1st round trade value.

[upinsmoke]

What kind of return could trading away our 1st net us? Juts a few ideas for conversation sakes.

• Salmons/1st for Al Jefferson (as i understand it utah has Gsw's 1st rounder so they could have three 1st rounders for the price of salmons lousy contract and Big Al
• If the clips and Magic make a deal we send away our 1st for D. Jordan.

 

[ParniValjak]

1. We can't trade consecutive #1s and we have already traded one (lottery protected) with Casspi to get Hickson.

2. Why would Utah take on Salmons and give up their best player in the process?!

 

[Nighthawk1]

1. We can't trade consecutive #1s and we have already traded one (lottery protected) with Casspi to get Hickson.

2. Why would Utah take on Salmons and give up their best player in the process?!

This brings me to a question I have been to lazy to research. Do protected #1's count? Like you mention the Casspi for Hickson/Lottery Protected 1st. Can we even dangle it as trade bait until that has been fulfilled?

 

[Glenn]

This brings me to a question I have been too lazy to research. Do protected #1's count? Like you mention the Casspi for Hickson/Lottery Protected 1st. Can we even dangle it as trade bait until that has been fulfilled?

I don't know why we couldn't but good question.

 

[upinsmoke]

1. We can't trade consecutive #1s and we have already traded one (lottery protected) with Casspi to get Hickson.

2. Why would Utah take on Salmons and give up their best player in the process?!

It wont be consecutive picks it would be the same one. Thats how I understand it at least, cleveland is out of luck because were not going anywhere close to the playoffs. Should be tradable...

 

[Bricklayer]

It wont be consecutive picks it would be the same one. Thats how I understand it at least, cleveland is out of luck because were not going anywhere close to the playoffs. Should be tradable...

If it is, logically it would not be until after the season, or at the very least until after we have been mathematically eliminated from the playoffs.

Jefferson BTW is completely the opposite of what we need there. Well not completely opposite. But a shot demanding non-defending guy is not what is needed next to Cousins.

 

[Section 101]

If it is, logically it would not be until after the season, or at the very least until after we have been mathematically eliminated from the playoffs.

Jefferson BTW is completely the opposite of what we need there. Well not completely opposite. But a shot demanding non-defending guy is not what is needed next to Cousins.

What he is saying is trade the protected part of the pick. The problem is if by chance the pick goes to Cleveland then there would be condition that the next available pick goes in the trade. Thus any potential trade of the pick would lower the value.

 

[ElRey]

The thing that makes me reluctant to trade this upcoming pick is that this looks like an awesome 2012 Draft. It's also quite strong exactly where we have needs, starting SF and PF. Petrie drafts much better than he trades. Unless it's a no brainer trade, I say keep the pick. I have dreams of Tyreke throwing alleyoops to our next young athletic SF or PF.

This is the draft class where if you get lucky, can completely turn your team around.

 

[sterö]

This is one of the best and deepest drafts in many years. Why would you trade away your pick?

 

[Padrino]

This is one of the best and deepest drafts in many years. Why would you trade away your pick?

because the kings already have two potential cornerstone pieces in tyreke evans and demarcus cousins, and an excellent third wheel in marcus thornton. all three are tremendously young players, and with jimmer playing below expectation, the LAST thing this team needs is another rookie. the kings need veteran role players to stabilize their rotation, preferably those that play above average defense, and preferably at least one that is a starter quality SF. if, say, gerald wallace were available, and the kings were able to trade their first round draft pick this year, i'd love to see it packaged with just about anybody other than evans, cousins, and thornton to acquire him...

edit: and it makes sense for the kings to trade their first rounder precisely because its such a deep draft. any pick in the lottery is going to be of excellent value, and could easily aid in netting something worthwhile in return...

