Sactown Royalty: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
New Blog: The Nova Blog for Villanova Fans!

Rebuilding Project

So, the Kings are in a rebuilding phase.  It was inevitable, and has been for a few years now.  However, it is only in the past few months that the team seems to be willing to admit this, rather preferring to put on a face of competing.  Finally, though, the secret that every one who cared to look could see, is out in the open.

  As in every rebuilding phase, the team has to have a plan.  Geoff Petrie, our GM, seems to have one.  Central to that plan, is to get younger, more athletic, and keep everything lined up so that the team will have a lot of cap space in the now famous summer of 2010, or what is otherwise known as the summer of LeBron. 

  At the moment, the Kings only have three players signed to play past that all-important summer; Kevin Martin, John Salmons, and the recently resigned Beno Udrih.  Others on the team who are likely to be extended past that date, are Spencer Hawes, Jason Thompson, and Francisco Garcia.  Others that are still auditioning to stay with the team are, Shelden Williams, Quincy Douby, and Sean Singletary.  Petrie has already stated that he doesn't anticipate adding any free agents this offseason, and it doesn't look like he'll have to next year, in order to fill out the roster.

  So, we can basically see what the team will look like at that time, barring any moves, which there ought to be.  It is generally assumed that the Kings are actively shopping Ron Artest, as he has just come off a career season, has an expiring contract, and doesn't seem to be in the team's long term plans.  He is a very tradable chip, and it would make sense for the Kings to swing something to get something for him, before he walks in free agency next year.  This much is generally assumed.

 What I also propose, that isn't generally assumed, is that the Kings should attempt to trade Brad Miller.  Now, don't get me wrong, I like Miller quite a bit, and believe that there is also value in keeping him.  However, the Kings are loaded in the front court, and really, shouldn't play more than four guys.  Trading Miller would open playing time for Hawes to start.  Mikki Moore would start alongside him, to provide the veteran presence on the front line, and they would be backed up by Shelden Williams and Jason Thompson.  This is crucial in my opinion, because the Kings have an option on Shelden Williams for one more year after this season.  In order to properly evaluate whether or not they should pick up the option, he should be provided with ample playing time.  He started to perform fairly well toward the end of his rookie season, but lost his PT when the Hawks drafted Horford, and didn't get off the bench much with the Kings.  He is a good rebounder and defender, and has very good timing for shot blocking, so he may prove to be a valuable asset.  These are the reasons that the Kings should try to open up playing time for him.

  In order to reach this end, I believe that the Kings should target draft picks in return for Artest and Miller.  This way, they would be receiving young talent, that would still be on their rookie contracts, when 2010 roles around.  To go along with that, I believe they should target dead weight players to match the salaries with the teams, and in order to maximize the value of the draft picks in return.  There are numerous teams that would seem to be interested in one of these two, but for the most part, there are only a couple types of teams that I could see legitimately wanting them.  One, is the playoff team, that feels that one improvement at SF or C would push them into contention, or into a position of dominance.  And then there is the team that is on the Playoff bubble, that needs to add another piece to get into the playoffs.  Unfortunately, as much as I would prefer a bad team to try and trade for one of these two, I just don't see it.  At this stage in their careers, they are not truly franchise changers, especially Miller, and are also short term options.  Artest being a one year player, and Miller two years.  So now that you have my reasons, let's get down to proposals.  As I said, there are several potential matches for each player, so I will only concentrate on a couple.

  Artest:  I think a very interesting, and intriguing possibility was opened up over the last week, with the LA Clippers.  Nothing is final yet, but with Davis opting out of GS and agreeing to go to the Clippers, this puts the Clippers back on the playoff map, assuming that Brand does decide to stay.  The odd man out, though, is Maggette, as the Clippers will be unable to resign him if they bring in Davis and resign Brand.  This opens up the SF spot.  The Clippers also have a bloated contract, being paid out to the bloated form of Tim Thomas, who is under contract for two more seasons.  The Clippers, with a starting lineup of Davis, Mobley, Artest, Brand, and the resurrected Kaman, would be formidable, and a near playoff lock.  The other benefit or the Clippers, and the ever cheap Donald Sterling, would be to get Tim Thomas off the books for next season.  So, the proposal;  Ron Artest for Tim Thomas, DeAndre Jordan, and the Minnesota Timberwolves' 2009 first round draft pick, which is top ten protected through 2011.

