Pick situation (split)
- Thread starter Kingsfan23
- Start date
You're the first person I've seen mention this - do you have a source? Up until I saw the same thing on nbadraft.net, I was under the impression that if NOP get a top 3 pick this year, then we wouldn't get any first rounder from them. Nbadraft.net says that if they don't convey this year, then it's top 1 protected in 2018 and 2019. Was everyone aware of this already? Maybe I was out of the loop but I hadn't seen it reported by anyone.
My understanding is the best case scenario for the Kings now is that the Pelicans come in at fourth, while Kings own pick comes in at fifth (to avoid giving to the Bulls), and the Sixers are somewhere in 1-3. Results of this are 2 top 10 picks 4 and 5
Worst case scenario is the Pelicans tank and get 1-3 while the Kings go 10+ and give their pick away to the Bulls. No 1st round picks but 2 2nd round picks.
Worst case scenario is the Pelicans tank and get 1-3 while the Kings go 10+ and give their pick away to the Bulls. No 1st round picks but 2 2nd round picks.
The pick situation is the pick the Kings are giving Philly in 2019 will be much higher than the pick the Pelicans will give us in 2017. After his two biggest trades, Vlade moved Cousins for Buddy and couldn't refill the massive pick hole he dug in the summer of 2015. Some folks are acting like the Kings have a ton of extra picks, the Kings are even back to even par when it comes to picks after the Pelicans trade.
The Kings gained no cap space the summer of 2015 they could not obtain by stretching JT and Landry and trading Nik for a top 55 protected 2nd rounder. This would be year 2 of 5 of carrying 5 million of dead money.
The last 5 million we spent last summer was Barnes. While the odds of a pick swap are low this year, the Kings could get swapped this year because they wanted extra cap last summer, this summer, and the next two. Currently, they spent that money on Barnes. Who, in the greatest of ironies, the Kings stretched and will now carry his dead money going forward. So, they've already closed about 30% of the cap they had to keep open instead of stretching JT and Landry ... or ya know, maybe not clearing cap space for Wes Mathews before even indicated that he'd take it.
The Kings gained no cap space the summer of 2015 they could not obtain by stretching JT and Landry and trading Nik for a top 55 protected 2nd rounder. This would be year 2 of 5 of carrying 5 million of dead money.
The last 5 million we spent last summer was Barnes. While the odds of a pick swap are low this year, the Kings could get swapped this year because they wanted extra cap last summer, this summer, and the next two. Currently, they spent that money on Barnes. Who, in the greatest of ironies, the Kings stretched and will now carry his dead money going forward. So, they've already closed about 30% of the cap they had to keep open instead of stretching JT and Landry ... or ya know, maybe not clearing cap space for Wes Mathews before even indicated that he'd take it.
would anyone be opposed to trading our 2 1st rounders in the draft to move up and possibly get one of Fultz or Ball? They are real cornerstone franchise players I believe and we'd finally get an all star PG that we've been missing forever..(in saying that it kills me to see how well IT is going).
If Boston was pushing for a PG13 or Butler, we could possibly be the third team involved getting a higher pick for our 2 1sts and then Boston could use that instead to getting PG or Butler.
If Boston was pushing for a PG13 or Butler, we could possibly be the third team involved getting a higher pick for our 2 1sts and then Boston could use that instead to getting PG or Butler.
I can't speak to the 2019 class yet, way to early. But the 2018 class looks pretty good. At least on paper. There are four players at the top of that class, and three of them are big's. DeAndre Ayton, a 7'0" center, Mohamed Bamba, a 7'0" PF, Michael Porter, a 6'10" SF/PF, and finally a non big player that a lot of scouts think will be the best of the class, Luka Doncic a European player that's a 6'8" SG/SF. I happen to like Porter a lot, but until they actually play a college game, who knows for sure.
Marco was signed with some of that salary the Philly trade freed up. Vlade traded Marco for a 1st round pick that became Malachi. As far as Barnes salary hit next season it should not be an issue with so many Rookie deals on the Kings roster.
