Tetsujin
The Game Thread Dude
I'm going to be honest, I rip John Salmons because I'm pretty sure his beard is the product of witchcraft.
I'm going to be honest, I rip John Salmons because I'm pretty sure his beard is the product of witchcraft.
The Knicks would have to send out almost $8M more in salary on top of Shumpert to make it work. So they would be relying on the Celtics wanting to take on A) 3 years of JR Smith and 3 years of Raymond Felton, or B) 2 years of pick your poison contract (Bargnani, Chandler, Amare) on top of Shumpert.
It appears that the Knicks don't have a first-rounder available to trade away until 2018, either.
I have trouble believing that there is a lot of interest from the Celtics on this one. An injured Rondo has more value than "let's eat really bad contracts".
twslam07
All-Star
I would be open to a deal that brings Stoudemire over.
Celtics Get:
Iman Shumpert
John Salmons
Patrick Patterson
Celtics Give:
Rajon Rondo
Knicks Get:
Rajon Rondo
Carl Landry
Knicks Give:
Amare Stoudemire
Iman Shumpert
Kings Get:
Amare Stoudemire
Kings Give:
John Salmons
Carl Landry
Patrick Patterson
Why for the Celtics?
I think it's quite obvious that the Celtics are in rebuild mode. They want to acquire as many young, talented players and ultimately end up in the lottery with a chance at a high draft pick. With Rondo on the roster, it makes them a much more competitive team. With Rondo shipped out, it will help them get that higher pick. They also get Shumpert who is an up and coming SG in this league that has potential. Salmons and Patterson are included to act as ending contracts to give them more cap flexibility next offseason.
Why for the Knicks?
The Knicks do this deal to become more competitive this year while also ridding themselves of Stoudemire's contract. Rondo would instantly become their starting PG when he returns from injury and would push Felton to the bench. Landry will be able to provide them with low post scoring off the bench in a similar role that Stoudemire was playing but for much cheaper. When their team is completely healthy their lineup will look like this:
PG - Rondo/Felton/Progioni/Udrih
SG - Smith/Hardaway/Murry
SF - World Peace/Anthony
PF - Anthony/Landry/Martin
C - Chandler/Bargnani/Aldrich
Why for the Kings?
The Kings have many contracts that are expiring after the 2014-2015 offseason. I think it makes sense to trade away our cap space this offseason for more cap space the following offseason. The Kings will only have Cousins, Thompson, McLemore, 2014 1st round pick, 2015 1st round pick, 2014 2nd round pick, 2015 2nd round pick and McCallum on the books going forward. That gives us approximately 25-30 mil in cap space to surround our young core with complimentary players. I would even prefer if we move Thompson for cap space after the 2014-2015 season. I think he is a great third big off the bench, but a third big off the bench shouldn't be making 6 to 6.5 mil a year. As a small market team, you can't afford to overpay for your roleplayers. If we did end up moving Thompson for cap space, we would have 31-36 mil in cap space that year.
I think a move like this would benefit our franchise tremendously in the long run. 1) It wouldn't make us more competitive this year thus allowing us an easier shot at a high draft pick. 2) We would have roughly the same team next year setting us up for most likely another lottery pick. 3) We would have a massive amount of cap space to use in 2015 to finally establish our roster long term around Cousins, McLemore, 2014 1st round pick, 2015 1st round pick, 2014 2nd round pick, 2015 2nd round pick, and McCallum.
One thing to note is that this deal can't be done until closer to the trade deadline when Landry becomes eligible to be traded.
Celtics Get:
Iman Shumpert
John Salmons
Patrick Patterson
Celtics Give:
Rajon Rondo
Knicks Get:
Rajon Rondo
Carl Landry
Knicks Give:
Amare Stoudemire
Iman Shumpert
Kings Get:
Amare Stoudemire
Kings Give:
John Salmons
Carl Landry
Patrick Patterson
Why for the Celtics?
