More photos » by David Zalubowski - AP

Browse more photos »

The Kings have, in the past, reportedly had interest in both David Lee and Nate Robinson, current restricted free agents of the New York Knicks. For Lee, the rumors came when Ron Artest first made the mill. A trade sending Artest to New York, it was reported, would require Lee to Sacramento in return. The Knicks never bit (not Isiah Thomas or Donnie Walsh), and Artest ended up bringing back Donté Greene, Bobby Jackson and the pick which became Omri Casspi.

Nate's connection to Sacramento is more recent: a deadline day 2009 rumor that the Kings offered Kenny Thomas in exchange for Robinson and Jared Jeffries, a player with a ruddy contract which extends in 2011. Shockingly, the Knicks did not bite, despite an apparent bloodthrist for contracts expiring in 2010, which Thomas' does. Clearly, by agreeing to exchange K-9's expiring contract for Jeffries' cantankerous deal, the Kings wanted Nate.

Yet, here we are, with Lee and Robinson clearly available. Lee nor Robinson has been rumored to be near signing an offer sheet -- Lee is reportedly in talks with Portland, a team which needs to spend the money Hedo Turkoglu passed up. I can't imagine, however, the Blazers will consider offering Lee what he wants, which would be a contract soaking up all $9.5 million Portland has available under the cap for next season. Nate hasn't been rumored heavily anywhere, really.

Will the Kings get involved this week? More importantly, should they?

Continue reading this post »

Back in December, Mr. section214 made a fantastic argument in favor of the Kings going after Carlos Boozer. I will excerpt it.

Carlos Boozer is an NBA all-star, a career double-double man (21/11 over the past two plus seasons). He is a low post beast that finishes at the rim with either hand, and he can hit the mid-range jumper. He runs the pick and roll with the best of them, and he is currently 27 years old. He has already told the Jazz that he is opting out of the final year of his contract.

Oh yes, that. Carlos Boozer has the reputation of being a "mercenary," a gun for hire, a player with no loyalty. This was born out of his nasty exodus from Cleveland. And there is no way to candy coat this – when an agent thinks that you’re too sleazy to work with, well, that’s sayin’ something. Add to that the announcement to opt out and the fact that he has missed significant time to injury in three of his seven seasons, and you have all of the ammunition that you need to call this guy a selfish pr*ck.

Except that his teammates have never really castigated him for any of this. It is the nature of the beast of the modern day athlete. They all play in glass arena’s and none of them will throw stones, as they are all prepared to take a similar path if the opportunity presents itself.

I agree completely with 214 on these points. The sensationalism of Boozer's separation from Cleveland is not that no one else would ever do it, it was that no one else had ever done it. Especially to a blind guy. Meanwhile, you have a star power forward with one of the best rebound rates in the league, elite scoring instincts and even a record of success following his latest injury.

Continue reading this post »

Right now I think the 4 best words out there are "Kenny Thomas' Expiring Contract".  Congrats Kenny!  You've moved into the lexicon with legends such as P.J. Brown, Penny Hardaway and Raef LaFrentz! 

Kenny Thomas is slated to make a little over $8.7 million this season.  A staggering number considering his production.  But he might be the best asset on the team this season.  He either provides us cap relief towards next summer's storied free agent class of 2010, or he could be traded to a team looking for cap relief.  Either way, we'll be in a better situation.

Continue reading this post »

More photos » by Nam Y Huh - AP

Browse more photos »

TrueHoop's Henry Abbott suggested Jason Thompson and the No. 4 pick might be one of the lower bids for Rajon Rondo. My initial response would be: fine, let someone else give up more if Rondo is in fact on the block. But I obviously owe a deeper explanation as to why I wouldn't support such a move from the outset, as my previous post on the subject concerned more about trading Thompson in any deal.

There's this idea that the fancy metrics love Rondo. That's not completely accurate. His PER was 18.8 last year, and I think we'll see Thompson get there as soon as he

a) has a halfway decent coach, and

b) he learns how not to foul on every possession.

I think he has a sentient coach now, and there has typically been a drop in fouls/minute among sophomore big men.

Rondo looks great in assist rate (because he doesn't shoot much) and rebound rate (because he's a maniac rebounder). He's a very good defender, the best at his position. But he shoots poorly, he scores infrequently and he's turnover-prone (relative to the number of possessions he uses).

* The Kings don't have a decent internal power structure (forget decent -- there isn't one at all) so those negative things Rondo brings that Rivers, Garnett, Pierce and Allen were able to squelch -- especially Rondo getting mad when his wings missed shots -- might pop back up here. Who's going to keep him in check? Has two years with Garnett and Allen really changed him as a person?

