LaVine traded to the Kings as part of 3 team deal (Huerter, Tre Jones to Bulls)

[kodo]

We talked about this a lot already, but Kings GM is lost! Directionless dummie who assembled team who just doesnt fit together at all. Still cant believe they traded away Haliburton and then also Fox in few years lol. Now their starting 5 played last third of season without PG?! How stupid is that??

I'm a huge Sabonis fan but the Haliburton trade was insane.

The Fox trade was positive. Fox is an expiring next season, they traded away nothing once Fox made it clear he wasn't coming back. Instead of empty cap space he got Lavine, 3 first round picks, 3 second round picks.
The 1st rounders are the Hornets, Spurs, and TWolves. Charlotte will keep the pick due to protections, but I assume this the protections will drop over time.

Then again I don't see Fox as some superstar like some people, I think he's about the same as Lavine although in a more important position. Sacramento was a play-in team w/ Fox and Lavine has kept them a play-in team.

Of course they could have kept Fox by just giving him a hometown max in the future, but giving Fox like $60M a year is a far worse decision.

[kodo]

From the general board

Rusty Buckets did (a long-winded as usual) video essay on the death of the SG and used Zach LaVine as his prototype.

Basically, a volume scoring SG without playmaking abilities is the least valuable player in today’s NBA. Players like Zach LaVine are best suited as 6th men, but are talented enough to score 25 PPG, thus tricking teams into thinking he’s a 1st option.

Watch on YouTube

Interesting, but tries too hard to make a point. Didn't like him dissing my boy Kevin Huerter as well. Didn't mention Giddey as a tall PG. I know this was an older video though.

The SG portion was one of the dumber things I've seen about basketball. So if a SG has star level talent, he's then a "PG" so the SG position is dead. So it's basically just semantics. Harden is too good to be a SG, he's really a PG. Luka is too good to be a SF, he's really a PG. Etc..

Yes if you take every star level SG and call them "PGs" then yes the SG position looks very weak. What a brilliant basketball mind. Does remind me of the Tim Duncan position debate. Duncan was a C his entire pre NBA career. He only was a 4 because SAS also had David Robinson. After the Admiral, he played most of his minutes at the 5. But he's still called a PF largely because people said he was too skilled to be a Center. Duncan is 6' 11" / 7', Oberto was 6' 10" but they still called Oberto the C because Timmy was the more skilled big man.

[sco]

From the general board

Interesting, but tries too hard to make a point. Didn't like him dissing my boy Kevin Huerter as well. Didn't mention Giddey as a tall PG. I know this was an older video though.

The SG portion was one of the dumber things I've seen about basketball. So if a SG has star level talent, he's then a "PG" so the SG position is dead. So it's basically just semantics. Harden is too good to be a SG, he's really a PG. Luka is too good to be a SF, he's really a PG. Etc..

Yes if you take every star level SG and call them "PGs" then yes the SG position looks very weak. What a brilliant basketball mind. Does remind me of the Tim Duncan position debate. Duncan was a C his entire pre NBA career. He only was a 4 because SAS also had David Robinson. After the Admiral, he played most of his minutes at the 5. But he's still called a PF largely because people said he was too skilled to be a Center. Duncan is 6' 11" / 7', Oberto was 6' 10" but they still called Oberto the C because Timmy was the more skilled big man.

I think the whole PF/C issue was also about guys guys like Duncan and Garnett not wanting to get beaten up in the paint as C's. I'm not sure on this second part, but IIRC PF's were getting paid better than C's back then too.

[coldfish]

https://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/SAC/2025/on-off/
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/lavinza01.html

Zach finished the year with Sacramento. His numbers were very similar to what he was doing in Chicago. Per minute maybe down a little with slightly better efficiency but overall the same player box score wise.

What sticks out is that again, his on/off numbers were terrible. This is lead by the defense where the Kings were 8.1 points worse per 100 possessions with Zach on the court.

