Siakam/LaVine

[Godaddycurse]

To get a mulligan on the contract.

Its not a mulligan when they combine to make more for the next few years. IQ's contact is flat too so it will be decent value by year 3-5 of its deal. This is a major downgrade on court for us

Yes, it is a major downgrade, and it is also a year off the back end and two contracts that are individually more tradeable.

nah IQ is a much more sought after archtype and his contract will be fine in couple years if we really want to get off his contract.

[ReggiesKnicks]

I wonder if both teams would rather do something like
Demar + Monk + Picks for Siakam.

For Sac the idea is LaVine on paper fits better with Sabonis/Siakam.
Schroder - LaVine - Keegan - Siakam - Sabonis
Carter - Keon - Nique - Jones - Maxime

For Indiana, they would try and find a new home for Demar at the deadline, and more than likely a new home for Monk at some point over the next year. But he would fit in great next to Nembhard if they did decide to keep him.

Monk isn't a player we would consider a fit, nor is Demar.

That said, I think we prefer the salary expiring in 2026-2027 rather than Monk's deal running through 2027-2028.

[Godaddycurse]

Seemed more like it was also Siakam pushing to Indy in that process, too?

Indiana was willing to max him which is why he pushed to Indy imo. If Sacramento valued him like Indy did then i dont think he would mind very much. He wanted a max deal and refused to go where it wasn't offered

Per reports, he also wanted to play with a center that he felt best stretched the floor, and a PG that would put him in position to succeed. Sacramento offered like a quarter of each of those two requests?

Those are bonuses but his most important goal was a max contract. ie if he has a choice between sacramento max contract vs Indy less than max but get to play with turner and hali he would pick the former. I think Indy had to make bunch of moves to clear max space for him that offseason if they didnt have his bird rights but i could be wrong

[Scoot McGroot]

coulda got him couple years ago if Kings were willing to pay more than huerter/barnes and a first instead of disparaging his game. Seem like a heavy price to pay now for him 2 years older now

Seemed more like it was also Siakam pushing to Indy in that process, too?

I was prepared to think this was something Indiana should not do, but getting unprotected Kings picks is probably worth it. LaVine on a cheaper deal would be nice next to Hali, and maybe Walker can grow into a larger role. If he can't, they have sufficient pick value to move for another player to replace Siakam. I am not saying Indiana shouldl do it (well, I think they should), but it would not be egregious.

For Sacramento - I would not do it - but it would at least lead to an interesting and much better balanced team. In principal, I like the four man combination of Ellis-Murray-Siakam-Sabonis. I think it just requires the right player at "point guard" to bring it together into something interesting. Honestly, I would not hate them following up with Monk + Schroder for Quickley.

That player option probably just kills any discussion here. Especially as it means that Indy then is proceeding with no answer long-term at the 4 or the 5. That's a lot of "unknown" that I just don't think Indy can afford to lock in?

Also, while it at least includes that unprotected 1st this year, I think a Murray/Siakam/Sabonis front court is a playoff team. Like, Siakam probably stabilizes a lot there and helps them excel?

I am not sure in the West it is. I think it has a good chance, but the West is brutal. Plus it is more than just the 2026 pick, and it likely ensures the 2026 pick that Indiana has (of its own) is top 6-7 at worst. I think there are several ways where this pays off and the uncertainty isn't that great. LaVine would have one more year making what he does now and Indiana would have the option to move some other pieces + picks for the starting 4 they need (or draft one, or see of Walker grows into it), or they could aggregate an expiring LaVine with assets for someone else. I think in the end they come out ahead, asset wise. But assets aren't the only reason to make a decision, especially as Hali + Siakam seems to be a 'sum is greater than the parts' situation.

There could be a way that this works out to Indiana having a top 4 pick without Siakam, or something more like 8-10 with him. In that case, it is probably worth it to have the higher pick and the additional draft assets?

Yeah, I doubt Indy is willing to tank, even if just one year of tanking, and then re start the building process of developing a new 4 and 5 over the next 3-4 seasons before being competitive again?

