You guys are underrating Kevin Martin..i wouldnt trade him for rubio nor wall...what have these guys proven? Neither one have even played a COLLEGE game in America let alone an NBA game.... Kevin Martin is proven scorer....best in the league in getting to the line and making fts....he can create his own shot, and like someone said earlier, he doesn't always need the ball...dude is mad efficient
Get both Rubio and Griffin ...
- Thread starter KingsCitizen
- Start date
Okay, but there are a lot more than 2 or 3 players in the last 20 years who are better than Kevin Martin. I understand not wanting to trade performance for potential, but you're taking it to a whole new extreme. The name of the game is getting better and you do that with better players. If we can trade Kevin Martin for a top 20 player, we do it (barring other circumstances, salary differential, age, etc). There is some risk that the young hotshot you trade Kevin for is Jay Williams 2.0 and you're worse off than you started, but nobody is going to give a franchise player away. Sometimes you have to take a measured level of risk in order to improve your team.
I'm not exactly on the 'trade Kevin' bandwagon as of yet, but I wouldn't rule it out either. Depending on how much better you think he'll get, it's worth considering trade options until the point where either (a) he establishes himself as a franchise player (or at least an essential part of team chemistry) or (b) his trade value drops below the point where trading him would be worthwhile. For the most part I would agree with you that a lot of the guys ranked in the top 10 each year are not going to surpass what Kevin has done already. Choosing the right prospects to trade for mainly depends on how much you trust your ability to scout talent.
I'm not exactly on the 'trade Kevin' bandwagon as of yet, but I wouldn't rule it out either. Depending on how much better you think he'll get, it's worth considering trade options until the point where either (a) he establishes himself as a franchise player (or at least an essential part of team chemistry) or (b) his trade value drops below the point where trading him would be worthwhile. For the most part I would agree with you that a lot of the guys ranked in the top 10 each year are not going to surpass what Kevin has done already. Choosing the right prospects to trade for mainly depends on how much you trust your ability to scout talent.
Every team could really use, or does need a guy like KMart. I think about Peja, and how he did disappear a lot late in games, but he was a guy that would definitely hit a lot of shots DURING the game and would keep our team in the lead or put the dagger in the casket so to speak.
KMART does not have to be a leader. I don't even want him to try, but during a game if he can score without hogging the ball then I am all for it. I would want him to stay.
KMART does not have to be a leader. I don't even want him to try, but during a game if he can score without hogging the ball then I am all for it. I would want him to stay.
I'm glad you know how to break down stats and I applaud you for that, but mere statistics alone do not at all distinguish what Kevin Martin means to the Kings. He is not the only person on the team and is not the reason why we only won 17 games. If you look at the complexion of the season we easily could have won 10-12 more games that we blew or competed in but lost. This isn't a team like the Vancouver Grizzlies back in the 90's we have talent on the team, but we have no direction from a real coach and we have some wholes to fill. To blame Kevin Martin for our win total is easy, because he's the best player on the team, but night in night out even in his bad games he still gets 18 to 25 points on like what 12 shot attempts. So what about percentages look deeper into this you do the trade if someone's going to give you wade or howard or lebron, but to trade him for unproven players after he's shown you he's an all star caliber player who has the injury bug is not smart. I think GP knows that and all you internet GM's can let the notion of K-mart getting traded go.
I remember a day when we traded Mitch Richmond, our only true star at the time, for a problematic Chris Webber...
I like Kevin Martin...a lot. BUT having said that, if we could parlay him into getting Griffin and Rubio (I'll let the experts work out the details on how that could happen), it would be on like Donkey Kong.
If you're really hungry for an omelette, you've got to be willing to break some eggs.
Having said that, I am not advocating trading Martin for anything other than a much brighter chance at a future. I would much prefer to see him out there in a Kings uniform but this is one of those very rare hypothetical situations that I would, should it come up, be willing to take the risk.
I like Kevin Martin...a lot. BUT having said that, if we could parlay him into getting Griffin and Rubio (I'll let the experts work out the details on how that could happen), it would be on like Donkey Kong.
If you're really hungry for an omelette, you've got to be willing to break some eggs.
