Lowry talk heating up .. Kings in the mix (ESPN)

[Capt. Factorial]

There comes a point when you have your talent and you need your stabilizing vets and roleplayers. People are stubborn about this, but we have our talent. What we have almost none of are the behind the scenes guys that provide the skeleton for that talent to win with.

I'm not entirely sure that we have significantly more talent than we had at the end of '10-'11 when we last had Dalembert, though. An extra year of experience for Tyreke/DeMarcus, yes (though not a terribly build-worthy year for Tyreke). On top of that we've added IT, Jimmer, and a bunch of guys that are, at best, stabilizing vets and roleplayers. Even if you're thinking that the final piece was Marcus Thornton, we went .370 after acquiring him at the deadline.

I just don't see how a rotation of Tyreke/MT23/Beno/Casspi/JT/Cousins/Dalembert can equate to "not having your talent yet" and a rotation of IT/MT23/Jimmer/Tyreke/JT/Cousins/Hayes can equate to "talent's there, gotta get the role players". Dalembert wasn't enough to put us over the top just one year ago - why should we think he's enough to put us over the top now? I'd say we still need more talent, and the best place to get that talent is...probably with the #5 pick. If we want to get Dally back, why not wait for Houston to waive him? Let's not burn the #5 on him. Ugh.

 

[LWP777]

I'm not entirely sure that we have significantly more talent than we had at the end of '10-'11 when we last had Dalembert, though. An extra year of experience for Tyreke/DeMarcus, yes (though not a terribly build-worthy year for Tyreke). On top of that we've added IT, Jimmer, and a bunch of guys that are, at best, stabilizing vets and roleplayers. Even if you're thinking that the final piece was Marcus Thornton, we went .370 after acquiring him at the deadline.

I just don't see how a rotation of Tyreke/MT23/Beno/Casspi/JT/Cousins/Dalembert can equate to "not having your talent yet" and a rotation of IT/MT23/Jimmer/Tyreke/JT/Cousins/Hayes can equate to "talent's there, gotta get the role players". Dalembert wasn't enough to put us over the top just one year ago - why should we think he's enough to put us over the top now? I'd say we still need more talent, and the best place to get that talent is...probably with the #5 pick. If we want to get Dally back, why not wait for Houston to waive him? Let's not burn the #5 on him. Ugh.

Good post. I really feel like a lot of people around here overvalue our talent. Sure we do have some, but what team doesn't in the league? DMC has the chance to be really special but I think it's pretty certain now that Tyreke is not going to be a Hall of Famer. The other guys are just like you said they are -- role players.

 

[Hoovtrain]

Look, I can only deal with facts. How intelligent or inept someone may or may not be is irrelevant to the conversation. Its merely a subjective opinon that varies from person to person, and more importantly, something I can do nothing about. Personally, I disagree about Petrie. I think he's a bright guy, and he didn't suddenly become stupid. What he can and can't do is decided by ownership. To what degree the Maloofs interfere, is unknown and subject to the personal speculation of each individual.

So there's no way for me to factor in any of that since I don't know the degree of the interference.

Well it is relevant to the conversation because you asked why people were getting worked up over something that hasnt occurred. I just gave my take . And i agree with you on Petrie. The ineptitude i was referring to was directed at the owners.

 

[rainmaker]

I think your missing the point. According to the rumor, Orlando is lusting after Drummond. If so, and thats the basis for these trades, then it doesn't matter what Toronto wants. Your not going to get Drummond with the 8th pick in the draft, but you are going to get him with the 5th pick in the draft. If Drummond is the key player here, then the Kings have all the power with the 5th pick.

You're right, if Orl says Drummond and maybe Kev/Scola would be enough. But from what I've seen Orl wants two top 10 picks. This is also complete speculation that Orl would settle for Dummond instead of Drummond plus another lottery pick. Yes we somewhat hold the cards with Hou, but Hou is doing this because Orl holds their cards, and if Orl wants two lop 10 picks...

This was from truehoop

Upon hearing of Sunday night's developments, one rival general manager told ESPN.com that he believes Houston's real aim is acquiring two top-10 picks this week to turn around quickly and offer both to the Orlando Magic as part of a considerable trade offer for Dwight Howard.