Larry David do not take this personally as it is not directed strictly at you. But honestly I think some are trying to make the Kings situation as bleak as possible.
Larry David do not take this personally as it is not directed strictly at you. But honestly I think some are trying to make the Kings situation as bleak as possible.
I'm correct on the cap in terms of what the Kings did in the summer of 2015 vs what they could have done if they availed themselves / understood the rules available to them.
They made that horrendous move so they wouldn't have to carry 5 million of dead money.
Last summer, they spent that money on Barnes. A good chunk of Barnes' money is now dead.
I'm not saying the Kings are going to be short cap. Far from it, they have to hit the floor, they intend to be bad and bottom out, so that's a non-issue.
But the Kings brain trust gave up an unprotected 2019 pick so they wouldn't have to carry dead money ... made a blash signing ... and then promptly took the money they "feed up" (pretty expensive cost) and made it dead money 18 months later.
If that doesn't raise some concerns for ya, so be it. But, I'm familiar.
They made that horrendous move so they wouldn't have to carry 5 million of dead money.
Last summer, they spent that money on Barnes. A good chunk of Barnes' money is now dead.
I'm not saying the Kings are going to be short cap. Far from it, they have to hit the floor, they intend to be bad and bottom out, so that's a non-issue.
But the Kings brain trust gave up an unprotected 2019 pick so they wouldn't have to carry dead money ... made a blash signing ... and then promptly took the money they "feed up" (pretty expensive cost) and made it dead money 18 months later.
If that doesn't raise some concerns for ya, so be it. But, I'm familiar.
That's possible. Of course, for a decade most of the folks here and most of the key media covering the team have repeatedly observed blatant dysfunction and said, "Yeah, not so great right now. But I think the owner / GM / coach / players on the team are just about to figure this out and we'll be good."
Maybe it's overly pessimistic. Maybe it's an honest conversation about they problems the Kings made for themselves and continue to face as they rather haphazardly start another flawed plan.
Maybe it's overly pessimistic. Maybe it's an honest conversation about they problems the Kings made for themselves and continue to face as they rather haphazardly start another flawed plan.
They also freed up $18.5M of cash (which, as Yogi Berra says, is just like real money).
The Kings had a choice of paying out $18.5M to players they were going to cut while also taking a cap hit for the next five years, or giving up two pick swaps and a first-round pick. They chose to "sell" that first-round pick (and the swaps, and Stauskas) for $18.5M and some additional cap flexibility. Salary floor rules meant that Philly effectively paid less than that (when all is said and done the Kings actually "stole" that money from Philly's players, which is an interesting trick), but from the Kings' side that's not really a terrible bargain. Now, what they did with that $18.5M and the cap flexibility didn't work, but that doesn't mean they didn't understand the rules. That $18.5M is effectively what they paid Marco Belinelli ($19M/3). Now, Belinelli didn't work out, but they obviously thought he would, and while without the trade they could have used the rules differently to get the cap space to sign him, that wouldn't have helped them have the CASH to sign him, since they would be paying that money to players they had waived instead.
In short, the Kings sold a first round pick for a lot of money. Then they screwed up with what they spent the money on. But these are two separate transactions.
The Kings had a choice of paying out $18.5M to players they were going to cut while also taking a cap hit for the next five years, or giving up two pick swaps and a first-round pick. They chose to "sell" that first-round pick (and the swaps, and Stauskas) for $18.5M and some additional cap flexibility. Salary floor rules meant that Philly effectively paid less than that (when all is said and done the Kings actually "stole" that money from Philly's players, which is an interesting trick), but from the Kings' side that's not really a terrible bargain. Now, what they did with that $18.5M and the cap flexibility didn't work, but that doesn't mean they didn't understand the rules. That $18.5M is effectively what they paid Marco Belinelli ($19M/3). Now, Belinelli didn't work out, but they obviously thought he would, and while without the trade they could have used the rules differently to get the cap space to sign him, that wouldn't have helped them have the CASH to sign him, since they would be paying that money to players they had waived instead.
In short, the Kings sold a first round pick for a lot of money. Then they screwed up with what they spent the money on. But these are two separate transactions.