Having said that, I am not advocating trading Martin for anything other than a much brighter chance at a future. I would much prefer to see him out there in a Kings uniform but this is one of those very rare hypothetical situations that I would, should it come up, be willing to take the risk.
I agree, as I think Kev is an extremely valuable piece in the Kings limited arsenal at this point. I love his uncanny way of getting to the line to rack up his around 25ppg scoring average plus top FT % - among other things. On the negative side are repeated injury issues, lackluster D, mediocre rebounding and a few other downers. It would be SO difficult to see him traded but at least a very solid Francisco Garcia or whatever may come back at SG, etc. could make it much easier to swallow.
The trick is knowing who the great stars will be. Yes there are many more than 2-3 that are better than Martin in the last 20 years but predicting it is tough. In addition to Lebron, there have been guys like Hakeem, Ewing, Magic, perhaps Duncan that most people were very confident that would be some of the greatest. They created a true "buzz"
These are few and far between. Most #1 and #2s are potentials - but "will have to wait and see." Many of the greatest are drafted after the first 2 top spots. There is nobody in this years draft like Lebron or Hakeem - not even close.
These are few and far between. Most #1 and #2s are potentials - but "will have to wait and see." Many of the greatest are drafted after the first 2 top spots. There is nobody in this years draft like Lebron or Hakeem - not even close.
You're assuming - and I think erroneously - that someone is going to trade down just for our benefit. If we truly wanted to get a shot at both Griffin and Rubio, trading Jason Thompson wouldn't do the trick.
What Brickie said above and I agree with is that getting a team to trade away the chance at Rubio would take a better player than Thompson. It would take someone who fits their needs AND is a proven producer. The only one we have that we could dangle would be Kevin Martin.
What Brickie said above and I agree with is that getting a team to trade away the chance at Rubio would take a better player than Thompson. It would take someone who fits their needs AND is a proven producer. The only one we have that we could dangle would be Kevin Martin.
Im not sure it would take that much though. If a team is trading out of the top 3 ( were Rubio would go ) I think it would be because of that teams lack of cap space and the state of the economy. If you look at the 'top lottery teams' we are the team with some wiggle room. Teams like Washington and LA are in pretty bad situations cap wise. If we take one of there bad contracts along with Thompson I think a trade could be made. These teams cant afford to add Kevin Martin unless were giving up martin for a pick AND helping that team cap - wise, which I think is too much.
---
I just looked over Washingtons salaries and they are more screwed than I thought. They might not even be able to sign a top pick ( unless there is something like the MLE for rookies that im forgetting ) If we take back Etan Thomas or Mike James along with the pick and give them Thompson in return I think they have to think about it ..
---
I just looked over Washingtons salaries and they are more screwed than I thought. They might not even be able to sign a top pick ( unless there is something like the MLE for rookies that im forgetting ) If we take back Etan Thomas or Mike James along with the pick and give them Thompson in return I think they have to think about it ..
Yes, but, unlike most players that shot that poorly, he compensated by averaging 10.3 FTA's per game (2nd in the league behind Dwight Howard). Out of the 10.3 per game, he converted 9 per game.
What does that mean? It means that Martin scored 9 points every single game without even registering an official shot attempt (best in the league by a point and a half. Dwyane Wade averaged 7.5 for 2nd place). That's pretty damn efficient!
Factor that in to his FG% and what do you get?
If Martin shot 8 for 20 in a game (40%, which is below what he averaged) and made 9 of 10 FT's (his average), he'd score 25 points (assuming all FG's were of the 2pt variety).
25 points on 20 official shot attempts is VERY efficient. For a player to match that without shooting any FT's, they'd have to convert 12 out of 20 shot attempts (including 1 3pt FG), which is 60% shooting.
While we'd all like to see Martin's 2-pt FG% climb back to where it was 2-3 seasons ago, his ability to consistently get to the FT line more than adequately compensates for the drop. While he's no Kobe, LeBron, or Wade, he's still one of the most efficient scorers in the league and the numbers prove that.
What does that mean? It means that Martin scored 9 points every single game without even registering an official shot attempt (best in the league by a point and a half. Dwyane Wade averaged 7.5 for 2nd place). That's pretty damn efficient!
