Everytime that I look in the mirror All these lines on my face gettin clearer The past is gone It went by like dust to dawn Isnt that the way Everybodys got their dues in life to pay I know what nobody knows Where it comes and where it goes I know its everybodys sin You got to lose to know how to win Half my life is in books written pages Live and learn from fools and from sages You know its true All the things come back to you Sing with me, sing for the years Sing for the laughter, sing for the tears Sing with me, if its just for today Maybe tomorrow the good lord will take you away
Okay, I admit, I only put this here cuz I love the song, but it's better than putting something like the Pussycat Dolls isn't it? It's trading season. Let's make a deal. Okay?
Amare Stoudemire is the hot topic. Here, and everywhere else. Why? Cuz. Blog A Bull has an Amare to Chicago update. I suggest checking out BSoS for any Amare updates. Chances are Phoenix will trade Amare if they get the cap space and the young player they are looking for. Of course, the Suns are also, apparently, trying to get under the tax this season as well. Side Note: For those wondering, and I'm sure there will be 1 or 2 of you, the Kings get nothing except basketball talent/asset's by helping the Suns get under the tax. It was structured that way so teams could get under the tax, and get help from non-paying tax teams to do so. The reason I say that is that each team gets a 1/30th share of the luxury tax, and the remainder goes to other things, but mostly to the NBA front office. The NBA Front Office also pays part of the salary for veterans players on minimum contracts, and as such, helps every team reduce their salaries.
The Amare Stoudemire chronicles pookay!guru style
Do I think the Kings could enter these sweepstakes? Yes, I do. It wouldn't be that hard. John Salmons, Mikki Moore and Spencer Hawes would all work for Phoenix in terms of fit. Amare Stoudemire could be traded straight up for that right there. But, that doesn't get the Suns under the luxury tax. Unless they decided to move Grant Hill for Bobby Brown. That would get them under the luxury tax (barely), and the Kings could waive Hill under these circumstances (Hill has said he doesn't want to leave Phoenix, but I doubt he wouldn't mind a chance to go to Orlando instead at this point--better than finishing up his career in Phoenix the way it's currently going).
Now, again, I don't want Stoudemire, but keep in mind, that Phoenix probably about 75.7 million dollars in total salary. Maybe not quite that much, but they would likely have to shed around 4.5 million dollars to get under the luxury tax THIS season. The Kings themselves (by virtue of the Shareef medical retirement--and the high likelihood that the team will get all of his extra salary taken off the books) wouldn't end up paying luxury tax despite the extra salary taken on by Stoudemire and Hill. I'm not changing my mind about Amare, but these are the workable circumstances I could see happening if somehow Phoenix doesn't find an East Coast team (Chicago or New York mainly) to deal with them.
Speaking of Chicago: I think the deal that will end up happening (if Chicago consents to it) is: Drew Gooden (expiring contract), Tyrus Thomas (young talent), and Thabo Sefolosha. The big problem I see here is Chicago going over the tax to acquire Stoudemire. I don't see them doing that, even if that makes them an instant playoff team. Reinsdorf has always shown he won't pay the tax, and it's difficult to imagine that the Bulls won't get a deal done with Phoenix unless they can stay under the tax. Also, I think they're other issue's with Stoudemire (that would plague Sac in a deal, which is why I'm so firmly opposed to it) and integrating him for Chicago. Read this for more.
I think the team with the best shot, as long as David Lee and Danilo Galinari aren't made completely untouchable, is New York. The Knicks have something that nobody else has: a willingless to pay luxury tax. So they can do a complicated deal with Phoenix that nets them Stoudemire. Ask yourself if you're the Knicks, would you be willing to take on Shaq and Stoudemire both? Cuz they could pull it off. Stephon Marbury's fat expiring contract will no doubt interest Phoenix because suddenly Shaq is in play here, and it will help alleviate the salary issue for next season. (The other issue is that it would help Phoenix get under the tax this season.) Shaq and Stoudemire combined make just under 35.1 million combined this season. Marbury makes nearly 21 million of that by himself. So it's very easy to see why New York wouldn't bother to waive Marbury if a guy like Stoudemire becomes available, and hey why not, let's get Shaq and bring him near Newark while he's at it?
Here's the proposal: Shaquille O'Neal and Amare Stoudemire for Stephon Marbury, David Lee, Danilo Galinari, and Jerome James. This slashes nearly 3 million off the payroll, and barring another money saving deal, another team could take the rest for Phoenix. They can get under the tax, and they can do so easily by simply shedding Shaq & Amare. Why does New York do this? Why not? Help juice the team (mostly for prospective FA's other than LeBron) with Shaq & Amare's arrival, and D'Antoni could probably convince Donnie Walsh and the rest of the Knicks brass that they could make this doable (in terms of making Amare & Shaq work together better than they have this season), and it could help the franchise believe pulling off a LeBron James coup in 2010 is still possible; which said cap room is still available assuming they don't sign Amare or Shaq to an extension this off-season.