Sincerely respectfully, I'm pretty sure you've got the time period wrong. They did not free up the 20 million to sign Marco.
They could have signed Marco and everyone else they signed in the summer of 2015 by: (1) making the 76ers trade; or (2) stretching JT, Landry, and dumping Stauskas to a team with cap space for a top 55 protected second rounder.
Instead, they sold a first round pick to have the option of not carrying that dead money for 4 additional years. Over 4 years, that could be 20 million (5 a year x 4 years to spend it) You are right there.
The last guy we signed with our cap space for the first off-season of 4 ... was Barnes. If we had not done the 76ers trade, the Kings would not have had the cap space to sign Barnes. That was a two year deal.
By --- again ironically --- using the stretch provision, the Kings spread that deal out but make some of the 5 million they "bought" dead.
The cost benefit analysis of the 76ers trade turns on what the Kings do with the remaining (5 million - the final number on the Barnes stretch each year), not on how Richardson develops. Because they could have got Marco / Richardson either way, but they wanted the extra 5 million (or more likely didn't grasp the impact of the other road) and thus made the horrible 76ers trade.
They could have signed Marco and everyone else they signed in the summer of 2015 by: (1) making the 76ers trade; or (2) stretching JT, Landry, and dumping Stauskas to a team with cap space for a top 55 protected second rounder.
Instead, they sold a first round pick to have the option of not carrying that dead money for 4 additional years. Over 4 years, that could be 20 million (5 a year x 4 years to spend it) You are right there.
The last guy we signed with our cap space for the first off-season of 4 ... was Barnes. If we had not done the 76ers trade, the Kings would not have had the cap space to sign Barnes. That was a two year deal.
By --- again ironically --- using the stretch provision, the Kings spread that deal out but make some of the 5 million they "bought" dead.
The cost benefit analysis of the 76ers trade turns on what the Kings do with the remaining (5 million - the final number on the Barnes stretch each year), not on how Richardson develops. Because they could have got Marco / Richardson either way, but they wanted the extra 5 million (or more likely didn't grasp the impact of the other road) and thus made the horrible 76ers trade.
I'm not sure why you say that. The 76ers trade was 7/9/2015. Belinelli. Koufos, and Rondo were all signed 7/13/2015.
Whether the $20M (technically more like $18.5M) went to Marco, or to Koufos, or to Rondo is pretty much irrelevant. It was really just an example.
This is true. But the difference between (1) and (2) is that for (1) there is $18.5M of cold hard cash in Vivek's wallet which under scenario (2) is instead in JT and Landry's wallets. Under scenario (1) we did not have to pay the remainder of JT and Landry's contracts, but under scenario (2) we would have. You are talking as if the salary cap implications of the deal are the only important aspects and that $18.5M in cash is absolutely unimportant. I am trying to argue that $18.5M in cash is very important.
Again, you are focusing solely on the cap implications and completely ignoring the cash implications.
Whether the $20M (technically more like $18.5M) went to Marco, or to Koufos, or to Rondo is pretty much irrelevant. It was really just an example.
This is true. But the difference between (1) and (2) is that for (1) there is $18.5M of cold hard cash in Vivek's wallet which under scenario (2) is instead in JT and Landry's wallets. Under scenario (1) we did not have to pay the remainder of JT and Landry's contracts, but under scenario (2) we would have. You are talking as if the salary cap implications of the deal are the only important aspects and that $18.5M in cash is absolutely unimportant. I am trying to argue that $18.5M in cash is very important.
Again, you are focusing solely on the cap implications and completely ignoring the cash implications.
Ya know, I feel pretty good about Vlade's draft picks. Papa is a wildcard, but I can live with that. The other first round picks are working for me. As is the possible/likely acquiring of Bogdan next year. Now, if you're talking about the DMC trade and how that rolled out, I don't feel so good about Vlade. And I wish he had unloaded a few of our vets so Joerger would have to give the young guys more PT. But I'm guessing that he kept the vets for two reasons: a) he couldn't get much in return, and b) he wanted to keep Joerger happy. Let's not underestimate the importance of b.