Blazers talking to Kings?

[Bibby.10]

I'd be against that deal. I have a lot of hopes for Brown, who has a lot of talent and potential. Tossing him in might end up hurting us more than helping. If we do, in fact, go with Raef and a pick, it's just a further indication to me that Petrie is in fact stockpiling picks with something very interesting in mind. In all honesty, that possibility has me totally intrigued.

You would rather have Brown and our second than Beyless?

 

[Vlade4GM]

I'd say that's a pretty fair deal. Salmons has a higher value than Artest because he doesn't have the baggage. Salmons is a better player right now than Bayless, no doubt about it, but Bayless may have more upside and definitely fills a need.

Well he doesn't have Artest's baggage but you are getting a bit of a character problem in Salmons, and he's not as good as Artest.

 

[VF21]

You would rather have Brown and our second than Beyless?

I think it's message board fodder and nothing more.

I don't think Brown is on the block right now...and I don't think Bayless is going to be included in a deal like this from Portland.

 

[Bricklayer]

Obviously I like the push for Bayless, and might be willing to tweak things to make that work for them (but NOT by giving up any of our picks -- just players. If they wanted Bobby Brown back, go for it). But in the end, if/when they say no to the Bayless thing I'd be willing to back off and take the Raef and a first deal rather than let the whole deal fall apart. Just don't tell them I said that.

 

[HighTopKicks]

John is very moveable. Since Martins return, he's been a very good 2nd option, and increased his rpg & apg & 3pt shooting percentage. So, we've set the price, and Portland has to decide if having a guy that can help them get past LAL in the Finals is worth a backup SG.

I personally hope that GP doesn't blink. Utah, Milwaukee, and the Bobcats all have injurys to their starting SF/SG that Salmons could fill. If Portland doesn't wants to get greedy, maybe we trade for Boozer, Sessions, or someone else.

 

[Smills91]

I'd be against that deal. I have a lot of hopes for Brown, who has a lot of talent and potential. Tossing him in might end up hurting us more than helping. If we do, in fact, go with Raef and a pick, it's just a further indication to me that Petrie is in fact stockpiling picks with something very interesting in mind. In all honesty, that possibility has me totally intrigued.

Oh please. I like Brown as much as the next guy, but his ceiling is a very good back-up PG. If we can get Bayless and the you're looking at Brown as a deal-breaker you need to reconsider your assessment on Brown.

 

[Smills91]

Obviously I like the push for Bayless, and might be willing to tweak things to make that work for them (but NOT by giving up any of our picks -- just players. If they wanted Bobby Brown back, go for it). But in the end, if/when they say no to the Bayless thing I'd be willing to back off and take the Raef and a first deal rather than let the whole deal fall apart. Just don't tell them I said that.

Well I'd go back to the orginal LaFrentz/1st IF they make concessions of their own.

They take Kenny Thomas instead of Moore and they add Sergio(who they'd have to move someone anyways to faciliate the deal.)

 

[Vlade4GM]

Obviously I like the push for Bayless, and might be willing to tweak things to make that work for them (but NOT by giving up any of our picks -- just players. If they wanted Bobby Brown back, go for it). But in the end, if/when they say no to the Bayless thing I'd be willing to back off and take the Raef and a first deal rather than let the whole deal fall apart. Just don't tell them I said that.

Hopefully it can be done like that, but I would hope asking for Bayless doesn't kill the deal. I liked the LaFrentz/1st for Moore/Salmons deal, and if we end up with nothing or crap for Salmons because we (may have) held out for Bayless, I'm going to be pissed.

 

[Smills91]

Hopefully it can be done like that, but I would hope asking for Bayless doesn't kill the deal. I liked the LaFrentz/1st for Moore/Salmons deal, and if we end up with nothing or crap for Salmons because we (may have) held out for Bayless, I'm going to be pissed.

Why? I'll bet you there are better deal than LaFrentz/1st out there before the deadline. That offer is really a, here take this offer from Pritchard. He wants Salmons for free and that's what that deal is for PDX.

 

[VF21]

Oh please. I like Brown as much as the next guy, but his ceiling is a very good back-up PG. If we can get Bayless and the you're looking at Brown as a deal-breaker you need to reconsider your assessment on Brown.

You know what? You're probably right.

 

[Vlade4GM]

Why? I'll bet you there are better deal than LaFrentz/1st out there before the deadline.

It's hard to get good rebuilding packages, all teams generally like to keep expirings and picks. So, I hope you're right but since I'm not a big fan of Bayless I'm not really that excited about the upside of holding out for him.

 

[hrdboild]

I've never liked Bayless. I was glad we didn't draft him, and I don't want him now. He was a scoring point guard in high school, a scoring point guard at Arizona, and all indications so far is that he'll be a scoring point guard in the NBA. No thanks. He's got talent, sure, but we need an identity more than we need pure talent right now (in my opinion anyway) and I don't think Bayless is the right type of player. If we can get a PG in the draft, than Bayless would be redundant anyway. How many backup PGs do you really need? We've already got three of them. (Two when Bobby leaves) I'd rather get Freeland.

