Dalembert being shopped with one of Houstons draft picks?

[twslam07]

I just wish it was Thomas, Hayes, Garcia and #5 for Dalembert, Lowry, and #16. Then trade Thornton for a #10-15 pick.

Take Myers Leonard with the #10-15 pick
Take Jeff Taylor with the #16 pick
Resign Thompson
Resign Williams

Lowry/Fredette
Evans/Williams
Taylor/Salmons/Outlaw/Honeycutt
Dalembert/Thompson
Cousins/Leonard/Whiteside

Three very solid perimeter defenders and a rim protector. Lowry, Taylor, Salmons, and Fredette can spread the floor for Evans and Cousins. Very deep big man rotation. If Dalembert is not resigned after his contract expires, Leonard and/or Whiteside can step up and be that rim protector of the future. Also this team would be just under the salary cap.

 

[mac]

I just wish it was Thomas, Hayes, Garcia and #5 for Dalembert, Lowry, and #16. Then trade Thornton for a #10-15 pick.

Take Myers Leonard with the #10-15 pick
Take Jeff Taylor with the #16 pick
Resign Thompson
Resign Williams

Lowry/Fredette
Evans/Williams
Taylor/Salmons/Outlaw/Honeycutt
Dalembert/Thompson
Cousins/Leonard/Whiteside

Three very solid perimeter defenders and a rim protector. Lowry, Taylor, Salmons, and Fredette can spread the floor for Evans and Cousins. Very deep big man rotation. If Dalembert is not resigned after his contract expires, Leonard and/or Whiteside can step up and be that rim protector of the future. Also this team would be just under the salary cap.

Surprisingly I'd actually be afraid that we wouldnt have enough scorers. Salmons DOES NOT spread the floor, you should know that by now. Our bench would struggle to score.

 

[twslam07]

Surprisingly I'd actually be afraid that we wouldnt have enough scorers. Salmons DOES NOT spread the floor, you should know that by now. Our bench would struggle to score.

Well Thomas and Lowry score at similar rates. So the only thing that changed was trading away Thornton. It's become very apparent that we have too many scorers on this team and then when we trade one away you get scared. Typical Kings FO mentality. We need defense man. If scoring and putting up points is what you're worried about, then you need to reassess our team.

Also Salmons shot 38.5% and 35.5% the last two months of the season from 3. I'm sure he's capable of spreading the floor going into next season.

In Thompson's career with the King's he has averaged 8.4 points as a sub. Last year Salmons averaged 8.1 points as a sub. Last year Fredette averaged 7.2 points as a sub. And last year Williams averaged 7.1 points as a sub. That's just shy of 31 points. That doesn't seem too bad to me...

 

[MassachusettsKingsFan]

Obviously the Kings value Jimmer. Your treating him like nothing more than a throw away. I also think we ought to wait on IT. Lets see how his sophmore year goes. He's no longer a surprise to everyone, and the league is going to make life a lot more difficult for him next season. Not saying he won't succeed, just that there's a long history of players struggling in thier second year. Personally, I'm far from ready to give up on Jimmer. His debut reminds me somewhat of Beno at San Antonio, although Jimmer comes with a rep as a better outside shooter. Some of you guys just have no patience. If a player doesn't come out with guns blazing, you want to throw in the trash and move on to the next victim.

By the way, that doesn't mean I wouldn't trade Jimmer, but he has more value in my mind than just a throw in.

I think my 'value' is fair, but my words may be too harsh.

I didn't want him. I hated the deal. But that's water under the bridge at this point. He had a lackluster year at best ... I don't think anyone can deny that. I mean, his two big issues coming out of college were his handle and his defense. Both of those were veryyyy suspect this season. And his one major strength, his shot, wasn't as good as you'd hope either.

With that being said, I think my actual value is pretty fair. I suggested Dalembert and #16 for Hayes and Jimmer. I think that is proper Jimmer value. He was the tenth pick in the draft, so we'd essentially be moving 6 spots down in a strong draft, plus getting the better player who is owed less money moving forward. But like I said before .. I'm not even sure that's a deal Houston would do.

And I'm not saying give up on him. He is a King, and for that I'm a fan. I certainly don't want him to fail. But as you said, if a good deal comes a long I'm not going to NOT pull the trigger because Jimmer is in it.

 

[rainmaker]

I'd be quite nervous handing over any responsibility to Salmons next year. Not only did he play like utter poop the majority of the year aside from some time at backup point, but then it seemed his body broke down, had a hip injury or whatever, and then he didn't suit up for the rest of the year and we didn't hear anything. He's turning 33 in Dec also, so I don't really see him getting any better than what he showed last year. He's never been that great a spot up shooter, but rather has been better off the dribble and would create space partly due to his ability to drive, which decreases heading into your mid 30's.