Factor that in to his FG% and what do you get?
If Martin shot 8 for 20 in a game (40%, which is below what he averaged) and made 9 of 10 FT's (his average), he'd score 25 points (assuming all FG's were of the 2pt variety).
25 points on 20 official shot attempts is VERY efficient. For a player to match that without shooting any FT's, they'd have to convert 12 out of 20 shot attempts (including 1 3pt FG), which is 60% shooting.
While we'd all like to see Martin's 2-pt FG% climb back to where it was 2-3 seasons ago, his ability to consistently get to the FT line more than adequately compensates for the drop. While he's no Kobe, LeBron, or Wade, he's still one of the most efficient scorers in the league and the numbers prove that.
Jeeeeeezzzzz! My thread is turning into a "Why not trade Kevin Martin" thread. We don't need to dig that deep into getting that #2 or #3 pick of 2009. Washington are way beyond the cap next season and with the economic issues, our cap space may just come in handy. Remember the shocking trade of Camby for 2nd rounder from Clippers? Who knows! But in my opinion we don't really need to put Kevin Martin alongside unproven draft picks unless were like the Denver roster who were overflowing with Star Player (Anthony, Iverson (now Billups), Camby, Martin, Nene). Not at this time. Not in this draft. 
I think that our 23rd pick and Jason Thompson could get the job done if you really wanted Rubio and I think that if you did that and provided we get Griffin I think you could get the same if not better production out of him to replace the absence of Thompson. I'd much rather trade Thompson who I like as a player than Martin. All this is hypothetical but if they are cash strapped like we speculate that might get us Rubio
Jeeeeeezzzzz! My thread is turning into a "Why not trade Kevin Martin" thread. We don't need to dig that deep into getting that #2 or #3 pick of 2009. Washington are way beyond the cap next season and with the economic issues, our cap space may just come in handy. Remember the shocking trade of Camby for 2nd rounder from Clippers? Who knows! But in my opinion we don't really need to put Kevin Martin alongside unproven draft picks unless were like the Denver roster who were overflowing with Star Player (Anthony, Iverson (now Billups), Camby, Martin, Nene). Not at this time. Not in this draft.
It's TDOS. I'm just glad people are still around talking about the Kings. That's a good thing.
Not only is SG "not one of the more difficult positons to fill," it is, hands down, the easiest position to fill. There isn't a SG in the NBA that couldn't average twenty-plus points a game if you made them the focal point of your offense. It's all well and to the good that Martin is "efficient," but efficient does not equate to indispensable; If you believe that Rubio is a superstar, and the asking price is Kevin Martin, then you trade him without hesitation, and wish him fair winds and following seas.
A
it would depend on which team is picking rubio.... if its washington, you might not need martin because they cant afford all of those players... with martin their starting lineup alone would put them over the cap and pushing the luxury tax threshold. they would probably love kenny thomas and some of our capspace... rubio is the least of their worries....
if its the clippers, then i wouldnt mind trading beno and thomas to the clips for davis/jordan and let them keep rubio. though id rather have rubio than baron i would be happy coming out of the draft with griffin and davis. the kings could easily become a better team than the warriors were 2 years ago.
i dont think that we would need to trade martin for rubio for either team. if its the thunder..... we would have to trade martin. hands down, there is no way around it.
now that i think about it.... one of those teams will have a tougher decision on their hands, picking rubio over thabeet.... that makes things interesting, the clippers wont pick thabeet... but the wizards and thunder could and that could knock rubio down a spot or two.... the clippers would have no real need for rubio or thabeet. the wiz would be better off taking thabeet since they have arenas.... the thunder would also be better off taking thabeet because their bigmen suck..... they almost traded for chandler, thabeet would be a cheaper replacement with more upside. that leaves the grzz and twolves, jennings, lawson and curry will also be available at their pick if they want a pg.
if its the clippers, then i wouldnt mind trading beno and thomas to the clips for davis/jordan and let them keep rubio. though id rather have rubio than baron i would be happy coming out of the draft with griffin and davis. the kings could easily become a better team than the warriors were 2 years ago.
