Fox and/or #4 Trade Ideas

pdxKingsFan said:
Can we just pick BPA at 4 and be happy?

man some of these suggestions are depressing. Unless there is a deal with Detroit or Indy that nets us Murray and a free pick, I'm very happy even if it's Ivey or Sharpe.
Click to expand...

That is the key. I think the only trades worth considering are the ones that get you an extra piece, but also let you have a real shot at Murray or Sharpe or whoever you like most at 4. It is a trade down to maximize value (I.e. the guy you want at 4 is likely available at 5-7, so you try to trade down and get a goody). The only realistic targets to me are Detroit, Indy, and maybe Portland.
 
Rain man said:
That is the key. I think the only trades worth considering are the ones that get you an extra piece, but also let you have a real shot at Murray or Sharpe or whoever you like most at 4. It is a trade down to maximize value (I.e. the guy you want at 4 is likely available at 5-7, so you try to trade down and get a goody). The only realistic targets to me are Detroit, Indy, and maybe Portland.
Click to expand...
Now that we aren't picking 7th, I think it's fairly safe to say that barring some major reach/unexpected shift there is a huge drop in talent at 7, so no way would I trade with Portland.

I do like Benn there, nobody is mocking him at 7 though, and we are way better off if we can get a perfect middleman between Barnes and Sabonis.

If the team is high on Sharpe though and he is available, I think I can swallow that much more than Ivey.
 
pdxKingsFan said:
Can we just pick BPA at 4 and be happy?

man some of these suggestions are depressing. Unless there is a deal with Detroit or Indy that nets us Murray and a free pick, I'm very happy even if it's Ivey or Sharpe.
Click to expand...

Kind of where I'm at. I want Murray, but Ivey and Sharpe are both worthy #4 selections too. If we work a deal with Indy or Det, cool, but walking away with one of these prospects is very very good for our future.

In terms of 4 for a vet, I'm not overly interested. Basically would need to be a Beal caliber type guy coming back. I wouldn't flip for Collins, unless we were getting like a Hunter or Okongwu as well.
 
The_Jamal said:
Kind of where I'm at. I want Murray, but Ivey and Sharpe are both worthy #4 selections too. If we work a deal with Indy or Det, cool, but walking away with one of these prospects is very very good for our future.

In terms of 4 for a vet, I'm not overly interested. Basically would need to be a Beal caliber type guy coming back. I wouldn't flip for Collins, unless we were getting like a Hunter or Okongwu as well.
Click to expand...

Right now the only trade I'm really hoping for is Holmes to Charlotte for Plumlee's contract and #13 so the Kings can grabe Sharpe or Murray and Eason.

I think Murray will be a good pro, but if I had to make the decision today I think I'd swing on Sharpe. We'll see what Monte does. Maybe Banchero or Smith Jr drop to #4. We'll see.
 
I think this pick presents the Kings last good chance to add to this core. The hope should be to get a player who can be up there with Sabonis and Fox, either by drafting that player or trading for one. I would not be in favor of some of these proposals that trade down to plug multiple holes—they should be looking to get a player that can be a top guy on the team, not upgrading the 4th or 5th best player role. Maybe that’s not realistic, but that’s where I aim first.
 
How about the "ultimate" trade back?



Trade #1: #4 for Devin Vassell, #9, & #20
Trade #2: Richaun Holmes, #9, & #20 for PJ Washington, #13, & #15
Trade #3: #15 for Jerami Grant


The combine trade would look like this (to make salaries work):

CHA Gets: Richaun Holmes, Justin Holiday, #9, & #20
CHA Gives: Mason Plumlee, PJ Washington, #13, & #15

DET Gets: Mason Plumlee, Mo Harkless, & #15
DET Gives: Jerami Grant

SAS Gets: Alex Len & #4
SAS Gives: Devin Vassell, #9, & #20

SAC Gets: Jerami Grant, PJ Washington, Devin Vassell, & #13
SAC Gives: Richaun Holmes, Justin Holiday, Mo Harkless, Alex Len, & #4

PG - Fox / Mitchell
SG - Vassell / DiVincenzo
SF - Barnes / Davis
PF - Grant / Washington / Lyles / Metu
C - Sabonis
Picks - #13 / #37 / #49



Grant, Washington, Vassell, & #13 would be quite the haul for Holmes & #4.
 
twslam07 said:
How about the "ultimate" trade back?



