reasonable contract or leave and get a raise.

Minnesota had the benefit of restricted free agency with Naz too though so they at least had the threat of matching an offer. Monk being unrestricted means that if a team wants him, they can get him, albeit with needing to probably overpay a bit.

Naz was actually an unrestricted free agent, which made his choice of staying even more important for Minnesota.

[OxAndFox]

With the raising cap, I don’t think I’m that afraid of giving Monk a front loaded deal starting between 24-27 mil.. which works out to be a lot more than Sac can offer anyways. Somewhere between 4yr88-100 million. Orlando looks really bad if they don’t front load it though..

I would probably be afraid of giving Monk a FVV deal and then you end up still giving him 22-24 mil a year in 2 years when the cap is over 160 and he’s worth 12-15% of it.. It’s just ownerships money, but that probably ends up just being 20ish million thrown away.

Stealing FVV was worth losing money in the deal.

I think Monk would easily take 2yr64-70 over 4yr80 and bet on himself at 29 to get another 20mil a year contract (only really needing to get 10mil per year to make more than staying in Sac).. So halfway agree with you. Just think the team would regret it when they pay him 3yr60-70 in 2026..

Think overall you're correct with how the contract could go if he essentially leaves the Kings, but I don't see anyone going that high.
Honestly, I think the Kings' number is at the very high end of what a team should go to on a Monk contract. Now we all know FOs do extreme things sometimes, but would the Spurs be comfortable potentially paying guards around $90m next season? Trades can be made etc, but I don't see a Monk/Vassell with Jones/Johnson off the bench a great option.
Orlando would certainly be easier, but with all those young guards they will need to do something very quickly or their value diminishes. I wonder what their FO is thinking. Good problem to have though for sure.

[JRoy]

In the event that Monk does leave, the deal I'm looking hard at is looking to acquire both Grant and Brogdon from Portland.

As I see it, it would look like this:

Kings trade
Barnes
Huerter
Mitchell
Vezenkov
#13 pick
2028 top 10 protected 1st
2 2nds

get
Grant
Brogdon

Huerter goes to a 3rd team for matching salary and hopefully a flier asset. Barnes provides vet leadership in Portland.

Kings move forward like:
Fox/Jones
Brogdon/Ellis
Murray/Duarte/Edwards
Grant/Lyles
Sabonis/Len

Might start Ellis over Brogdon just to give the bench some offensive juice.

To rich. Doesn’t need the other first or Mitchell IMO.

Agreed, assuming Huerter could be routed elsewhere.

[NYG]

What about use the MLE on Tyus Jones to replace Monk if he leaves then use the trade to go all in on PF (which, as I previously mentioned in this thread, is an underwhelming group)?

[codydaze]

What about use the MLE on Tyus Jones to replace Monk if he leaves then use the trade to go all in on PF (which, as I previously mentioned in this thread, is an underwhelming group)?

I've wanted Tyus Jones in Sac for years so I would definitely be in on him here for the MLE.