 

[Vlade4GM]

Calling him a scoring PG is generous IMO. He has some drive and kick ability, but other than that the dude is thinking scoring. He doesn't have a PG's mentality, he's a gunner plain and simple.

 

[asakkings]

Does anyone know how clutch bayless is towards the end of games.

 

[=LarryLegend=]

I wouldnt mind Spanish Chocolate......kind of a kings rebirth.

Lockout season and White Chocolate.....maybe another lockout season....Spanish choclate. LOL

 

[Sptsjunkie]

I am a bit baffeled here. If we can fanagle a player like Bayless we do it 10 time out of 10. Worst case he is a scoring guard off the bench. Or a Ben Gordon clone with some decent trade value. I think considering out current position he would be a great roll of the dice. Couldn't be any worse than the scoring PG we currently have.

 

[NoBonus]

I am a bit baffeled here. If we can fanagle a player like Bayless we do it 10 time out of 10. Worst case he is a scoring guard off the bench. Or a Ben Gordon clone with some decent trade value. I think considering out current position he would be a great roll of the dice. Couldn't be any worse than the scoring PG we currently have.

Scoring point guards... ie. Douby.... there is a valuable trading piece.

 

[Dime Dropper]

Scoring point guards... ie. Douby.... there is a valuable trading piece.

I don't get your point, Bayless is a far better player than Douby will ever be. That aside, are you saying that scoring PGs don't have value in this league?

 

[NoBonus]

I don't get your point, Bayless is a far better player than Douby will ever be. That aside, are you saying that scoring PGs don't have value in this league?

They do, if they are 6'5" or taller. Bayless, like Douby, is undersized and a scoring PG... these types of players are generally only successful through the college level. Honestly, who wants a PG that can't/refuses to pass? Don't get me wrong, I think he would be a great Douby replacement for future years, but I would *almost* prefer a first rounder (provided the draft was a bit deeper).

Either way, if the Kings can move Salmons and Moore, that give more time to our future stars. LaFrentz likely will never put on a Kings jersey (just guessing here, but he has been out all season); he is just an ender... a terrible, terrible ender. Makes you wonder if the Kings are talking to the Knicks about a Marbury for Miller deal.

 

[sdballer]

They do, if they are 6'5" or taller. Bayless, like Douby, is undersized and a scoring PG... these types of players are generally only successful through the college level. Honestly, who wants a PG that can't/refuses to pass? Don't get me wrong, I think he would be a great Douby replacement for future years, but I would *almost* prefer a first rounder (provided the draft was a bit deeper).

Either way, if the Kings can move Salmons and Moore, that give more time to our future stars. LaFrentz likely will never put on a Kings jersey (just guessing here, but he has been out all season); he is just an ender... a terrible, terrible ender. Makes you wonder if the Kings are talking to the Knicks about a Marbury for Miller deal.

I still don't get the logic behind these trades. We get out of Miller's deal a year early. Ok, what does that truly gain the team? Unless you get back young prospects or a valuable draft pick (or can package it with a long term deal you want out of), I just think its selling too low.

 

[Bibby.10]

I still don't get the logic behind these trades. We get out of Miller's deal a year early. Ok, what does that truly gain the team? Unless you get back young prospects or a valuable draft pick (or can package it with a long term deal you want out of), I just think its selling too low.

What does keeping himthat extra year do besides hindering Spencer Hawes development? His value won't go up after this season.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

They do, if they are 6'5" or taller. Bayless, like Douby, is undersized and a scoring PG...

I'm drawing a blank trying to come up with a 6'5" PG currently playing, much less a 6'5" scoring point. Is Crittenton 6'5"?

 

[Sptsjunkie]

They do, if they are 6'5" or taller. Bayless, like Douby, is undersized and a scoring PG... these types of players are generally only successful through the college level. Honestly, who wants a PG that can't/refuses to pass? Don't get me wrong, I think he would be a great Douby replacement for future years, but I would *almost* prefer a first rounder (provided the draft was a bit deeper).
.

Ok, Bayless may be a scoring guard, but let's not condemn all scoring guards because of Douby. Bayless has better nerves, handles, finishes stronger inside and gets to the line more. And even for a scoing guard, I think he has better court awareness than Douby.

Bobby Jackson, Ben Gordon, Wade, there are a number of good ones. If we can get Bayless, we do it.

 

[Vlade4GM]

I still don't get the logic behind these trades. We get out of Miller's deal a year early. Ok, what does that truly gain the team? Unless you get back young prospects or a valuable draft pick (or can package it with a long term deal you want out of), I just think its selling too low.

It give us the option of using our cap space a year earlier. I highly doubt Miller's value as a player goes up next year.

 

[sdballer]

It give us the option of using our cap space a year earlier. I highly doubt Miller's value as a player goes up next year.