Overall, I think Zach is a hard worker and seems to be a good guy as NBA players go. Fantastic shooter. That said, he just has issues with his game that make is box score contribution much greater than his contribution to actually winning the game. As such, he is simply massively overpaid and most of the league figured that out, which is why he was traded for peanuts.

[Jvaughn]

https://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/SAC/2025/on-off/
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/lavinza01.html

Zach finished the year with Sacramento. His numbers were very similar to what he was doing in Chicago. Per minute maybe down a little with slightly better efficiency but overall the same player box score wise.

What sticks out is that again, his on/off numbers were terrible. This is lead by the defense where the Kings were 8.1 points worse per 100 possessions with Zach on the court.

Overall, I think Zach is a hard worker and seems to be a good guy as NBA players go. Fantastic shooter. That said, he just has issues with his game that make is box score contribution much greater than his contribution to actually winning the game. As such, he is simply massively overpaid and most of the league figured that out, which is why he was traded for peanuts.

I wonder if he played with an organization like Pops Spurs, Thibs Knicks, or Kerr's Warriors, would he understand defensive schemes better and become at good team defender. He has the athleticism to be a good defender, and he is a solid man defender, but he has no understanding on team concepts.

[coldfish]

https://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/SAC/2025/on-off/
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/lavinza01.html

Zach finished the year with Sacramento. His numbers were very similar to what he was doing in Chicago. Per minute maybe down a little with slightly better efficiency but overall the same player box score wise.

What sticks out is that again, his on/off numbers were terrible. This is lead by the defense where the Kings were 8.1 points worse per 100 possessions with Zach on the court.

Overall, I think Zach is a hard worker and seems to be a good guy as NBA players go. Fantastic shooter. That said, he just has issues with his game that make is box score contribution much greater than his contribution to actually winning the game. As such, he is simply massively overpaid and most of the league figured that out, which is why he was traded for peanuts.

I wonder if he played with an organization like Pops Spurs, Thibs Knicks, or Kerr's Warriors, would he understand defensive schemes better and become at good team defender. He has the athleticism to be a good defender, and he is a solid man defender, but he has no understanding on team concepts.

The year he made the all star game he was a noticeably better defender and his on off numbers were better. He knows what to do but just is (IMO) saving energy.

[PaKii94]

https://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/SAC/2025/on-off/
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/lavinza01.html

Zach finished the year with Sacramento. His numbers were very similar to what he was doing in Chicago. Per minute maybe down a little with slightly better efficiency but overall the same player box score wise.

What sticks out is that again, his on/off numbers were terrible. This is lead by the defense where the Kings were 8.1 points worse per 100 possessions with Zach on the court.

Overall, I think Zach is a hard worker and seems to be a good guy as NBA players go. Fantastic shooter. That said, he just has issues with his game that make is box score contribution much greater than his contribution to actually winning the game. As such, he is simply massively overpaid and most of the league figured that out, which is why he was traded for peanuts.

I wonder if he played with an organization like Pops Spurs, Thibs Knicks, or Kerr's Warriors, would he understand defensive schemes better and become at good team defender. He has the athleticism to be a good defender, and he is a solid man defender, but he has no understanding on team concepts.

The year he made the all star game he was a noticeably better defender and his on off numbers were better. He knows what to do but just is (IMO) saving energy.

He could get a bit better with focus but he is who he is Those on off numbers you're talking about (his peak) still only rated him out to barely a net positive and that's including historic efficiency/shooting levels on the offensive end

A wonderful elite tough shot maker with severe deficiencies in everything else and then a poor IQ (which hinders off ball movement from him and anything more than basic playmaking)

That poor IQ applies on the defensive side too.

