Dealing Landry...

[Smills91]

..let me preface this by saying. I really do like Landry's game. He's a great efficiency player and has a distinct and useful skill-set that EVERY team needs badly(LOW-POST SCORING threat).

With that said. I think Landry is our most valuable trade chip. He's a UFA at season's end and only earns 3 million dollars. With the addition of Cousins, Daly, and Whiteside and the progression of Thompson I think Landry is expendable to fill more pressing needs, namely SHOOTERS.

More than anything I think we need shooters.

One thought that I had was with Phoenix who is in need of a starting caliber PF.

This was inspired by a RGM thread, but perfected by yours truly ;-)

http://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1042008

Kings deal:
Carl Landry

Suns deal:
Jared Dudley
Earl Clark
top 3 protected 2011 pick

Why for the Suns. They get a respectable Amare replacement on the cheap and younger to boot.

Why for the Kings. They add a great shooter and perimeter defender in (Dudley) and Clark has always intrigued be since his college days at UofL. He could be an Odom type PF. Right now he'd fit nicely with Greene as our back-up PF's.

However, the caveat here is that pick. The Suns are in flux right now. Who knows what they do. Nash is their catalyst and he's now in his mid-30's. The day he goes, is the day their engine goes. So that pick could be anywhere in the 3-20 range. Which is a huge wildcard.

Roster for this season:

C: Dalembert, Cousins, Whiteside
PF: Thompson, Clark, Jackson?
SF: Greene, Casspi, Wright
SG: Garcia, Dudley, Sloan?
PG: Evans, Beno, Jeter

I like that roster with Sloan and/or Jackson as unknowns to make the roster.

 

[funkykingston]

Landry is not at all what the Suns need and I can't see them being remotely interested in such a deal. They also know that Nash's window is closing and they will have to rebuild and won't be trading away potential lottery picks for a guy who doesn't fit their current system and will be a free agent at season's end.

And that's the problem with Landry. He's a hardnosed player and good low post scorer and a great sparkplug off the bench. But he's also a bit undersized, is a poor rebounder for the position. His relative bargain of a deal means he's won't be coveted by teams looking for an ending deal to shed salary and teams wanting to keep him know they'll have to give him a substantial raise next season or lose him for nothing.

Landry played well last year, has a lunch pail attitude that helps this young team, and ideally can go back to being a sixth man for this team.

But if he has to be dealt I think it will be to a team looking to send a bigger contract back the Kings way since they have the cap room to absorb it.

 

[NoBonus]

Why trade a starter for a role player?

 

[matthew76]

maybe trade Landry to the Pacers for Brandon Rush? He's a youngster who's pretty good... Maybe take on one of the players they want to get rid of like TJ Ford or Mike Dunleavy?

 

[Superman]

Landry played well last year, has a lunch pail attitude that helps this young team, and ideally can go back to being a sixth man for this team.

That's what I'd love to see happen, but knowing that Landry is looking to get paid and assuming he's going to command a nice contract makes me doubtful that we'll be willing to pay a 6th man what he's going to be able to get from other teams. And any team looking to trade for him would likely have the same hesitation.

The unknown regarding the CBA makes it hard to project, but considering that Drew Gooden, Channing Frye and Hakim Warrick all got $30+ million over five years, I'd assume that Landry is going to get something similar, maybe more. Or the new CBA equivalent. And I think that prices him out of our spending range, especially as a 6th man. Not that he doesn't deserve it, but I don't think it makes sense for a team like ours, with big extensions coming up for our young guys.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

Why trade a starter for a role player?

Well, we've got a big logjam down low (especially if Whiteside can handle a few minutes this year) and Landry is no lock to be back next year. He's kind of a sell-high asset at this point, with a small salary that's about to balloon for whoever signs him next. And presumably long term either Landry or Dalembert (or Thompson) has to go to make room for Cousins and hopefully Whiteside. We should probably deal one of the two before the deadline to get value before they walk next year, and Landry is probably going to net more in return. But that's just the argument as for why Landry should be available.

