In-Season Rebuild Plan

[nbrans]

Oh boy, it's been a while since I've done one of these. First off, given the number of teams gearing up for 2010 cap room.... Honestly, I think the Kings should just forget about it. No one is coming here in two years barring some miracle or Maloof bribery/criminal behavior. So why not go after some good young players whose deals happen to extend beyond 2010. Such as....

Trade #1:

John Salmons
Mikki Moore

for

Chris Kaman
Jason Hart (yay!)

This trade assumes that Chris Kaman and Zach Randolph don't play well together on the floor (since Zach Randolph doesn't play well with anyone this seems likely), and that the Clippers really struggle since they don't have a consistent scorer on the wings. Meanwhile, since they just signed Baron and traded for Zach Randolph they're in win-now mode. This trade gives the Clippers a starting shooting guard and a decent third big who doesn't cost very much. They become Baron/Salmons/Thornton/Randolph/Camby with Gordon and Moore of the bench, which is actually a pretty solid team on paper.

The Kings get a 26 year old solid center and have their frontcourt trio of the future with Thompson, Hawes and Kaman.

Trade #2:

Bobby Jackson
Shelden Williams
Rockets 1st

for

Gerald Wallace

This trade assumes that the Bobcats want to dump salary to try and save Bob Johnson some money given how crappy they are. They get straight expirings. This would put them in position to have some cap room in the '09 offseason, which they would probably use to overpay Shawn Marion. Oh, and a draft pick, which they will use on whoever Jordan happened to see in the paper before a round of golf.

The Kings get Wallace back. I've always liked the idea of playing Wallace and Martin together because of the way their games complement each other.

Trade #3:

Brad Miller

for

.... anyone?

If the rumors are true and Miami wants him, um, go for it. But I honestly can't see that happening.

Perhaps more realistic, given how crappy the non-Duncan Spurs bigs have been:

Brad Miller to the Spurs

for

Fabricio Oberto
Kurt Thomas
Roger Mason (all three expiring in '10)
1st Rounder and/or Mahinmi

Then, your 2009 Draft: point guard all the way.

This sets up:

'09 point guard/Beno
Martin/Garcia
Wallace/Greene
Thompson/Hawes/Mahinmi
Kaman/Hawes/Mahinmi

Now that's the making of a team!

 

[GeraldWallace#3]

Like the Wallace one. Not sure bout the Kaman one, the idea for giving up Salmons for a center whos stats are depleating and has the athleticism of a 40 year old Brad Miller just isn't my liking. And the last one is not of my personal taste, the only part of that trade I like is Roger Mason.

 

[LPKingsFan]

The thing is, I don't think either the Clippers or Bobcats are setting themselves up for a 2010 FA run, either. So, while their owners are notorious cheapskates, these deals are pretty one sided. If we're going to rip someone off, I'd imagine it's a team dead set on clearing room for 2010.

 

[nbrans]

The thing is, I don't think either the Clippers or Bobcats are setting themselves up for a 2010 FA run, either. So, while their owners are notorious cheapskates, these deals are pretty one sided. If we're going to rip someone off, I'd imagine it's a team dead set on clearing room for 2010.

They aren't yet, but this would put both of them on the path toward clearing cap room. Charlotte would have cap room in '09, and even more if they traded Richardson for an expiring. The Clippers would have room in '10 too, with Camby coming off the books.

 

[Arby's Roast Beef]

Trade tres is wishful thinking--given their offensive woes, Roger Mason is a godsend for them, and has been an early season surprise. I agree with their lack of big man complement after Robinson left (Nesterovic, Mohammed have gone, and Oberto even seems like a downgrade talentwise from those two), but come on, Brad Miller and defense are not synonymous with each other.