If there's a 4 or 5 to acquire with those assets, probably need to identify it as part of this trade immediately, rather than making the trade and just hoping something presents itself in another year or two?

And, 6th or 7th at worst is probably only happening if Walker/Mathurin don't develop? And we know Obi shouldn't be the long-term starting 4? Because if Walker develops and produces there at the 4, that team is still looking at close to play-in? Like, picking 8-12, at best, barring lotto luck? And if Walker doesn't produce, then you're even deeper in the hole at the 4 long term?

[babyjax13]

Its not a mulligan when they combine to make more for the next few years. IQ's contact is flat too so it will be decent value by year 3-5 of its deal. This is a major downgrade on court for us

Yes, it is a major downgrade, and it is also a year off the back end and two contracts that are individually more tradeable.

nah IQ is a much more sought after archtype and his contract will be fine in couple years if we really want to get off his contract.

You might be right. I am more hopeful about IQ than the other big contracts Toronto has.

[LightTheBeam]

I wonder if both teams would rather do something like
Demar + Monk + Picks for Siakam.

For Sac the idea is LaVine on paper fits better with Sabonis/Siakam.
Schroder - LaVine - Keegan - Siakam - Sabonis
Carter - Keon - Nique - Jones - Maxime

For Indiana, they would try and find a new home for Demar at the deadline, and more than likely a new home for Monk at some point over the next year. But he would fit in great next to Nembhard if they did decide to keep him.

Monk isn't a player we would consider a fit, nor is Demar.

That said, I think we prefer the salary expiring in 2026-2027 rather than Monk's deal running through 2027-2028.

Thats fair. I don't think Demar is. I just think Demar is movable at the deadline for potentially more value. Monk can either fit in as a cheaper salary allowing them to add next year, or be moved.

For what its worth, I personally prefer the OP. LaVine sucks. Id rather start Keon at the 2, keep Monk on our bench, and move Demar at some point for more forward depth.

[babyjax13]

Seemed more like it was also Siakam pushing to Indy in that process, too?



That player option probably just kills any discussion here. Especially as it means that Indy then is proceeding with no answer long-term at the 4 or the 5. That's a lot of "unknown" that I just don't think Indy can afford to lock in?

Also, while it at least includes that unprotected 1st this year, I think a Murray/Siakam/Sabonis front court is a playoff team. Like, Siakam probably stabilizes a lot there and helps them excel?

I am not sure in the West it is. I think it has a good chance, but the West is brutal. Plus it is more than just the 2026 pick, and it likely ensures the 2026 pick that Indiana has (of its own) is top 6-7 at worst. I think there are several ways where this pays off and the uncertainty isn't that great. LaVine would have one more year making what he does now and Indiana would have the option to move some other pieces + picks for the starting 4 they need (or draft one, or see of Walker grows into it), or they could aggregate an expiring LaVine with assets for someone else. I think in the end they come out ahead, asset wise. But assets aren't the only reason to make a decision, especially as Hali + Siakam seems to be a 'sum is greater than the parts' situation.

There could be a way that this works out to Indiana having a top 4 pick without Siakam, or something more like 8-10 with him. In that case, it is probably worth it to have the higher pick and the additional draft assets?

Yeah, I doubt Indy is willing to tank, even if just one year of tanking, and then re start the building process of developing a new 4 and 5 over the next 3-4 seasons before being competitive again?

If there's a 4 or 5 to acquire with those assets, probably need to identify it as part of this trade immediately, rather than making the trade and just hoping something presents itself in another year or two?

And, 6th or 7th at worst is probably only happening if Walker/Mathurin don't develop? And we know Obi shouldn't be the long-term starting 4? Because if Walker develops and produces there at the 4, that team is still looking at close to play-in? Like, picking 8-12, at best, barring lotto luck? And if Walker doesn't produce, then you're even deeper in the hole at the 4 long term?

I think even if Walker develops that this season it would be a process. He would have to be as good as Siakam for the team to have the same result as it would with Siakam - and most good power forwards are not as good as Pascal.