* This team as constructed will not emphasize defense. Rondo would be the only above-average defender. How much is that going to help? Do the Kings become the No. 27 defense instead of No. 30? Do the Kings have a plan to significantly upgrade the defense at small forward?

* Thompson is the only finisher on the squad right now. Who exactly is Rondo passing to, other than Martin from the wing?


* Is all this worth a) a point guard (Rubio, Flynn, Holiday, Jennings, Evans) who could be terrific and cheap for four years, AND b) a cheap, young, hard-working, nasty power forward who meshes with Spencer Hawes rather well?

You're opening up one hole to fill another. Ike Diogu becomes your starting power forward -- and you'd have to re-sign him. Rondo is up for a contract next summer. Thompson is up for a contract in 2012. The No. 4 pick is up for a contract in 2013. Unless the team thinks it can upgrade its defense around Rondo, Martin and Hawes -- that'd mean small forward and the newly vacant power forward -- I'm not sure how it makes sense. How easy will it be to pull one of the great defenders at small forward this summer or next? I'm talking Trevor Ariza, Luol Deng, (cough) Ron Artest, Marvin Williams?

On the surface, Rondo is better than JT and likely better than the No. 4. But looking at the context, it doesn't make sense for the team.

More photos » by Ben Margot - AP

Sacramento Kings' Jason Thompson reacts to repeated attempts to mark him as a throw-in in various draft-related trades. (AP Photo/Ben Margot)

Browse more photos »

Since the Day of Doom, rumors have been placing Jason Thompson as a throw-in for draft day deals. First, it was the No. 4 pick and Thompson to Memphis or Oklahoma City for (one would assume) Ricky Rubio. Now we have Rajon Rondo for the No. 4 pick and Thompson. With less than two weeks to go, the rumor mill will ramp up and we'll hear even more. And unfortunately, we'll hear Thompson being termed as a "throw-in."

I have two issues with this. One, the term "throw-in" has some unsavory attributes attached. It implies the "throw-in" is beyond the scope of the major pieces of the trade -- that, say, Rondo and the No. 4 are the critical pieces, and Thompson is just a condiment to make the numbers work. That's obviously not true in the sense that it's likely (in my opinion) Boston wouldn't do the deal without Thompson, and Sacramento wouldn't do the deal with Thompson. Same with the Memphis-Sacramento rumor. Memphis sure as hell isn't giving up the No. 2 for the No. 4 without getting an extra piece of some quality. Sacramento, on the other end, won't be casual about making Thompson available.

In other words, in all of these rumored deals, Thompson is a central component. Not a condiment. Chad Ford is reporting this right to a degree -- that Boston isn't giving up Rondo without getting a good piece like Thompson back. As in, it doesn't work logically without something else of value (or that's the thinking, at least). But the implication, as well as Ford's quickness in attaching Thompson a bit casually to other rumors, such as the Memphis one, is that neither team really cares about Thompson all that much, and if he'll help land Rondo or Rubio the Kings really don't mind. That may true, but the idea that the Kings don't value Thompson and would only give him up in for a player they desperately desire isn't accurate. And again, Ford's not really saying that. But the implication comes in, and we all get hung up on that.

When we're evaluating these types of rumors to figure out whether they make us happy or sad, we need to detach ourselves from the snap "I like JT!, so no!" reaction and really weigh everything. Don't fall into the rationale that "Rondo for the No. 4 sounds good to me, so I say no to the No. 4 plus Thompson." The question should be: is Rondo worth the No. 4 and Thompson? The question should be: is Rubio worth the No. 4 and Thompson?

I have trouble signing on to either idea. Things are too murky with Rubio's status to give an accurate answer as to whether he's worth it. I mean, with every passing day the hope that Rubio will be available at No. 4 grows in strength. With that in mind, it's impossible to advocate trading up. Geoff Petrie and Jason Levien will better know whether Memphis is in a position to pick him, or whether Oklahoma City will trade down so someone else can grab him. On Rondo, it's (again) tough to discern based on our vantage point. The idea that (again) Rubio could be available at No. 4 worries me -- would you give up Rubio and Thompson for a player like Rondo? I probably would not, but I've got Ricky colored glasses on.

But the key, again, is understanding that any deal including Thompson will be weighed by the Kings on the merits of giving up Thompson to secure the targeted player. He's not Ike Diogu. The team understands that.

