RantSports projects Kings will be a 'second‑apron' team after 22‑win season

The Kings’ problem is not just that they were bad. It’s that they were bad and expensive at the same time. Sacramento finished 22-60 in 2025-26, one of the league’s worst records, and now heads into the summer with a payroll that sits around $213.9 million on Spotrac’s cap sheet. That is above the projected 2025-26 second apron line of about $207.8 million. So the team is not staring at a normal “let’s tweak the roster” offseason — it’s staring at a roster-building trap. ### Why does “second apron” matter so much? The second apron is basically the NBA’s punishment zone for teams that spend too much. Once you’re above it, the menu of ways to improve gets much smaller. Teams over that line can’t use the taxpayer midlevel exception, can’t take back extra salary in certain trades, and lose access to several trade-building tools that richer teams used to lean on. So even. ### What put Sacramento in this spot? The Kings are carrying a very top-heavy cap sheet. Zach LaVine is listed at about $47.5 million, Domantas Sabonis at $42.3 million, DeMar DeRozan at $24.6 million, De’Andre Hunter at $23.3 million, and Malik Monk at $18.8 million for 2025-26. Keegan Murray and Devin Carter are cheaper, but the core money is tied up in veterans. Add the rest of the roster and dead money, and the total cap allocation pushes well past the projected second apron. ### Is this just a cap problem, or a basketball problem too? It’s both. Sacramento didn’t just miss the playoffs — it posted a minus-10.0 net rating, ranked 26th in offensive rating and 28th in defensive rating. That is the profile of a team that needs real changes, not cosmetic ones. But the catch is that the players most likely to be moved are also the players making the most money, and large contracts are a form of salary bloat. ### Can they just trade one big contract? Maybe, but that’s the hard version of the fix. LaVine is the obvious swing piece because his contract is huge and expiring soon, which can be useful. But moving one big salary does not automatically solve the bigger issue. If Sacramento dumps one veteran without getting real value back, the team could end up with more flexibility but still look a lot like the same 22-win roster shell. That’s the tension hanging over the summer. ### Why are people calling for a “boring” offseason? Because boring may be the only realistic version of smart. When a team is expensive, bad, and short on trade leverage, the flashy move is often the wrong move. Sacramento may be better off keeping optionality alive — using the draft, minimum contracts, and smaller cleanup trades instead of forcing a blockbuster just to prove something. The boring move. ### Does the draft matter more now? Yes. Cheap rookie-scale talent matters a lot more when the veteran core eats this much of the cap. Sacramento’s own offseason framing has pointed toward limited spending power and more reliance on the draft and minimum deals. That is not glamorous, but it’s one of the few ways to add value when the apron rules shut so many other doors. What's the real story here? The real story is not “the Kings might do nothing.” It’s “the Kings may be forced to do less than they want.” A 22-win team usually gets to dream big in the offseason. Sacramento doesn’t have that luxury. It has expensive veterans, weak recent results, and a payroll structure that turns every fix into a harder negotiation. It's less about finding one magic trade and more about escaping a bad cap shape without making it worse. That usually looks boring from the outside. But for this roster, boring might be the first step back toward sane.