  From the Kings side, they would give up Artest, and have to take on the cancer that is Thomas.  The gains would be DeAndre Jordan, who has the physical potential of Andrew Jordan and Dwight Howard, and the likely high draft pick of the Timberwolves.  I don't think that Thomas should ever actually step on the floor for the Kings, and they should try to reach a buyout with him.  Jordan isn't NBA ready, so wouldn't be a loss for the Clippers chances at competing, and they wouldn't miss Thomas.  For the Kings, Jordan would either be a late game reserve while he develops, or be sent to the D-League so that he could get play time.  The Wolves aren't likely to break out of the bottom ten of the league anytime soon, so the Kings would likely have to wait for that draft pick, but it could be worth it.  I think that this trade would work well for both teams.

  For Miller, it would be harder to find a way to get much promising young talent in return.  However, I think that we could find some takers.  Among the teams I believe would be interested, are; the Spurs, the Knicks, the Hawks, the Wizards, the Bobcats, the Heat, and the Magic.  With the Hawks, a trade including Speedy Claxton and Zaza Pachulia would match up salary wise, and would improve the Hawks.  The Spurs are the definition of being in a win now mode, so would be a prime candidate.  The Wizards and Bobcats could both use a center.  With the Wizards just tying up so much money this offseason to keep the same team, they will have little chance otherwise to improve a team that is continually bounced in the first couple rounds.  The best fit to me though, are the two Florida teams.

  The proposal for the Heat, would be; Brad Miller for Mark Blount, Daequan Cook, and a first rounder.  This would immediately improve the Heat, with a starting five of Chalmers, Wade, Marion, Haslem, and Miller.  Coming off the bench, they would have a supreme scoring threat in this year's number two pick, Michael Beasley, and Alonzo Mourning wants to return for another season.  The Heat are very undersized without this trade, and on the edge of being back in contention.  This helps them immediately.

  The proposal with the Magic, would be; Miller for Tonie Battie, two of JJ Reddick, Kieth Bogans, and Brian Cook, and a first rounder.  The Magic struggled with Howard being their only big man last year, as Battie doesn't cut it.  This would allow Lewis to move off of the four, where he is ill suited, and would give the team better balance, and a great passing big man to pass to Dwight, Hedo, and Rashard. 

  All of these options are with the intentions of accumulating draft picks, and none of them would take on any salary past 2010, leaving Petrie's plan intact.  Trading Artest and Miller would open the floor and time for players such as Hawes, Thompson, Williams, Garcia, and Salmons, as well as firmly putting Martin at the head of the team, instead of standing and watching as Artest takes over the offense.

 There would be serious loss with trading Miller, as he could teach the young bigs a lot, potentially.  However, they also need play time, and it would be nice to have the picks.  The last, added bonus of doing these deals, would be that in handing over the team to the young guys, it should aid their development, and the Kings would actually suck, rather than only kind of sucking.  The point being, that standing in the middle of the league neither gives you playoff success, nor does it give you high draft picks, which the Kings could really use to land another star.

  So that's my proposal for this offseason.  Sorry it is so long winded.  Ultimately, my goal is to acquire DeAndre Jordan, the Timberwolves draft pick, and one or two draft picks from one of the other teams I mentioned for the Miller trade.

  Thanks to those of you who took the time to read this.  Any thoughts, comments, or proposals of your own?

(This is a FanPost from a member of the Sactown Royalty community. The views expressed come from the member, and not Sactown Royalty staff.)

7 recs  |  Comment 41 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

agree in concept, not in execution...