I think it's quite obvious that the Celtics are in rebuild mode. They want to acquire as many young, talented players and ultimately end up in the lottery with a chance at a high draft pick. With Rondo on the roster, it makes them a much more competitive team. With Rondo shipped out, it will help them get that higher pick. They also get Shumpert who is an up and coming SG in this league that has potential. Salmons and Patterson are included to act as ending contracts to give them more cap flexibility next offseason.
Why for the Knicks?
The Knicks do this deal to become more competitive this year while also ridding themselves of Stoudemire's contract. Rondo would instantly become their starting PG when he returns from injury and would push Felton to the bench. Landry will be able to provide them with low post scoring off the bench in a similar role that Stoudemire was playing but for much cheaper. When their team is completely healthy their lineup will look like this:
PG - Rondo/Felton/Progioni/Udrih
SG - Smith/Hardaway/Murry
SF - World Peace/Anthony
PF - Anthony/Landry/Martin
C - Chandler/Bargnani/Aldrich
Why for the Kings?
The Kings have many contracts that are expiring after the 2014-2015 offseason. I think it makes sense to trade away our cap space this offseason for more cap space the following offseason. The Kings will only have Cousins, Thompson, McLemore, 2014 1st round pick, 2015 1st round pick, 2014 2nd round pick, 2015 2nd round pick and McCallum on the books going forward. That gives us approximately 25-30 mil in cap space to surround our young core with complimentary players. I would even prefer if we move Thompson for cap space after the 2014-2015 season. I think he is a great third big off the bench, but a third big off the bench shouldn't be making 6 to 6.5 mil a year. As a small market team, you can't afford to overpay for your roleplayers. If we did end up moving Thompson for cap space, we would have 31-36 mil in cap space that year.
I think a move like this would benefit our franchise tremendously in the long run. 1) It wouldn't make us more competitive this year thus allowing us an easier shot at a high draft pick. 2) We would have roughly the same team next year setting us up for most likely another lottery pick. 3) We would have a massive amount of cap space to use in 2015 to finally establish our roster long term around Cousins, McLemore, 2014 1st round pick, 2015 1st round pick, 2014 2nd round pick, 2015 2nd round pick, and McCallum.
One thing to note is that this deal can't be done until closer to the trade deadline when Landry becomes eligible to be traded.
Last edited:
DesertFox
Starter
I like the idea of moving out of Landry's contract, but that deal has zero chance of happening. Landry is not getting traded this season.
If the Kings were to do a salary dump move, it would be MT, JT, or Hayes, but if Amare is the only return, the Kings are then trading 2 expiring deals for (at best) an additional 5 mil in capspace in 2 years. If the Kings don't get Iman, no way the Kings take Amare.
If the Kings were to do a salary dump move, it would be MT, JT, or Hayes, but if Amare is the only return, the Kings are then trading 2 expiring deals for (at best) an additional 5 mil in capspace in 2 years. If the Kings don't get Iman, no way the Kings take Amare.
I don't think this would help us at all. Amare is basically done, but he's owed $45M over the next two years. But since we're assuming that the trade can't happen until (about) halfway through the season, we'll prorate this year's salaries. That drops the commitment to Amare to about $34M.
We'd be trading away two contracts that expire (Patterson) or get bought out (Salmons) next year, hence only Landry, who may yet be a useful rotation player, actually comes off the books long term. Total salary would be about $29M prorated. So in essence, we're losing whatever utility we might get out of Landry (3.5 years of it), taking on a deadweight player, and paying an extra $5M - all to gain $6.5M in cap space in 2015.
This does not sound like a good deal to me.
twslam07
All-Star
That's because this is deal tailored toward the future. I completely agree that this trade does not help us now. We're pretty much trading for a 2015 expiring (That's when the rest of our bad contracts come off the books). So in essence, we will only be left with players that we want to build with in 2015. If we stay as is and don't make any trades, we will have a payroll of 53 mil next year (That's assuming we don't resign Vasquez, Thomas, Patterson, and Ndiaye). Factor in the salary of our 2014 draft picks and we're probably sitting somewhere around 56.5 mil. That gives us around 1.5-2.5 mil of cap space to sign a player. Is that enough to make a splash and move this team forward? Of course not. Our time is 2015 whether this trade goes down or not.