As far as trading Landry away for Dudley, I'm not so sure that's the best we could do. The pick would go a ways towards alleviating that, but I'd rather wait until somebody gets desperate close to the deadline. Who knows, maybe we'll be in contention for a playoff spot by then and we'll want to hold it together!

 

[tjh_32]

Dalembert will be out next year so we'll be left with Whiteside, Cousins, Thompson, and Landry. I'm with you on dealing Landry for a shooter, I like Thompson's rebounding better and Cousins can do the scoring down-low. Plus, Landry will be out next season too unless we offer him a good/bigger contract.

 

[hammystyle]

Well, we've got a big logjam down low (especially if Whiteside can handle a few minutes this year) and Landry is no lock to be back next year. He's kind of a sell-high asset at this point, with a small salary that's about to balloon for whoever signs him next. And presumably long term either Landry or Dalembert (or Thompson) has to go to make room for Cousins and hopefully Whiteside. We should probably deal one of the two before the deadline to get value before they walk next year, and Landry is probably going to net more in return. But that's just the argument as for why Landry should be available.

As far as trading Landry away for Dudley, I'm not so sure that's the best we could do. The pick would go a ways towards alleviating that, but I'd rather wait until somebody gets desperate close to the deadline. Who knows, maybe we'll be in contention for a playoff spot by then and we'll want to hold it together!

Exactly, things change. A contender has an injury and all of a sudden Landrry and his $3m contract seems like a godsend.

 

[funkykingston]

That's what I'd love to see happen, but knowing that Landry is looking to get paid and assuming he's going to command a nice contract makes me doubtful that we'll be willing to pay a 6th man what he's going to be able to get from other teams. And any team looking to trade for him would likely have the same hesitation.

The unknown regarding the CBA makes it hard to project, but considering that Drew Gooden, Channing Frye and Hakim Warrick all got $30+ million over five years, I'd assume that Landry is going to get something similar, maybe more. Or the new CBA equivalent. And I think that prices him out of our spending range, especially as a 6th man. Not that he doesn't deserve it, but I don't think it makes sense for a team like ours, with big extensions coming up for our young guys.

I think a lot depends on how Landry plays this well. Considering this year's free agent spending insanity nothing would surprise me but I don't see teams with caproom giving huge money and a starter's role to a slightly undersized, fairly groundbound and weak reboundng PF. I think there will be interest in Landry from good teams for the same role the Kings want but something a bit above MLE money SHOULD keep him in Sacramento. But again, with the spending this offseason who knows?

Exactly, things change. A contender has an injury and all of a sudden Landrry and his $3m contract seems like a godsend.

If the right deal is out there, I think you deal him. For a great shooter at the SG for instance. But dealing him for end of bench guys and a 2011 draft pick makes no sense to me. We hope Jason Thompson continues his development from the end of last season. And we hope Cousins improves his conditioning and takes the role of starting center. But in the meantime we have to very capable vets in Dalembert and Landry, who seem like perfect compliments to one another.

This team just added a bunch of intriguing pieces (and only had Carl for half a season last year) not to mention the expected growth of the young players. I'd at least wait until close to the trading deadline when it is more clear how all the pieces of this roster fit together before making moves.

 

[Bricklayer]

I've said before and I'll say again Landry's post game, ability to explode off the bench, toughness, and apparent vet leadership are things you will find on every championship level team. We do need a plan about how we want to deal with our embarrassment of frontcourt riches, but that plan does not necessarily have to involve moving Landry. He's a lot better than a number of other undersized scoring pop bigs that have come off the bench for title rosters, Corliss Williamson, Big Baby etc.

 

[Superman]

I think a lot depends on how Landry plays this well. Considering this year's free agent spending insanity nothing would surprise me but I don't see teams with caproom giving huge money and a starter's role to a slightly undersized, fairly groundbound and weak reboundng PF. I think there will be interest in Landry from good teams for the same role the Kings want but something a bit above MLE money SHOULD keep him in Sacramento. But again, with the spending this offseason who knows?