Trade #1: #4 for Devin Vassell, #9, & #20
Trade #2: Richaun Holmes, #9, & #20 for PJ Washington, #13, & #15
Trade #3: #15 for Jerami Grant


The combine trade would look like this (to make salaries work):

CHA Gets: Richaun Holmes, Justin Holiday, #9, & #20
CHA Gives: Mason Plumlee, PJ Washington, #13, & #15

DET Gets: Mason Plumlee, Mo Harkless, & #15
DET Gives: Jerami Grant

SAS Gets: Alex Len & #4
SAS Gives: Devin Vassell, #9, & #20

SAC Gets: Jerami Grant, PJ Washington, Devin Vassell, & #13
SAC Gives: Richaun Holmes, Justin Holiday, Mo Harkless, Alex Len, & #4

PG - Fox / Mitchell
SG - Vassell / DiVincenzo
SF - Barnes / Davis
PF - Grant / Washington / Lyles / Metu
C - Sabonis
Picks - #13 / #37 / #49



Grant, Washington, Vassell, & #13 would be quite the haul for Holmes & #4.
Click to expand...

I like the Vassell+9 for 4 idea if the Spurs are in love with Ivey. Gets you your wing of the future and can still get a Davis/Eason/Griffin type at 9.
 
pdxKingsFan said:
Now that we aren't picking 7th, I think it's fairly safe to say that barring some major reach/unexpected shift there is a huge drop in talent at 7, so no way would I trade with Portland.

I do like Benn there, nobody is mocking him at 7 though, and we are way better off if we can get a perfect middleman between Barnes and Sabonis.

If the team is high on Sharpe though and he is available, I think I can swallow that much more than Ivey.
Click to expand...

I've invested less in researching the prospects - i.e., reading a ton of other people's opinions and watching highlights - this year than previous years, but seems to me that about the only things "fairly safe to say" about this draft is that there's no consensus, can't-miss superstar to be had and no consensus shelf after which the talent drops off massively.

The top-4 seems pretty firm still, but now - on this board and elsewhere - I'm seeing Murray, Sharpe, Mathurin, Duren, and Griffin all occupying the full range of spots in that next tier (Murray and Sharpe trending toward the top, to be sure).
 
Woot! said:
I've invested less in researching the prospects - i.e., reading a ton of other people's opinions and watching highlights - this year than previous years, but seems to me that about the only things "fairly safe to say" about this draft is that there's no consensus, can't-miss superstar to be had and no consensus shelf after which the talent drops off massively.

The top-4 seems pretty firm still, but now - on this board and elsewhere - I'm seeing Murray, Sharpe, Mathurin, Duren, and Griffin all occupying the full range of spots in that next tier (Murray and Sharpe trending toward the top, to be sure).
Click to expand...
I've maybe only seen one mock that differed from the top 6 of Chet/Jabari/Banchero/Ivey/Sharpe/Murray and most have those guys going in that order give or take one position.

I've watched a lot of them.

I can also say that Portland fans are furious they are on the outside of that top 6 and basically praying Murray falls to them. Almost every mock I've seen has them drafting Griffin. I'd be pretty bummed about that too, I think.

and yes, yes, I realize mocks are useless and as soon as one domino falls they basically break down completely. I am hoping that happens in the top 3.
 

Fun idea. I think Murray and Franz are kind of similar archetypes. Franz a better playmaker, Murray more scoring oriented, Franz more of a true 3/4 flex while Murray is probably a switchable 4.

What do we think?
 
The_Jamal said:
I like the Vassell+9 for 4 idea if the Spurs are in love with Ivey. Gets you your wing of the future and can still get a Davis/Eason/Griffin type at 9.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I'd personally be very happy coming away with Vassell & Eason (for example), but considering the position McNair is in, I would think he would want to move #9 for another win now player (in hopes of keeping his job). There were talks of shopping #7 for a win now player. I would think he would view #9 in a similar light.
 
The_Jamal said:

Fun idea. I think Murray and Franz are kind of similar archetypes. Franz a better playmaker, Murray more scoring oriented, Franz more of a true 3/4 flex while Murray is probably a switchable 4.

What do we think?
Click to expand...
I don't think drafting a PF pushes Wagner out. I think drafting a PF makes it difficult with the minutes rotation between Isaac, Okeke, Carter, Bamba, & #1. I think they'd be perfectly fine with having Wagner play the 3.