The main reason I made this trade was to give us even more cap space in 2015. With Landry being shipped away that gives us another 6.5 mil to work with in the 2015 offseason. Considering the makeup of this team will be relatively similar in the 2014-2015 season, I'm expecting us to place in the bottom 10 which would allow us to keep our 1st round pick (top 10 protected in 2015 and 2016). I would prefer to begin signing free agents that we see as long term fits after we have made our 2014 1st round pick and 2015 1st round pick selections so we know what positions need to be filled and what type of players we should go after. Rather than signing or trading for players that have long term contracts and then trying to draft by need or position which usually never works out in the end.
I know we all want a quick fix, but with our salary situation and the current contracts we have, that is not possible. Again, our time to make a splash and be competitive again is in 2015. Whether we like it or not.
Last edited:
twslam07
All-Star
To me, it makes no sense to trade Thornton or Hayes at this point. We might as well keep them as enders for 2015 since we have Moute and Outlaw coming off our books at that time as well. I would be open to throwing in Thompson instead of Landry, but the only reason I didn't do that was because I thought it would be much easier to move Thompson by himself. We could easily swing a deal that would be Thompson for a 2015 ender. I have a harder time seeing that with Landry, but it could be possible.
The Kings take on Amare to get 6.5 mil in cap space in 2015 and remove an underszied, overpaid, ill-fitting PF from the roster. Period. This trade is not a trade to bring back talent. It is a trade to allow us to bring the right talent into the organization through free agency. And don't get me wrong. When I say talent, I don't mean stars (which are next to impossible to bring to Sacramento). I mean roleplayers that will fit with our core group of players that we have accumulated through the draft (Cousins, McLemore, 2014 1st round pick, 2015 1st round pick).
Section 101
All-Star
A bird in the hand is better than 2 in the bush.
LPKingsFan
All-Star
You're assuming that the FO agrees with you in this assessment of Landry. Given that they are the ones that just sought out and signed him to that contract that you're now trying to ditch, I find it hard to believe they feel the same way. I would have just kept Lopez in the New Orleans deal, but they obviously think there's something (seemingly intangible--veteran leadership? familiarity with Malone? culture change?) worth keeping him for. The injury, I don't think, is enough to reverse that in just a couple months.
twslam07
All-Star
So keeping an undersized, ill-fitting PF and having 6.5 mil less in cap space is better than not having an undersized, ill-fitting PF and 6.5 mil more in cap space?
twslam07
All-Star
Many of the trades I post on this forum aren't indicative of what the FO would do. It is what I would do if I were in the FO's position. It's similar to those threads that ask you to predict the starting lineup. There are many people who post what they think the coach will go with and then there are others who post what they would like to see. I happen to be the type of person who likes to come up with unique solutions rather than predicting what solutions the FO has in store for us.
I think this deal becomes more realistic if Thompson is the one involved rather than Landry, but again, I included Landry in this deal because I thought it would be much more difficult to move Landry by himself for a 2015 ender. It's possible by next year's trade deadline that some team would be willing to take him on for an ender, but I think we would have more luck if that player was Thompson.
Man I agree. Remember in the BK game when Landry...
Oh wait. We have yet to see a single minute of Landry this season. Might want to wait till he... you know.. plays the game of basketball for us before casting him off as the biggest waste of money in NBA history
twslam07
All-Star
I could write something similar to what I replied to LPKingsFan with, but I'll just direct you to the post directly above yours.
If I want to make this a little more 'FO realistic,' then I would replace Landry with Thompson. Satisfied?
Last edited:
Section 101
All-Star
Cap space 2 years from now does nothing. It doesn't mean you get to pick your free agent signing.
twslam07
All-Star
Everything has to be an extreme on this forum. I appreciate the attempt of putting words in my mouth though.