Obviously Indiana doesn't tank, which is admirable, but this might be a situation where it is palatable because it is in service of maximizing Hali long term. I think as soon as he is healthy again, whether they have Siakam or not, they are probably a playoff team. But a playoff team with say ... a Haliburton - Dybantsa - Walker core, or a Haliburton - Boozer core, is a different proposition than a Haliburton - Siakam core. I don't have a strong position about which of these possible situations should be preferred (especially because drafting top 2-3 is not assured), but the longevity of a team with a high lottery pick this year could be a great outcome.

But also, flattened odds and whatnot, Indiana could finish with the 9th best odds and move up into the top 4 pretty easily.

[Scoot McGroot]

Indiana was willing to max him which is why he pushed to Indy imo. If Sacramento valued him like Indy did then i dont think he would mind very much. He wanted a max deal and refused to go where it wasn't offered

Per reports, he also wanted to play with a center that he felt best stretched the floor, and a PG that would put him in position to succeed. Sacramento offered like a quarter of each of those two requests?

Those are bonuses but his most important goal was a max contract. ie if he has a choice between sacramento max contract vs Indy less than max but get to play with turner and hali he would pick the former. I think Indy had to make bunch of moves to clear max space for him that offseason if they didnt have his bird rights but i could be wrong

Felt like they were more of a requirement, as it was kind of a double down of feeling those would put him in the best situation possible to earn a max contract? But yeah, hindsight, reports versus his actual word, etc. And yeah, Indy was only able to really sign him if they traded for him...

[Godaddycurse]

Per reports, he also wanted to play with a center that he felt best stretched the floor, and a PG that would put him in position to succeed. Sacramento offered like a quarter of each of those two requests?

Those are bonuses but his most important goal was a max contract. ie if he has a choice between sacramento max contract vs Indy less than max but get to play with turner and hali he would pick the former. I think Indy had to make bunch of moves to clear max space for him that offseason if they didnt have his bird rights but i could be wrong

Felt like they were more of a requirement, as it was kind of a double down of feeling those would put him in the best situation possible to earn a max contract? But yeah, hindsight, reports versus his actual word, etc. And yeah, Indy was only able to really sign him if they traded for him...

They weren't a requirement for him re-signing/extending with Toronto if Toronto had been willing to offer him a max deal. He and his agent knew this is his last big deal. Indiana deserves credit for not lowballing Toronto very much though or Masai likely would have kept him like he did with Lowry

[Scoot McGroot]

I wonder if both teams would rather do something like
Demar + Monk + Picks for Siakam.

For Sac the idea is LaVine on paper fits better with Sabonis/Siakam.
Schroder - LaVine - Keegan - Siakam - Sabonis
Carter - Keon - Nique - Jones - Maxime

For Indiana, they would try and find a new home for Demar at the deadline, and more than likely a new home for Monk at some point over the next year. But he would fit in great next to Nembhard if they did decide to keep him.

Monk isn't a player we would consider a fit, nor is Demar.

That said, I think we prefer the salary expiring in 2026-2027 rather than Monk's deal running through 2027-2028.

Thats fair. I don't think Demar is. I just think Demar is movable at the deadline for potentially more value. Monk can either fit in as a cheaper salary allowing them to add next year, or be moved.

For what its worth, I personally prefer the OP. LaVine sucks. Id rather start Keon at the 2, keep Monk on our bench, and move Demar at some point for more forward depth.

I think if Demar was movable for ANY value, he likely would've been this offseason, no?


Any Sacramento swap is just very tough as none of LaVine, Monk, or DeRozan are really a player that fills a need for Indy. Or even really a want. LaVine and Monk are bigger contracts that may help fill a hole for this year, but then they become huge hindrances off the bench behind Hali/Nemby? And with McConnell, Mathurin, Nesmith, Sheppard, etc, there's a pretty huge clog there? DeRozan is a nice enough player, for sure, but he's definitely not the style of play of a 3/4 that Indy wants... At that point, the picks required to accommodate those contracts and motivate Indy is just more than Sacramento should be willing to pay.


