Kings inquire about Batum - Jason Jones

Bricklayer said:
But again, is this 100% true?

The Kings have a remainder interest in those picks. Meaning Cleveland has part of our rights to the pick and we have the rest. Why could we not trade the remainder/our part of the rights?

If I had, say, the rights to a pick if it was #1 to #5, and you had rights to the same pick if it were #6 to #10, why could I not just give my rights from #1 to #5 to my friend Barney? Doesn't effect your rights.
Click to expand...

Nope. You cannot trade consecutive year #1 picks. If they give up their pick this year they have to have a number one pick next year which they potentially already have traded if the Cavs get the pick. The Cavs would have to agree to not take the pick next year.

Now they can in the off season trade the pick, but it won't actually be official till the next league year (july 1).
 
I guess we need a PF! :rolleyes:

I have said before that Batum would be a great SF for us and that I would trade Thornton for him and it would make us a much better balanced team. The salaries are very different of course and there would need to be other pieces involved.

I propose Thornton and Hickson for Batum and some other expiring deal to make salaries match....Felton?! I get the impression Portland would trade Felton if they could find a taker as he has been a major disappointment for them.
 
The question with all the Batum talk is simple: Is Portland willing to give him up for anything short of Reke/DMC? If so, then you simply find out what they want and then begin to move the deal forward.

If they absolutely won't trade Batum... they surely must be willing to trade Wallace. If I'm Petrie, and I can no longer pry one of those two away from Portland with the pieces I currently have, I'd have to start questioning whether I still have it or not.
 
Long, young, good spot up 3 pt shooter, good defender. Doesn't need the ball to be effective.

I'm calling this complete bull. It's too logical for Petrie/Maloofs to try. Too much of a "basketball" move. Taking DMC/Reke/This year's first off the table, do we have the goods to get him? Also, how much do you pay for a guy who's going to be an RFA? This puts undue burden on you to match no matter what because you gave up assets for him.

Portland is in need of moves and they have never been shy. However, Batum is going to be reupped this offseason and should get 10/per, especially as he is stepping up as the only other guy behind LA. Not sure if Wallace is going to take the option, as he is due 10. Given his injury history and the way he plays, I would hope he enters free agency and locks down a long term contract. This, however frees up Portland to match the offer. They really like Batum and will have plenty of cap space to resign him. Only way we can get him in the offseason is to overpay and do so with a front loaded contract to hamper Portland's ability to be a player in the FA market. Still, I'm not sure at what point Portland would pull out. 10, 11, 12? And at what point does Batum still make sense?

I'm with the Mark Cuban school of basketball in that you pay players based on what they give you as an aggregate team. Is Batum worth 12? I don't think so. Is he worth 12 for us? I would say that if he allows Tyreke and DMC the space to operate, plays good defense, doesn't ask to be a star, and steps up as a consumate glue guy/roleplayer, yes. The worth he could give to DMC and Tyreke to open up their games would definitely make up for "overpaying" him.
 
rhythmless said:
Long, young, good spot up 3 pt shooter, good defender. Doesn't need the ball to be effective.

I'm calling this complete bull. It's too logical for Petrie/Maloofs to try. Too much of a "basketball" move. Taking DMC/Reke/This year's first off the table, do we have the goods to get him? Also, how much do you pay for a guy who's going to be an RFA? This puts undue burden on you to match no matter what because you gave up assets for him.

Portland is in need of moves and they have never been shy. However, Batum is going to be reupped this offseason and should get 10/per, especially as he is stepping up as the only other guy behind LA. Not sure if Wallace is going to take the option, as he is due 10. Given his injury history and the way he plays, I would hope he enters free agency and locks down a long term contract. This, however frees up Portland to match the offer. They really like Batum and will have plenty of cap space to resign him. Only way we can get him in the offseason is to overpay and do so with a front loaded contract to hamper Portland's ability to be a player in the FA market. Still, I'm not sure at what point Portland would pull out. 10, 11, 12? And at what point does Batum still make sense?

