Consider This, Miami ...

by Tom Ziller on Jun 25, 2008 10:23 AM PDT

Let's start with two facts:

Miami is absolutely insane for wanting to trade the #2 pick.
On close inspection, the Kings have extremely limited options in moving up or down in the first round -- section214's breakdown is a must-read going into the rumor furnace.

Chad Ford lays out the best options for Miami, who seems hell-bent on moving Michael Beasley by the end of Thursday. The Kings, obviously, are not involved.

Here's my pitch, which would never beat a Mike Conley-Mike Miller-#5 pick option and is inferior on face value with a Chris Wilcox-#4 option. But it's the only thing the Kings have got, dammit.

#2, Mark Blount, Marcus Banks for #12, a future conditional first, Spencer Hawes, Francisco Garcia, Mikki Moore and Quincy Douby (and a second-rounder, if they want it)

In this deal, Miami gives up its only two albatrosses, and gains no albatross. (Moore can be bought out for $2 million next summer, and he makes $2 million less than Blount this year for twice the potential production and 200 times the effort.) Meanwhile, Hawes is a starting center for the next 12 years, Garcia becomes one of the top sixth men in the East almost instantly, #12 is a significant asset, Douby's a body and better than the D-Leaguers Miami brought in to end the season, and a future Kings pick with the standard conditions figures to be a top-20 pick in two years.

With this deal, Miami can get Elton Brand or Carlos Boozer locked up longterm next summer with no other long, big contracts besides Dwyane Wade. They'd have a potentially elite frontcourt and, again, Dwyane F. Wade.

The Kings, meanwhile ... it's a steep price, but it could also be one of the best power forwards in modern basketball, locked up for eternity. You'd be left with Kevin Martin, Michael Beasley and a bunch of veterans. But if Brad Miller lives another year, and Ron Artest exists in harmony with his new friends, this is a potential playoff team this year.

Obviously, this thing is rife with hitches, central among them being that Miami wants O.J. Mayo and Jerryd Bayless, and neither will survive until pick #12. My dreamer's mitigation says Shawn Marion could be used by Miami to snatch a top-8 pick, but what do I know?

Tweet Comment 12 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Read More: draft, Sacramento Kings, Miami Heat

Comments

to be honest, I’m not a fan of this deal anyways. We basically mortgage our whole future for a guy who could be one of the best PFs ever, but who also could be mediocre. The Heat won’t want to move this far down anyways without getting some great name value to hype up the fans, and the Kings I’m sure haven’t even worked out or done a whole lot of digging on Beasley.

by coachtheus on Jun 25, 2008 10:33 AM PDT reply actions

mediocre my ass

Have you even watched Beasley play? 20-10 for the next decade, money player with a cocky streak. If the Kings could trade all 11 guys not named Martin for him they would be wise to do it.

Hot dogs, get your hot dogs.

by jjham15 on Jun 25, 2008 12:14 PM PDT up reply actions

Well I see where you're going with this but......

I don’t really care for Beasley. I don’t think the guy is as good as everyone believes he is, but while he is immature he is talented. I wouldn’t mortgage the future just to get him.

I see the reasoning, and I understand the motive, and I even get where having Beasley would help. But I would love to see the Kings get rings, and gutting this team to get Beasley and taking on 2 bad contracts is just not something I understand. Especially since you have 2 players who aren’t giving you anything in SAR and K9.

I would rather roll the dice on Speights @ 12, trade for TJ Ford and Rasho moving Salmons and K9 in the process, and use the 2 2nd rounders on a PG/C to help fill out the roster moving forward.

On the other hand Beasley could be the most talented player on the Kings, and it would help address some of the issues they currently have in athleticism and perhaps rebounding area’s. I could see going in the Beasley direction, but I can’t imagine where it makes the Kings better without some serious moves in the future either. For that matter that’s equally true of my preferred route as well. I suppose it’s an apple to an orange really. I prefer my apple to that orange scenario.

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on

by pookeyguru on Jun 25, 2008 10:55 AM PDT reply actions

I also think bringing in Beasley means you're trying to win with Artest next year

I don’t really see that being possible no matter how enamored people are of his current PR run.

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on

by pookeyguru on Jun 25, 2008 10:56 AM PDT up reply actions

Not necessarily

2008: Beno?, Martin, Artest, Beasley, Miller

Now you look to trade Artest (Ford? Odom? Jefferson? Prospects? Picks?) and possibly even Miller (depending on what you can get for him).

Ford, Martin, Salmons, Beasley, Miller?
Beno, Martin, Jefferson, Beasley, Miller?

These are not bad options, and are both relatively realistic.

Making a move that depletes a team like this means that you’re a few years out, but it’s more of a LONG-TERM move, in my opinion. Blount expires in 2010, along with Miller/K9/SAR so if nothing else there are a lot of Expiring Contracts to deal in 2009 for anyone/everyone hoping to land one of the BIG FISH in 2010.

Then again, with Martin & Beasley (plus Ford? or Jefferson?) one of those big fish might be lured into Sacramento.

by smgmatt on Jun 25, 2008 12:17 PM PDT up reply actions

does miami want to compete now?

would have to wait until after draft, but Miami picks Beasley for Sac, we trade Miller/Artest /this years#12/ for Marion. Doesn’t Miller, Artest, Wade, compete in the East? I doubt the #12 gets it done though…. just not enough value…

by longtimelistenerfirsttimecaller on Jun 25, 2008 11:49 AM PDT reply actions

Double Check

I think you meant to say Miller/Artest/#12 for Marion/#2(Beasley), and I just don’t see that happening . . . you can’t expect Sacramento to get potentially 2 of the best 3 players in a deal like that.

Without looking at the numbers it would have to be something like Miller/Artest/#12 for Blount/Banks/#2(Beasley).

Well, looking at the numbers it looks like Miami would also have to include Haslem if they wanted both Artest & Miller. That gives them:
Wade, Cook, Artest, Marion, Miller (plus #12, Brandon Rush?) . . . don’t know if that’s enough with no bench to speak of. Memphis’ deal still looks better if I’m Miami (Lowry/Conley, Wade, Miller, Marion, Haslem plus the #5).

by smgmatt on Jun 25, 2008 12:10 PM PDT up reply actions

sleep!

All right, you guys have just to much time on your hands. Step away from the computer and get some rest.

by deepnu666 on Jun 25, 2008 11:53 AM PDT reply actions

The odds that Beasley

will turn out to be a mediocre pro are just about nil. He’s too powerful, too agile, too quick, and much too uh, beastly to entertain such fears.

http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Michael-Beasley-605/videos/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7It-TEEJvzU

The question should be: what are the odds the guy turns out to be a primadonna dickhead? That’s why we’re even having this fantasy about reaching up to get him (which ain’t gonna happen). If it was purely about basketball ability Michael Beasley would be the unquestioned #1 selection in the NBA draft.

Are there any scenarios that have us moving up to grab Jerryd Bayless?

"When the going gets Weird, the Weird turn professional."
(Hunter Thompson)

by Mucho Moss on Jun 25, 2008 12:14 PM PDT reply actions

No, but they're shouldn't be either

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on

by pookeyguru on Jun 25, 2008 12:22 PM PDT up reply actions

Ok...

Joe Alexander then?

"When the going gets Weird, the Weird turn professional."
(Hunter Thompson)

by Mucho Moss on Jun 25, 2008 1:08 PM PDT up reply actions

No--there is no good scenario to make moves this year

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on

by pookeyguru on Jun 25, 2008 3:03 PM PDT up reply actions