If Landry had been a free agent this year and had been offered 5 years, $40 million, I would not have been surprised. The new CBA might change everything, but I fully expect Landry to get some nice offers, assuming the new labor deal gets done in time.

 

[SacTownKid]

I've said before and I'll say again Landry's post game, ability to explode off the bench, toughness, and apparent vet leadership are things you will find on every championship level team. We do need a plan about how we want to deal with our embarrassment of frontcourt riches, but that plan does not necessarily have to involve moving Landry. He's a lot better than a number of other undersized scoring pop bigs that have come off the bench for title rosters, Corliss Williamson, Big Baby etc.

That's the issue though, what do you pay for that type of player if that's how he fits into this team long term? He's clearly more talented than your every day classic 6th man spark plug. He's arguably a better player than a good portion of the starting F's in the league.

I myself think Jason Thompson has more trade value than Landry.

 

[bajaden]

If Landry had been a free agent this year and had been offered 5 years, $40 million, I would not have been surprised. The new CBA might change everything, but I fully expect Landry to get some nice offers, assuming the new labor deal gets done in time.

I really doubt that the new labor agreement gets done before the end of next season. I fully expect a lockout, and I wouldn't be surprised to see the entire year cancelled. That being said, there's no way to predict what the rules will be as to how long the contracts will be and what the max will be. But, if the rules were to stay the same, which they won't, but if, then I'm sure Landry would command a pretty hefty increase. Paul Millsap is making over 8 mil this coming season and I think Landrys game is comparable to Millsaps. With Millsap being a little better rebounder.

As far as this propossed trade goes, I'm sure we could do better than Dudley and Clark. I want nothing to do with Clark, and if anyone is intriqued by his game, then you need to spend more time watching him. He flat stunk last season and was good at absolutely nothing. He's a terrible outside shooter. He has no post game to speak of and he doesn't rebound. I watched him play in summer league and even though they were trying to feature him, he was just terrible and was even hard to watch. So needless to say I want no part of Earl Clark. If were going to trade Landry, can we at least trade him for a young, good shooting SG that can handle the ball a little bit.

 

[Warhawk]

Dalembert will be out next year so we'll be left with Whiteside, Cousins, Thompson, and Landry. I'm with you on dealing Landry for a shooter, I like Thompson's rebounding better and Cousins can do the scoring down-low. Plus, Landry will be out next season too unless we offer him a good/bigger contract.

Why do you say this? We have no idea if he will be back or not.

 

[Superman]

I really doubt that the new labor agreement gets done before the end of next season. I fully expect a lockout, and I wouldn't be surprised to see the entire year cancelled. That being said, there's no way to predict what the rules will be as to how long the contracts will be and what the max will be. But, if the rules were to stay the same, which they won't, but if, then I'm sure Landry would command a pretty hefty increase. Paul Millsap is making over 8 mil this coming season and I think Landrys game is comparable to Millsaps. With Millsap being a little better rebounder.

Unfortunately, all evidence supports your expectations. Sucks, too.

I agree that Landry would probably get something comparable to Paul Millsap, maybe a little bit more since two years will have gone by, and considering the deals Gooden and Co. got this summer. Again, that's before taking the new CBA into consideration, which makes it impossible to project contracts after this season. I expect a lot of changes to the pay structure and free agency rules once the new deal gets done, so in a way, it's kind of pointless to say what Landry might get. I'm sort of wondering now if it wouldn't be better to keep him and Dalembert, since no one knows what impact the new CBA is going to have. Unless someone knocks our socks off, we might be better off just standing pat this season. Hmm...

 

[bajaden]

Unfortunately, all evidence supports your expectations. Sucks, too.