The thing is we have already seen Landry here with the same bigs. What would make you think anything has changed? Is Malone going to tap into some unknown skillset that suddenly makes him compatible with our bigs?
This is my logic... Cousins is our best big man. Cousins should be seeing 36 mpg. For those 36 minutes, Cousins should be paired with a big man that compliments his skillset as much as possible. That compliment would be a guy who has size, can rebound, block shots, defend PFs, knock down open jumpers, and stay out of Cousins way on offense. Does this player sound like Landry? Not at all. Now if you want to play Landry when Cousins is off the floor and when he is paired with a rim protecting center who is a strong rebounder, then go right ahead. But wait a minute. Do we have that intimidating, rim protecting, rebounding center? No. Well that's a bummer, but at least he's only on the floor for 12 minutes when Cousins is not playing. That ill-fitting PF/C combo of Landry and player xyz won't cost us too much. But hold on, we gave 6.5 mil a year to a player who is only playing 12 mpg? Yikes!
Now don't get me wrong, I think Landry can be a very valuable player in the right system. He needs defensive bigs next to him for his team to have success. That's why I thought Utah would be a good place for him. Favors, Kanter, and Gobert all fit that description.
The fact is that Landry and Cousins need very similar players next to them for their teams to be as successful as possible. Now am I saying we can't find success with Landry and Cousins playing next to each other? No, but whatever success we do have could be extrapolated if we had the right type of big playing next to Cousins.
twslam07
All-Star
I'm confused to why having cap space does nothing. Typically it's a good thing to have bad contracts come off the books and have cap space. I didn't know there was this much ground for debate on such a topic.
twslam07
All-Star
As do I. 2015 is when I see us becoming competitive again. We might as well wait out the bad contracts from the old regime and start fresh in the 2015 offseason.
Amare has one of the 5 worst contracts in the league. Even if we shipped them every bad deal that ends in 2015 for him, we'd still be getting the raw end of the deal. Plus I don't think we even have enough bad deals ending in 2015 to make it even work.
He's not getting moved unless he's packaged with something of value or the Knicks take back bad, longer deals.
I don't like the Landry signing but he isn't one of those deals.
He's not getting moved unless he's packaged with something of value or the Knicks take back bad, longer deals.
I don't like the Landry signing but he isn't one of those deals.
twslam07
All-Star
I agree that he has one of the worst contracts in basketball, but as I mentioned before this trade is not a trade to bring back talent. It is a trade to allow us to bring the right talent into the organization through free agency.
I'm not suggesting we trade our 2015 enders. In fact, quite the opposite. We're sending them Salmons and Patterson who are both 2014 enders while Landry's contract expires in 2017 (they get cap relief next offseason, but have to take on long term salary while we give up cap relief next year, but we get more cap relief in 2015). I want us to hold on to our 2015 enders. I'm not sure why we would send them all of our 2015 enders when Amare is a 2015 ender himself. It seems kind of pointless.
In regards to the last sentence in bold, I think Landry has value in this league. He can be a very good 3rd big off the bench, but his team must surround him with defensive, rebounding bigs to make up for his deficiencies. So in a sense, I can agree that his deal is not terrible, but when you take into account the team he's on, it's a pretty bad deal considering how he would pair with Cousins.
Section 101
All-Star
And what happens when no free agents sign here that are worth anything? How's your plan working now? You want free agents then you better have a winning team and a franchise that players can respect. Plus, you don't need cap space unless you plan to sign a player outright. Lately, there have been more sign and trades than players going for just cap space.
Glenn
Hall of Famer
I presume what was meant was that having cap space guarantees us nothing as Sacramento is not a destination for FAs especially game changing FAs. All cap space gives us is the ability to sign roll players. We need more than that although getting the proper roll player sounds good if it is done properly. Landry??
Ahh, Section 101 answered his own question.
twslam07
All-Star
You say that like it's a for sure thing. Star players rarely come to Sacramento because they have the power to choose their destination with relative ease, and the city of Sacramento doesn't appear to be the most attractive location. However, roleplayers don't have that luxury.
