Kings rebuilt part deux - Two deals with Dallas and Indy

[Smills91]

Deal one: Like in the other thread.

Kings/Dallas
Artest for Harris/Buckner/08 1st

Deal 2: Kings/Indy

Kings deal: Mike Bibby
Kings receive: Danny Granger, Rafer Alston, Bobby Sura(Cut), JLIII(cut).

Pacers deal: Murphy/Granger
Pacers receive: Mike Bibby

Rockets deal: Rafer Alston, Bobby Sura, JL III
Rockets receive: Troy Murphy

Kings final roster:
C: Brad Miller, Mikki Moore, Spencer Hawes
PF: Kenny Thomas, SAR, Justin Williams
SF: Danny Granger, Francisco Garcia, Greg Buckner
SG: Kevin Martin, John Salmons, Quincy Douby
PG: Devin Harris, Rafer Alston, Mustafa Shakur

 

[VF21]

The Pacers have expressed little to no interest in Mike Bibby but they are very high on Danny Granger. I don't see any way this deal goes down. What's your rationale for them doing it?

 

[Smills91]

The Pacers have expressed little to no interest in Mike Bibby but they are very high on Danny Granger. I don't see any way this deal goes down. What's your rationale for them doing it?

They don't want Tinsley starting...Bibby is a HUGE upgrade at PG IMO...also Murphy has 4 years left on his deal so in essence they get an upgrade at PG while slashing Murphy's deal in half in the process...the cost is Granger where they have Shawne Williams and Dunleavy slotted to play as well.

 

[dude12]

Granted Murphy has a big contract but he's also young and a solid big guy. Granger is very good. I'm not so sure that Bibby is an upgrade over Tinsley or if he is its not enough to offset the cost here. Tinsley's problem is stayiong healthy.

 

[Smills91]

Granted Murphy has a big contract but he's also young and a solid big guy. Granger is very good. I'm not so sure that Bibby is an upgrade over Tinsley or if he is its not enough to offset the cost here. Tinsley's problem is stayiong healthy.

And the fact that the Pacers want him off the roster due to character issues. Tinsley's not close to Bibby in terms of what level echelon of a player he is. He's an average PG...Bibby is an above average PG.

 

[beb0p]

For any other GM, this proposal will draw a gut-busting laughter. But with Larry Bird, you never know. He seems to like slow-footed guys who can't play a lick of defense to fast athletic players... After last season's "trade" (acutally more like a give-away), I think he is capable of this level of ugliness.

 

[Smills91]

For any other GM, this proposal will draw a gut-busting laughter. But with Larry Bird, you never know. He seems to like slow-footed guys who can't play a lick of defense to fast athletic players... After last season's "trade" (acutally more like a give-away), I think he is capable of this level of ugliness.

Bibby's quite a step up from Murphy in terms of slow foot, unathletic players that can't play a lick of defense.

 

[VF21]

The Pacers are VERY HIGH on Danny Granger. They aren't going to give him up. And I wouldn't be bragging too much about Bibby's defensive abilities. That's one of the things most people dog him for.

 

[Smills91]

The Pacers are VERY HIGH on Danny Granger. They aren't going to give him up. And I wouldn't be bragging too much about Bibby's defensive abilities. That's one of the things most people dog him for.

True, but he looks like Mookie Blalock in his prime if you compare him directly to Troy Murphy.

 

[Arby's Roast Beef]

There's many flaws to this trade IMHO I don't know how to slice it...but let's start with this:

The Mavs are absolutely in love with Devin Harris. Forget the fact that he hasn't broken out quite just yet, but Mark Cuban is a fanatic for athletic players with skills and potential and Harris has both, to the point that Jason Terry was even mentioned in trade rumors early in the offseason. Harris is pretty much close to untouchable--in fact, the Mavs probably perceive his value nearly as equal, if not higher, than Artest, given the latter's off-the-court troubles.

As VF21 also stated, I can't see the Pacers pursuing Bibby--yes, Tinsley's inconsistencies and injuries may irritate the team brass, but recent comments by Bird revealed that the team planned on keeping Tinsley for the start of the season. Which probably means that Bibby isn't a necessity for them at this point. And Danny Granger?...The Pacers are absolutely in love with him, and if they're looking to "rebuild", would probably look to make him their centerpiece. If anything, they would look to dangle Shawne Williams or Dunleavy (although with his ridiculous contract combined with his woeful season this year, it's hard to trade him).

 

[RunNGun]

Terrible deal. I like Harris' speed, but his offense only comes and goes. Somehow i'm not impressed with his offensive leadership. Rafer Alston makes Bibby look like an All-star.

 

[Entity]

I'm sorry but the biggest problems on the kings team are still here with all your trades. Mike Bibby and Ron Artest will be gone more than likely in 2 years. But SAR, KT and Brad Miller will still be here. Bibby and Artest are FAR more talented than any of those 3 maybe even if you put them together. So spend you efforts into making up trades that do indeed make us better now or in the future. I just don't see Danny Granger ever being as good as Artest or Harris ever as good as Bibby. So why not keep those 2 while they are in their prime and work with them by getting what is needed. you are trading our best players and keeping our worst. And please don't give me the draft pick crap. because i will not bet any money and neither should you that some guy that hasn't played college ball yet is going to be better than Bibby or Artest.

 

[Smills91]

I'm sorry but the biggest problems on the kings team are still here with all your trades. Mike Bibby and Ron Artest will be gone more than likely in 2 years. But SAR, KT and Brad Miller will still be here. Bibby and Artest are FAR more talented than any of those 3 maybe even if you put them together. So spend you efforts into making up trades that do indeed make us better now or in the future. I just don't see Danny Granger ever being as good as Artest or Harris ever as good as Bibby. So why not keep those 2 while they are in their prime and work with them by getting what is needed. you are trading our best players and keeping our worst. And please don't give me the draft pick crap. because i will not bet any money and neither should you that some guy that hasn't played college ball yet is going to be better than Bibby or Artest.