 

[ParniValjak]

because the kings already have two potential cornerstone pieces in tyreke evans and demarcus cousins, and an excellent third wheel in marcus thornton. all three are tremendously young players, and with jimmer playing below expectation, the LAST thing this team needs is another rookie. the kings need veteran role players to stabilize their rotation, preferably those that play above average defense, and preferably at least one that is a starter quality SF. if, say, gerald wallace were available, and the kings were able to trade their first round draft pick this year, i'd love to see it packaged with just about anybody other than evans, cousins, and thornton to acquire him...

edit: and it makes sense for the kings to trade their first rounder precisely because its such a deep draft. any pick in the lottery is going to be of excellent value, and could easily aid in netting something worthwhile in return...

I will be the first one to admit that I know nothing about this draft or the type of players available in the pool. However, while we might be stacked with youth and have our foundations in Reke and Cousins and have added Thornton as the 3rd option, you would not trade the pick if it gets you a genuine superstar. What we have with our "big 3" is great but if you have a chance to upgrade that talent at that position or overall, then one of those guys can easily become expandable.

Like I said, it depends what the draft is like but if we get a pick that can land us another LeBron, or Kobe or MJ etc..then that pick is absolutely the keeper. You don't want to end up being the Blazers and overlook MJ because they had Drexler.

I am very much open to trading the pick for a veteran but I would want to make sure I know exact value of that pick and what it could translate to before I trade it away for a veteran because you might be trading 15 years of superstardom for a few years of veteran play which in the long run does not add up. If we end up with a top 5 pick and if that gets us a "can't miss" prospect then I would be reluctant to trade that pick.

 

[Kingster]

I will be the first one to admit that I know nothing about this draft or the type of players available in the pool. However, while we might be stacked with youth and have our foundations in Reke and Cousins and have added Thornton as the 3rd option, you would not trade the pick if it gets you a genuine superstar. What we have with our "big 3" is great but if you have a chance to upgrade that talent at that position or overall, then one of those guys can easily become expandable.

Like I said, it depends what the draft is like but if we get a pick that can land us another LeBron, or Kobe or MJ etc..then that pick is absolutely the keeper. You don't want to end up being the Blazers and overlook MJ because they had Drexler.

I am very much open to trading the pick for a veteran but I would want to make sure I know exact value of that pick and what it could translate to before I trade it away for a veteran because you might be trading 15 years of superstardom for a few years of veteran play which in the long run does not add up. If we end up with a top 5 pick and if that gets us a "can't miss" prospect then I would be reluctant to trade that pick.

Agreed. I also think that we can't count our chickens yet on our young players. It's not a done deal with these guys that they are going to be cornerstones or All Stars on this team. All kind of things can happen between now and then. If you have a chance for another potentially excellent young player, you just add him to the mix. It increases the odds that somebody among the bunch will become an outstanding player in the future.

 

[upinsmoke]

it makes sense for the kings to trade their first rounder precisely because its such a deep draft. any pick in the lottery is going to be of excellent value, and could easily aid in netting something worthwhile in return...

My thoughts exactly, of course you have to look at both sides of the arguement because there is the potential of missing out on a heck of a player in the draft. The other side is most of these young guys are still considered projects once they show up on the pro stage. GO KINGS!

 

[Padrino]

I will be the first one to admit that I know nothing about this draft or the type of players available in the pool. However, while we might be stacked with youth and have our foundations in Reke and Cousins and have added Thornton as the 3rd option, you would not trade the pick if it gets you a genuine superstar. What we have with our "big 3" is great but if you have a chance to upgrade that talent at that position or overall, then one of those guys can easily become expandable.

Like I said, it depends what the draft is like but if we get a pick that can land us another LeBron, or Kobe or MJ etc..then that pick is absolutely the keeper. You don't want to end up being the Blazers and overlook MJ because they had Drexler.