I'm with the Mark Cuban school of basketball in that you pay players based on what they give you as an aggregate team. Is Batum worth 12? I don't think so. Is he worth 12 for us? I would say that if he allows Tyreke and DMC the space to operate, plays good defense, doesn't ask to be a star, and steps up as a consumate glue guy/roleplayer, yes. The worth he could give to DMC and Tyreke to open up their games would definitely make up for "overpaying" him.
Click to expand...

While I don't think you give it up for Batum, I don't know why everybody assumes this year's first is off the table. Given our current standings it could be precisely the piece to pry away a major player, if we foun one that would make a difference for us.
 
Bricklayer said:
While I don't think you give it up for Batum, I don't know why everybody assumes this year's first is off the table. Given our current standings it could be precisely the piece to pry away a major player, if we foun one that would make a difference for us.
Click to expand...

Nothing's off the table, but I pulled the 1st on Batum given his contract status. I would trade anybody on this team if we got the right guys back. I took our core off only becasue Batum + those guys = basketball again (vs what we see nowadays). Who are you thinking of, Granger?
 
rhythmless said:
Nothing's off the table, but I pulled the 1st on Batum given his contract status. I would trade anybody on this team if we got the right guys back. I took our core off only becasue Batum + those guys = basketball again (vs what we see nowadays). Who are you thinking of, Granger?
Click to expand...

Would they even trade him given the year they are having?

Dunno. Normally you have to find teams in trouble for that sort of thing. The annoying limitation for us as well is in this new era of the cowardly superstar, we really can't trade for naybody in the last year or two of their deals, because once their deals are up they'll just go run off to hide behind some other star's skirts in the market with the most strip clubs.
 
I'm sure that if we end up trading our pick, this will be the year we get lucky and win the lottery. 100% sure. So, I'm totally against trading our pick.
 
Mass said:
I'm sure that if we end up trading our pick, this will be the year we get lucky and win the lottery. 100% sure. So, I'm totally against trading our pick.
Click to expand...

We won the lottery once. Ended up taking a skinny 6'9" PF/C who was all the thing after his freshman year in college.

Name was Pervis Ellison. :)
 
Bricklayer said:
While I don't think you give it up for Batum, I don't know why everybody assumes this year's first is off the table. Given our current standings it could be precisely the piece to pry away a major player, if we foun one that would make a difference for us.
Click to expand...

We'd have to be eliminated from playoff contention for us to trade the pick.
 
Bricklayer said:
Would they even trade him given the year they are having?

Dunno. Normally you have to find teams in trouble for that sort of thing. The annoying limitation for us as well is in this new era of the cowardly superstar, we really can't trade for naybody in the last year or two of their deals, because once their deals are up they'll just go run off to hide behind some other star's skirts in the market with the most strip clubs.
Click to expand...

If you throw in a 1st, it's gotta be a known commodity. I'm assuming you're after a rangy defensive 3 that's not too old and could flourish as a slowly declining vet 3rd option on an eventual championship team then redefining himsefl into Bruce Browen/old Battier. There's all of Gay, Granger, Deng, Iggy, and Batum that fits that mold. Slide over to SG and you have Afflalo/Courtney Lee. There aren't many guys who have size, play both sides of the ball without needing the ball to be impactful.
 
SacTownKid said:
No way in F do you give up that pick for Batum.
Click to expand...



No you don't.

But I will say this I absolutely guarantee you that at least half the teams with lottery picks this year will end up with lesser players than Batum and wish they'd traded their picks for him. Its just something you can't know ahead of tiem though.
 
SacTownKid said:
No way in F do you give up that pick for Batum.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't give up our pick (and we can't) but I would give up Minnesota's pick (via New Orleans) if we were able to strike a deal with them.

Batum is worth any pick outside of the top 12, I'd say, and that's about where the Timberwolves pick would come in.
 
MassachusettsKingsFan said:
I wouldn't give up our pick (and we can't) but I would give up Minnesota's pick (via New Orleans) if we were able to strike a deal with them.

Batum is worth any pick outside of the top 12, I'd say, and that's about where the Timberwolves pick would come in.
Click to expand...


Top 12? I'd give up any pick outside of Top 5 for him! Remember only Davis and perhaps Drummonds are considered superstar talent. The other guys I don't see as having more potential than batum.
 