Edit: To be clear, I'm just not really a fan of trading a valued player for pieces under the concept of "well, you can trade those ill-fitting pieces down the road", because I've experienced where you can't always do that? And sometimes, the players lose value as ill-fitting pieces in your system? Etc.

[Scoot McGroot]

Those are bonuses but his most important goal was a max contract. ie if he has a choice between sacramento max contract vs Indy less than max but get to play with turner and hali he would pick the former. I think Indy had to make bunch of moves to clear max space for him that offseason if they didnt have his bird rights but i could be wrong

Felt like they were more of a requirement, as it was kind of a double down of feeling those would put him in the best situation possible to earn a max contract? But yeah, hindsight, reports versus his actual word, etc. And yeah, Indy was only able to really sign him if they traded for him...

They weren't a requirement for him re-signing/extending with Toronto if Toronto had been willing to offer him a max deal. He and his agent knew this is his last big deal

Well, sure. Toronto was the only professional city he had known. Surely it's easier to understand willing to stay in your "own city" long term under any fit if they're willing to pay you? But they're not, and you then realize that you need to look like the best player you can be to get a long-term max (your last big deal, as you point out), so you start looking at fit?

[Godaddycurse]

Felt like they were more of a requirement, as it was kind of a double down of feeling those would put him in the best situation possible to earn a max contract? But yeah, hindsight, reports versus his actual word, etc. And yeah, Indy was only able to really sign him if they traded for him...

They weren't a requirement for him re-signing/extending with Toronto if Toronto had been willing to offer him a max deal. He and his agent knew this is his last big deal

Well, sure. Toronto was the only professional city he had known. Surely it's easier to understand willing to stay in your "own city" long term under any fit if they're willing to pay you? But they're not, and you then realize that you need to look like the best player you can be to get a long-term max (your last big deal, as you point out), so you start looking at fit?

I dont know what Sacramento or Atlanta was willing to offer him but i suspect it wasn't a max, hence his reluctance to be traded there. I dont think there were a lot of capspace teams that would be willing to max him that offseason (ie he had low leverage) so he wanted a promise in place first, which Indiana gave. Pacers pounced when others were hesitant and reaped the benefits.

[Godaddycurse]

ANyways to not detract from OP too much, if Indy fans dont like Lavine, what about a 3 way with utah?

Lauri + 1st to Indiana
Siakam to Sacramento
Lavine + 1sts to Utah

Lauri is 3 yrs younger than Siakam so Indiana can stay competitive longer

[babyjax13]

ANyways to not detract from OP too much, if Indy fans dont like Lavine, what about a 3 way with utah?

Lauri + 1st to Indiana
Siakam to Sacramento
Lavine + 1sts to Utah

Lauri is 3 yrs younger than Siakam so Indiana can stay competitive longer

I think that really only makes sense cutting out Indiana. They'd likely prefer keeping the better/more versatile player. Of course if the pick capital is enough between Lauri/Siakam, maybe? Or if the offseason comes perhaps then Lauri to Indiana makes sense after they know where their 2026 picks land.

[basketballwacko2]

Siakam for LaVine/26 1st unprotected /28 1st some protection/Minny 30 1st unprotected

Kings go all in on the Sabonis era.

Sabonis/Siakam/Murray/DDR/Dennis - Ellis/Clifford/Rayaud

Pacers look to the late 2026 and beyond for a return to the finals by loading up on picks, getting a bridge contract and letting their young guys flourish. When Hali is fully back to his old form (27) they are in a great position.

This is not a bad offer value. 3 #1's 2 unprotected, and LaVine but the Pacers just don't need LaVine unless they are going to tank it up for 25/26.

[SNPA]

Siakam for LaVine/26 1st unprotected /28 1st some protection/Minny 30 1st unprotected

Kings go all in on the Sabonis era.

Sabonis/Siakam/Murray/DDR/Dennis - Ellis/Clifford/Rayaud

Pacers look to the late 2026 and beyond for a return to the finals by loading up on picks, getting a bridge contract and letting their young guys flourish. When Hali is fully back to his old form (27) they are in a great position.