His salary it too much even if he could spread the floor coming off the bench. He's getting paid a starters salary. I really hope we move him, buy him out or amnesty him.

 

[The_Jamal]

Dalembert's numbers were rock steady last year, just as they always have been. He was botha + +/- player and a + defensive player for them.

But he's past 30, is still going to be looking to get paid (there is a mercenary aspect to Daly, always has been), and dangled along with the #16 for instance Houston might hope to jump up in the lottry and be able to kickstart a rebuild with an iimpact guy.

lol.

Losing your starting job to a 1000 year old Marcus Camby is really holding "rock steady"

 

[cuad]

I'd rather play Hassan. I loooove Hassan.

 

[Tetsujin]

Do we know that? Its entirely possible, and something I would like to know the truth about, but there was an x-factor that changed early this past season.

Well, let's put it this way- Houston is the third straight team that seems eager to get rid of him despite him putting some of the best defensive numbers in the league. They're doing this, it should be noted, despite the fact that Camby is both older than the dinosaurs and a free agent, effectively leaving them with a Scola/Patterson frontcourt.

 

[SacTownKid]

Dalembert's numbers were rock steady last year, just as they always have been. He was botha + +/- player and a + defensive player for them.

But he's past 30, is still going to be looking to get paid (there is a mercenary aspect to Daly, always has been), and dangled along with the #16 for instance Houston might hope to jump up in the lottry and be able to kickstart a rebuild with an iimpact guy.

Yet he finished quite a few games on the bench after they upgraded him to a 38 year old Marcus Camby. What does that say?

 

[Bricklayer]

lol.

Losing your starting job to a 1000 year old Marcus Camby is really holding "rock steady"

That's a load of horse manure, as you either DO know, and are just trying to be deceptive, or SHOULD know before making a statement like that.

I'll do you the credit of assuming you were just talking out of your *** rather than ratehr ridiculously trying to deceive everybody on the assumption that I of all people would not call you on it.

Dalembert pre-AllStar (pre Camby):
23.2min 7.2pts (.500 .820) 7.7reb 0.7ast 0.7stl 1.9blk 1.4TO

Dalembert post AllStar (postCamby):
21.2min 7.9pts (.513 .778) 6.3reb 0.4ast 0.4stl 1.5blk 1.1TO

Truly an incredible difference. Camby's platoon gave them 48 minutes of that type of production, that was the big change. Camby's numbers post trade BTW: 24.1min 7.1pts (.484 .423) 9.2reb 1.7ast 0.9stl 1.5blk 0.5TO. Pretty good for an old man.

Dalembert's NBA ranks:
NBA Blks/48 rank: 3.68 (6th)
NBA Rebs/48 rank: 15.1 (11th)

 

[mac]

Well Thomas and Lowry score at similar rates. So the only thing that changed was trading away Thornton. It's become very apparent that we have too many scorers on this team and then when we trade one away you get scared. Typical Kings FO mentality. We need defense man. If scoring and putting up points is what you're worried about, then you need to reassess our team.

Also Salmons shot 38.5% and 35.5% the last two months of the season from 3. I'm sure he's capable of spreading the floor going into next season.

In Thompson's career with the King's he has averaged 8.4 points as a sub. Last year Salmons averaged 8.1 points as a sub. Last year Fredette averaged 7.2 points as a sub. And last year Williams averaged 7.1 points as a sub. That's just shy of 31 points. That doesn't seem too bad to me...

Oh please, spare me your lecture on defense. You don't think I know that we have wayy too many scorers?

Salmon's marvellous 3P% is one of the major reasons why we brought him back, where he promptly missed a string of 20+ 3 pointers over how many games? And your stats were for Feb and March. For the season he averaged 29.5% from 3. That's basically what Evans shot in the 10-11 season.

You can't just throw players' PPG together and say, oh we have no problems scoring. Does Mikki Moore sound familiar? The reason these players get half their points is because they are getting open shots created by our star players.

Again, my concern is the bench.

Fredette
Williams
Salmons/Outlaw/Honeycutt
Thompson
Leonard/ Whiteside

Of these guys, the only ones who can create (at this point) are Williams and maybe Salmons. Again, I don't think that Salmons spaces the floor very much so you can't have your offense simply being Twill penetrating and kicking out to Jimmer or Salmons. I won't even talk about Outlaw and Honeycutt because they frankly haven't done anything at this point to warrant staying on the team. I don't know about Leonard, not sure what his skill set is. Thompson is a guy you create open jumpshots for or who scores off of putbacks.