I do believe the Kings plan includes getting significant salary cap room, but not for obtaining the three or four high profile FA’s in 2010… too many teams are angling for the same cap room that year… do we really think LeBron/Wade/Bosh will spurn a max deal from New Jersey or their own teams for the greener pastures of Sac? I don’t. I think the strategy has to be through trade, thus the need to obtain valuable assets now. I agree Artest and Miller (and any of the non-future players as possible) should be moved, but not for draft picks and expiring contracts. Rather, they should be moved for a one/two/three year player that appears to have potential. I think that is what was behind the Shelden Williams acquisition… and the interest in Kleiza last year. By acquiring a number of talented “up-and-comers” hopefully, a couple of those can be packaged to a team looking to shed a “star” (i.e. not a “superstar”) to insert into our lineup… you might argue that acquiring draft picks is the same thing, but i disagree. Nearly all the draft picks we could get would likely be mid-rounders and they simply take too much time to develop and learn if they can be a player or not. By getting players with a couple seasons under their belt, they either will pan out or won’t within the next couple years when, i hope, the plan comes to fruition and we are again a team worthy of the price of a season ticket.

by longtimelistenerfirsttimecaller on Jul 7, 2008 1:13 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Rory

I posted your “idea” for the Clippers/Kings swap on ClipsNationClipsNation, the SBN Clippers blog, and we’ll see what they think. I’m personally curious which is why I posted it there. Plus, we’ll have a good idea of what the perils are from the other side, or at least what the perceived perils are.

Now I’m personally not in favor of Jordan because I’d rather like to look at Sheldern first, and that Jordan would take too long to pan out to be of any real value. Also more than the Wolves draft pick would be needed to satisfy me as it is possible that one of Boston’s pick would end up being the property of the Clippers via the Wolves. That could end up being a low 20’s pick, and that combined with DeAndre Jordan is far less appealing than 20th overall and Linas Kleiza. That’s just me. Add an extra first rounder, drop Jordan, and I’m good to go with the whole thing.

As far as MIller goes if you can move him great. Why not? I’m not really down with taking back Blount and Cook as I’m sure neither fills a void. However, grabbing Cook & Battie I think does solve a need as both expire, and can be used to acquire players in the arms race of 10. I also think the 1st round pick also makes a sweet boost in moving Brad Miller (even if it’s a low 20’s pick) now as opposed to trying to get a better “vet” in direct exchange.

Overall I like your idea’s Rory. I agree partially with the Clippers trade if you couldn’t get Brandan Wright plus a trade exception. I agree with the Magic option, but not the Heat option.

Excellent diary. Definitely deserving of a “rec” for the effort.

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 Jul 7, 2008 1:29 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Note

Blount expires the same time (2010) as Battie & Cook . . . does that change your opinion of the HEAT deal?

by smgmatt on Jul 7, 2008 1:33 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Nope not at all

I think Battie has more trade value than Blount does (Blount being a sack of shit and Battie can be a valuable role player), and JJ Redick is totally expendable in every way. I also think Cook has no real position, being being a backup SG already occupied by Douby. Where does Cook excel on this team with Martin Garcia and Salmons ahead of him?) Mostly that’s the big reason. That and I don’t see Miller enticing Riley enough to give up the first rounder along with Cook.

I can see the Magic doing that deal because Brad Miller could add more in the shortterm than what they could get out of the 1st rounder, Battie or Redick. That’s why the Magic do that deal.

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 Jul 7, 2008 1:52 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Fair enough

I saw the 2010 cap space comment and thought that’s all you were considering . . . but I see that you’ve put much more thought into it than just that.

I also think that Orlando is more likely to pull the trigger, but I think that Miami may yield a (slightly) higher draft pick, so depending on the re-trade value of the players we got back, that might still lean towards Orlando for a better deal for the Kings, or perhaps a push at worst.

by smgmatt on Jul 7, 2008 1:56 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Good stuff

The Clippers deal you mentioned has been batted around in another thread, but apparently everyone (myself included) forgot that they had the ‘09 T-Wolves pick, which makes a deal with them more enticing (and more likely to get 2 picks out of them, if one of them isn’t even theirs).

I’d take the ‘09 Wolves & ‘10 Clippers picks for Ron-Ron. That gives the Kings two picks in consecutive years, in which case at least one of the two should have the possibility of being decent (depending how all 3 teams do, with injuries and all).

Does anyone know what protections the ‘09 Wolves pick has?

I don’t really care too much for Jordan, but his developing in the D-League wouldn’t be counter-productive to the young guys currently on the roster. I’d take him if we still got two picks, or if there was no chance of getting two picks and that was the best deal on the table.

by smgmatt on Jul 7, 2008 1:39 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

rory had it at top-10 protected til 2011, and I think that’s right. (DraftExpress is my typical source on this, but it isn’t loading.)

by Ziller on Jul 8, 2008 6:57 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

How dare your draft express not load!