The bottom line, if I'm Phoenix, and I'm dealing with New York, is I try to move Shaq & Amare, and cut my payroll way down to start the rebuilding effort this summer. I get 2 young players, and in return, payroll slashed for next season, and perhaps the cost cutting measure of no luxury tax this season. It's a win-win for Phoenix and New York given Phx doesn't care they're giving up Shaq, and the Knicks don't mind taking on that salary (I doubt it--but you never know). Now, I'm done with the Amare talk.
Tjhe Carlos Boozer addendum to this crappile
Carlos Boozer is another guy whom I think Utah will seriously move if they can find the right deal. One, is that they could deal Boozer to Chicago (that's the best place they could deal him to--in terms of fit), and the next best place would be to Miami. Here's the potential Miami deal first: Carlos Boozer, Jarron Collins, and Kyle Korver for Shawn Marion and James Jones. Utah cuts salary for next season. They swap shooters. Miami gets a little big man depth with Collins added to the deal. They get to move Beasley to SF where he belongs full time. This deal doesn't put Miami over the luxury tax (actually it moves them quite a ways from it), and puts Utah a little close, but not over, the tax themselves. It works under the cap, and they can make it work. Will they? Who knows. It's always possible the Heat just wait until the Summer, and the Jazz want to make a run with Boozer over the spring, and then let Boozer's cap room help them over the summertime. This is all contigent, of course, that Miami would be willing to deal for Boozer under these circumstances where Boozer is still out after his knee surgery. (That is something that the Jazz may be forced to table any idea's of wanting to deal Boozer before the deadline. But that's something that's more of wait & see. There is still 9 days, and it's always possible Boozer could return shortly. (I doubt it though.)
The other, of course, is Chicago. Personally, I think this would be easier for Chicago to do than Miami because of the type of players Chicago has (Gooden/Sefolosha/Gray/Thomas), and doing a trade here would not be difficult at all. I still think, more than anything, other than Chicago and Miami, the best place for Carlos Boozer, surprise surprise, is Utah. If he doesn't end up in either of those 2 markets, it's probably going to be a scenario that he will end up not opting out of his contract, and Utah will have to end up making a decision on Boozer/Millsap this summer. I'm not going to do the trade machine line for the Chicago, but I will say the biggest issue for the Jazz will be finding spots for the incoming Bulls players they do acquire (regardless of whether they cut them or not), and I think any potential Boozer injury will keep him from being dealt by the deadline. Which is why little Boozer talk has cropped up at all (that and the deafening fervor of the Amare talk hasn't helped either).
Brad Miller destinations: If the Utah deal doesn't happen (and I would think Miami would do that in a heartbeat), then I suppose the potential of a Mikki Moore/Brad Miller for Shawn Marion swap will happen, and of course, this means Quincy Douby will get cut. Oh well. Good luck Quincy!
I also think Chicago is a possibility, but only if Larry Hughes is in play. I don't see that happening, so I think that rules Chicago out. There's always a possibility that the Kings could move Brad Miller and John Salmons to Chicago and Cleveland in a 3 way deal with somehow receiving Larry Hughes back while taking on Wally Szczerbiak at the same time, if that makes any sense. (I would imagine Hughes would be cut over the summer to save costs.) I don't know if that would work out, but I do know that the Kings have to deal Miller before they do anything else, and they have to desire cap room more than anything else for him. They already have a host of young players, 3 draft picks (their own, Houston's and a high 2nd rounder--and don't discount that high 2nd rounder as a sluff off pick for an European player--this is the type of pick that's ripe for that), and no real need to add a 4th pick in this draft (weak or not) to get minutes on this roster next season with Hawes, Thompson, Greene currently on the roster. It doesn't make a ton of sense to just put out a really young roster, unless, that really young roster is growing and learning together. (And producing while we're on that topic.) I'm not a big fan of Eddie Jordan for this team next year (particularly if it's young), because his history of dealing with young players is dicey at best. (Just ask the folks at Bullets Forever).