I agree that Landry would probably get something comparable to Paul Millsap, maybe a little bit more since two years will have gone by, and considering the deals Gooden and Co. got this summer. Again, that's before taking the new CBA into consideration, which makes it impossible to project contracts after this season. I expect a lot of changes to the pay structure and free agency rules once the new deal gets done, so in a way, it's kind of pointless to say what Landry might get. I'm sort of wondering now if it wouldn't be better to keep him and Dalembert, since no one knows what impact the new CBA is going to have. Unless someone knocks our socks off, we might be better off just standing pat this season. Hmm...

Yeah you could be right. I was going to say that if we didn't trade them at the trade deadline, we would retain the bird rights to Dalmembert and Landry would at least be a restricted free agent. But if the new CBA places a hard cap, there probably won't be anything such as a restricted free agent or bird rights, making whether we trade them or not immaterial. I'm not even sure we can sign them to an extension at this point. I've always been a little foggy on the extension part and when you can do it.

 

[KingsCitizen]

Why are you going to trade the most proven front court player on this team?

Keep Landry!

With all the promise that this new front court may offer. These are are all just potentials. Let's see the team play first with this bunch of new faces.

As I see it, only Landry is the proven valuable front court player that this the team have.
JT is still learning, Dalembert have not played for PW, Cousins and Whiteside only competed in summer league and they are rookies.

I would even support resigning Landry and Dalembert should the team progress well.
We need to stop shipping guys out of this team. Probably, we are just 1 solid wing player away from being a serious playoff competitor in the Western Conference.

Landry maybe undersized but he always played so much bigger than he is. He may not grab a lot of rebounds but he is more than willing to dive for lose balls which also gives additional ball positions.

Give it a break people!

 

[Chupacabra]

Is it impossible to understand that Evans and Cousins will have to be resigned at some point? Dalembert and Landry will each command annual salaries of around 10 million per year. We cant resign EITHER of them. The core of our front court after the upcoming season will be Cousins/Thompson/Whiteside.

 

[Big Cuz 15]

daly will not get 10m a year. he's more in the lines of a 6-7m per year unless someone desperate wants him and will over pay. landry will be getting at least 5-6m a year easily for his skillset. if he gets 10m a year, it'll be one of those WTF are you kidding contracts.

 

[NME]

daly will not get 10m a year. he's more in the lines of a 6-7m per year unless someone desperate wants him and will over pay. landry will be getting at least 5-6m a year easily for his skillset. if he gets 10m a year, it'll be one of those WTF are you kidding contracts.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=ys-haywoodmavericks070810

The Dallas Mavericks have reached agreement on a six-year, $55 million contract to re-sign center Brendan Haywood

 

[Chupacabra]

Unfortunately, we watch a league where players like Dalembert and Landry get offered contracts around 10 mill per year. Mark this post lol

 

[mr. moustache]

I'd HAPPILY drop 30m for 5 years more of Landry. What I don't want is 5 years at 42m+

That's what I'd love to see happen, but knowing that Landry is looking to get paid and assuming he's going to command a nice contract makes me doubtful that we'll be willing to pay a 6th man what he's going to be able to get from other teams. And any team looking to trade for him would likely have the same hesitation.

The unknown regarding the CBA makes it hard to project, but considering that Drew Gooden, Channing Frye and Hakim Warrick all got $30+ million over five years, I'd assume that Landry is going to get something similar, maybe more. Or the new CBA equivalent. And I think that prices him out of our spending range, especially as a 6th man. Not that he doesn't deserve it, but I don't think it makes sense for a team like ours, with big extensions coming up for our young guys.

 

[Big Cuz 15]

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=ys-haywoodmavericks070810

ill believe it when i see it. i still don't think he'll get 10m/yr w/ the new cba looming

 

[Prince_XY]

Is it impossible to understand that Evans and Cousins will have to be resigned at some point? Dalembert and Landry will each command annual salaries of around 10 million per year. We cant resign EITHER of them. The core of our front court after the upcoming season will be Cousins/Thompson/Whiteside.

Pardon me, but I really need some help here.

I honestly cannot understand why we have to be very stingy right now and not hold on a little bit longer to such proven players like Dalembert and Landry when our total salary for this year is only about 43M.