His ideal role is again 6th man off the bench. Provide a scoring punch when there is a lull in the game with second stringers. If he's doing well continue to play him. If he's doing poorly just bench hin

[ChettheJet]

We saw who he was in CHI, he could score with anybody, 20 in a quarter,50 in a game, he had 5 rebounds and 5 assist. Everybody liked him as person. He was just inattentive on defense he lost his man,didn't switch, never took afoul when he rotated in the lane. If he wasn't the face of the franchise he should have been taken out for defense a lot.This is something people who propose halfassed trades for other max guys just ignore, there's more than box score stats to tell you how much a guy does for you or comes up short. He needs to play next to a passing defensive guard and have the big rim protector behind him, that's the lineup he fits into

[MrSparkle]

I don't wonder much about Lavine. If a defensive minded team with a good playmaker picked him up (ideally as the 3rd or 4th option), he'd be an excellent addition. Even a guy with the worst defense ever is a huge plus to a balanced defensive team if he's shooting 45% from 3P and has a 64% TS (on high volume, and high usage) -- and draws FTs. Honestly, Miami should consider him, if they aren't going to nuke their team. Sell high on Herro, buy low on Lavine.

[meekrab]

https://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/SAC/2025/on-off/
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/lavinza01.html

Zach finished the year with Sacramento. His numbers were very similar to what he was doing in Chicago. Per minute maybe down a little with slightly better efficiency but overall the same player box score wise.

What sticks out is that again, his on/off numbers were terrible. This is lead by the defense where the Kings were 8.1 points worse per 100 possessions with Zach on the court.

Overall, I think Zach is a hard worker and seems to be a good guy as NBA players go. Fantastic shooter. That said, he just has issues with his game that make is box score contribution much greater than his contribution to actually winning the game. As such, he is simply massively overpaid and most of the league figured that out, which is why he was traded for peanuts.

And even then the Kings massively lost the trade.

[MrSparkle]

I don't wonder much about Lavine. If a defensive minded team with a good playmaker picked him up (ideally as the 3rd or 4th option), he'd be an excellent addition. Even a guy with the worst defense ever is a huge plus to a balanced defensive team if he's shooting 45% from 3P and has a 64% TS (on high volume, and high usage) -- and draws FTs. Honestly, Miami should consider him, if they aren't going to nuke their team. Sell high on Herro, buy low on Lavine.

“Hi- we’re looking for Ranadive? We have a young all-star we’re willing to part with for Zach and a FRP?”

[kodo]

https://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/SAC/2025/on-off/
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/lavinza01.html

Zach finished the year with Sacramento. His numbers were very similar to what he was doing in Chicago. Per minute maybe down a little with slightly better efficiency but overall the same player box score wise.

What sticks out is that again, his on/off numbers were terrible. This is lead by the defense where the Kings were 8.1 points worse per 100 possessions with Zach on the court.

Overall, I think Zach is a hard worker and seems to be a good guy as NBA players go. Fantastic shooter. That said, he just has issues with his game that make is box score contribution much greater than his contribution to actually winning the game. As such, he is simply massively overpaid and most of the league figured that out, which is why he was traded for peanuts.

And even then the Kings massively lost the trade.

Really? I thought they made out like bandits.

They got no worse with the Fox/Lavine swap. Fox had them as a play-in team, Zach replacing Fox had them as a play-in team. Fox scored 25 ppg on 57% TS, Lavine scored 23 ppg on 64% TS. And with the swap they got 6 picks, 3 first round picks and 3 2nd round picks.

If we traded Coby and got identical production back, got no worse as a team, and got 6 picks I'd call that a massive win.

And Fox was an expiring next year no team option, no Restricted status. He was about to be worth absolutely 0 very fast for SAC.

[meekrab]

https://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/SAC/2025/on-off/
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/lavinza01.html

Zach finished the year with Sacramento. His numbers were very similar to what he was doing in Chicago. Per minute maybe down a little with slightly better efficiency but overall the same player box score wise.

What sticks out is that again, his on/off numbers were terrible. This is lead by the defense where the Kings were 8.1 points worse per 100 possessions with Zach on the court.

Overall, I think Zach is a hard worker and seems to be a good guy as NBA players go. Fantastic shooter. That said, he just has issues with his game that make is box score contribution much greater than his contribution to actually winning the game. As such, he is simply massively overpaid and most of the league figured that out, which is why he was traded for peanuts.