i dont think that we would need to trade martin for rubio for either team. if its the thunder..... we would have to trade martin. hands down, there is no way around it.
now that i think about it.... one of those teams will have a tougher decision on their hands, picking rubio over thabeet.... that makes things interesting, the clippers wont pick thabeet... but the wizards and thunder could and that could knock rubio down a spot or two.... the clippers would have no real need for rubio or thabeet. the wiz would be better off taking thabeet since they have arenas.... the thunder would also be better off taking thabeet because their bigmen suck..... they almost traded for chandler, thabeet would be a cheaper replacement with more upside. that leaves the grzz and twolves, jennings, lawson and curry will also be available at their pick if they want a pg.
You can always sign a first-round draft pick to slot money. It's just like signing your own player, it's an automatic exception that is separate from the MLE/LLE. I think you can always sign a second-round pick as well, but I can't actually find anything about it in the salary cap FAQ, so I'm not sure.
Washington's problem is that they're already about $6M over the tax before signing their top-5 pick. Unfortunately for us, we won't have enough cap room after signing our pick to give Washington a lot of salary relief - probably not enough to pry away a top-5 pick. I think our only chance would be if we can eat some extra money with some trade exceptions. I've seen some mention that we have an exemption of about $3.5M as a result of the Shelden trade but I can't really find any confirmation.
Washington's problem is that they're already about $6M over the tax before signing their top-5 pick. Unfortunately for us, we won't have enough cap room after signing our pick to give Washington a lot of salary relief - probably not enough to pry away a top-5 pick. I think our only chance would be if we can eat some extra money with some trade exceptions. I've seen some mention that we have an exemption of about $3.5M as a result of the Shelden trade but I can't really find any confirmation.
Peeps, if the Wiz are over the tax limit if we did no more than took Washington's pick from them we would save them $8 MILLION DOLLARS (the rookie's base salary of $4mil or so x2 (because they would have to pay the $ for $ tax for being over the tax threshhold). For every million dollars we take back on top of that, we save Washington $2 million. And if we trade them a player (i.e. the Kevin scenario) and eat back more salary than we sent out that gets doubled too. If we traded them Kevin at $10mil, and took back Etan Thomas and Mike James (combined $13.8mil) we would actually save them $3.8mil x 2 (over the tax remember) = $7.6mil + the $8mil from not havng to pay the pick = $15.6 million dollars. You can save them a LOT of money even without actually getting them under the tax threshold.
They just signed Flip Saunders -- they are clearly not giving up and are going to want to win. They aren't just going to blow up the team or take a talent dump after dishing out big bucks for the coach. But if they can get a deal where they get talent and can save millions upon millions of dollars its hard to see them not being in the market.
P.S. Note what I did there BTW -- trading Kevin's salary for Washington's pick (potentially giving us the #1, #2, #23 and #31 picks) and bringing back two ending contracts that will be done next summer, thus potentially putting us back into the free agent market next year with the two Thomases (Kenny and Etan) and James combining for $20 million coming off the books. Your salary structure potentially becomes:
Jason (rookie contract)
Spencer (rookie contract)
Greene (rookie contract)
#1 (rookie contract)
#2 (rookie contract)
#23 (rookie contract)
#31 (rookie contract)
Cisco $5.8mil (4yrs)
Nocioni $7.5mil (3yrs)
Udrih $6.1mil (4yrs)
Etan Thomas (ender)
Kenny Thomas (ender)
Mike James (ender)
3 long term vet deals, 7 rookie deals, and 3 enders clearing $20 mil next summer. Then next summer add another lottery pick and a big $$ free agent (I am guestimating that we would have less than $40mil in committed salaries so lots of cap room). You've done rebuilding by the numbers.
[yt=How John Wall Spent This Winter]v4CbQGBbUOw[/yt]
Last edited:
Interesting dialog going on in this thread. I'd like to say that, for the record, if we're going to trade Martin (and not Thompson), so that we end up with 2 picks in the top 4, I'd actually rather see us take Thabeet or DeRozan/Harden.