The Rockets' willingness to trade for Howard -- even without the All-Star center's signature on a contract extension -- is an open secret around the league. But it's believed that two top-eight picks, assuming Houston managed to complete trades with both Sacramento and Toronto, would seriously pique the interest of new Magic general manager Rob Hennigan, who could then quickly start following the same sort of roster-building blueprint relied on by his previous employers in Oklahoma City.

Seen other mentions of this as well. What have you seen which suggests Drummond alone without another top 10 pick is enough for Orl?

 

[SacKings7]

Westbrook is signed for the next four years. He just signed a new contract. The only two key players coming up for contracts after next year are Harden and Ibaka.

Oh. This must have been a while ago that I read that then. The NBA has fallen to #4 for me in the 4 major sports leagues lately...

 

[Glenn]

I've already said whether I think it's a good deal or not. I want Daly, but not at the expense of the #5. Him walking in a year is too risky for me, and I'm a huge Daly fan. If we're just discussing rumors, which we are, I dont see how you can be so certain based on a tweet that Daly's issue was only based on Westy. Maybe, maybe not.

But imo trading the #5 for what could be a 1 yr rental is too risky for me.

P.S. I'm not angry at all. Nothing has happened yet.

I probably should go back and read the thread but I hope no one suggested a one for one #5 for Daly trade. That makes little sense.

 

[Sptsjunkie]

I'll add to that -- if we had just taken Brandon Knight or Bismack Biyombo with our pick last year instead of trying to fix all of our problems at once we wouldn't need to make this Houston deal, all we'd have to do is take the best player available whether it's Robinson or MKG or Barnes and add them to one of the best young cores in the league. Throwing away top picks impulsively (or wasting them) is how franchises stay in the basement for years on end.

I'm dubious about this.

Knight and Biyombo might develop, but frankly they both stunk last year.

Knight was given over 2000 minutes and free reign to handle the ball and perform and he was awful. He played 32mpg and was often the primary ball handler (sometimes it was Stuckey) and he shot 41% with 3.8 assists and a TS% of 51% and an 11.7 PER. He also averaged only .7 steals. He's young and certainly has time to improve, but he wouldn't be alleviating any problems here. And likely would have had worse stats in Sac if he was playing off ball, stuck behind IT in the rotation and dealing 2 different coaches.

Biyombo blocked shot. That's it. He has no jumper and took all his shots in the key and still only shot 46% even though he was assisted on 70% of his baskets. and he only hit 48% of his free throws. His rebound rate was 14.5%. Last year rebounding was a problem for us as JT had a career low 14.7% rebound rate. He also only mustered .3 assists per game and a A/T just of 0.27. His PER was 10.7. And if you watched him play, he displayed very little basketball IQ. Again he is young, but having Biyombo would not solidify any position for us.

Ironically, the guys who may have helped more were the ones we passed on at 10 (Klay and Leonard in particular).

 

[Gary]

Id take Taylor and Moultrie, or Harkless and Moultrie. I'm not a big fan of Melo. Maybe the most one demensional big man in the draft. If we get Lowery, why the heck would we need Marshall? And I happen to love Marshall.

I was never really high on Lowry so I would rather have some insurance if we did trade for him. But you're right, I would probably take Ross over Marshall. So Melo/Ross.

Yes he's one dimensional, but he the kind of one dimensional player we need. Weak side D who can block/alter shots. Plus he's a solid 7'0 player.

Ross on the other hand has a good stroke, and a good outside shot. Does not get to the rim very well, but frankly, I don't want him clogging up the lane with Evans, and Cousins anyway. It's too easy to defend.

As for defense Ross is a good off the ball defender. I only saw him about 4-5 times this year but every game I watched he has impressed me.

As for your players I don't really think you could go wrong with either of them (Harkless and Moultrie).. They would be high on my list if we had picks in the teens but I did see more of Ross than Harkless. I don't even think I saw Harkless this year more than once or twice.

 

[Big Cuz 15]

Bulls don't want to take on more salary, hence why they are looking to trade Deng and/or Noah and even if they did, there is no way that Maloofs pony up that much cash for Deng. They are broke and are looking to do it the cheap way and it means not paying someone 13 or 14 million per season for the next 2 years if that guy is not a perennial all-star level player.