To put things in perspective, consider this. We were what, 6th in the league in PPG? Guess where our bench was. At one point I believe we were last in the league, but we finished the season as 24th in the league in bench PPG.

If you look at all the good second units in the league you'll find that they either have a good playmaker/ creator (Ginobili, Harden) or instant offense guys (Terry, Crawford).

Now could this lineup work? Well there's a possiblity, and I'm not ruling it out. But there's also a possibility that Tyler honeycutt will be an all star next season. I'm just basing it on the play of these guys last season, and based on that it's not a bench that I would be very comfortable with, offensively.

And if you ask me, second units have two main roles: Keeping the team in the game till starters get back, and providing energy, getting the crowd into it etc. As important as defense is, you're not going to inject any energy into the game if you don't score. And this lineup also isn't one that is very fast in transition and able to rely on getting easy fast break baskets off of good defense.

Starting lineup you proposed is well balanced and good thoguh.

 

[twslam07]

Oh please, spare me your lecture on defense. You don't think I know that we have wayy too many scorers?

Salmon's marvellous 3P% is one of the major reasons why we brought him back, where he promptly missed a string of 20+ 3 pointers over how many games? How many games did he even play in in the last 2 months of the season?

You can't just throw players' PPG together and say, oh we have no problems scoring. Does Mikki Moore sound familiar? The reason these players get half their points is because they are getting open shots created by our star players.

Again, my concern is the bench.

Fredette
Williams
Salmons/Outlaw/Honeycutt
Thompson
Leonard/ Whiteside

Of these guys, the only ones who can create (at this point) are Williams and maybe Salmons. Again, I don't think that Salmons spaces the floor very much so you can't have your offense simply being Twill penetrating and kicking out to Jimmer or Salmons. I won't even talk about Outlaw and Honeycutt because they frankly haven't done anything at this point to warrant staying on the team. I don't know about Leonard, not sure what his skill set is. Thompson is a guy you create open jumpshots for or who scores off of putbacks.

To put things in perspective, consider this. We were what, 6th in the league in PPG? Guess where our bench was. At one point I believe we were last in the league, but we finished the season as 24th in the league in bench PPG.

If you look at all the good second units in the league you'll find that they either have a good playmaker/ creator (Ginobili, Harden) or instant offense guys (Terry, Crawford).

Now could this lineup work? Well there's a possiblity, and I'm not ruling it out. But there's also a possibility that Tyler honeycutt will be an all star next season. I'm just basing it on the play of these guys last season, and based on that it's not a bench that I would be very comfortable with, offensively.

And if you ask me, second units have two main roles: Keeping the team in the game till starters get back, and providing energy, getting the crowd into it etc. As important as defense is, you're not going to inject any energy into the game if you don't score. And this lineup also isn't one that is very fast in transition and able to rely on getting easy fast break baskets off of good defense.

Starting lineup you proposed is well balanced and good thoguh.

Salmons played 26 games in those two months. He played 46 total this season. He really only had one dismal month shooting from beyond the arc where he shot 14% (yikes).

I understand I can't just string their points together as there are many variables that need to be considered, but it is a useful benchmark to use. I don't see why it is a bad thing that our star players create shots for our other players (or at least something that should be held against them). Williams and Salmons both do a decent job at setting up teammates (more so Williams). The Heat literally have 3 players who can beat their man off the dribble consistently and the rest are their to knock down 3s and midrange jumpers.

I hope Smart doesn't play all of our bench players at once. I have never been a fan of that. My 8 man rotation included Williams, Salmons, and Thompson off the bench who can all contribute to the team in some way. Whether it's scoring, 3 pt shooting, playmaking, defense, or rebounding. Fredette would be the 4th guard who picks up limited minutes but who is able to spread the floor while he is in. Leonard would be the 4th big who would give us another shot blocking athletic big to fill in when needed.

Besides I think you are getting a little ahead of yourself. Our biggest problems are SF and shotblocker. I propose a solution that fixes that (Taylor and Dalembert/Leonard) and now we're heavily evaluating the bench situation? If you are worried about adding scoring punch off the bench I'm sure we would be able to sign or trade for one. Scorers are dime a dozen in the league. Our team is not going to be perfect next season, but if we set up our team in this fashion then we can take the next step to improving that sixth man role.