Rubio/Wall - Beno - Jackson
DeRozan/Harden - Garcia
Garcia - Nocioni
Thompson - Hawes
Hawes - Thabeet
As many have mentioned before, Thompson and Griffin are duplicative talents. If we trade Thompson for another top pick, then we should absolutely draft Griffin, but if we trade Martin, I'd rather we went with Thabeet to round out our front court or DeRozan/Harden to plug the new formed hole at SG.
If, for a very specific and unlikely example, the draft order was:
1. Sacramento
2. Wash
3. OKC
I'd advocate us trading Martin to Wash for their pick, and Griffin (and other reasonable assets) for OKC's pick and Jeff Green. Rubio/Harden/Green/Thompson/Hawes gives you a great young core that is oozing potential at every position.
Also, if Wall were to declare, he's the only player I'd want in this draft over Rubio. Not because I think he'll be a better true point (which we desperately need) than Rubio, but because he'd be the guy with most franchise player potential. The Kings certainly need to plug a lot of holes, but first and foremost, we need the unstoppable franchise guy. We need the guy that the other team gameplans around and says "let's just try and limit him, we can't stop him."
Rubio/Wall - Beno - Jackson
DeRozan/Harden - Garcia
Garcia - Nocioni
Thompson - Hawes
Hawes - Thabeet
As many have mentioned before, Thompson and Griffin are duplicative talents. If we trade Thompson for another top pick, then we should absolutely draft Griffin, but if we trade Martin, I'd rather we went with Thabeet to round out our front court or DeRozan/Harden to plug the new formed hole at SG.
If, for a very specific and unlikely example, the draft order was:
1. Sacramento
2. Wash
3. OKC
I'd advocate us trading Martin to Wash for their pick, and Griffin (and other reasonable assets) for OKC's pick and Jeff Green. Rubio/Harden/Green/Thompson/Hawes gives you a great young core that is oozing potential at every position.
Also, if Wall were to declare, he's the only player I'd want in this draft over Rubio. Not because I think he'll be a better true point (which we desperately need) than Rubio, but because he'd be the guy with most franchise player potential. The Kings certainly need to plug a lot of holes, but first and foremost, we need the unstoppable franchise guy. We need the guy that the other team gameplans around and says "let's just try and limit him, we can't stop him."
Yes, the dollar-for-dollar tax is the whole reason why it's plausible to think that Washington might dump their pick for salary relief. The question (hypothetical at this point) is how far we can go (under the CBA) to grant them relief and score the pick. I'm going under the assumption that the Wizards get the #2 pick because it sounds as if they'd hold on to Griffin if they nabbed him.
I believe simply taking the pick off of their hands for nothing won't cut it. It would save them $7.4M (the #2 pick is slated for $3.7M) but any number of teams could do that, so why us? If the Wizards are selling, one guess is that they'll be looking for as much relief as possible.
So the question is, how much relief can we provide? Well, let's go rosy and say we get the #1 pick. Take that and the #23, and at the start of July our total salary is at $50.2M, leaving us about $7M in cap space. The simplest trade would be to send Greene for Stevenson and the #2 pick. We stay under the cap, save them $12.2M this year and $7M next year, or about $19.2M over the next two years. We might have enough cap room to change out Songaila for Stevenson which would be worth almost $2M more to them, but we might not have the room.
In your scenario, the Wizards are willing to spend some future salary to get Martin, which is a reasonable assumption. I'm sure they'd prefer something structured like that deal rather than a simple dump for Greene, but I'm more hesitant than you are to deal Martin - especially if we can manage the same results without trading him.
Either way, it's possible to save them a good chunk of money. But how willing are they to give up their pick to do it? Is it a no-go outside of the Martin route? What's our front office willing to give up for (hypothetically) Rubio?
I believe simply taking the pick off of their hands for nothing won't cut it. It would save them $7.4M (the #2 pick is slated for $3.7M) but any number of teams could do that, so why us? If the Wizards are selling, one guess is that they'll be looking for as much relief as possible.
So the question is, how much relief can we provide? Well, let's go rosy and say we get the #1 pick. Take that and the #23, and at the start of July our total salary is at $50.2M, leaving us about $7M in cap space. The simplest trade would be to send Greene for Stevenson and the #2 pick. We stay under the cap, save them $12.2M this year and $7M next year, or about $19.2M over the next two years. We might have enough cap room to change out Songaila for Stevenson which would be worth almost $2M more to them, but we might not have the room.