Agreed, but his value as a contract goes up. I'm not opposed to trading him this year, but as there isn't exactly a great group of FA available, why do it if you don't get more than what you would if you waited one year.

 

[Bricklayer]

Agreed, but his value as a contract goes up. I'm not opposed to trading him this year, but as there isn't exactly a great group of FA available, why do it if you don't get more than what you would if you waited one year.

a) you don't get more. Guys are getting older, their roles are declining, this IS the peak value for players liek Brad and John.

b) you lose development time for your kids. Every minute Spencer is on the court instead of Brad, every extra minute we get to see ouot of Donte, help them develop, and help us guage their development. Also helps increase their trade value if we wanted to move them. The old guys are stifling them.

c) the fanbase needs a shakeup. Desperately. When you are a terrible team you can;t jsut keep on trotting out the same terrible players. Nobody wants to see them out there anymore. Soon nobody will care at all if we insist on sitting on them. There is absolutely no excitrment with this team. A young team wiht guys on the rise can be exciting even while losing.

d) better draft picks. Given how miserable we currently are, maybe this no longer applies. But in general, you ship out your vets, acquire assets, acquire caproom, and notch a couple of extra losses along the wy to improve your draft position.

e) free agency flexibility. EVERYBODY is trying to free capspace for 2010. If we put all our eggs in that basket we could be facing 10 other teams wiht major caproom, and threaten to get shut out entirely, especially if guys like LeBron start realizing where their bread is buttered and resign. If we have the caproom by this summer, then we can use it now, while few other teams are competing, or hang onto it for 2010 if there is nothing we like available. Lessons the chance of doing all the prepwork for 2010 and then coming up empty and saying what now. Also opens us up as a potential trade partner for various teams looking to dump sdalary before the 2010 rush.

 

[NoBonus]

I still don't get the logic behind these trades. We get out of Miller's deal a year early. Ok, what does that truly gain the team? Unless you get back young prospects or a valuable draft pick (or can package it with a long term deal you want out of), I just think its selling too low.

I think if you can get back a prospect or draft pick for Miller or Salmons in addition to an ender, that is the basis of rebuilding. If the Kings are able to drop enough salary, they will be able to secure a reasonably good Free Agent or two this offseason. Draft some prospects or makes some draft day dealing to upgrade picks, downgrade picks, or trade picks for young prospects. Pretty soon, you will have some players with big upsides that you can either develop or trade for greater value. Miller, sadly, is not worth too much as he is overpaid.

 

[sdballer]

a) you don't get more. Guys are getting older, their roles are declining, this IS the peak value for players liek Brad and John.]

John maybe. I disagree on Brad as I think his value this year or next as a player are about the same but that big of an expiring contract opens a lot of eyes. Maybe its only the difference between an extra pick or some guy stashed in Europe but I think there is no harm in waiting for the right move.

[b) you lose development time for your kids. Every minute Spencer is on the court instead of Brad, every extra minute we get to see ouot of Donte, help them develop, and help us guage their development. Also helps increase their trade value if we wanted to move them. The old guys are stifling them.

Why, you don't have to play them. Teams do it all the team by putting the older, better-right-now guy on the bench to open development time for a young guy. That's a coaching move, not a reason to sell low. Besides, Donte simply isn't ready to do much more than launch a few ill-advised 3s, hustle but look lost and provide a sense of humor. There's talent but I don't know that throwing him out there for 20+ mpg is always the right thing for development.

[c) the fanbase needs a shakeup. Desperately. When you are a terrible team you can;t jsut keep on trotting out the same terrible players. Nobody wants to see them out there anymore. Soon nobody will care at all if we insist on sitting on them. There is absolutely no excitrment with this team. A young team wiht guys on the rise can be exciting even while losing.]

Getting Raef and throwing the youngsters out there to get slaughtered isn't that exciting. I've watched our games and while its clear the vets time is over, fans aren't going to suddenly start running to the arena to watch a young team get killed. Psychologically, maybe its a good nudge but I'd rather the team make the right moves than moves for the sake of change.

[d) better draft picks. Given how miserable we currently are, maybe this no longer applies. But in general, you ship out your vets, acquire assets, acquire caproom, and notch a couple of extra losses along the wy to improve your draft position.

I think we agree. I don't think anything at this point makes us that much worse or better this year.

 

[Bricklayer]

Well I'd go back to the orginal LaFrentz/1st IF they make concessions of their own.

They take Kenny Thomas instead of Moore and they add Sergio(who they'd have to move someone anyways to faciliate the deal.)

Pretty much the concessions I was thinking of too -- use the Bayless threat to make them slightly loosen up + sweeten the non-Bayless package.

 

[Vlade4GM]

Agreed, but his value as a contract goes up. I'm not opposed to trading him this year, but as there isn't exactly a great group of FA available, why do it if you don't get more than what you would if you waited one year.

What do you think teams would prefer? An expiring contract where they'd have to actually pay him, or a trade exemption for the same amount? You can do more with cap space than just outright sign FA's. You never know what opportunities may arise.