Deng is a pipe dream. Lowry is more realistic since he is a bit of a bargain making $5.75M next season and a team option for just over $6million for the 2013-2014 season. He is a very productive player (borderline all-star last year and this year before that blood virus) getting paid less than Salmons, Garcia and around the same money as Hayes.

bulls would be willing to take on a few mill to put a bonafide scorer next to rose. that is what the bulls are lacking. for the maloofs, it would be shuffling $$ around and actually saving a few mill in the process. we are going to pay both salmons AND thornton anyway. those contracts run for 3 more years while deng's runs for 2 more. when his contract is up, i'm pretty sure he will not be paid that amount again. nobody in their right mind would give him 13 mill per season. he should be paid 7-8 mill per season.

 

[Bricklayer]

I'm not entirely sure that we have significantly more talent than we had at the end of '10-'11 when we last had Dalembert, though. An extra year of experience for Tyreke/DeMarcus, yes (though not a terribly build-worthy year for Tyreke). On top of that we've added IT, Jimmer, and a bunch of guys that are, at best, stabilizing vets and roleplayers. Even if you're thinking that the final piece was Marcus Thornton, we went .370 after acquiring him at the deadline.

I just don't see how a rotation of Tyreke/MT23/Beno/Casspi/JT/Cousins/Dalembert can equate to "not having your talent yet" and a rotation of IT/MT23/Jimmer/Tyreke/JT/Cousins/Hayes can equate to "talent's there, gotta get the role players". Dalembert wasn't enough to put us over the top just one year ago - why should we think he's enough to put us over the top now? I'd say we still need more talent, and the best place to get that talent is...probably with the #5 pick. If we want to get Dally back, why not wait for Houston to waive him? Let's not burn the #5 on him. Ugh.

We WERE already there last year. That's where we screwed up. I was advocating trading that damn pick last year too. And oh how I wish we just had instead of buying the college hype nonsense. But the talent was already in place a year ago. And ever since then, almost every single move we have made has been completely incompetent and reflecting no feel whatsoever on how to build an actual team. I was an advocate for flat out tanking a few years back, because it was the point in our development where you flat out tank. I make no excuses for it. It was smart. But that era is over. We tanked, wilingly or unwillingly, and it WORKED. We got our star. We may have our stars, plural.

As for Daly on last year's team -- after Westphal finally caved we were DOMINATING the interior down the stretch of the season last year. We finished seocnd in the entire league in rebounding. Second! And that was with a much less mature Cousins fighting with the coach, constantly distracted, not in shape. You better beleive I would love to return our frontline to that state, but now with a Yr 3 Cousins about to bust out rather than a yr 1 Cousins sloppy as can be.

 

[Gary]

I won't get many that agree with me but I think we should have swapped players and got Jordan Hamilton and Denver's 1st rounder this year as well. That's what I wanted to do last year.

 

[Tyndel]

I think people may be kind of sticking their head in the sand a bit here as to just how short our window is. And by our window, I mean the whole franchise's window. Sacramento's. This board's. In two year's time DeMarcus Cousins can say adios muchachos. We might already have lost our ROY. A rotting building, broke owners still pushing to leave, a fanbase turned off in droves after 7 straight losing seasons. Geoff may have retired, to be replaced by the family dog. There is a cataclysm awaiting continued failure.

I agree and Winning fixes allot of these problems. Playoffs this last year and 500 the year before mean we have an arena with the team sewn up long term and some shiny free agents signed last off season instead of the mess we created. I hope smart works this year or he and this off season might lead us to a new blow up and start over scenario.

 

[hrdboild]

I'm dubious about this.

Knight and Biyombo might develop, but frankly they both stunk last year.

Knight was given over 2000 minutes and free reign to handle the ball and perform and he was awful. He played 32mpg and was often the primary ball handler (sometimes it was Stuckey) and he shot 41% with 3.8 assists and a TS% of 51% and an 11.7 PER. He also averaged only .7 steals. He's young and certainly has time to improve, but he wouldn't be alleviating any problems here. And likely would have had worse stats in Sac if he was playing off ball, stuck behind IT in the rotation and dealing 2 different coaches.

Biyombo blocked shot. That's it. He has no jumper and took all his shots in the key and still only shot 46% even though he was assisted on 70% of his baskets. and he only hit 48% of his free throws. His rebound rate was 14.5%. Last year rebounding was a problem for us as JT had a career low 14.7% rebound rate. He also only mustered .3 assists per game and a A/T just of 0.27. His PER was 10.7. And if you watched him play, he displayed very little basketball IQ. Again he is young, but having Biyombo would not solidify any position for us.