And even then the Kings massively lost the trade.

Really? I thought they made out like bandits.

They got no worse with the Fox/Lavine swap. Fox had them as a play-in team, Zach replacing Fox had them as a play-in team. Fox scored 25 ppg on 57% TS, Lavine scored 23 ppg on 64% TS. And with the swap they got 6 picks, 3 first round picks and 3 2nd round picks.

If we traded Coby and got identical production back, got no worse as a team, and got 6 picks I'd call that a massive win.

And Fox was an expiring next year no team option, no Restricted status. He was about to be worth absolutely 0 very fast for SAC.

Charlotte 2025 ended up not conveying, so they netted a 2027 from the Spurs who should be in the playoffs and a 2031 from the Wolves which could be good or could be #30. In exchange they have a roster so dysfunctional they went out and signed Markelle Fultz to try to have a PG.

[WookieOnRitalin]

https://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/SAC/2025/on-off/
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/lavinza01.html

Zach finished the year with Sacramento. His numbers were very similar to what he was doing in Chicago. Per minute maybe down a little with slightly better efficiency but overall the same player box score wise.

What sticks out is that again, his on/off numbers were terrible. This is lead by the defense where the Kings were 8.1 points worse per 100 possessions with Zach on the court.

Overall, I think Zach is a hard worker and seems to be a good guy as NBA players go. Fantastic shooter. That said, he just has issues with his game that make is box score contribution much greater than his contribution to actually winning the game. As such, he is simply massively overpaid and most of the league figured that out, which is why he was traded for peanuts.

He's been a loser his whole career because he does not help teams win.

I've been repeating this for five years. Vuc is also a loser. When AKME made them the foundation of this roster, I puked. I'd rather have Lauri and Wendall back. No, that is not hindsight. I hated moving on from all those players including Gafford.

[sco]

https://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/SAC/2025/on-off/
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/lavinza01.html

Zach finished the year with Sacramento. His numbers were very similar to what he was doing in Chicago. Per minute maybe down a little with slightly better efficiency but overall the same player box score wise.

What sticks out is that again, his on/off numbers were terrible. This is lead by the defense where the Kings were 8.1 points worse per 100 possessions with Zach on the court.

Overall, I think Zach is a hard worker and seems to be a good guy as NBA players go. Fantastic shooter. That said, he just has issues with his game that make is box score contribution much greater than his contribution to actually winning the game. As such, he is simply massively overpaid and most of the league figured that out, which is why he was traded for peanuts.

And even then the Kings massively lost the trade.

Really? I thought they made out like bandits.

They got no worse with the Fox/Lavine swap. Fox had them as a play-in team, Zach replacing Fox had them as a play-in team. Fox scored 25 ppg on 57% TS, Lavine scored 23 ppg on 64% TS. And with the swap they got 6 picks, 3 first round picks and 3 2nd round picks.

If we traded Coby and got identical production back, got no worse as a team, and got 6 picks I'd call that a massive win.

And Fox was an expiring next year no team option, no Restricted status. He was about to be worth absolutely 0 very fast for SAC.

Yeah, big win for SAC in terms of being able to have better assets to move forward with. They have too many guys who need the ball in their hands and too few defenders and no PG, but they probably have the assets now to make those changes.

[dougthonus]

I'm a huge Sabonis fan but the Haliburton trade was insane.

The Fox trade was positive. Fox is an expiring next season, they traded away nothing once Fox made it clear he wasn't coming back. Instead of empty cap space he got Lavine, 3 first round picks, 3 second round picks.
The 1st rounders are the Hornets, Spurs, and TWolves. Charlotte will keep the pick due to protections, but I assume this the protections will drop over time.

Then again I don't see Fox as some superstar like some people, I think he's about the same as Lavine although in a more important position. Sacramento was a play-in team w/ Fox and Lavine has kept them a play-in team.