This is not a bad offer value. 3 #1's 2 unprotected, and LaVine but the Pacers just don't need LaVine unless they are going to tank it up for 25/26.

I’m going on the assumption Hali isn’t really back to old form till middle of 26/27 season. I think this coming year is shot and he’ll need some time the following.


Sac has a new front office so any old bad blood shouldn’t carry over.

For Sac you lose this years pick. But the other one is protected and the Minny pick isn’t theirs. Post Sabonis/Siakam era Kings only have one impacted pick.

[LightTheBeam]

Monk isn't a player we would consider a fit, nor is Demar.

That said, I think we prefer the salary expiring in 2026-2027 rather than Monk's deal running through 2027-2028.

Thats fair. I don't think Demar is. I just think Demar is movable at the deadline for potentially more value. Monk can either fit in as a cheaper salary allowing them to add next year, or be moved.

For what its worth, I personally prefer the OP. LaVine sucks. Id rather start Keon at the 2, keep Monk on our bench, and move Demar at some point for more forward depth.

I think if Demar was movable for ANY value, he likely would've been this offseason, no?


Any Sacramento swap is just very tough as none of LaVine, Monk, or DeRozan are really a player that fills a need for Indy. Or even really a want. LaVine and Monk are bigger contracts that may help fill a hole for this year, but then they become huge hindrances off the bench behind Hali/Nemby? And with McConnell, Mathurin, Nesmith, Sheppard, etc, there's a pretty huge clog there? DeRozan is a nice enough player, for sure, but he's definitely not the style of play of a 3/4 that Indy wants... At that point, the picks required to accommodate those contracts and motivate Indy is just more than Sacramento should be willing to pay.


Edit: To be clear, I'm just not really a fan of trading a valued player for pieces under the concept of "well, you can trade those ill-fitting pieces down the road", because I've experienced where you can't always do that? And sometimes, the players lose value as ill-fitting pieces in your system? Etc.

I don't think Demar has any value right now. I've hoped they'd trade him for an expiring. I think the idea here is that at the deadline some team needs a scorer and gives up a protected 1st or 2nds + expirings for Demar. We will see if that happens.

As for the "trade the pieces later". I don't think the players are value to the Pacers (maybe Monk could be ). I think getting 2 unprotected 1sts from the worst franchise in the league + another unprotected 1st is the value. I was simply saying maybe Demar/Monk would be more digestible than being completely stuck with LaVine for 2 years. I'm not OP, and I don't think Indiana sells Siakam regardless, even if they should.

[Daddy 801]

Do this immediately if I am the Indy GM.

[SNPA]

For Sac the pain point is this year’s pick. The 28 is protected. The 30 is Minny’s.

What do they get for this…a chance to actually be a real playoff team for a three seasons. That’s huge for Sac. Notice, by the time Siakam/Sabonis expire Sac has all their picks going forward. I’d rather this future than two more middling first rounder, the dream of Minny being bad and the 10-11 seed for a few years.

[Scoot McGroot]

They weren't a requirement for him re-signing/extending with Toronto if Toronto had been willing to offer him a max deal. He and his agent knew this is his last big deal

Well, sure. Toronto was the only professional city he had known. Surely it's easier to understand willing to stay in your "own city" long term under any fit if they're willing to pay you? But they're not, and you then realize that you need to look like the best player you can be to get a long-term max (your last big deal, as you point out), so you start looking at fit?

I dont know what Sacramento or Atlanta was willing to offer him but i suspect it wasn't a max, hence his reluctance to be traded there. I dont think there were a lot of capspace teams that would be willing to max him that offseason (ie he had low leverage) so he wanted a promise in place first, which Indiana gave. Pacers pounced when others were hesitant and reaped the benefits.

From all parties, there was not a promise in place at the time of the trade. They all agreed that they would have to see the fit before committing to each other long term.

Pacers pounced, and the cost was low, because Siakam pushed for Indy for effective PG play and a stretch center. This was repeatedly mentioned by national guys like Stein and the local guys in Indy. Indy was also clear that while they weren’t going to rule out a max contract, they also were not going to guarantee one before seeing proof of fit.