Are we really in danger of going over the salary cap if for example we give Dalembert 8-9M ( which actually will be less than what he is getting now ) for the next 3-4 years so we can start tasting a few more wins and probably start developing the winning mentality in our young players?

Are we really sure the salary cap after the new CBA will be that ridiculously restrictive to maybe about 50M?

Maybe you ( or some other posters please ) can explain to me that exact scenario and computation that a lot of the GM-fans here seems to fear if we re-sign either Dalembert or Landry.

Right now our salary total will be about 43M and I think we actually have to sign one more scrub player just to get to that league minimum salary of 43M. Dalembert share on that total is about 12M. If we resign him for 8-9M for another 3-4 years, we will still farther SAVE around 3-4M in our total salary. In other words, the salary total for next year will be farther reduced to a ridiculously low 39M.

Is 39M total salary for 2011-2012 not enough to absorb the salary increase of whoever young guys ( like Thompson and Greene ) we need to re-sign?

And what about the overpayed Beno and Garcia who's contracts we can let expire in a few years from now? Those salaries ( together with Dalembert if we only sign him for another 3 years ) will come off the books and can give us again some flexibility in the future.

Will those savings be a hindrance in re-signing Evans and Cousins ( or even Whiteside ) comes that time we need to re-sign them?

Can someone please explain the timelines for these re-signings and show how re-signing Dalembert or Landry will actually be severely detrimental financial-wise and not just say " oh, we can't sign Dalembert or Landry because we need financial flexibility in the future".

 

[Smills91]

I really doubt that the new labor agreement gets done before the end of next season. I fully expect a lockout, and I wouldn't be surprised to see the entire year cancelled. That being said, there's no way to predict what the rules will be as to how long the contracts will be and what the max will be. But, if the rules were to stay the same, which they won't, but if, then I'm sure Landry would command a pretty hefty increase. Paul Millsap is making over 8 mil this coming season and I think Landrys game is comparable to Millsaps. With Millsap being a little better rebounder.

As far as this propossed trade goes, I'm sure we could do better than Dudley and Clark. I want nothing to do with Clark, and if anyone is intriqued by his game, then you need to spend more time watching him. He flat stunk last season and was good at absolutely nothing. He's a terrible outside shooter. He has no post game to speak of and he doesn't rebound. I watched him play in summer league and even though they were trying to feature him, he was just terrible and was even hard to watch. So needless to say I want no part of Earl Clark. If were going to trade Landry, can we at least trade him for a young, good shooting SG that can handle the ball a little bit.

You see you look at some rookie stats and a handful of games in his ROOKIE campaign to draw that assessment. I saw those things too, however, being that I have live in Louisville the past 5 years I'm also well aware of his collegiate career and that maybe, just maybe, he'll be a late bloomer and develop into the player I saw at the college level. You wouldn't be the first to underestimate a young player's career based solely off a small sample size in their rookie campaign. But I think Clark still has the ability to become a very good NBA player. Adding Dudley's solid game AND a pick with little protection on it and I think I have to pull the trigger, just on potential alone. I think the risk is lessened when spread out over 3 assets, rather than putting all your eggs in the UFA basket of Carl Landry looking for his first big payday(which WILL be in the 7-10 million/year range).

 

[Smills91]

Keep Landry!

With all the promise that this new front court may offer. These are are all just potentials. Let's see the team play first with this bunch of new faces.

As I see it, only Landry is the proven valuable front court player that this the team have.
JT is still learning, Dalembert have not played for PW, Cousins and Whiteside only competed in summer league and they are rookies.

I would even support resigning Landry and Dalembert should the team progress well.
We need to stop shipping guys out of this team. Probably, we are just 1 solid wing player away from being a serious playoff competitor in the Western Conference.

Landry maybe undersized but he always played so much bigger than he is. He may not grab a lot of rebounds but he is more than willing to dive for lose balls which also gives additional ball positions.