PG - Suggs / Anthony / Cannady
SG - Ross / Fultz / Hampton
SF - Wagner
PF - Isaac / Okeke
C - Carter / Bamba / Wagner


Having said that if the trade was on the table, I am leaning towards declining even though I love Wagner's game. The reason being is he doesn't really have the rim protection component I'm looking for in a long term PF complement to Sabonis. Someone like Murray has that potential (and this type of player is particularly hard to find).
 
See_Hanks said:
How about trading Fox and #4 to Indiana for Hali and Indiana's pick? :)
Click to expand...
They literally traded a two-time All-Star in his prime to get Hali. They aren't trading Hali and an asset back for #4 pick in this draft.
 
I'm all for moving Fox but I doubt Indiana looked at the great success of Buddy/Fox/Hali/Holmes and thought "we want that!"
 
macadocious said:
Why are all the trade proposals trading back?!?!?
Click to expand...

That's a good question. Who could the Kings move to move up? You have the 3 big losers who are trying to stay young and get talent at 1-3. Davion looked good to Kings fans, but no team is going to see a 4/Davion package as the deal of the century and to me moving future picks is a bad bad idea. The Kings would have a difficult time moving up if teams actually feel this is a top 3 draft. You never know though, if Ivey's at 4 and one of the top 3 actually want him or Sharpe and think they can pick up Davion with him maybe the Kings could shift in there. Then it's a question of is it worth it? Or do you call their bluff?
 
SacTownKid said:
That's a good question. Who could the Kings move to move up? You have the 3 big losers who are trying to stay young and get talent at 1-3. Davion looked good to Kings fans, but no team is going to see a 4/Davion package as the deal of the century and to me moving future picks is a bad bad idea. The Kings would have a difficult time moving up if teams actually feel this is a top 3 draft. You never know though, if Ivey's at 4 and one of the top 3 actually want him or Sharpe and think they can pick up Davion with him maybe the Kings could shift in there. Then it's a question of is it worth it? Or do you call their bluff?
Click to expand...
I really wonder if even though Chet/Jabari/Banchero are the logical top 3 what the odds are that 2 teams ahead of us (OKC and HOU) who appear committed to a multiyear process tank won't swing for the fences with Ivey and Sharpe. Of course Banchero could be a homerun for the right team. I really would love Smith and he probably should be 1 or 2 but if Murray is "too safe" at 4 the same dumb logic applies with Smith?

Also this "too safe" logic right now feels like the same kind of dumb logic that lead to us picking Bagley. Doncic was the safe pick. Pro experience, showed all the BBIQ and actual skills but "he's not an athletic freak!" "will he eat himself out of the NBA?" "doughboy". Somehow now folks are talking themselves into the opportunity to hit a home run and who cares if we strike out?

Umm, I do!
 
twslam07 said:
Yeah, I'd personally be very happy coming away with Vassell & Eason (for example), but considering the position McNair is in, I would think he would want to move #9 for another win now player (in hopes of keeping his job). There were talks of shopping #7 for a win now player. I would think he would view #9 in a similar light.
Click to expand...
@The_Jamal maybe this is a compromise that will be more up your alley:

CHA Gets: Richaun Holmes, #20, & #37
CHA Gives: Mason Plumlee & PJ Washington

SAS Gets: Mo Harkless & #4
SAS Gives: Devin Vassell, #9, & #20

SAC Gets: Mason Plumlee, PJ Washington, Devin Vassell, & #9
SAC Gives: Richaun Holmes, Mo Harkless, #4, & #37



I'd then target Eason, Griffin, Mathurin, Davis, or Agbaji with #9 and go into next season with:

PG - Fox / Mitchell
SG - Vassell / DiVincenzo / Davis
SF - Barnes / Holiday
PF - Washington / Eason / Lyles / Metu
C - Sabonis / Plumlee / Len
 
twslam07 said:
@The_Jamal maybe this is a compromise that will be more up your alley:

CHA Gets: Richaun Holmes, #20, & #37
CHA Gives: Mason Plumlee & PJ Washington

SAS Gets: Mo Harkless & #4
SAS Gives: Devin Vassell, #9, & #20

SAC Gets: Mason Plumlee, PJ Washington, Devin Vassell, & #9
SAC Gives: Richaun Holmes, Mo Harkless, #4, & #37



I'd then target Eason, Griffin, Mathurin, Davis, or Agbaji with #9 and go into next season with:

PG - Fox / Mitchell
SG - Vassell / DiVincenzo / Davis
SF - Barnes / Holiday
PF - Washington / Eason / Lyles / Metu
C - Sabonis / Plumlee / Len
Click to expand...