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 Jul 8, 2008 7:07 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Thanks

Sure enough, there it is:

...and the Minnesota Timberwolves’ 2009 first round draft pick, which is top ten protected through 2011.

I must have just missed that detail when I read it the first time . . . although I just checked DraftExpress and here’s what they have to say:

Los Angeles Clippers receive Minnesota’s first round pick (top-10 protected through 2010) as part of the Sam Cassell/Marko Jaric trade.

Thanks TZ.

by smgmatt on Jul 8, 2008 7:46 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Bad source

I double checked my source and found that is was incorrect. Sorry about that. Don’t use realgm.com. It is indeed protected through 2010. Even better.

by rory_sayer on Jul 8, 2008 12:32 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Just so you know

I wasn’t trying to call you out, or anything like that.

I was actually calling myself out for missing it the first time I read through your post . . . and since TZ couldn’t get onto DraftExpress I checked that out as well, and found the good news there.

by smgmatt on Jul 8, 2008 12:46 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Nothing to worry about

I didn’t think you were. However, I still made a mistake in not checking my source. Can’t do that and expect to have any credibility.

by rory_sayer on Jul 8, 2008 3:01 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Don't sweat it.

We all make mistakes, and there’s so much conflicting information that it’s hard to figure out what’s what even if you do check multiple sources (like Ron Artest’s 2009 salary!).

by smgmatt on Jul 9, 2008 7:24 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Sign me up...

if we can get two picks and Jordan. If it’s one pick and Jordan, it would depend on the pick and what else is offered – I might opt to hold out until the deadline and hope the Clips are in 5th place and getting desperate.

by cabz on Jul 7, 2008 2:56 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

This does seem like a great idea, but...

Isn’t Al Thornton a SF? I think they like him a lot.

by furious.d on Jul 7, 2008 3:10 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

He is...

but is he ready to help them win now? Jordan doesn’t do that, 1st round picks don’t, and I’m not sure Thornton does either. In the meantime, Brand and Davis aren’t getting any younger.

by cabz on Jul 7, 2008 3:19 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Thorton

is a SF, yes. But he is mostly a scorer, and somebody that would still be very useful coming off the bench in their second unit. Depth is never a bad idea, especially when you’re trying to win now.

by rory_sayer on Jul 8, 2008 2:51 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Thornton

is ready. He averaged 15.5 pts in the 31 games he started last year. I think he played 4 yrs of college too, cause he’s 24.

Brand and Davis aren’t getting younger, you’re right. But 29 isn’t very well all that old either.

by DustyG on Jul 7, 2008 4:34 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Well...

29 and a serious injury and/or history of injury trouble is really a few years older in my book, but I understand that’s a matter of opinion.

As far as Thornton is concerned, 12/4 for a 23 win team isn’t all that impressive to me. For a rookie, I’ll be happy if we get anything close to that from Jason Thompson this year, but even if we do I won’t be ready to proclaim that makes him ready to start for a championship contender.

With all that said, do you think Artest gives the Clippers a shot at winning the title this year (assuming Brand resigns) if it only takes pieces that won’t play a role to land him (ie: Jordan and/or picks)? Do you think he provides a better shot at contention than Thornton? To me, it’s about whether or not the Clippers feel they’re close enough that Artest can be the difference AND how long they see their window of contention (you can say 5 years, but I’m not sure I’d agree).

by cabz on Jul 7, 2008 6:09 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Window

They Clippers have already seen one window close prematurely, and I agree that Jordan and picks is little to give up (although I doubt they trade 2 picks and Jordan).

I think that this idea has legs, especially since Thornton isn’t part of it, and would still get plenty of minutes leading the 2nd unit (and on Ron’s “off” days).

I also think that this is the kind of deal that probably won’t get done until much closer to the trade deadline, when LAC realizes that they’re still missing something to really contend. Time will tell if Ron’s still available at that time (or if he’s already gone).

by smgmatt on Jul 8, 2008 6:50 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Interestingly enough

That’s about the only thing everyone agree’s on. (Kings & Clipper’s fans alike that is.) Neither side believes that the Clippers should give up 2 1st rounders to take back Artest. I don’t see how taking Tim Thomas a protected 1st and Jordan does the Kings any good personally. And another 2nd round pick isn’t worth that much to Petrie. The Clippers are a tough nut to crack because Sterling probably won’t approve 2 1st’s for a rental, and it’s hard to imagine Petrie settling for anything less than premium value for Artest. As section consistently points, Petrie’s MO is to trade a star for a star.