Give it a break people!

Buy low, sell high.

IT's that simple. I don't want to risk losing landry for nothing, his value is high RIGHT NOW and I don't think I want to go forward paying him 8-10 million a year either. So get a great package and keep on trucking. That is why.

 

[Smills91]

Pardon me, but I really need some help here.

I honestly cannot understand why we have to be very stingy right now and not hold on a little bit longer to such proven players like Dalembert and Landry when our total salary for this year is only about 43M.

Are we really in danger of going over the salary cap if for example we give Dalembert 8-9M ( which actually will be less than what he is getting now ) for the next 3-4 years so we can start tasting a few more wins and probably start developing the winning mentality in our young players?

Are we really sure the salary cap after the new CBA will be that ridiculously restrictive to maybe about 50M?

Maybe you ( or some other posters please ) can explain to me that exact scenario and computation that a lot of the GM-fans here seems to fear if we re-sign either Dalembert or Landry.

Right now our salary total will be about 43M and I think we actually have to sign one more scrub player just to get to that league minimum salary of 43M. Dalembert share on that total is about 12M. If we resign him for 8-9M for another 3-4 years, we will still farther SAVE around 3-4M in our total salary. In other words, the salary total for next year will be farther reduced to a ridiculously low 39M.

Is 39M total salary for 2011-2012 not enough to absorb the salary increase of whoever young guys ( like Thompson and Greene ) we need to re-sign?

And what about the overpayed Beno and Garcia who's contracts we can let expire in a few years from now? Those salaries ( together with Dalembert if we only sign him for another 3 years ) will come off the books and can give us again some flexibility in the future.

Will those savings be a hindrance in re-signing Evans and Cousins ( or even Whiteside ) comes that time we need to re-sign them?

Can someone please explain the timelines for these re-signings and show how re-signing Dalembert or Landry will actually be severely detrimental financial-wise and not just say " oh, we can't sign Dalembert or Landry because we need financial flexibility in the future".

Just because you can, doesn't mean you SHOULD. While Daly and Landry are quality players, they may or may not be what this team needs going forward. By arbitrarily re-signing such players you risk losing the flexibility you've acquired to add the opportunisitic perfect fit for your franchise. That last piece we would need to be considered as an elite contender. If you feel like Landry or Daly are worth the price they seek on the open market, by all means. But I have a hard time justifying Landry at 7-10 a year range. And even a harder time justifying Dalembert on a long term contract approaching upwards of 10 million a year.

I'd rather be more opportunisitic and really watch a few of these teams look to unload salary when the new CBA comes into effect and basically puts these teams in a wrench. We'd be dealing from a position of leverage and be able to pick and choose the pieces we want going forward. That's why I think getting tradable assets like Dudley, Clark and a very unprotected pick for Landry helps going forward. They're cheap, they're young and they're promising pieces. Those are what's for sale when you're buying an upgrade. Let's stock up and put ourselves into an opportunistic situation.

 

[MassachusettsKingsFan]

While I agree with everyone here that Landry is a nice player, would be erfect on the bench yadda yadda yadda .. You have to admit out of our bigs he should be the first one to go. ( aside from dally )


It just makes too much sense. And dont get me wrong, Im not in a rush to trade him, but his size will always be an issue, and while I love love love love him at 3 million .. unless the new CBA totally screws the players, he's going to make around 9-10 million a year. Is he worth that? I dont know .. my gut tells me no. Especially while we have the core that we do.

He also has the most trade value. By the deadline this year his contract will be at 1.5 million. Thats crazy for his production. A playoff team that is maxed out could easily add him. We should be able to get a real piece.

And in a perfect world, the big man rotation of Whiteside, Cousins, and JT is perfect. That is kind of the 'pie in the sky' approach that all of these guys will develop into the players you want them too, but the potential is there.

And lets say Whiteside doesnt pan out .. big possibilty there. Do you really want a rotation of Cousins, JT, and Landry? None of those players are defenders, and never will be known for that aspect of thier game .. I just dont think it would work.