As with the 1st trade, we've gotten from talking about Salmons, however wistfully, for a 1st rounder(s) to Salmons for a fringe all star like Kaman? I sincerely doubt that would happen, and the Clippers won't want our trash a la fumblefingers Mikki--especially since they've had him before, and more likely than not weren't impressed by him. I'd say that this has even less plausibility than the Spurs trade, regardless of however badly the Clippers covet a scoring guard (which Salmons is). Besides, it would be mass egomania right there--would you imagine a team with tunnel vision Salmons, tunnel vision Randolph, and then scoring-first Thornton and BDiddy? Won't work

Second trade is probable, but from the early returns it seems that Charlotte wants someone of value for Wallace--they've dangled Wallace for Kaman straight up to no avail. I don't blame them, because how often do you have a swingman who's capable of 2+ steals, 2+ blocks a game and possesses elite level athleticism while working their tail off defensively? He's worth way more than the trash we're sending the other way, and as much as I loved Wallace and all his intrigue in the past, I now fear for his tendency to become injury-prone and his mildly regressing stats, not to mention our plethora of swings doesn't help the matter.

 

[Entity]

Sorry nbrans but this is the first trade scenerio of yours I don't agree with. Well really just the Kaman part everything else is cool. I am just not a fan of Kaman. He has his moment and quite possibly the best we COULD get but, I am just not sure.

 

[bajaden]

In all honesty, the only trade I see happening is a trade involving Miller and Marion. The Heat are desperate for a center. Miller would fit their system. They want to move Marion. The two teams have talked. Miller plus, you pick, Moore, Williams, Salmons, Thomas. They all work.

I do like the Kaman trade. Not sure why others are so down on him. I think he would be an excellent backup to Hawes. They can keep Hart though.

 

[Vlade4GM]

Salmons is a nice player and all, but you don't give up young 15-10-2 centers for nice wing players. The clippers don't do it.

I'm worried about Wallace's concussions. One more bad one and bball may be too much of a risk for him.

I'm all for sending Miller and Salmons off while they still got some value. Same goes for Udrih if possible.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

In all honesty, the only trade I see happening is a trade involving Miller and Marion. The Heat are desperate for a center. Miller would fit their system. They want to move Marion. The two teams have talked. Miller plus, you pick, Moore, Williams, Salmons, Thomas. They all work.

This seems to me the only plausible trade of the bunch. Two comments, though.

First, I wouldn't dangle Salmons as the second player. I think Salmons (shockingly, to read this board) has a lot more value than that. He's got 2 3/4 seasons left on his contract at the MLE. Sure, he doesn't help clear capspace for anybody in the 2010 FA market, but he's a starting-caliber scoring wing who can handle and plays good D. At a reasonable contract. The only real reason to get rid of him now, ballhog label aside, is that we're not likely to contend when he's with us so we should try to turn him into assets that will help us when we are ready to contend. Throwing him in on the above trade doesn't do that.

Second, I don't think the above trade does much for us outside of clearing capspace for the underwhelming 2009 FA market. We're not likely to bring Marion back. And right now I'd hate to dump Brad's contract for 2009 capspace. Miller's contract is basically as valuable as Salmons', but not for the same reasons. Miller has two plus points. 1) He's a legitimate starting center, good in the high post, great passer, great spot shooter. This is why Miami would be after him now. 2) He's got a large, 2010-expiring contract, perfect for the "legendary" FA market. This is why many big-market teams will likely be after him this summer or at the trade deadline in '10. We should be able to get a pretty high draft pick for his contract when all is said and done. And that doesn't happen here. So I'm not really for a Miller/Marion trade.

Note: We might -- might -- be able to get an unprotected, high 2010 pick from the Knicks (Nets?) if they don't play their finances right before then. I know unprotected picks don't come along that often, but NYK/NJN would be essentially using the Miller contract to make room for LeBron. And who in their right mind would accept a protected 2010 pick if the (unprotected or less-protected) 2011 pick is liable to be in the 20s? It's a bargaining chip: "You're using this trade to get LeBron. Is a lottery pick so much to ask?" Play the Knicks against the Nets, and it's that much more likely to happen. (Sure, it's no sure thing, but it's nice to think about from that POV. Miller's contract could potentially nab us a lotto pick. Why settle for cap space?)

