Skip to main content

Nique Clifford didn't "fall down" the Kings' rotation; they dug a hole and buried him

The choice to give up was made weeks ago.
ByIan Goodwillie
Apr 12, 2026; Portland, Oregon, USA; Sacramento Kings guard Nique Clifford (5) waits during a break during the second half in a game against the Portland Trail Blazers at Moda Center. Mandatory Credit: Troy Wayrynen-Imagn Images
Apr 12, 2026; Portland, Oregon, USA; Sacramento Kings guard Nique Clifford (5) waits during a break during the second half in a game against the Portland Trail Blazers at Moda Center. Mandatory Credit: Troy Wayrynen-Imagn Images | IMAGN IMAGES via Reuters Connect

When the Sacramento Kings decided to trade Nique Clifford, one of the most common comments was how he had "fallen down the rotation." It's a euphemism for what happened, which was that the Kings actively chose to bench him to rationalize the move. That's par for the course in Sactown.

All the way back in 2025, the OKC Thunder drafted Clifford. He's a great developmental player with real potential to be a key 3&D wing off the bench. Scott Perry and the Kings must have agreed with that as they traded for him on draft night, giving the Thunder a first-round draft pick in exchange.

Less than 18 months later, Sacramento decided they had reached the end of the line with Clifford and sent him back to OKC in exchange for two second-round draft picks. If you look at that whole deal and think that the Kings bought high and sold low on Clifford, you would be 100% correct.

If that's not incomprehensible enough for you, the Kings turned around and used the space created by Clifford's departure to sign Mason Plumlee. They didn't even add a point guard to help back up Darius Acuff Jr. Instead, they added a fifth center to the rotation because they needed a new logjam.

No one is buying the rationale for the Clifford move

Reputedly, the Kings were not happy with Clifford's progress. They started focusing on other players, and he fell down the rotation. By the end of his tenure in Sacramento, he was barely getting any time on the court at all. There are more than a few holes in that logic, which isn't a surprise for the Kings.

First and foremost, the Kings were the ones responsible for developing Clifford. And this franchise is notorious for their terrible, borderline non-existent developmental system. Basically, it's a sink-or-swim environment for rookies, and the franchise just keeps tossing them weights.

The bigger lie is that he fell down the rotation. In reality, the Kings pushed him down the rotation. They actively decided to stop playing him and just left Clifford on the bench a lot. The one time he got real minutes and usage was in the first preseason game, and he absolutely killed it.

Make no mistake that the Kings just gave up on Clifford because it was easier than actually putting the work in to develop him. He had huge potential for this franchise. The problem is that both the coaching staff and front office are too short-sighted to recognize that.

Add us as a preferred source on Google