In your scenario, the Wizards are willing to spend some future salary to get Martin, which is a reasonable assumption. I'm sure they'd prefer something structured like that deal rather than a simple dump for Greene, but I'm more hesitant than you are to deal Martin - especially if we can manage the same results without trading him.
Either way, it's possible to save them a good chunk of money. But how willing are they to give up their pick to do it? Is it a no-go outside of the Martin route? What's our front office willing to give up for (hypothetically) Rubio?
I tend to agree. Wall looks like he has all star capability with his speed, athleticism and control. He is long and looks quite capable defensively. I don't envision him to be a pioneer of the point guard position but he looks like he has plenty of craftiness. If the premise is trading KMart to get a pick that lands Wall then that leaves us thinner shooting-wise. I would envision Garcia and Greene being the main deep threats.
I like your draft scenario but I would tweak it accordingly:
This particular scenario requires us to get lucky in the draft and land #1 and WAS #2
1. Draft Griffin, PF of the Kings future
2. Trade Kevin Martin to Washington, draft Wall
3. Trade Jason Thompson to XXX for Thabeet
4. Pick up SG depth with Houston's pick
Wall/Udrih
Garcia/HOUSTON'S PICK
Nocioni/Greene
Griffin/Hawes
Hawes/Thabeet
I do like your scenario which parlay's Griffin for a pick and more talent. Perhaps keeping JT and grabbing Thabeet + more talent would be the ideal move. Something inside of me says Griffin will be a better rebounder and has more of a nose for the rim but I could go either way.
I like your draft scenario but I would tweak it accordingly:
This particular scenario requires us to get lucky in the draft and land #1 and WAS #2
1. Draft Griffin, PF of the Kings future
2. Trade Kevin Martin to Washington, draft Wall
3. Trade Jason Thompson to XXX for Thabeet
4. Pick up SG depth with Houston's pick
Wall/Udrih
Garcia/HOUSTON'S PICK
Nocioni/Greene
Griffin/Hawes
Hawes/Thabeet
I do like your scenario which parlay's Griffin for a pick and more talent. Perhaps keeping JT and grabbing Thabeet + more talent would be the ideal move. Something inside of me says Griffin will be a better rebounder and has more of a nose for the rim but I could go either way.
Thats why Ive been lobbying the Thompson - to - Washington deal.
He's a whole lot cheeper than Martin and more valuable then Greene. And assuming the goal of this thread is Griffin and Rubio, the acquisition of Griffin makes Thompson expendable.
If your Washington, do you want to trade two enders for another long term contract? Even if the player is Kevin Martin. With those two Enders they'll be under the tax in the 2010 summer anyways, If we take back Songaila and Stevensen who each have one more year on there deal than Thomas/James that might be better in there eyes, because Enders are somewhat valuable come trade deadline.
Then theres the question of do they Wizards want Thompson at all with Javale Mcgee and Andray Blatche as young pieces .. then if haywood comes back they could have a little logjam of bigs .. maybe we take back haywood?
He's a whole lot cheeper than Martin and more valuable then Greene. And assuming the goal of this thread is Griffin and Rubio, the acquisition of Griffin makes Thompson expendable.
If your Washington, do you want to trade two enders for another long term contract? Even if the player is Kevin Martin. With those two Enders they'll be under the tax in the 2010 summer anyways, If we take back Songaila and Stevensen who each have one more year on there deal than Thomas/James that might be better in there eyes, because Enders are somewhat valuable come trade deadline.
Then theres the question of do they Wizards want Thompson at all with Javale Mcgee and Andray Blatche as young pieces .. then if haywood comes back they could have a little logjam of bigs .. maybe we take back haywood?