I am very much open to trading the pick for a veteran but I would want to make sure I know exact value of that pick and what it could translate to before I trade it away for a veteran because you might be trading 15 years of superstardom for a few years of veteran play which in the long run does not add up. If we end up with a top 5 pick and if that gets us a "can't miss" prospect then I would be reluctant to trade that pick.

its a very deep draft, but for those who haven't done much homework on the top prospects yet, there is no michael jordan, lebron james, or kobe bryant coming out of it. there is quality to be had, and lots of it, but the depth of this draft is due in large part to the uncertainty that surrounded the lockout. most of the top talents declared for last year's draft anyway...

the thing about guys like lebron james is that they're hard consensus #1's. by that, i mean they're undisputed top picks. we see them coming years ahead of time, and whoever gets the #1 pick is blessed something extraordinary in the draft year of those players. but nothing like that exists in this draft. there's plenty of good potential. there's loads of talent in the lottery, but nothing "for sure..."

let me put it this way: i don't see any of the lottery prospects becoming miles better than demarcus cousins or tyreke evans. at a certain point, you have to commit to the choices you've made as a franchise, in my opinion. you can't keep floating in the land of a-hope-and-a-prayer. the kings front office bet on evans and cousins. now you have to roll the dice with them, or trade them for comparable talents that are more veteran in nature. otherwise you are destined for the basement year in and year out, with no end in sight...

i'm so tired of seeing the kings in the lottery. unless they are of an elite prospect quality, a la lebron james, a rookie, no matter how talented, will not elevate this team to playoff status. steady, complementary veteran players who fill in the gaps around evans and cousins could make the difference and expedite the growth of the kings talented young duo. adding more youth just adds more uncertainty and more mistakes. its time to take the next step, and i think trading a lottery pick in a deep draft for a quality, veteran, complementary presence is exactly what could elevate this team past their "potential"...

alternatively, you could hold onto your pick, use it, and attempt to jigsaw another confused, young player into a team of confused young players. but we've already established that its going to be difficult for the kings to lure the kind of veteran free agents they need to acquire to stabilize their rotations. so if they are unable to parlay their disparate young players into a trade for some veteran talent, we'll all likely get to watch as the kings continue to struggle, and we'll all likely get to watch as tyreke evans and demarcus cousins take off for greener pastures in free agency, because, past a certain point, it will become clear to both of them that the kings are going nowhere...

by season's end, the picture should be clearer, and a lottery pick in a deep draft is exceptional trade bait...

 

[upinsmoke]

trevor ariza for Garcia+1st might also work out as well for both parties.

 

[mr. moustache]

trevor ariza for Garcia+1st might also work out as well for both parties.

That would be a terrible trade for us. The 1st has considerable value.

 

[Dreadnought]

It would be foolish to trade the pick, we're going nowhere. Tyreke and Cousins are great pieces, but they are clearly not franchise players. Lets just hope the lottery gods finally smile on us and give us a #1 or #2.

 

[Glenn]

It would be foolish to trade the pick, we're going nowhere. Tyreke and Cousins are great pieces, but they are clearly not franchise players. Lets just hope the lottery gods finally smile on us and give us a #1 or #2.

Do you have doubts???? Anyway, we could get a franchise changer if everything falls the right way. I don't mean a Kobe or Lebron but another spectacular player to go with the two or three we seem to have perculating right now.

Considering the lottery gods have shunned us recently, it is easy to have doubts. But still ...... The odds are still there as usual and unfortunately just because we have done poorly recently (some would say we got screwed ) doesn't mean anything evens out. The odds are what they are. I think Tyreke and Cuz are as close to a lock on being great and Thornton worries me a little. Add another makes us younger yet again but in 5 years, if they all stay together, wow!

I don't need an NBA championship to be happy and we are heading in the right direction despite this summer's moves. This summer didn't cost us anything in a bad way but simply guaranteed a bad year.

BTW, what's a franchise player in your definition? I haven't seen a big guy of Cousins' multiple skill levels come out in a long time. Not arguing, just curious.

 

[upinsmoke]

That would be a terrible trade for us. The 1st has considerable value.