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 Jul 8, 2008 7:03 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Not so much lately

Look at what he took for Bibby. Two expiring contracts, a second round pick, and a guy who has a chance to be decent. Or even more, look at what he took back for Webber. Brian Skinner, Kenny Thomas, and Corliss Williamson. Not even a draft pick. I think that Petrie would take one, good first round pick, along with change. I honestly don’t think he is going to get a better offer.

by rory_sayer on Jul 8, 2008 12:37 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

You're barking up the wrong tree

I danced a jig everywhere in the EC the day Bibby was traded. Nobody disliked Mike Bibby being on the Kings anymore than I. As far as I’m concerned the Hawks overpayed. I’m happy with the trade, and always will be.

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 Jul 8, 2008 4:16 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Well

You may not have liked Bibby, and I too wanted him traded. However, the Kings traded a guy that was essentially, exactly what the Hawks needed. A veteran pg that could hit an open jump shot, and bring a bit of leadership. In return, they got one guy that MAY turn into something. I hardly think that is overpaying. Still, the trade was better than not trading him.

by rory_sayer on Jul 9, 2008 4:58 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'm happy with the deal

The Kings would be paying luxury tax, and trading a player for nothing away. Sometimes you have to clear salary off the books.

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 Jul 9, 2008 5:29 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Interesting comparison

I lived in southern California last year, and was subjected to a fair amount of Clippers basketball and I agree with Dusty that Thornton will be a good starting SF for them this year. I don’t think that Thornton is a better overall basketball player than Ron-Ron right now; however, all things considered, the Clippers trading for Artest makes little sense to me.

First a comparison between Brand, Davis, and Artest seems appropriate because they are all within 8 months in age (Brand is the oldest, Artest the youngest) and they came into the league the same year (99-00). Davis has a reputation for being injury prone, however he has played in more games (608) than Artest (535) in the same amount of seasons (Brand has played in 614). Artest’s 7 game campaign in the brawl season (04-05) hurts his average, but he would’ve had to play in 80 games that year (a mark that he has never reached in his nine NBA seasons) to be equal to Davis in career appearances. So, the numbers seem to suggest that trading for Artest would only make the Clippers potential problems of age and questionable health worse.

On top of reliability problems, there is the issue of securing playing time for Thornton. Cabz isn’t impressed with his 12 ppg and 4.5 rpg as a rookie on a 23 win team, but Thornton’s numbers last season were slightly better in almost every category (except assists and steals) than those produced by Artest in his rookie season on a Bulls team that won 17 games, even though Artest saw a lot more playing time. Clearly Ron has improved since then and his unique defensive ability makes him valuable, but he also has obvious drawbacks.

Unless the Clippers expect to pull a Celtics and win the Championship literally next year, trading for Ron Artest seems very unwise to me. If I were them, I would prefer to trade Tim Thomas’s expiring contract next year to add depth around the core of Davis, Gordon, Thornton, and Brand after having seen them play together for a season. Or maybe package the $16 mil worth of Thomas and Mobley’s expiring contracts in 09-10 with those good draft picks for another great player. I would not want to give up potentially good draft picks to rent a guy that might seriously disrupt the team’s harmony and hurt the growth of a quality young player at the same position for one season. And I think that the Davis signing that left Maggette out is an indication that the Clippers see their future a similar way.

by furious.d on Jul 8, 2008 12:06 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Correction...