At FanHouse, I explain why Washington is dumb to trade its draft pick to keep its veteran core (Antawn Jamison, Caron Butler) in tact. The popular rumor is that the Wizards will attempt to package the pick (unprotected, no doubt) with either Etan Thomas or Mike James in exchange for an expiring contract. Thanks to the extensions for Gilbert Arenas, Jamison, Darius Songaila, DeShawn Stevenson and others, the team is due to pay $7-8 million in luxury tax in 2009-10. The Wizards do not pay the tax. Given the team's record, I don't blame them.

The Kings have some expiring contracts. Bobby Jackson, in particular, could be traded for Thomas or James straight up. (I believe this to be the case; Thomas apparently has a 20% trade kicker. If the kicker is larger than 20%, there would need to be a Bobby Brown or Quincy Douby involved. If the kicker is 20%, Jackson-for-Thomas works.)

Thomas is owed (assuming the 20% kicker) $8.8 million in 2009-10. That's a lot of money for someone who wouldn't likely play well or often. He'd be Kenny Thomas Part II, assuming the King are not able to trade Kenny Thomas Part I this season.

But you'd be getting another top-six pick. Washington is currently 29th in the league, better only than Sacramento. I assume Minnesota has a fighter's chance of getting into the bottom two in the league, which would bump Washington to No. 28 at best. That would guarantee a pick no worse than No. 6.

Shareef Abdur-Rahim is officially off the 2009-10 payroll, assuming he does not pull a Darius Miles next year. By trading expiring contracts for Thomas and no other moves, the Kings would sit at $60 million in payroll. Add $8 million in the event the Kings get the No. 1 pick and the Washington pick ends up No. 2. In all likelihood, the team would be safely under the luxury tax threshold by a small amount.

And the team would own: Kevin Martin, Jason Thompson, Spencer Hawes, two of the top six picks in the 2009 draft, Donté Greene, a late first-round 2009 pick, $28-33 million in '10 expiring contracts, Francisco Garcia and Beno Udrih. The team would have only $35 million locked in for 2010-11.

And again, this assumes no other deals. If you want to start from scratch, adding two top-6 picks ain't a bad way to go. (I'm a bit skeptical Washington will actually trade its pick this week, but the rumor has popped up in multiple legit places.)

WHEREAS the Kings are looking to burnish their roster with awesome young men in an effort to compete at a higher level, and

WHEREAS the Kings have few remarkable assets with which to barter, in terms of the viewpoints of other teams, and

WHEREAS the Kings have failed in any potential ploy to acquire the services of one Tyson Chandler, a noted defender of high honor, and

WHEREAS the Suns have allegedly taken one Amar'e Stoudemire, a graceful pivot full of sweet offensive production, and

WHEREAS the Kings need help in both the implementation of a good defense and a good offense, primarily in the center, point guard and small forward positions, and

WHEREAS other teams are in similarly dire straits in terms of needing roster upgrades and/or future financial flexibility, and

WHEREAS Quincy Douby, superstar garbage-time defender of the Kings, is a handsome fellow,

Let it be RESOLVED that the Kings, and by virtue of meta(physical/phorical) extension Kings fans, should continue to look for opportunities for improvement, as known as herewithin as activity for the sake of activity.

ATTACHMENT #1: COMPARISON

Tyson Chandler, age 26: 10 pt, 9.6 reb, 1.6 blk, 1.6 tov per 36 min; 56% shooting, 13.8 OReb%, 19.2 DReb%, 14 PER, +3.6 adjusted plus-minus, $26 million owed through 2010-11.

Samuel Dalembert, age 27: 8.8 pt, 12.5 reb, 2.6 blk, 2.1 tov per 36 min; 50% shooting, 11.8 OReb%, 28.9 DReb%, 13 PER, +4 adjusted plus-minus, $25 million owed through 2010-11.

***

Chandler's reputation is much stronger than that of Dalembert, though I can't really understand why. The only real, measurable advantages for Chandler are that he is 17 months younger, that he refuses to shoot if he can't dunk (hence the higher FG%) and he doesn't put the ball on the floor ever.

Dalembert is an equal or slightly better rebounder, a far better shot-blocker, is slightly cheaper in salary and MUCH cheaper in terms of acquisition costs. If Chandler would have cost John Salmons and an expiring contract, Dalembert has the sort of stigma that might end up with Philadelphia pay the Kings to take him away.

Ignore my comparison for a second and ask yourself if you could see the Sixers taking any of these trades ...