Yea your right they would have to eat salmons contract then it would be good deal imo.
Ariza would be a good fit for this squad. Long, athletic good rebounder and plays solid D who can also knock down the set 3.

 

[bajaden]

This is the deepest draft in the last 15 years. There are players that will go at number 10 and 11, that would have been considered for the number one spot last season. Why do we always think someone else's players are our saviors. Plus, I still don't think you can even trade the unprotected part of our pick. Say you do, and then next season we make the playoffs, and our pick we traded for Hickson gets used. That would mean we would be trading our number one two years in a row. Whick we can't. I don't think we can trade another 1st round pick, unless its after 2016 when the protected pick becomes a 2nd round pick, until the protected pick gets resolved one way or the other.

 

[Padrino]

This is the deepest draft in the last 15 years. There are players that will go at number 10 and 11, that would have been considered for the number one spot last season. Why do we always think someone else's players are our saviors. Plus, I still don't think you can even trade the unprotected part of our pick. Say you do, and then next season we make the playoffs, and our pick we traded for Hickson gets used. That would mean we would be trading our number one two years in a row. Whick we can't. I don't think we can trade another 1st round pick, unless its after 2016 when the protected pick becomes a 2nd round pick, until the protected pick gets resolved one way or the other.

this is awful logic. what is a draft pick if not someone else's player? at least an nba veteran has the luxury of having played for an nba team, if not more than one nba team. that tells you something about their ability to compete at the nba level. they're known quantities. on the other hand, our own rookie jimmer fredette is the perfect example of "someone else's player." he found success within a particular system and under a particular coach at byu who gave him undisciplined free reign for four years. that's entrenchment right there. jimmer is dave rose's player. but he was never going to get that same kinda green light in the nba, where he would unlikely be the best player on the court at any given moment. and when finally thrust into the nba's style of play, he has stumbled mightily. its pretty astonishing to me that an as-advertised shooter who shot nearly 46% across a four-year college career is now shooting 36% as a professional. i have confidence that he'll find his rhythm, but his early struggles are an indication that, no matter how hyped the draft pick is, if its not a certainty like lebron james, derrick rose, kevin durant, or blake griffin, you're unlikely to see a major or immediate impact at the outset...

beyond that, the kings don't need an additional three years of wondering if yet another top draft pick will develop into the player we want them to be, while also wondering if that player will be able to fit alongside the team's other young players who are only just beginning to become what we want them to be. once again, if its not a lebron james level player, lottery picks just beget more lottery picks, unless they're followed up by smart signings and smart trades. signings are the tough part for a small market franchise in disarray, but smart trades are easier to accomplish if you have enough assets. and, for the record, trading for john salmons so you can move DOWN in the draft is NOT an example of a smart trade. petrie will need to step that part of his game up between now and the trade deadline, or during the upcoming offseason. and i think, should our first rounder be tradable (i'm shaky on the rules regarding the kings' situation), you'd have a mighty nice asset to package in a trade for the right player. i'm not suggesting that we up and trade a lottery pick in a deep draft for mr. ho-hum-whoever. i'm talking about a complementary, veteran talent, preferably a SF, who can steady the kings rotation. now, the first person to truly convince me that there's an out-of-the-park difference maker in this draft could easily get me to reverse my decision. but, as deep as this draft is, its short on surefire all star material in my estimation...

 

[Section 101]

this is awful logic. what is a draft pick if not someone else's player? at least an nba veteran has the luxury of having played for an nba team, if not more than one nba team. that tells you something about their ability to compete at the nba level. they're known quantities. on the other hand,

Explain Salmons by this logic.