I think you took my comments re: Thornton the wrong way. His numbers are impressive for a rookie, but IMO that does not make him an ideal starter on a championship-caliber team. I don’t think there’s any question he has potential and can be a nice piece for the Clippers, but he’s likely a few years away from hitting his potential, and I question whether or not the Clippers can wait for that to happen.

by cabz on Jul 8, 2008 10:47 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Thorton

was a 24 year old rookie. He’s not likely to improve that much more.

by rory_sayer on Jul 8, 2008 12:39 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Not often...

are players as good as they’re going to get in their first year, 24 years old or not, so I can’t agree with you there. Of course, it’s all relative, and I’ll give you his scale for improvement probably isn’t the same as a guy like Hawes or Thompson, but I doubt that starting part of your rookie season on a 23-win team catapults you to your potential – 24 or not.

by cabz on Jul 8, 2008 1:56 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I gave a bit too short of an answer

I don’t mean his is what he will be. What I mean, is that the history on guys starting out at his age isn’t great, and his room, and time, for improvement is rather limited, it would seem. However, there are always exceptions, and we’ll never know for sure before it takes place. So, I do believe he will improve, I just don’t expect the improvement to be a lot.

by rory_sayer on Jul 8, 2008 3:05 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

My response

would be that Ron Artest has done just as little to prove himself to be “an ideal starter on a championship-caliber team.” I don’t think having Artest makes them a championship-caliber team next year, so the risk/benefit ratio of trading picks for him seems out of whack. While I agree that Thornton needs time to improve, I don’t see the Clippers’ window as so desperately small that they must win THIS year.

by furious.d on Jul 8, 2008 3:32 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

good food

for thought, rory…

I’ve been thinking a lot about this topic. (In fact I posted a hypothetical rebuilding plan myself a few days ago… “The New and Future Kings”).

I’d say: yeah, if Petrie can deal those high-salary vets for some 1st round draft picks, that could also be a viable path back into contention, assuming of course he doesn’t have to pick up other fat, long term salaries in return.. .

In fact, I’m sorry to say that in my opinion the Kings are likely headed for a Top 3 pick soon, probably in 2009 and/or 2010. It’s an ugly but necessary part of the rebuilding process.

The main goal is to have a lot of cap room by 2010 or 2011, and have a talented, improving young team by then that will help attract one of the big name Free Agents who will be available at that time.

hmm… sounds so simple when I put it that way!

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

by Mucho Moss on Jul 8, 2008 1:21 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

It's all a moot point now

There is no way this trade works now that Brand has gone to the Sixers. Still, the principal behind rebuilding project remains. Trade veterans with an aim toward draft picks, and cap room.

by rory_sayer on Jul 9, 2008 5:00 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

I was going to mention that too

You think it sucks being a Kings fan? Try being a Clipps fan at this point.

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 Jul 9, 2008 5:30 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Warriors didn't fare much better

They lost Davis & Pietrus, and got Corey Maggette in return.

I also just heard that Ellis wants to go to NYK, but I don’t take much stock in that because they can’t really offer him anything, and without another PG on roster, I don’t see GS doing him any favors with a S&T. It would be a huge blow if he took the 1-year deal and tried again next year as an Unrestricted FA.

by smgmatt on Jul 9, 2008 7:30 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

That's what I'd do if I was him

Golden State is a bigger loser than the Clippers are in my opinion. Brand may be a low life loser, but the Clippers still had talent elsewhere on the roster, and reasonable trade chips like Mobley and Thomas coming up in a year. The Clippers could be respectable much more quickly and easily than some imagine. Even without Brand can you rule out a possible 8th seed if they have Davis with the other players on that roster? The West, despite being so “stacked”, will not be as tough this time around as some will prognosticate. More on this later.

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 Jul 9, 2008 7:49 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

No Roster spots

The Kings don’t have the roster spots to take back 3 for 1. As BMiller has only this year and next on his contract it wouldn’t make much sense to take back a two year contract almost as high without some considerable upside youngster involved.

eternal skeptical optimist

by lietothegirls on Jul 9, 2008 9:23 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Sure they have them

if they cut somebody that doesn’t do anything. But even still, most trades wouldn’t need to have a three for one sort of deal. As far as trading Miller for a worse player with a similar contract, the idea would be to do it for either a young player with promise, or a draft pick, with which we would select (hopefully) a young player with promise.
All that being said, the only value that either Thomas or Shareef have, is as a trade chip for a team looking to dump salary. Taking that kind of a trade would also go against Petrie’s plan to get cap room so that he can try to sign somebody.

by rory_sayer on Jul 9, 2008 9:45 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Roster 2

We have 13 spots locked up not counting either Singletary or Ewing (doubt he’s an issue) meaning 14 are taken. We could finally buyout KT of course or (pray to God) SAR takes/qualifies for medical retirement.
I’m also against any deals that bring in a PF type unless its a sure stud. Ain’t we got enough? Lets see what Thompson and SWilliams can do this year.