Dalembert and Willie Green for Brad Miller and Beno Udrih: Miller would be an offensive upgrade this season and next for a team that needs it. Andre Miller's old, and his deal expires this summer. Udrih could be a starter if needed, or a good back-up. Green's contract is small, runs through '11 and is partially unguaranteed (a la Mikki Moore, though with a potentially cheaper buy-out). Start Cassell!

Dalembert for John Salmons and Kenny Thomas: Since Elton Brand is out, the Sixers need help at the two/three (with Thad Young moving up to the four). Again, Salmons helps the offense. Also, everyone in Philadelphia is new; there shouldn't be any institutional biases against Salmons.

Dalembert for Mikki Moore and Kenny Thomas: Philly would save $2 million next year and $13 million in 2010-11. That might be important to them.

I'd love any of these ideas for the Kings. I think most 76ers fans would like them (they really don't like Dalembert). What do you think?

Since Woj's latest rumor mentions The Draft Pick, let's look at our odds here.

Assume the team trades for cap space instead of talent.

As OKC and LAC continue to improve, it seems likely that Sacramento would finish with the worst record or the second worst record. (Hello, D.C.!)

If the Kings finish with the worst record, the team would have a 46.5% chance of winning the #1 pick or the #2 pick.

If the Kings finish with the second worst record, the team would have a 38.7% chance of winning the #1 pick or the #2 pick.

Let's average these since it seems a toss-up as to whether Washington or Sacramento will be worse. That would indicate a 42.6% probability of the Kings earning a top-2 pick.

This has been said to be a bad draft, with one "sure thing" (Blake Griffin), one mystical/mythical enigma (Ricky Rubio), and a bunch of solid if somewhat frightful prospects (James Harden [too small?], Stephen Curry [too gunnerific?], Greg Monroe [too soft?], Hasheem Thabeet [too raw?], Jordan Hill [too slight?], Jrue Holiday [too shot-averse?], Brandon Jennings [too shot-impotent?]). Let's just say there's a massive drop-off in confidence between No. 2 and No. 3, assuming Rubio enters the draft. You want a top-2 pick.

What are the odds Rubio enters the draft? Some sources say he will if he's a guaranteed top-3 pick. (He seems to be a guaranteed top-3 pick.) Others say he'll wait until 2010 no matter what. I have tended to believe the former, but that's possibly a function of wishful thinking. Let's place it at 60-40, in slight favor of Rubio coming out. Rubio may or may not enter the draft this summer, but it seems somewhat more likely that he would.

So we have a 42.6% probability at best of the Kings earning a top-2 pick. Within that, there's a 22.45% probability of the Kings winning the No. 1 pick. If that happens, Rubio doesn't matter -- if he comes out, you can debate Griffin vs. Rubio; if he doesn't, you get Griffin and are happy. We also then have the 20.15% probability of the Kings winning the #2 pick. Rubio matters here. If Rubio enters, you are still guaranteed one of your two fellows. If not, you are -- in all likelihood -- debating Harden, Monroe, Thabeet, Curry, Hill, Holiday and Jennings. Again, that's a big drop-off.

So using our made-up 60% probability that Rubio enters the draft, we can figure (in made-up numbers) the probability the Kings win No. 2 but Rubio stays out of the draft: 8.06%. The parallel chance the Kings win No. 2 and Rubio enters the draft: 12.09%.

Under our assumptions, there is a 22.45% probability of the Kings winning No. 1 overall and a 12.09% probability of the Kings winning No. 2 with Rubio or Griffin on the board. We combine these to find a 34.54% probability of the Kings winning Griffin or Rubio, should our assumptions hold.

Let's lay this out in chart form. (The 'x' in 'Rubio x%' indicates the probability Rubio enters the draft. Choose the one you feel most comfortable with.)

Best case scenario, which is Rubio definitely coming out: the Kings have a 42.6% chance of getting Griffin or Rubio. Worst case scenario, which Rubio staying out of the draft: the Kings have a 22.45% chance of getting Griffin.

***

Everyone has different views on Amare, on Griffin, on Rubio, on Thabeet, on Shock & Hawes. At this point, most of us know each other's positions. But it's worth taking a step back to really consider the odds of our wildest dreams coming true. Maybe it's cold and anti-emotional. But it's pragmatic.

In the best case scenario -- Rubio entering the draft, the Timberwolves not falling below the Kings in the standings, the Kings continuing to be offensive on the court -- there is a less-than-50% chance of pulling one of the top two draft targets. Think about it. My asset list is certainly shifting because of this.