 

[Padrino]

Explain Salmons by this logic.

i already did, sir. later in my post, i pointed out that trading for john salmons to move down in the draft was a very poor decision. its what you DON'T do. salmons is a terrible fit here, and he's on the downside of his effectiveness as it is. that's on kings management. they need to do a much better job of evaluating the kinds of incoming players that would benefit this team the most. the same goes for the draft pick they acquired. jimmer fredette is NOT a good fit on this team. he may very well have a successful nba career, but his place on the kings is fuzzy at best...

regardless of those points specific to the kings, my general assertion regarding veteran nba players stands. they're known quantities, and if you're a gm who understands anything about the architecture of an nba team, you match complementary veteran players with your promising young talent. if it were possible, i would take gerald wallace, who will be 30 in july, over anybody coming out of this draft, and not because he's miles better now than any of them will ever be. that's probably not even remotely true. rather, i'd take wallace because i think he would immediately do more for this particular team than any draft prospect could. he's an excellent wing defender who does not require the ball in his hands, but will do something positive with it if its put in his hands. he's still very athletic despite his age, and he'd nicely fit into keith smart's desire to push the ball up court. he'd finish alley oops that other kings fumble, and he's also an excellent rebounder, which is something the kings already excel at, and would continue to excel at with the addition of wallace. as an entire position, SF is rudderless and empty, statistically, for the kings. adding a difference-maker like wallace would instantly make the kings a better team, and would set them on a path that errs much closer to the playoffs than the one they're on now. i don't see a single prospect in this draft that could offer the same. somebody prove me wrong...

note: of course, if acquiring a veteran player like wallace is not a possibility, you don't trade the pick. you never trade an asset just to trade it. you find your guy in the draft, pick him, and think about what pieces should be moved later in the offseason...

 

[Section 101]

i already did, sir. later in my post, i pointed out that trading for john salmons to move down in the draft was a very poor decision. its what you DON'T do. salmons is a terrible fit here, and he's on the downside of his effectiveness as it is. that's on kings management. they need to do a much better job of evaluating the kinds of incoming players that would benefit this team the most. the same goes for the draft pick they acquired. jimmer fredette is NOT a good fit on this team. he may very well have a successful nba career, but his place on the kings is fuzzy at best...

regardless of those points specific to the kings, my general assertion regarding veteran nba players stands. they're known quantities, and if you're a gm who understands anything about the architecture of an nba team, you match complementary veteran players with your promising young talent. if it were possible, i would take gerald wallace, who will be 30 in july, over anybody coming out of this draft, and not because he's miles better now than any of them will ever be. that's probably not even remotely true. rather, i'd take wallace because i think he would immediately do more for this particular team than any draft prospect could. he's an excellent wing defender who does not require the ball in his hands, but will do something positive with it if its put in his hands. he's still very athletic despite his age, and he'd nicely fit into keith smart's desire to push the ball up court. he'd finish alley oops that other kings fumble, and he's also an excellent rebounder, which is something the kings already excel at, and would continue to excel at with the addition of wallace. as an entire position, SF is rudderless and empty, statistically, for the kings. adding a difference-maker like wallace would instantly make the kings a better team, and would set them on a path that errs much closer to the playoffs than the one they're on now. i don't see a single prospect in this draft that could offer the same. somebody prove me wrong...

note: of course, if acquiring a veteran player like wallace is not a possibility, you don't trade the pick. you never trade an asset just to trade it. you find your guy in the draft, pick him, and think about what pieces should be moved later in the offseason...

I was referring to the part about known quantities. Salmons game was well known. Yes he's a bad fit, but his play has been beyond horrible. His skill set has dimished since last season. He's gone from the 06-07 season in PER till now : 12.69, 14.29, 16.03, 14.70, 12.89, 7.15! That's not even taking into account his matador defense.