 

[mac]

I hope Smart doesn't play all of our bench players at once. I have never been a fan of that. My 8 man rotation included Williams, Salmons, and Thompson off the bench who can all contribute to the team in some way. Whether it's scoring, 3 pt shooting, playmaking, defense, or rebounding. Fredette would be the 4th guard who picks up limited minutes but who is able to spread the floor while he is in. Leonard would be the 4th big who would give us another shot blocking athletic big to fill in when needed.

Besides I think you are getting a little ahead of yourself. Our biggest problems are SF and shotblocker. I propose a solution that fixes that (Taylor and Dalembert/Leonard) and now we're heavily evaluating the bench situation? If you are worried about adding scoring punch off the bench I'm sure we would be able to sign or trade for one. Scorers are dime a dozen in the league. Our team is not going to be perfect next season, but if we set up our team in this fashion then we can take the next step to improving that sixth man role.

Yes, and I have no issue with our starters you proposed. But I feel our bench would go from bad to worse IMO, because you're moving both IT and MT, which leaves us with no scoring threats outside of Evans and DMC. And with no scoring threats, guys like Outlaw, JT and Jimmer aren't going to be able to get their points as easily either. Which is why it makes more sense to use only 2 out of IT, MT and the #5 to get our SF and shotblocker. If you get Dalembert you dont need Leonard (esp with Whiteside). You play a 3 man rotation of Cuz JT and Daly.

Why wait another season to fix that 6th man spot if you already have someone capable of the role?

 

[twslam07]

Yes, and I have no issue with our starters you proposed. But I feel our bench would go from bad to worse IMO, because you're moving both IT and MT, which leaves us with no scoring threats outside of Evans and DMC. And with no scoring threats, guys like Outlaw, JT and Jimmer aren't going to be able to get their points as easily either. Which is why it makes more sense to use only 2 out of IT, MT and the #5 to get our SF and shotblocker. If you get Dalembert you dont need Leonard (esp with Whiteside). You play a 3 man rotation of Cuz JT and Daly.

Why wait another season to fix that 6th man spot if you already have someone capable of the role?

We would be getting Lowry back who is capable of scoring just like Thomas so it is like we are only trading 2 out of Thomas, Thornton, and #5. So that solves your problem there.

Dalembert is getting older. He's not going to be able to contribute at a high level when Cousins and Evans hit their primes. That is why we trade Thornton to fix our shotblocker for the FUTURE. We will have a Cousins, Dalembert, and Thompson big man rotation with Leonard picking up the leftover minutes, and when Dalembert leaves we have four bigs to choose from to make a nice rotation (Cousins, Thompson, Leonard, and Whiteside).

The reason I don't address the sixth man spot is because I look to fix the shotblocking role in the short term (Dalembert) and the long term (Leonard and Whiteside). You are thinking about fixing it only in the short term. It is much harder to find shotblockers than scoring players off the bench. We can easily pickup up a nice sixth man with the MLE in the future.

 

[mac]

We would be getting Lowry back who is capable of scoring just like Thomas so it is like we are only trading 2 out of Thomas, Thornton, and #5. So that solves your problem there.

Dalembert is getting older. He's not going to be able to contribute at a high level when Cousins and Evans hit their primes. That is why we trade Thornton to fix our shotblocker for the FUTURE. We will have a Cousins, Dalembert, and Thompson big man rotation with Leonard picking up the leftover minutes, and when Dalembert leaves we have four bigs to choose from to make a nice rotation (Cousins, Thompson, Leonard, and Whiteside).

The reason I don't address the sixth man spot is because I look to fix the shotblocking role in the short term (Dalembert) and the long term (Leonard and Whiteside). You are thinking about fixing it only in the short term. It is much harder to find shotblockers than scoring players off the bench. We can easily pickup up a nice sixth man with the MLE in the future.

Is that so? Let's see who have we been giving our MLEs to over the years ... Mikki Moore? SAR? Garcia? Chuck Hayes? I think you are underestimating the value of a good sixth man in the league. Do you know what the good sixth men are getting paid?

Here's a list of the sixth man candidates this season.
Jason Terry - 11mil
Al Harrington - 6.2 mil, increasing
Lou Williams - QO of 6mil
Ginobili - 14 mil
OJ Mayo - 7.4mil QO
Mo Williams - 8.5mil

Crawford is the rare exception only getting 5 mil a year. Harden is going to have a pretty big contract when his time comes. And if I'm not wrong, the MLE is not as big under the new CBA.