Thank you finally someone who agrees with me that if we get the number one pick and Washington got the number 2 pick that Jason would be expendable not because he isn't a hell of a player, but because it'd be easier to replace him than K-Mart and also easier to trade contract wise. The bigs you named above are no where near the players JT is so who cares if they are young JT could easily slide into their rotation if a trade was done. The trade isn't farfetched it's just how motivated is washington to give up the pick. I think if you came to them with a combination of players surrounding JT the houston pick and maybe even the 2nd if need be we'd be better off. Think about Rubio Griffin K-mart and Hawes on the floor at the same time then if you go big with Greene that's a scary thought.
People rarely look at things from the OTHER team's perspective. They just brought in the big veteran coach. They have 3 star players in place at PG/SF/PF who are between 26-33 and a returning center who is 28/29. They are not likely to be enticed by a kid, and they are not likely to WANT a pick back the other other way -- they are trying to shed salary, not gain it (a pick in future years is a possibility though). If they are going to move that pick they are going to want guys ready to make an impact today, and preferably guys who play positions where they do not already have an impact player (OG/C). If all they want is a young big then if they get #1 they can take Griffin himself, or if they get #2-3, Thabeet, or #4-#5 Hill.
Now frankly if I was Washington I am not even sure I would do the deal to get Kevin, he plays the right posiiton, but has the wrong game for them. He is soft and plays no defense just like their three current stars and is of absolutely no value unless he is a featured scorer -- indeed was one of the least effective SGs in the game at all the other elements of basketball this season. And on a team run by Arenas, who is not a distributor, and populated by 2 other 20pt scorers as well, the shots might not be there. But to trade for a Top 3 pick in the NBA takes a major asset. Maybe Kevin is not the right guy for them, but its hard to see anybody else we can afford to lose (i.e. not Spencer) working for them either.
As an aside, the inital inspiration for this rumination was John Wall, not the other guys. And it certainly does not depend on getting Grffin up top. In fact it might be more urgent if we are picking #3 or 4 ourselves and Washington is picking #1 or #2. Our pick becomes Thabeet (hopefully, if we are at #4 he might not be there). Washington's then is how we get Rubio, or in the unlikely chance Wall still does enter, it becomes Wall. I might well do it for Wall -- he has the look. You can see why everybody is excited by him. Would I do it for Rubio? That is the interesting one. If you are going to trade Kevin for a guy, he needs to be an impact player for it to be worth it. Am I 100% convinced Rubio is that guy? Voison suggests that at least somebody in Kingsland thinks we might maneuver to try to get him: http://www.sacbee.com/sports/story/1799242.html
Now frankly if I was Washington I am not even sure I would do the deal to get Kevin, he plays the right posiiton, but has the wrong game for them. He is soft and plays no defense just like their three current stars and is of absolutely no value unless he is a featured scorer -- indeed was one of the least effective SGs in the game at all the other elements of basketball this season. And on a team run by Arenas, who is not a distributor, and populated by 2 other 20pt scorers as well, the shots might not be there. But to trade for a Top 3 pick in the NBA takes a major asset. Maybe Kevin is not the right guy for them, but its hard to see anybody else we can afford to lose (i.e. not Spencer) working for them either.
As an aside, the inital inspiration for this rumination was John Wall, not the other guys. And it certainly does not depend on getting Grffin up top. In fact it might be more urgent if we are picking #3 or 4 ourselves and Washington is picking #1 or #2. Our pick becomes Thabeet (hopefully, if we are at #4 he might not be there). Washington's then is how we get Rubio, or in the unlikely chance Wall still does enter, it becomes Wall. I might well do it for Wall -- he has the look. You can see why everybody is excited by him. Would I do it for Rubio? That is the interesting one. If you are going to trade Kevin for a guy, he needs to be an impact player for it to be worth it. Am I 100% convinced Rubio is that guy? Voison suggests that at least somebody in Kingsland thinks we might maneuver to try to get him: http://www.sacbee.com/sports/story/1799242.html
Last edited:
Washington needs one thing that nobody can provide them with besides money - health. THeir starting 5 can play with any team in the game. Short of the SG position, everybody else is a bonafide all star (haywood is very good, not quite there) They need defense and an actual bench. If they all stay healthy, they should be very good next year, and I doubt they will be trying to add pieces. They need salary cap relief. That's about it. Whether what they currently have on the bench will have to be dismantled due to the $$ issue is another question - they would have to retool and maybe that's where we help out, but they seem to be in win now mode - I don't think they would be willing to sacrifice 2-3 million here and there when they've already got so much invested, and such a small window of opportunity.