A team consisting of Cousins (who will be a 5 year vet), McLemore (2 year vet), McCallum (2 year vet), 2014 1st round draft pick (1 year vet), 2014 2nd round draft pick (1 year vet), 2015 1st round pick (rookie), and 2015 2nd round pick (rookie) doesn't seem attractive to you? Obviously we'll have to see who we take with those picks, but that core seems like a recipe for success if I'm a roleplayer. That's a very exciting team to be a part of. With that much young talent, a franchise center, and a young, up and coming coach, I'm sure we'll be more than okay attracting roleplayers to our team.
Tetsujin
The Game Thread Dude
Players weren't queuing to join the Kings when Vlade and C-Webb were leading the team (unless you count Tony Massenberg and Anthony Peeler as big name signings). What makes you think that would suddenly change now?
Glenn
Hall of Famer
We don't have to go through convoluted shenanigans to get roll players. We are filled with ill fitting roll players and now we can just let the clock tick off and get us some more roll players. As is said, they can't pick and chose so why the preparation to get in a good position to get one? I honestly have never understood that except perhaps discussing such moves is just plain fun. I have nothing against fun and applaud people who exercise their brains.
I think Sacramento will become a destination for all FAs. In the recent past, player's agents HAD to tell their free agents that Sacramento was not the place to go. Does anyone doubt that? I think when the arena is built and people become (hopefully) impressed with Ranadive, that will change. Great players want to go where they can win and enjoy playing. Some may need a big city but I sincerely wonder how important that is for the vast majority of players. The big time FAs go to big markets because the big markets are willing to pay the luxury tax and therefore shower them with oodles of money. As the years pass and punishments for going over the luxury tax line increase, even that may be less of an issue.
I think Sacramento will become a destination for all FAs. In the recent past, player's agents HAD to tell their free agents that Sacramento was not the place to go. Does anyone doubt that? I think when the arena is built and people become (hopefully) impressed with Ranadive, that will change. Great players want to go where they can win and enjoy playing. Some may need a big city but I sincerely wonder how important that is for the vast majority of players. The big time FAs go to big markets because the big markets are willing to pay the luxury tax and therefore shower them with oodles of money. As the years pass and punishments for going over the luxury tax line increase, even that may be less of an issue.
Glenn
Hall of Famer
See my reply above.
twslam07
All-Star
But do we need 'game changing' free agents? I'm expecting to pick up our #2 option in this year's draft. Let's say we don't luck into Wiggins or Parker and get Marcus Smart. instead. I see our three go-to options of the future as Smart, McLemore, and Cousins. Everyone else is a roleplayer in my eyes. We can pick up another quality young player in the 2015 draft granted there aren't 10 teams that finish with a worse record that year (the pick is top 10 protected).
After these two drafts, I don't see us needing to go after big time free agents. We can take the OKC method and come up with our own version of Westbrook, Harden, and Durant through the draft while we sign free agents to fill in everywhere else.
DesertFox
Starter
I'd like to see Vivek, Cuz, and Malone make it through the next 3 years with that plan in place.
McLemore, 2 1st round picks (if the Cavs don't get one), and a bunch of 2nd round vets (that belong to the Kings only conditionally). As a role player, tell me there won't be more attractive situations, especially considering by that time the team hasn't won in a decade. So the Kings will have capspace to overpay for roleplayers, and we've seen that result.
Glenn
Hall of Famer
So it makes no difference if we trade this person and that to get cap space. Cap space will occur as contracts expire.
Who are we creating this cap space for? Role players?? Honest?
Similar threads
- Yahoo! Sports - NBA - Sacramento Kings News
- Kings News Links
- Yahoo! Sports - NBA - Sacramento Kings News
- Kings News Links
- Yahoo! Sports - NBA - Sacramento Kings News
- Kings News Links
- Sports Illustrated Inside the Kings News
- Kings News Links