So you're trading Marcus Thornton, our biggest FA acquisition last season and arguably our biggest trading asset, for someone who is going to come in and POSSIBLY be our shotblocker 2-3 years from now (Evans and Cousins in their prime as you said). Dalembert may also leave after this year btw. We're still left with terrible SF depth, assuming Taylor can even fit right in and be our starting SF. We're giving up an awful lot to have Dalembert (who you don't even plan on having around long term) and two mid first round picks. I would maybe do the first trade just for Lowry and if Dalembert was in our plans going forward, but certainly not MT for a #10-15 pick.

 

[Jkbiker]

oh my gosh, I will be just sick if we loose our 5th pick, just to get Delambert?

After last year debacle? Just for one year until he tests FA again?

If they want Hayes back and his contract? or some other player maybe

But giving up our 5th? If they took drummond and he was huge in 2 yrs , we would
look like idiots

If we could get MKG much better
If we take Drummond , Im ok

But trade either for Daly , and more drama next year just for him to leave
Sorry , its a no for me

 

[MassachusettsKingsFan]

oh my gosh, I will be just sick if we loose our 5th pick, just to get Delambert?

After last year debacle? Just for one year until he tests FA again?

If they want Hayes back and his contract? or some other player maybe

But giving up our 5th? If they took drummond and he was huge in 2 yrs , we would
look like idiots

If we could get MKG much better
If we take Drummond , Im ok

But trade either for Daly , and more drama next year just for him to leave
Sorry , its a no for me

Who is suggesting #5 for Dalembert?

 

[Uncia03]

oh my gosh, I will be just sick if we loose our 5th pick, just to get Delambert?

After last year debacle? Just for one year until he tests FA again?

If they want Hayes back and his contract? or some other player maybe

But giving up our 5th? If they took drummond and he was huge in 2 yrs , we would
look like idiots

If we could get MKG much better
If we take Drummond , Im ok

But trade either for Daly , and more drama next year just for him to leave
Sorry , its a no for me

Well it would be a disaster of a trade if you were trading the #5 for Dalembert, but that's not what's being proposed.

The first part of the trade would be: # 5 for Lowry & #14

Lowry is a great defensive-minded/Tenacious PG who also finally figured out how to shoot the deep ball.
So you get him to pair along-side Tyreke and all of a sudden you have a great defensive pairing at the 1 & 2 spots.
Then you take the #14 pick and you select Jeffrey Taylor who will be your starting SF. Taylor and MKG were the two best wing defenders in college last season and Taylor, being a senior, finally figured out how to shoot the deep ball and is currently a couple levels head of MKG in the shooting department.
So now you're set defensively at the 1, 2, & 3 spots and you have outside shooting at the 1 & 3 spots.

The 2nd part of the trade is Hayes for Dalembert.

This is a no-brainer for us. We trade Hayes who really didn't perform for us, with a player who fits the exact type of player we need next to Cousins, and it's also sort of a salary dump for us. We get rid of Hayes' long-term contract, and if Dalembert doesn't work out, he's gone at the end of the year, and if he does work out, then we pay him.

So if the choice is between:
1.) Getting MKG with the #5 pick to shore up the SF position with a super defender & ultimate glue-guy/winner
vs.
2.) Getting Lowry to shore up the defensive/shooting rotation & the 1-2 spots + getting an elite SF defender and better shooter than MKG + turning Hayes into the exact player we need next to Cousins

To me it's a very hard choice. I absolutely love, love, love MKG, but the balance you could get on the roster (as well as defenders at the 1, 2, 3, 4 positions) as well as adding a veteran in Lowry....it would be hard to pass up.

I would not be in favor of trading Thornton for a mid-1st round pick. I like Leonard, but I think we could get more from him down the line if we felt we had to trade him.

 

[Jkbiker]

Well I guess I missed the whole point of the thread

I thought it was reported that Houston was shopping Dally and their #16

to trade up to a top ten pick

So I thought the basics of a deal if it was with us would be our #5 for Dally and #16

I thought all the discussion was about what other players might be involved

 

[Uncia03]

Well I guess I missed the whole point of the thread

I thought it was reported that Houston was shopping Dally and their #16

to trade up to a top ten pick

So I thought the basics of a deal if it was with us would be our #5 for Dally and #16

I thought all the discussion was about what other players might be involved

That makes sense.

From our perspective trading the #5 for Dally & #16 would be a disaster. We'd need a lot more, and ideally that 'lot more' would include Lowry (who has demanded a trade) and hopefully off-loading Hayes who did really well in Houston.

 

[gunks]

The Kings arent trading Jimmer. if they were high on him enough to draft him as soon as they did last year they arent gonna give up on him just like that.

Maybe the Magoofs/FO will decide that everyone who wants a Jimmer jersey already bought one, therefor his usefulness to the Kings is over.