 

[Padrino]

I was referring to the part about known quantities. Salmons game was well known. Yes he's a bad fit, but his play has been beyond horrible. His skill set has dimished since last season. He's gone from the 06-07 season in PER till now : 12.69, 14.29, 16.03, 14.70, 12.89, 7.15! That's not even taking into account his matador defense.

his PER runs in a pretty standard trajectory for a mediocre player: climbs for a bit, peaks, diminishes, then plummets. but its precisely because he's a bad fit that we've seen such a dropoff. on a team with tyreke evans, demarcus cousins, marcus thornton, and with the additions of jimmer fredette and isaiah thomas, both who are seeing significant court time, where was john effing salmons gonna fit? again, he's a known quantity, and one of the most knowable aspects of his quantity is that he requires time with the ball in his hands to be effective. he doesn't get that time on the kings, so when he does get the ball, he forces the issue. PER is advanced stuff, but this right here is pretty simple statistics: 1 ball, 5 players. the other side of nba veterans being a known quantity is knowing which veterans NOT to bring over to your team. this one's on petrie...

 

[Section 101]

his PER runs in a pretty standard trajectory for a mediocre player: climbs for a bit, peaks, diminishes, then plummets. but its precisely because he's a bad fit that we've seen such a dropoff. on a team with tyreke evans, demarcus cousins, marcus thornton, and with the additions of jimmer fredette and isaiah thomas, both who are seeing significant court time, where was john effing salmons gonna fit? again, he's a known quantity, and one of the most knowable aspects of his quantity is that he requires time with the ball in his hands to be effective. he doesn't get that time on the kings, so when he does get the ball, he forces the issue. PER is advanced stuff, but this right here is pretty simple statistics: 1 ball, 5 players. the other side of nba veterans being a known quantity is knowing which veterans NOT to bring over to your team. this one's on petrie...

Doesn't explain his missed wide open shots and defense lapse. Just saying proven players can decline for no reason too. But draft picks/young players still have a chance to improve.

 

[Padrino]

Doesn't explain his missed wide open shots and defense lapse. Just saying proven players can decline for no reason too. But draft picks/young players still have a chance to improve.

fair enough. but how does that help the kings? again, i'm not talking about trading a top draft pick for a mediocre acquisition like salmons. i'm talking about putting an end to all of this languishing in development by packaging that pick to acquire a talented veteran that could impact the roster both positively and immediately. i'm still waiting for someone to point out one player in this upcoming draft that will have an immediate impact on the kings, catapulting them out of the basement of the western conference. i'm not sold on any of them. most of them just scream "potential" to me, and few strike me as players that would obviously become better than evans or cousins, thus making it worthwhile to consider trading one of those two...

 

[Glenn]

fair enough. but how does that help the kings? again, i'm not talking about trading a top draft pick for a mediocre acquisition like salmons. i'm talking about putting an end to all of this languishing in development by packaging that pick to acquire a talented veteran that could impact the roster both positively and immediately. i'm still waiting for someone to point out one player in this upcoming draft that will have an immediate impact on the kings, catapulting them out of the basement of the western conference. i'm not sold on any of them. most of them just scream "potential" to me, and few strike me as players that would obviously become better than evans or cousins, thus making it worthwhile to consider trading one of those two...

Anthony Davis. Put him next to Cousins and you won't need another starting big for a minimum of 10 years. This is a situation where the sum is worth more than the parts.

 

[Padrino]

Anthony Davis. Put him next to Cousins and you won't need another starting big for a minimum of 10 years. This is a situation where the sum is worth more than the parts.

meh. i'm not sold on davis in the least. i don't think he's anywhere near ready to compete at the nba level. his defense is certainly top notch as a collegiate athlete. he's a rarity in that respect. but his offense is nonexistent. its not mediocre or unrefined. its utterly nonexistent. his field goal percentage is extremely high, but his usage rate at kentucky is tremendously low because he just doesn't have much skill as an offensive player. really, he reminds me a ton of tyrus thomas, who was also massively hyped coming out of lsu...

now, the kings don't necessarily need offense from whoever they put next to cousins, but they do need a player who's ready to compete. once again, davis does not represent a sure thing to me. he's so raw to this point, and by the time he's nba ready, the kings may still be perennial losers, and evans and cousins may have already moved on in free agency...

 

[Heuge]

Wow. Jefferson. lol.