Of course they could have kept Fox by just giving him a hometown max in the future, but giving Fox like $60M a year is a far worse decision.

I agree, people are grading the Fox / LaVine swap as if they were trying to upgrade talent instead of one where they got three first round draft picks and stayed about the same. Give me as many trades as you can where my talent level is more or less a wash but I get three firsts.

[sco]

I'm a huge Sabonis fan but the Haliburton trade was insane.

The Fox trade was positive. Fox is an expiring next season, they traded away nothing once Fox made it clear he wasn't coming back. Instead of empty cap space he got Lavine, 3 first round picks, 3 second round picks.
The 1st rounders are the Hornets, Spurs, and TWolves. Charlotte will keep the pick due to protections, but I assume this the protections will drop over time.

Then again I don't see Fox as some superstar like some people, I think he's about the same as Lavine although in a more important position. Sacramento was a play-in team w/ Fox and Lavine has kept them a play-in team.

Of course they could have kept Fox by just giving him a hometown max in the future, but giving Fox like $60M a year is a far worse decision.

I agree, people are grading the Fox / LaVine swap as if they were trying to upgrade talent instead of one where they got three first round draft picks and stayed about the same. Give me as many trades as you can where my talent level is more or less a wash but I get three firsts.

I wonder if Demar's contract is movable. 2 years @ 25 for his production isn't terrible. Lavine, after next season may be movable too. Murray could fetch them a good PG if they decided to let him go.

[MrSparkle]

And even then the Kings massively lost the trade.

Really? I thought they made out like bandits.

They got no worse with the Fox/Lavine swap. Fox had them as a play-in team, Zach replacing Fox had them as a play-in team. Fox scored 25 ppg on 57% TS, Lavine scored 23 ppg on 64% TS. And with the swap they got 6 picks, 3 first round picks and 3 2nd round picks.

If we traded Coby and got identical production back, got no worse as a team, and got 6 picks I'd call that a massive win.

And Fox was an expiring next year no team option, no Restricted status. He was about to be worth absolutely 0 very fast for SAC.

Charlotte 2025 ended up not conveying, so they netted a 2027 from the Spurs who should be in the playoffs and a 2031 from the Wolves which could be good or could be #30. In exchange they have a roster so dysfunctional they went out and signed Markelle Fultz to try to have a PG.

I think you’re both right. Kings were in a dead-end, and did get a fairly lateral swap done… but end of the day, Kings’ pick payout was fool’s gold. Fox is better than Lavine, and more importantly he has a higher ceiling. Coming off a weak season… but he hits his potential in SAS, it’s gonna make the trade look a lot worse. Indiana trade didn’t look that bad either, at first.

[dougthonus]

I think you’re both right. Kings were in a dead-end, and did get a fairly lateral swap done… but end of the day, Kings’ pick payout was fool’s gold. Fox is better than Lavine, and more importantly he has a higher ceiling. Coming off a weak season… but he hits his potential in SAS, it’s gonna make the trade look a lot worse. Indiana trade didn’t look that bad either, at first.

Depends a lot on what you think of Fox, but he's going to make as much as LaVine (pro-rated out to current money, 30% max) but locked up for four (or five) years instead of two, and you're going to start that deal after next season. Maybe he's a little better, but I don't buy a lot better, and his lack of shooting is a problem you have to constantly work around. I wouldn't be excited about Fox on a 30% max deal. Maybe he'll end up getting paid less and it won't be so bad.

For the Kings, I think they avoided a really expensive contract that probably wouldn't have aged well or they traded a guy whom wasn't going to stay with them anyway. They pay an extra one year to LaVine, but they were salary neutral through two years by dumping guys they didn't want anyway, and got three first round picks.

I think that's a pretty good outcome for them given that it wasn't a particularly great hand they had. You could probably question whether they should have taken on LaVine's extra year vs letting the money roll off the books though. That part was definitely a bit of an AK style move of not wanting to give up being mediocre.