HMM that article stirs the pot even more. I say we pray for the number 1 pick and get Griffin. Keep him then trade our other 2 picks 23 and 31 and either Thompson, Nocioni or Garcia with those picks for Rubio to whoever has the 2nd pick. If you come away in the draft getting Rubio and Griffin you are better off than having 3 picks anyway because the 31 is just like the team we trade with getting 2 First round picks and a player that can help them immediately. That would leave for a vey exciting Portland like team.
Last edited:
Well, I might as well jump into the fray. All of this is fun, but moot until we really know where everyone is drafting. The most obvious trade partner is Washington. I agree that the last thing that they want is to add any more salary or long term contracts. Their weakness is at shooting guard. I also agree with Bricky in that I'm not sure how Martin fits on a team that already has people that like to shoot the ball and one player that likes to dominate the ball..
We do have a 3.4 mil trade excemption from the Williams deal. Stevenson makes around 3.9 mil. I'm not sure you get the same leeway when trading and excemption as you do with a player, but if so, we could do a straight swap and give them instant relief. We could also trade Thomas for Thomas and give them relief one year earlier than they would have gotten it. To sweeten the pot we could throw in a future, protected, 1st round pick.
I think too many people are willing to give away the house for pie in the sky. Good young bigs don't grow on trees. Especially one's that are dedicated and work hard. We've seen enough of Thompson to make a reasonable judgement that he can play in this league as a starter and has the promise to be pretty good. There are no guarantee's that Griffin will be better than him. Ditto Rubio. My approach is to always offer the least amount possible and then go from there. We have the start of a good young nucleus. Lets try and fix the parts that need fixing, but not at the expense of parts that aren't broke.
If we can aquire another high pick in the draft cheaply, and not at the expense of the foundation parts all ready in place, I'm all for it. Don't get me wrong. I'd do Hawes and Martin for Wade in a heartbeat. But I would know exactly what I'm getting.
We do have a 3.4 mil trade excemption from the Williams deal. Stevenson makes around 3.9 mil. I'm not sure you get the same leeway when trading and excemption as you do with a player, but if so, we could do a straight swap and give them instant relief. We could also trade Thomas for Thomas and give them relief one year earlier than they would have gotten it. To sweeten the pot we could throw in a future, protected, 1st round pick.
I think too many people are willing to give away the house for pie in the sky. Good young bigs don't grow on trees. Especially one's that are dedicated and work hard. We've seen enough of Thompson to make a reasonable judgement that he can play in this league as a starter and has the promise to be pretty good. There are no guarantee's that Griffin will be better than him. Ditto Rubio. My approach is to always offer the least amount possible and then go from there. We have the start of a good young nucleus. Lets try and fix the parts that need fixing, but not at the expense of parts that aren't broke.
If we can aquire another high pick in the draft cheaply, and not at the expense of the foundation parts all ready in place, I'm all for it. Don't get me wrong. I'd do Hawes and Martin for Wade in a heartbeat. But I would know exactly what I'm getting.
I believe McCants, who is a solid offensive SG, will be a good fit for Washington considering how they really missed Arenas offensive aggressiveness this season. They are already crowded with a good combo of young (Blatche, McGee) and vet (Haywood, Thomas, Jamison, Songaila) bigs.
So as for Washington, I'm sticking with McCants and future draft/this year's draft(23 or 31) + any package or salary relief we can offer for getting Rubio and any of their garbage. This allows Washington to receive a small salaried player who can contribute immediately without having to give away any of their veteran core.
BTW, we do hold the rights to resign McCants but is there any restriction if we can trade him on the draft day?
So as for Washington, I'm sticking with McCants and future draft/this year's draft(23 or 31) + any package or salary relief we can offer for getting Rubio and any of their garbage. This allows Washington to receive a small salaried player who can contribute immediately without having to give away any of their veteran core.
BTW, we do hold the rights to resign McCants but is there any restriction if we can trade him on the draft day?