Current Roster

[kevin44]

I have to assume this is the team were stuck with. Play in if we're lucky? I can't wait.

[codydaze]

I'd have the depth chart looking something like this:

Schroder/Monk/Carter
Lavine/Keon/Davis
Derozan/Clifford/McDermott
Keegan/Jones/Saric
Sabonis/Raynaud/Eubanks

Davis, Saric and Eubanks are all pretty much nothings, I wouldn't be surprised if one or more of them is cut before training camp to bring in Westbrook who has been heavily rumored to come here.

Fairly uninspiring roster, I would very much rather watch a rebuild than watch this squad win 40 games and get bounced in the play-in.

[TyFrekey]

Agree with both of you, I’m certainly not watching with any hopes beyond making the play in. And every move that’s been made this offseason has gotten a meh reaction from me because it does nothing to move us away from that purgatory, though I suppose there could be longer term benefits. My season will be spent watching mainly hoping to root for a team competitive night to night, enjoy players I love, and hoping for development of younger guys.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[thomas1897]

Sacramento Kings 2025–26 Roster Evaluation
Strengths
• Scoring Depth: Lavine, DeRozan, Monk, and Sabonis can all create offense at multiple levels. This team could rank top 10 in offensive rating.
• Veteran Experience: DeRozan, Schroder, and Lavine bring playoff reps and leadership — valuable in close games and locker room dynamics.
• Young Talent: Keegan Murray, Devin Carter, and Nique Clifford offer upside, especially defensively and in transition.
• Versatility: Multiple players can slide between positions — Monk (1–2), Lavine (2–3), Keegan (3–4), Saric (4–5).
Weaknesses
• Defense: Bottom-10 last season, and the core additions (Lavine, DeRozan, Schroder) don’t fix that. Perimeter containment and rim protection and rebounding remain major concerns.
• Fit & Redundancy: Lavine and DeRozan struggled together in Chicago. Sabonis needs spacing, but DeRozan lives in the midrange, and Lavine is ball dominant.
• Leadership Clarity: Who’s the alpha? Sabonis is the offensive hub, but not a closer. Lavine has never led a winning team. Schroder is solid but not a franchise floor general. Sacramento has talent, but not elite structure. They’re a play-in level team unless the defense improves dramatically and the offense gels beyond individual scoring. A “play-in level team” in today’s NBA refers to a squad that finishes between 7th and 10th place in its conference — not quite a guaranteed playoff team, but competitive enough to fight for a spot. Cost and strategic flexibility absolutely factor into why some NBA teams, like Sacramento, may settle into a “play-in tier” rather than pushing all-in for a top 6 seed. Let’s unpack the logic behind it: Financial Strategy: Controlled Spending vs. Star Chasing
• Luxury Tax Avoidance: Building a top 6 contender often requires max contracts and deep benches — which means crossing into luxury tax territory. Sacramento has historically avoided that threshold.
• Short-Term Deals: Players like DeRozan, Schroder, and Saric are on manageable contracts. This gives the front office flexibility without long-term financial risk.
• Asset Preservation: By staying competitive but not overspending, the Kings keep their draft picks, cap space, and trade flexibility intact — useful if a true star becomes available.