 

[Vlade4GM]

The knicks could lose their 2009 pick to the Jazz so that might muck up an attempt to get a 2010 pick, the rules on trading picks in consecutive years gets a little sketchy here but that might throw a wrench in your idea.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

The knicks could lose their 2009 pick to the Jazz so that might muck up an attempt to get a 2010 pick, the rules on trading picks in consecutive years gets a little sketchy here but that might throw a wrench in your idea.

Oh, hadn't looked at that. If they don't lose their '09 pick to the Jazz they definitely can't give us a '10 pick. And if they do, that whole "two consecutive future picks" rule is kind of fuzzy. I think they might actually be able to trade their '10 pick after the '09 draft if they haven't given up their '11 pick...but it's top-22 protected in 2009 and unprotected in 2010 so that's out of the question.

Geez, think Utah fans are salivating over that unprotected Knicks lottery pick in 2010? Stupid Knicks.

 

[Smills91]

The thing is 2009 sucks in terms of quality FREE AGENTS and 2010 is going to be UBER-COMPETITIVE. We may actually be better off looking at 2011 and using the contracts of Moore/Miller/Thomas/Jackson as trade bait to a team more willing to get into the 2010 mix(likely a bigger market) and get some assets that come with contracts that expire in 2011(with John Salmons), also looking at 2011 that's one year closer to Beno expiring making him more likely future tradebait for a contract that expires in 2011.

 

[Heuge]

The thing is 2009 sucks in terms of quality FREE AGENTS and 2010 is going to be UBER-COMPETITIVE. We may actually be better off looking at 2011 and using the contracts of Moore/Miller/Thomas/Jackson as trade bait to a team more willing to get into the 2010 mix(likely a bigger market) and get some assets that come with contracts that expire in 2011(with John Salmons), also looking at 2011 that's one year closer to Beno expiring making him more likely future tradebait for a contract that expires in 2011.

Lets just look to 2035...pfft.

 

[LPKingsFan]

Yeah, at some point we're going to have to start competing here. If we wait til 2011 to start our run, we'll be wasting Kevin's prime. nbrans has the right idea here in that we can benefit from the 2010 bonanza not by signing one of the top FAs ourselves, but capitalizing on another team's desperation to clear space. I'm sure there will be some pretty good players available next year with contracts that run past 2010, as teams fall all over themselves to make a run at LeBron and co. I'm just not convinced either the Clippers or the Bobcats will be one of those teams.

 

[bajaden]

This seems to me the only plausible trade of the bunch. Two comments, though.

First, I wouldn't dangle Salmons as the second player. I think Salmons (shockingly, to read this board) has a lot more value than that. He's got 2 3/4 seasons left on his contract at the MLE. Sure, he doesn't help clear capspace for anybody in the 2010 FA market, but he's a starting-caliber scoring wing who can handle and plays good D. At a reasonable contract. The only real reason to get rid of him now, ballhog label aside, is that we're not likely to contend when he's with us so we should try to turn him into assets that will help us when we are ready to contend. Throwing him in on the above trade doesn't do that.

Second, I don't think the above trade does much for us outside of clearing capspace for the underwhelming 2009 FA market. We're not likely to bring Marion back. And right now I'd hate to dump Brad's contract for 2009 capspace. Miller's contract is basically as valuable as Salmons', but not for the same reasons. Miller has two plus points. 1) He's a legitimate starting center, good in the high post, great passer, great spot shooter. This is why Miami would be after him now. 2) He's got a large, 2010-expiring contract, perfect for the "legendary" FA market. This is why many big-market teams will likely be after him this summer or at the trade deadline in '10. We should be able to get a pretty high draft pick for his contract when all is said and done. And that doesn't happen here. So I'm not really for a Miller/Marion trade.

