At just over a month into the new NBA season, the trade market is already beginning to take shape, and one name continues to surface with increasing frequency: Zach LaVine. The All-Star guard hasn’t had the smoothest transition with the Sacramento Kings, and with the team stumbling to a disappointing 5-15 start, rival executives are already circling, waiting to see how impatient Sacramento’s front office may become.

The Kings made a bold move to acquire LaVine in the three-team deal that sent shockwaves around the league, but that gamble now sits under scrutiny as the franchise searches for an identity and stability.

Why the Warriors’ previous interest in Zach LaVine still matters

The Warriors have been a familiar name tied to LaVine dating back to last year, when Golden State reportedly held serious conversations about bringing him to the Bay before ultimately shifting course and securing Jimmy Butler.

That decision proved decisive enough to end LaVine’s path toward Chase Center, and most insiders believed the door was closed permanently.

However, in the modern NBA, nothing stays closed for long. Big contracts, declining timelines, rising frustrations, and shifting ambitions can reopen discussions nearly overnight.

Yet despite history and speculation, the current whispers around the league say the Warriors are not expected to re-enter the bidding for LaVine.

Jake Fischer reported that Golden State’s previous interest evaporated once Butler became available, and league sources suggest that the Warriors see no clear incentive to revisit those LaVine trade talks now.

But hypothetically, if the Warriors were to reconsider, would a trade for LaVine even make sense?

Can LaVine fix Golden State’s offensive identity crisis?

To answer that, you must begin with the central tension of the Golden State’s current season. The Warriors sit at a modest 11-10, good enough to remain competitive but not nearly assertive enough to feel convincing in the Western Conference hierarchy.

The dynasty has aged. Stephen Curry remains elite, but the roster around him continues to fluctuate between development, reinvention, and nostalgia. Draymond Green still anchors the defense when available, but his volatility has reduced his reliability.

Jimmy Butler is searching for touch, rhythm, and identity. Jonathan Kuminga and Brandin Podziemski are promising, but still navigating roles rather than defining them. The window is not closed, but it is no longer wide open.

Zach LaVine, in theory, represents offensive explosion and shot creation that the Warriors currently lack outside of Curry. His athleticism, three-level scoring, and ability to generate late-clock offense would ease the enormous offensive burden Curry carries nightly.

On paper, the idea is attractive. A core of Curry, LaVine, Butler, Green, and supporting depth would make for a dangerous postseason unit capable of surviving defensive storms and enduring scoring droughts.

But here is the truth that complicates everything: LaVine’s player option. At $48.9 million for the 2026-27 season, executives believe that number is suppressing his trade market.

According to Fischer, multiple teams have privately suggested that LaVine could find more suitors willing to part with meaningful assets if he were open to restructuring and lowering his long-term annual salary in exchange for guaranteed years.

In other words, he’s being treated like a depreciating asset rather than a rising star.

Golden State, with its already inflated payroll and luxury tax commitments, would hesitate to take on another long-term financial burden unless the move dramatically increased its title chances.

Article Continues Below

The Warriors’ ownership has paid historic luxury penalties before, but doing so again for a player who may not align with their aging timeline could be viewed as fiscally reckless rather than strategically bold.

There’s also the basketball fit. The Warriors’ offensive identity is rooted in movement, rhythm, and passing, not isolation. LaVine is most effective with the ball in his hands, operating as a primary scoring option.

In the Golden State, that role belongs unquestionably to Curry, and the ecosystem thrives when players accept roles built around spacing and off-ball creativity. Would LaVine adjust? Could he? And more importantly, would he be willing?

Will Sacramento actually pull the trigger on a reset?

For Sacramento, the answer is simpler. Trading LaVine would not merely be about conceding failure; it would be about recalibration.

The Kings took a swing, and swings don’t always land.

Their early struggles suggest that the roster lacks balance and defensive stability, and a reshuffle could accelerate the youth movement while allowing the franchise to refocus financially before the cap tightens.

And so the idea of a Warriors-Kings blockbuster emerges as a compelling intellectual exercise, but not an inevitable outcome.

The Warriors could build a package around Jonathan Kuminga's contract, salary filler, and young pieces like Moses Moody, but the question remains whether the front office wants to mortgage its future for a player that does not meaningfully guarantee contention.

In another era, when the Warriors were aggressively protecting a dynasty, this move would have felt inevitable. Today, it feels uncertain, complicated, and perhaps unnecessary.

Golden State may choose patience. Sacramento may choose flexibility. LaVine may need reinvention, or simply the right ecosystem.

For now, the trade rumor exists in that familiar NBA purgatory: realistic enough to debate, unlikely enough to ignore.

The Warriors-LaVine connection may never fully disappear, but right now, it remains more speculative fiction than impending reality.