 

[Prince_XY]

That's what I'd love to see happen, but knowing that Landry is looking to get paid and assuming he's going to command a nice contract makes me doubtful that we'll be willing to pay a 6th man what he's going to be able to get from other teams. And any team looking to trade for him would likely have the same hesitation.

The unknown regarding the CBA makes it hard to project, but considering that Drew Gooden, Channing Frye and Hakim Warrick all got $30+ million over five years, I'd assume that Landry is going to get something similar, maybe more. Or the new CBA equivalent. And I think that prices him out of our spending range, especially as a 6th man. Not that he doesn't deserve it, but I don't think it makes sense for a team like ours, with big extensions coming up for our young guys.

Since you are one of the advocates of saving our money for future re-signing of our young players, I will appreciate if you can answer my question on my previous post.

And please explain how re-signing Dalembert on my example will jeopardize re-signing our young players. And if you can, please put your best "guesstimates" of how much money you'll be needing for each re-signing of our young players on actual years. Also, please bear in mind that players like Beno and Garcia will be expiring contracts we can let go in a few more years.

I will appreciate it if you can put the breakdown each year starting NOW ( 2010-2011 ), then next year ( 2011-2012 ), and so on.

Thank you.

 

[Asaf]

Pardon me, but I really need some help here.

I honestly cannot understand why we have to be very stingy right now and not hold on a little bit longer to such proven players like Dalembert and Landry when our total salary for this year is only about 43M.

Are we really in danger of going over the salary cap if for example we give Dalembert 8-9M ( which actually will be less than what he is getting now ) for the next 3-4 years so we can start tasting a few more wins and probably start developing the winning mentality in our young players?

Are we really sure the salary cap after the new CBA will be that ridiculously restrictive to maybe about 50M?

Maybe you ( or some other posters please ) can explain to me that exact scenario and computation that a lot of the GM-fans here seems to fear if we re-sign either Dalembert or Landry.

Right now our salary total will be about 43M and I think we actually have to sign one more scrub player just to get to that league minimum salary of 43M. Dalembert share on that total is about 12M. If we resign him for 8-9M for another 3-4 years, we will still farther SAVE around 3-4M in our total salary. In other words, the salary total for next year will be farther reduced to a ridiculously low 39M.

Is 39M total salary for 2011-2012 not enough to absorb the salary increase of whoever young guys ( like Thompson and Greene ) we need to re-sign?

And what about the overpayed Beno and Garcia who's contracts we can let expire in a few years from now? Those salaries ( together with Dalembert if we only sign him for another 3 years ) will come off the books and can give us again some flexibility in the future.

Will those savings be a hindrance in re-signing Evans and Cousins ( or even Whiteside ) comes that time we need to re-sign them?

Can someone please explain the timelines for these re-signings and show how re-signing Dalembert or Landry will actually be severely detrimental financial-wise and not just say " oh, we can't sign Dalembert or Landry because we need financial flexibility in the future".

It's simple - right now we have a front court consisting of DMC, Whiteside, Landry, JT, and Dalembert. At the end of the season, the FO will have a much better idea of what the front court of the FUTURE should look like. Best case scenario is DMC having a year like Tyreke had last year and becoming a superstar in the making, Whiteside developing and becoming a legit NBA player who is also an elite shotblocker, and JT growing into his potential as well. If that happens, then I assume the team will want these three to be the core of the front court, and in that case it will make no sense to resign Landry and Dalembert to expensive, long term contracts, and they will probably let them go and sign cheaper, bench-level backup bigs. If, for example, DMC and JT live up to their potential but Whiteside seems like more of a longterm project, then they will probably resign one of Landry or Dalembert. And if all the young guys turn out to be complete busts, there will probably be an effort to resign both of them. In any case, there is no reason to come to clear-cut conclusions before we have seen DMC, Whiteside, or Dalembert even play one minute of basketball in Kings uniform (excluding summer league, of course).