San Antonio would never do that.

Maybe if it was for a top 3 pick but definitely not the 4th pick.
 
SacTownKid said:
That's a good question. Who could the Kings move to move up? You have the 3 big losers who are trying to stay young and get talent at 1-3. Davion looked good to Kings fans, but no team is going to see a 4/Davion package as the deal of the century and to me moving future picks is a bad bad idea. The Kings would have a difficult time moving up if teams actually feel this is a top 3 draft. You never know though, if Ivey's at 4 and one of the top 3 actually want him or Sharpe and think they can pick up Davion with him maybe the Kings could shift in there. Then it's a question of is it worth it? Or do you call their bluff?
Click to expand...


That's not what I meant. This is a league predicated on having 3ish top players and role players around them. Trading back for more role players doesnt fix this. We are not an FA destination, but we certainly can get our fair share of role players. We need a star, period. This pick needs to be a homerun. It just does. It's possible that player isn't in this draft, but I'm sure there are a few guys that will be All Stars, we need to get one. Or trade the pick for one.
 
twslam07 said:
Fair amount of their fans seem to really like the idea of trading up for Ivey/Sharpe.
Click to expand...

They'd essentially be giving up 2 lottery picks and a mid/late FRP to move from 9th to 4th.

I'd do it in a second. Could potentially come away with Vassell, Eason, and one of Daniels/Jovic/Jalen Williams/Liddell and STILL wind up with Wendell Moore/Keon Ellis in the 2nd round. 4 new players with a huge mix of shooting and defense. That's the type of change that needs to happen to this roster.

I just don't think SA would give up that much for a non top 3 pick.
 
ESP47 said:
They'd essentially be giving up 2 lottery picks and a mid/late FRP to move from 9th to 4th.

I'd do it in a second. Could potentially come away with Vassell, Eason, and one of Daniels/Jovic/Jalen Williams/Liddell and STILL wind up with Wendell Moore/Keon Ellis in the 2nd round. 4 new players with a huge mix of shooting and defense. That's the type of change that needs to happen to this roster.

I just don't think SA would give up that much for a non top 3 pick.
Click to expand...

When you call it a "move up", then usually you don't count the swapped pick as "given up". So they'd be giving up #20 and a "lottery pick" that has already been taken and whom they've had two years to evaluate. If you consider that Sharpe/Ivey are seen by many as potential franchise-altering talent, and neither will be there at #9, then giving up #20 and Vassell for potential franchise-altering talent doesn't sound so crazy. In fact, if the #4 pick hits in this scenario, it's a slam dunk for SA.
 
Capt. Factorial said:
When you call it a "move up", then usually you don't count the swapped pick as "given up". So they'd be giving up #20 and a "lottery pick" that has already been taken and whom they've had two years to evaluate. If you consider that Sharpe/Ivey are seen by many as potential franchise-altering talent, and neither will be there at #9, then giving up #20 and Vassell for potential franchise-altering talent doesn't sound so crazy. In fact, if the #4 pick hits in this scenario, it's a slam dunk for SA.
Click to expand...

I just realized he has #20 going to CHA in this scenario and not the Kings but from SA's perspective, it all remains the same.

I'm not following why you wouldn't consider the #9 pick as being given up by SA. They would no longer have the pick so they would give up #9, #20 and Vassell to move up to #4.
 
ESP47 said:
I just realized he has #20 going to CHA in this scenario and not the Kings but from SA's perspective, it all remains the same.

I'm not following why you wouldn't consider the #9 pick as being given up by SA. They would no longer have the pick so they would give up #9, #20 and Vassell to move up to #4.
Click to expand...

It's really just semantics, but the explanation is that the #20 pick is the cost of moving from #9 to #4.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

twslam07
  • Poll Poll
“THE” Trade Deadline Move to Make…
2 3 4
Replies
110
Views
11K
The_Jamal
T
twslam07
  • Poll Poll
OG Anunoby
Replies
11
Views
2K
Tizzy Flip
T
twslam07
  • Poll Poll
Kings Go All-In (w/ IND & TOR)
Replies
10
Views
2K
SacTownKid
SacTownKid
twslam07
  • Poll Poll
CHA - LAC - SAC
2
Replies
32
Views
6K
cwebb2002
C
twslam07
  • Poll Poll
CHA - DET - SAC
Replies
9
Views
968
twslam07
twslam07
Back
Top