Ironically, the guys who may have helped more were the ones we passed on at 10 (Klay and Leonard in particular).

Raw talent takes time to develop. Knight and Biyombo weren't ready to be full-time contributors -- they were two of the youngest players in the draft last year -- and yet they got a lot of minutes anyway because they play on terrible teams. Whether you believe in their talent as much as I do, the fact remains that we're talking about moving a top 5 pick in a good draft for a veteran shot blocker or point guard when we could have kept the pick last year, not brought in Salmons' big contract, and had a young PG or shotblocking specialist on a 4 year rookie deal. That's one less hole to fill and one less bad contract to move.

...

I've already talked about Lowry so much, there's not much else to say. Either you're on board or you're not. I've been consistently saying "Tyreke is best at PG" despite his turnover problems and poor shot selection because I think he'll figure that out. That being said, Lowry is almost a "best possible fit" wingman for Tyreke. If we're serious about taking a big step forward, getting an experienced play caller whether he's here longterm or just until Tyreke is ready to take off the training wheels, gives us a chance to be competitive from day one.

If Daryl Morey manages to turn an expiring contract, a player who has asked to be traded, and the 14th and 16th pick into the 5th and 8th pick than the rest of the league should just give up right now. That's some abracadabra ish right there. I don't care what Grant says, in no rational world is the #5 pick for the #14 and #16 a fair trade. Maybe if you know you're getting an absolute steal at 14, but that means 9 other GMs have to be asleep at the wheel and that just doesn't happen very often.

 

[DesertFox]

Dalembert is a great addition to this team, but he has little trade value. If the team trades the #5, it will be for a legit asset (either multiple firsts or Lowry + a first) with Dalembert as a parting gift, maybe in exchange for Hayes. He's certainly not worth a top 20 pick.

 

[swisshh]

what happened to Lowry.. How did this become #5 for Daly?

The original rumor sounded too good for the Kings to have Geoff Petrie involved in the move. I think we're now just trying to reconcile ourselves to the possibility of this going south.

Unless people really think Dally is worth the 5th pick.

 

[KingsCity]

Sources say from David Aldridge that even if dwight howard gets traded to houston that he will not commit long term and that's a good sign for kings because there are also sources that cavs are confused about taking either mkg and barnes but leaning more towards barnes which means mkg can drop to us. Iono about you guys but i feel if mkg drops to us then i would not trade our pick what so ever. This guy can change an atmosphere of a team just because he hustles and plays his heart out every game as if it was his last

 

[ParniValjak]

Looks like Raptors are not trading pick 8 for Lowry nor have they discussed it with Rockets....they could be telling porkies

http://basketball.realgm.com/wireta...th_Pick_Haven’t_Spoken_To_Rockets_About_Lowry

 

[Sptsjunkie]

Raw talent takes time to develop. Knight and Biyombo weren't ready to be full-time contributors -- they were two of the youngest players in the draft last year -- and yet they got a lot of minutes anyway because they play on terrible teams. Whether you believe in their talent as much as I do, the fact remains that we're talking about moving a top 5 pick in a good draft for a veteran shot blocker or point guard when we could have kept the pick last year, not brought in Salmons' big contract, and had a young PG or shotblocking specialist on a 4 year rookie deal. That's one less hole to fill and one less bad contract to move.

...

I've already talked about Lowry so much, there's not much else to say. Either you're on board or you're not. I've been consistently saying "Tyreke is best at PG" despite his turnover problems and poor shot selection because I think he'll figure that out. That being said, Lowry is almost a "best possible fit" wingman for Tyreke. If we're serious about taking a big step forward, getting an experienced play caller whether he's here longterm or just until Tyreke is ready to take off the training wheels, gives us a chance to be competitive from day one.

If Daryl Morey manages to turn an expiring contract, a player who has asked to be traded, and the 14th and 16th pick into the 5th and 8th pick than the rest of the league should just give up right now. That's some abracadabra ish right there. I don't care what Grant says, in no rational world is the #5 pick for the #14 and #16 a fair trade. Maybe if you know you're getting an absolute steal at 14, but that means 9 other GMs have to be asleep at the wheel and that just doesn't happen very often.