The_Jamal said:
I'd be willing to flip Thornton for him. It 1. Gives us the perfect SF for this team 2. Frees up enough money to give him a nice contract 3. Makes us a far better team with Reke going to SG and Batum taking SF 4. Frees up minutes in an extremley crowded backcourt

Thornton is no doubt talented, but he needs to be on a team where he's the main focus of the offense or the 2nd option and have the ball in his hands a majority of the game. He'll never be fully able to do that with Reke and Boogie here, and he's a waste of a talent on the bench for us. Guys like Terry/Harden/Manu a few years ago were all effective in that bench role because they're the 2nd or 3rd option on the team and can score without dominating the ball
Click to expand...
I'd like to get a draft pick too if we did this trade. Thornton is a slightly better player who's signed to a good contract. Batum plays a position of need for us though so it might work for both teams.
 
Most likely hickson wont play since its established fact hes being shopped.

We need to make this deal happen with the blazers. Game changer it is
 
I don't think the Blazers are looking to trade Batum... i thought the general concesus is that they wanted to lock him up long term. Our efforts might be better focused on Gerald Wallace or Paul Pierce who the Celtics have been rumored to be shopping.
 
Kings Faithful said:
I don't think the Blazers are looking to trade Batum... i thought the general concesus is that they wanted to lock him up long term. Our efforts might be better focused on Gerald Wallace or Paul Pierce who the Celtics have been rumored to be shopping.
Click to expand...

Paul Pierce is too old and as such the cost-benefit ratio just does not make sense for us.

Blazers had the opportunity to sign Batum to extension this season which they failed to do. This pretty much means that they are open to moving him for the right piece. If they really wanted to lock him up as their guy then they would have done so before the extension deadline.
 
Čarolija said:
Paul Pierce is too old and as such the cost-benefit ratio just does not make sense for us.
Click to expand...
Seriously - NOONE is too old for the Kings.

The thing the Kings need MOST is age - maturity - clutch play.
And if the vet is 38 but can still produce (JKidd, etc) than the Kings are the perfect team for aging vets to ply their trade and show they can still make a big impact on a TEAM.

The Kings have NO TEAM right now - just a disorganized glop of non-fitting pieces.
 
IfAt1st said:
Seriously - NOONE is too old for the Kings.

The thing the Kings need MOST is age - maturity - clutch play.
And if the vet is 38 but can still produce (JKidd, etc) than the Kings are the perfect team for aging vets to ply their trade and show they can still make a big impact on a TEAM.

The Kings have NO TEAM right now - just a disorganized glop of non-fitting pieces.
Click to expand...

are you joking? what is the point of pulling in a 38 year old and MAYBE playing .500 ball for a season or two before they retire? Ya we need vets, but we dont need senior citizens. A pierce or nash would be a temporary solution to permanent problems
 
bluntsnbball said:
are you joking? what is the point of pulling in a 38 year old and MAYBE playing .500 ball for a season or two before they retire? Ya we need vets, but we dont need senior citizens. A pierce or nash would be a temporary solution to permanent problems
Click to expand...

LOL you can't win with some kings fans that have no patience :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

twslam07
[Drastic Edition] “THE” Trade Deadline Move to Make…
2
Replies
39
Views
2K
twslam07
twslam07
Mr. S£im Citrus
  • Locked
  • Poll Poll
[Game] 20/82: Kings @ Trail Blazers 29 NOV 2024, 7pm PT/10pm ET
9 10 11
Replies
311
Views
8K
NewArena
NewArena
twslam07
  • Poll Poll
“THE” Trade Deadline Move to Make…
2 3 4
Replies
110
Views
6K
The_Jamal
T
Mr. S£im Citrus
  • Locked
  • Poll Poll
[Game] 19/82: Kings @ Timberwolves 27 NOV 2024, 5pm PT/8pm ET
13 14 15
Replies
426
Views
9K
NewArena
NewArena
Mr. S£im Citrus
  • Locked
  • Poll Poll
[Game] 71/82: Kings vs. Celtics 24 MAR 2025, 7pm PT/10pm ET
7 8 9
Replies
256
Views
7K
gunks
gunks
Back
Top