One team that I think could use 2 veteran players to add to their mix, would be Oklahoma City. If they wanted Miller and Salmons, the cost wouldn't be exorbitant, and worse, it would help them create some (reliable--conceivably) depth at the positions they need help in (C and SG). Miller could help facilitating their offense in the short term, as well as help provide some know how that would could help the kids in OKC grow up. The only problem here, is that Miller would be going to a young team, and it's hard to imagine that after his performance (good to very bad this season) is something that is really enticing for OKC at this point. They have two expiring contracts they could offer the Kings (Smith and Wilcox), and rather than making a big splash through Free Agency in 2009, which they could do, it's easier to see them making a minor splash with grabbing 2 veterans with short term contracts (but making quite a bit of money), and for making the money work, the Kings could add Bobby Brown, but would have to take Earl Watson for the right to move Miller in this deal.
Would any Thunder fan like the deal? No, because it probably won't free up any real cap room to go out and get a quality Free Agent they would all like to have. (Fans, especially those with less knowledge of how the NBA really works, tend to believe high profile signings are really an answer. I think we, as Kings fans, know better? Right?)
Here's the proposal: Brad Miller, John Salmons, Bobby Brown for Chris Wilcox, Earl Watson, and Joe Smith. Again, there are risks/rewards for this deal, but some of this is, you take on Watson to move Miller, and you slash some payroll next season. Is it perfect? No. But I'm not of the opinion (and this is something lost on the "let's get a lot of draft picks and bundle them to move higher in the draft" folks) that NBA GM's give 2 shits about how many draft picks a team has. I can point out quite a few examples where it matters a lot more that the draft has talent (which is when team's just wont give up these picks I might add), then when it matters if the team giving up a 1st rounder feels like, whatever, it's not a very big draft, and if they get lucky, well then so what? That's why I don't think the Kings could bundle 2 low 1st round picks for a mid 1st rounder. Having a higher pick in a weaker draft gives whatever team at that spot a better chance at a sleeper. There isn't many new things under the sun kiddies, and for whatever it's worth (probably little to many of you), having the Rockets pick (very likely--despite the inner turmoil they're currently experiencing), is going to be enough to work out for the long term. Personally, I would be happy to reduce salary for this squad going into 2009, and deal Mikki Moore for an expiring salary.
The bad part about the OKC deal I proposed is that it leaves Mikki Moore out of the loop as far as trading purposes, and it's hard to imagine that any team will just deal for him, unless New Jersey is that team, or some team like that (maybe Philly looking for up front depth--except they don't have any expiring's that would interest Sac I don't think--or talent that Sac could get for that matter). If you're asking me, the preferred deal here is with Miami, and perhaps, this is where OKC gets into things, and somehow, the Kings manage to give up Mikki and Brad and John to either Miami/OKC in the process. Brad Miller and Joe Smith and Earl Watson to the Heat John Salmons and Mikki Moore to the Thunder Shawn Marion and Marcus Banks to the Kings (Along with a Miami 2nd rounder in 2010--what did you think I was proposing 2009? Get real kiddies....) Trade Machine Link
I think Portland could end up in this somehow, but it's questionable how much they want to use Raef LaFrentz to acquire Kenny Thomas in the process. If the Kings could shed Thomas/Salmons for LaFrentz/Randolph and the rights to Koponen, that would be just dandy. In fact, taking back Marcus Banks, and leaving out OKC of the loop, is preferable, even though Geoff Petrie won't want to do it.
- Salmons/Thomas to Portland for LaFrentz/Shav Randolph/rights to Koponen
- Miller/Moore to Miami for Marion
Acceptable Options: The listed deals above (the 3 way deal with OKC & Miami) as well as the Marion/Banks for Miller/Moore deal
UN-Acceptable Options: No cap relief beyond Shawn Marion coming off the cap, and with Marcus Banks coming in return.
The deals are out there, if the Kings are willing to deal with the hard liner's, like Miami or OKC. There is always going to be a team that's going to take on money to get a deal done. I really don't mind if Banks is that guy if the KIngs get a chance to dump somewhere in the realm of 25 million in salary after acknowledging that Banks will be on the cap for the next 2 seasons (at around 10 million total). It's going to get easier to dump Banks, or just simply buy him out, if you're going to save so much money in the interim. The Kings need to dump Miller because Hawes is outplaying him, and even if it's only by a small margin, Miller hasn't proved himself to be a valuable member of the team game in/game out. This team needs a new mix of players, and the sooner they can get it done, the easier it can be accomplished by going about and getting a new team in here. This isn't new territory, but this is crunch-time for Geoff Petrie. If he doesn't cut enough salary off the cap, and bring in enough options for next season with the young talent he will get a chance to acquire through the draft, then I would say he's made a bigger error than he ever made in delaying Ron Artest trade's.
Of course, if there is nobody to trade the 7' pile of dung too, it's kinda hard to fault Mr Petrie for not trading the aforementioned pile.