I totally agree with the second part of your post. If we trade #5 for either Sammy and a pick or for the 14 and 16, I will be very upset. That's just awful. Getting a player who is going to be 31 next season and in the last year of their contract to move back 9 or 11 spaces in the draft would be foolish.

Getting a talented, 25 year old, high IQ, two way player who is a gym rat to play next to Evans and at least one draft pick would be a win (depending on who falls to 5). A Lowry-Evans back court would be a very rich man's version of what we had with Udrih and Evans. Two players who can penetrate, score inside, pass and defend. And Lowry's outside shooting would be a plus. And having IT + Thronton off the bench would give us a much stronger second unit and fix the offensively challenged bench we had this year.

Some of the Rockets boards are suggesting they would give up Lowry, 14 and 16 for #5. If they wanted to keep one of those picks to send to Toronto with Parsons, I could see us taking Lowry, #16 and Dalembert for the #5 and Garcia. We don't need to add three rookies to our very young team. Adding Lowry, Sammy and two rookies, while shedding a mediocre contract would make more sense.

 

[ParniValjak]

I totally agree with the second part of your post. If we trade #5 for either Sammy and a pick or for the 14 and 16, I will be very upset. That's just awful. Getting a player who is going to be 31 next season and in the last year of their contract to move back 9 or 11 spaces in the draft would be foolish.

Getting a talented, 25 year old, high IQ, two way player who is a gym rat to play next to Evans and at least one draft pick would be a win (depending on who falls to 5). A Lowry-Evans back court would be a very rich man's version of what we had with Udrih and Evans. Two players who can penetrate, score inside, pass and defend. And Lowry's outside shooting would be a plus. And having IT + Thronton off the bench would give us a much stronger second unit and fix the offensively challenged bench we had this year.

Some of the Rockets boards are suggesting they would give up Lowry, 14 and 16 for #5. If they wanted to keep one of those picks to send to Toronto with Parsons, I could see us taking Lowry, #16 and Dalembert for the #5 and Garcia. We don't need to add three rookies to our very young team. Adding Lowry, Sammy and two rookies, while shedding a mediocre contract would make more sense.

Garcia is practically an expiring contract (team option for 2013-2014) which makes him valuable trade asset for teams looking to cut salary. I would rather we dump one of the long term deals (looking at Salmons or Hayes) instead to maintain cap flexibility going forward.

As for IT and MT off the bench scenario, its not going to work like that in practice. One of those guys will get squeezed for minutes and the obvious one is IT. I would look at Lowry-Evans-MT in the same fashion as Beno-Reke-MT in a sense that those 3 guys have you covered at 2 backcourt positions. Lowry can play PG and can play off the ball as well. Tyreke also can play some point which means that the extra PG is not a necessity and would likely get squeezed out in the minute crunch. Lowry is not tall but he is a barrel chested strong player who can guard a lot of SG.

With this reasoning I would be open to including IT in the deal for Lowry under condition that we get BOTH draft picks from Houston. I would be happy to do Pick 5, IT and Hayes for Lowry, Dalembert, and picks 14 and 16. In fact I would sign off on that quicker than Houston could blink. I might even throw in pick 36 to get it over the line. IT would provide them with some insurance in case Dragic bolts in FA and if not, then they get a good back up for Dragic.

As far as I am concerned everyone and everything bar Cousins and Evans is up for trade but it depends on what I am getting back in return. I am in the camp that thinks that with Lowry and Dalembert in the starting line up we are significantly better even if our starting SF is Travis Outlaw. This trade would bring us back to what we had before we ****ed it all up last off season, a strong 3 big man rotation (Cousins-Dalembert-JT) and a strong 3 guard rotations (Lowry-Evans-Thornton). All thats left from there is SF position which would need to be defensive SF that can knock down a 3.

 

[Sptsjunkie]

Garcia is practically an expiring contract (team option for 2013-2014) which makes him valuable trade asset for teams looking to cut salary. I would rather we dump one of the long term deals (looking at Salmons or Hayes) instead to maintain cap flexibility going forward.