Note: We might -- might -- be able to get an unprotected, high 2010 pick from the Knicks (Nets?) if they don't play their finances right before then. I know unprotected picks don't come along that often, but NYK/NJN would be essentially using the Miller contract to make room for LeBron. And who in their right mind would accept a protected 2010 pick if the (unprotected or less-protected) 2011 pick is liable to be in the 20s? It's a bargaining chip: "You're using this trade to get LeBron. Is a lottery pick so much to ask?" Play the Knicks against the Nets, and it's that much more likely to happen. (Sure, it's no sure thing, but it's nice to think about from that POV. Miller's contract could potentially nab us a lotto pick. Why settle for cap space?)

I agree with most of what you say, and by no means was I endorsing any trade. I was merely pointing out that this one was the most likely now, as things stand.

I would also like to remind people that having cap space is not just valuable in the free agent market, but is also valuable when making trades. For instance, if your 20 mil under the cap, it would allow you to trade a player like Hawes straight across for a player like Wade. They're salarys don't come close to matching, but don't have to because you have the cap space to absorb it.

 

[sidney]

I would put getting Wallace as priority #1. He's the right age to fit in with our other talent, and is uniquely gifted.

If that takes Bobby/Sheldon/Rockets #1, that's fine.
If that takes Salmons/Sheldon/Rockets #1 that's fine too.

Honestly I'd even throw in Greene if that made the difference.

The vets and their cap space will be out of here no matter what in 18 months anyway. If we can get something for them, great. If not, let them expire.

I'd rather focus on getting a player that we can get in the mix now.

 

[LPKingsFan]

If anything, I'd imagine the Bobcats to be most interested in Miller for Wallace, since the rumors have mostly involved big men, ie, Kaman or Eddy Curry.

 

[VF21]

Um, Jason Hart? I don't think there are enough torches and pitchforks in all of the Western United States to handle the demand by irate fans if that lunacy came to be. He is arguably one of the biggest all-time failures in the NBA. I cannot even begin to entertain the idea that he could once again be wearing the uniform of the Kings, even if he never stepped foot into Arco...

 

[nbrans]

If anything, I'd imagine the Bobcats to be most interested in Miller for Wallace, since the rumors have mostly involved big men, ie, Kaman or Eddy Curry.

New idea:

Brad Miller and Kenny Thomas to the Knicks
Eddy Curry to the Bobcats
Gerald Wallace and Jerome James (salary purposes only) to the Kings

This way the Knicks continue to clear cap for 2010 without taking on long term salary, the Kings get Wallace, and the Bobcats get their young big.

 

[LPKingsFan]

Think I posted the same thing right about when the Eddy Curry to Bobcats rumors first sprang up. Fine by me, but I remember somewhere someone pointed out that Larry Brown coached Curry before and that didn't go so well.

 

[nbrans]

Think I posted the same thing right about when the Eddy Curry to Bobcats rumors first sprang up. Fine by me, but I remember somewhere someone pointed out that Larry Brown coached Curry before and that didn't go so well.

True enough. It still might be possible to include the Clippers if they decide to deal Kaman, using either Salmons or the expirings.

 

[sidney]

Using some of your ideas, NBRans, here's a fun 4 way trade that would work but probably never happen

Kings:
out: Miller, S Williams (expiring), Rockets #1 pick
in: Gerald Wallace, Malik Rose (expiring)

Miami:
out: Marion (expiring)
in: Miller, S Williams (expiring)

Knicks:
out: E. Curry, Malik Rose (expiring)
in: Marion (expiring)

Charlotte:
out: Gerald Wallace
in: E. Curry, Rockets #1 pick

Everyone gets something they want and gets rid of what they don't value. Only team I can't understand is Charlotte but that's based on their own rumors.

We could sweeten the deal for Charlotte and instead of the Rockets pick give them Salmons for Morrison who expires in 2010. I could see them going for that - 2 talented starters for Wallace. Their PF position is a disaster right now.