If I had to make a summer trade I’d start with MM, as much as I think the locker room might miss him. A playoff team might (should) consider him a valuable veteran asset off the bench at a reasonable price ($5mil).

As the trade deadline approaches, assuming GP hasn’t already traded him, I’d look at either an Artest or BMiller deal that would bring VALUE in return, either in young prospects with some upside or salary cap relief. I’m not big on draft picks unless they’re top five. Even then – (?).

I’m still in the camp (barely) that if we can free up space with another deal we ‘consider’ resigning Artest in the Kmart $ range. He’s still relatively young and defense wins playoff games.

Remember though in any trade senarios – roster spots.

rory_sayer – you posted while i was still writing. But the whole problem IS that no one wants SAR or KT unless they’re dumping even bigger contracts or starting over with an eye to 2010. Its only slightly possible that we’d be able to include one/either in any deal for one of our more tradable assets.

eternal skeptical optimist

by lietothegirls on Jul 9, 2008 9:49 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

I wasn't for a minute

suggesting that Shareef or Kenny have any value. I was saying that the only thing we could get for keeping either of them is a player that another team was trying to unload.
And, I’m also not suggesting that the Kings acquire a 4 with the intention of playing him. They won’t be able to trade for a stud 4, so they should go for dead weight contract, that could also bring young, undeveloped talent.
I am interested in all first round draft picks, even though you are not. Yes the probability of success is lower, but good scouting can pick a star, or at least a good complementary player out of the heap. Sometimes they bust, sure, but that’s why it helps to accumulate draft picks during a rebuilding phase. You stand a decent chance of finding a developing star for cheap.

by rory_sayer on Jul 11, 2008 9:07 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to Sactown Royalty, the best community of Sacramento Kings fans in the universe. That's not my opinion; it's scientific fact.
Start posting about the Kings »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

Connect_with_facebook

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Resized_tyreke6_small
NCAA March Madness Brackets!
Sadisticcomradepookey2_small
Why the recent Grant Napear-Sam Amick nonsense is just that: Nonsense
Garcia_small
Sacramento's Small Media Market is Showing
200751153242283_small
Talking about the "is" instead of the "isn't"

Recent FanPosts

Small
Wesley Johnson?
Dsc02920_small
Truth in Advertising (AKA a look at the rookies)
Small
Who should replace Sam Amick?
Small
Tiago Splitter
Mustang_pic_small
Tyreke's stats - Monthly averages
200751153242283_small
Lottery Watch
Images_small
Grading the Kings and Addressing their Needs...
Small
If not Peaches, then who?
C60c734c2af77ad6fb2a7cc4f3254efe-getty-90957467eg007_anaheim_ducks_small
Quick Question For Everyone..

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Local Sponsors

SBNation.com Recent Stories

BOSTON - MARCH 17:  Paul Pierce #34 of the Boston Celtics makes a move to the basket against Al Harrington #7 of the New York Knicks on March 17, 2010 at the TD Garden in Boston, Massachusetts.  (Photo by Brian Babineau/NBAE via Getty Images)

Pierce Scores 29 In 24 Minutes, Celtics Beats Knicks 109-97

Cleveland Cavaliers' LeBron James (23) shoots over Indiana Pacers' Brandon Rush in the fourth quarter of an NBA basketball game Wednesday, March 17, 2010, in Cleveland. James scored 32 points in the Cavaliers' 99-94 win that clinched the Central division title. (AP Photo/Mark Duncan)

LeBron's Near Triple-Double Lifts Cavs Over Pacers, 99-94

Toronto Raptors forwards Chris Bosh, left, and Andrea Bargnani (7) try to defend against Atlanta Hawks forward Josh Smith, center, during first-half NBA basketball game action in Toronto on Wednesday, March 17, 2010. (AP Photo/The Canadian Press,Frank Gunn) +1 updates

Bosh's Last-Second Game-Winner Gives Raptors 106-105 Win Over Hawks

More from SBNation.com >


Editor

Loofie_small Ziller

Joe_kleine_small section214

Associate Editor

Coachie_small rbiegler

Banana2_small Exhibit G

Eastern_logs_small Aykis16