As for IT and MT off the bench scenario, its not going to work like that in practice. One of those guys will get squeezed for minutes and the obvious one is IT. I would look at Lowry-Evans-MT in the same fashion as Beno-Reke-MT in a sense that those 3 guys have you covered at 2 backcourt positions. Lowry can play PG and can play off the ball as well. Tyreke also can play some point which means that the extra PG is not a necessity and would likely get squeezed out in the minute crunch. Lowry is not tall but he is a barrel chested strong player who can guard a lot of SG.

With this reasoning I would be open to including IT in the deal for Lowry under condition that we get BOTH draft picks from Houston. I would be happy to do Pick 5, IT and Hayes for Lowry, Dalembert, and picks 14 and 16. In fact I would sign off on that quicker than Houston could blink. I might even throw in pick 36 to get it over the line. IT would provide them with some insurance in case Dragic bolts in FA and if not, then they get a good back up for Dragic.

As far as I am concerned everyone and everything bar Cousins and Evans is up for trade but it depends on what I am getting back in return. I am in the camp that thinks that with Lowry and Dalembert in the starting line up we are significantly better even if our starting SF is Travis Outlaw. This trade would bring us back to what we had before we ****ed it all up last off season, a strong 3 big man rotation (Cousins-Dalembert-JT) and a strong 3 guard rotations (Lowry-Evans-Thornton). All thats left from there is SF position which would need to be defensive SF that can knock down a 3.

You may be right about the back court minutes.

Although, I would rather trade Thornton in this scenario than IT. I feel like IT is a much more well rounded player. He can shoot, pass, dribble and play D. Thornton can shoot and score, but is a below average passer for a SG and is an atrocious man and team defender.

Also, agree with you about throwing in another contract for Garcia.

#5, Thornton and Salmons/Hayes for Lowry, Sammy, 14 and 16 makes sense for us.

If the Rox are trying to get the Raptors pick too, they would probably not want to give both picks up. In that case, I would just subtract Thornton and 14 from the deal and then swing another draft day trade sending out Thornton for a pick.

I wonder what pick we could get for Thornton.

 

[ParniValjak]

You may be right about the back court minutes.

Although, I would rather trade Thornton in this scenario than IT. I feel like IT is a much more well rounded player. He can shoot, pass, dribble and play D. Thornton can shoot and score, but is a below average passer for a SG and is an atrocious man and team defender.

Also, agree with you about throwing in another contract for Garcia.

#5, Thornton and Salmons/Hayes for Lowry, Sammy, 14 and 16 makes sense for us.

If the Rox are trying to get the Raptors pick too, they would probably not want to give both picks up. In that case, I would just subtract Thornton and 14 from the deal and then swing another draft day trade sending out Thornton for a pick.

I wonder what pick we could get for Thornton.

Trading Thornton and keeping IT creates one problem I want to avoid and that's stretches of minutes where you will inevitably have to run with Lowry-IT backcourt. That is just not a good combination defensively.

I like Thornton in a certain role but I do agree with you that in terms of attitude and better rounded play, IT is better but defensively, IT-Lowry pairing is just troublesome no matter which way you slice it and dice it. Despite Lowry being a very good defender, IT-Lowry pairing could easily be exposed defensively.

Ideally in terms of developing chemistry and consistency (something we are in major need of) you would not want to go deeper than 3 man rotation for your backcourt and front court. Your 4th man in each position should either be a young developing kid who gets scrap minutes, or an old vet that is not in regular rotation but can contribute if called upon.

Your small forward backup ideally would be someone who can also play a bit of PF in certain line ups. I think if Outlaw gets his mojo back he can be a decent back up SF who can play a bit of PF in certain situations.

With picks 14 and 16 ideally you would want to pick a long term Dalembert replacement (Henson but likely gone by then) and let him fight it out with Whiteside and a developing SF (Harkless) or a SF with low upside but ready to contribute as a defensive role player who knocks down 3s at a good clip (Taylor).

 

[Sptsjunkie]

Trading Thornton and keeping IT creates one problem I want to avoid and that's stretches of minutes where you will inevitably have to run with Lowry-IT backcourt. That is just not a good combination defensively.

I like Thornton in a certain role but I do agree with you that in terms of attitude and better rounded play, IT is better but defensively, IT-Lowry pairing is just troublesome no matter which way you slice it and dice it. Despite Lowry being a very good defender, IT-Lowry pairing could easily be exposed defensively.

Ideally in terms of developing chemistry and consistency (something we are in major need of) you would not want to go deeper than 3 man rotation for your backcourt and front court. Your 4th man in each position should either be a young developing kid who gets scrap minutes, or an old vet that is not in regular rotation but can contribute if called upon.

Your small forward backup ideally would be someone who can also play a bit of PF in certain line ups. I think if Outlaw gets his mojo back he can be a decent back up SF who can play a bit of PF in certain situations.

With picks 14 and 16 ideally you would want to pick a long term Dalembert replacement (Henson but likely gone by then) and let him fight it out with Whiteside and a developing SF (Harkless) or a SF with low upside but ready to contribute as a defensive role player who knocks down 3s at a good clip (Taylor).

It's an interesting dilemma. This is one I am going to need to think about more.

If we get Lowry and Dally, then we are probably only getting one draft pick. And I am guessing Harkless or T Jones would be the most likely picks. Obviously, if Henson or Zeller drops they would be considered. But I am guessing they will be gone, so we get another high upside SF.

 

[sterö]

The Howard thing would probably not work out well for the Rockets according to DA:

http://tracking.si.com/2012/06/26/dwight-howard-trade-rockets-magic-nba-draft-kyle-lowry/

 

[Siranthony]

The Howard thing would probably not work out well for the Rockets according to DA:

http://tracking.si.com/2012/06/26/dwight-howard-trade-rockets-magic-nba-draft-kyle-lowry/

the trade may not happen and that's fine by me. It's funny how detailed people here get with how we will play X players in what rotation though.

 

[ParniValjak]

So Rockets just trade Chase Budinger and rights to Lior Eliyahu to Minny for pick 18.

They now have picks 14, 16 and 18. There is definitely something cooking in Houston. No way they keep all 3 picks.

 

[Bricklayer]

So Rockets just trade Chase Budinger and rights to Lior Eliyahu to Minny for pick 18.

They now have picks 14, 16 and 18. There is definitely something cooking in Houston. No way they keep all 3 picks.

Yeah, not anyway they just dump Budinger like that unless their whole point was getting exra picks. And thing is just this morning peoole were speculating that might be Kevin Martin going that way, although I was having a hard time seeing it for a #18 pick.

Morey is going to make this draft wacky. We won't even know if they guy we drafted at 5 is even really our player until later in the round.

 

[Bricklayer]

It's an interesting dilemma. This is one I am going to need to think about more.

If we get Lowry and Dally, then we are probably only getting one draft pick. And I am guessing Harkless or T Jones would be the most likely picks. Obviously, if Henson or Zeller drops they would be considered. But I am guessing they will be gone, so we get another high upside SF.

If we get back Daly, and with our intention of signing JT, then that's Cousins/Daly/JT/Hayes/Whiteside already as out 5 bigs. be very surprised if we used any pick coming out of that scrum on another one, unless maybe a 3/4 "stretch" type guy to replace Donte.

 

[ParniValjak]

Yeah, nor anyway they jsut dump Budinger like that unless their whole point was getting exra picks.

Morey is going to make this draft wacky. We won't even know if they guy we drafted at 5 is even really our player until later in the round.

Do doubt but I just can't see any team wanting that many picks in the teens. Those picks will be used as means to trade up into the top 10. They are obviously after Howard or another star player that is not publicly out there. I am more and more convinced we are somehow involved.

I just hope we don't get screwed in all the wheeling and dealing.

 

[ParniValjak]

If we get back Daly, and with our intention of signing JT, then that's Cousins/Daly/JT/Hayes/Whiteside already as out 5 bigs. be very surprised if we used any pick coming out of that scrum on another one, unless maybe a 3/4 "stretch" type guy to replace Donte.

Isn't Outlaw that guy for us?!

But I agree that if that our big man rotation going forward then we are looking for a SF somewhere in that range if in fact we end up picking there.

Surely we try and trade Hayes and/or Salmons just to dump that salary.

 

[lwc]

So Rockets just trade Chase Budinger and rights to Lior Eliyahu to Minny for pick 18.

They now have picks 14, 16 and 18. There is definitely something cooking in Houston. No way they keep all 3 picks.

For sure. Something is going down. There is NO WAY they would give up C.B. for the 18th just to have the 18th. They are definitely trying to package something together.