That is definitely one way to look at it...however, I see the FUTURE of the Kings built right underneath those contracts. I do think SAR can be traded on his own merit for expirings/late pick to a contender that needs low post scoring. Brad Miller I think will bounce back and be able to be dealt on his own merit. Kenny though, I think we're stuck with perhaps. Oh well.

With these two deals I see the Kings future roster being:

C - Spencer Hawes
PF - Darrel Arthur (picked up in the 2008 lottery that we'd inevitably be in)
SF - Danny Granger
SG - Kevin Martin
PG - Devin Harris
6th - Francisco Garcia
7th - Quincy Douby
8th - Justin Williams

THAT is what I see after these deals. By 2010 the bulk of the bad deals will be gone...we'll be able to extend these guys and perhaps even sign a free agent here or there.

But that team in 2-3 years will be on the upswing with all those players hitting their primes together. I like that roster, A LOT.

 

[dude12]

And the fact that the Pacers want him off the roster due to character issues. Tinsley's not close to Bibby in terms of what level echelon of a player he is. He's an average PG...Bibby is an above average PG.

I haven't heard about Murphy's character issues.....you got a quote or article? That's surprising. Tinsley is a different type of PG than Bibby. Tinsley does what he does well. Not saying he's great.

Pacers will not trade Granger.

 

[Smills91]

I haven't heard about Murphy's character issues.....you got a quote or article? That's surprising. Tinsley is a different type of PG than Bibby. Tinsley does what he does well. Not saying he's great.

Pacers will not trade Granger.

I don't know if I would say that...they have Dunleavy, Shawne Williams AND granger at SF. Many Pacer fans think that Williams has the higher ceiling and would like to move Granger with TInsley for an upgrade at the 1...ah hem(MIKE BIBBY). He's probably the best available PG for trade and I think getting a young player of either Granger/Williams caliber would be what the Kings are looking for if dealing Bibby.

Trading Artest for a solid young PG(i.e. Devin Harris) would be next on the to-do list

 

[RunNGun]

With these two deals I see the Kings future roster being:

C - Spencer Hawes
PF - Darrel Arthur (picked up in the 2008 lottery that we'd inevitably be in)
SF - Danny Granger
SG - Kevin Martin
PG - Devin Harris
6th - Francisco Garcia
7th - Quincy Douby
8th - Justin Williams

Maybe you see something I don't, but I see a lot missing from that line up. Aside from Martin and maybe a mature bodied Hawes I don't see the star potential. Just lots of role players (good ones, but still role players). Though I have no idea how Darrel Arthur would play. I still see lack of rebounding, playmakers, and a clutch player.

 

[beb0p]

C - Spencer Hawes
PF - Darrel Arthur (picked up in the 2008 lottery that we'd inevitably be in)
SF - Danny Granger
SG - Kevin Martin
PG - Devin Harris
6th - Francisco Garcia
7th - Quincy Douby
8th - Justin Williams

Dude, that lineup is nothing to brag about. Duncan, Dirk, Brand, Nene, Camby, Amare, Yao, and Boozer could sleepwalk all over that frontline.

Subsitute Harris for Derrick Rose (2008 lottery), Granger for Artest, and Arthur for Elton Brand (2008 FA) and you may have something (as long we're dreaming, may as well dream big).

 

[Smills91]

Dude, that lineup is nothing to brag about. Duncan, Dirk, Brand, Nene, Camby, Amare, Yao, and Boozer could sleepwalk all over that frontline.

Subsitute Harris for Derrick Rose (2008 lottery), Granger for Artest, and Arthur for Elton Brand (2008 FA) and you may have something (as long we're dreaming, may as well dream big).

WOW! Other than Nene(Mr. Injury), Amare, Boozer...the rest will be on the decline or retired in 4-5 years when that team will be hitting it's prime.

Kevin Martin = Future perenniel all-star
Hawes IMO will be an all-star at least once or twice in his career.
Devin Harris I think will be like Bibby(one of the league's best players to never make an all-star game).
Darrell Arthur has star potential IMO(assuming we'd land him).
Granger would be a very good player.

I see that roster as a similar roster to the Pistons that won the title.

A couple GREAT stars(Martin/Hawes) with VERY good starters and a good bench(Garcia/Douby/Williams) that work well together. Also if you factor in the 2010 FA class, we could very well SIGN the "missing" piece to put us over the top when Brad/Sar/KT come off the books.

 

[perezident]

i love that trade for the Rockets...Murphy fits better than scola imo..he brings more to the table also....and is exactly how Adelman likes his bigs

 

[beb0p]

Kevin Martin = Future perenniel all-star
Hawes IMO will be an all-star at least once or twice in his career.
Devin Harris I think will be like Bibby(one of the league's best players to never make an all-star game).
Darrell Arthur has star potential IMO(assuming we'd land him).
Granger would be a very good player.

Right, so who's your franchise player? Who's good enough to be the MVP or even the BDP that leads us to the promise land? There is none. Just a bunch of role players pieced together in a lottery-bound team.

 

[BawLa]

Right, so who's your franchise player? Who's good enough to be the MVP or even the BDP that leads us to the promise land? There is none. Just a bunch of role players pieced together in a lottery-bound team.

I think with a lineup like that, a franchise player would naturally emerge. That lineup would be stacked with talent, and that is what I think Smills was getting at. With the exception of LeBron James, there is no one that is born an MVP, players work hard to become an MVP. So a lineup stacked with young talent would not have an MVP until they played together and emerged as a force. Then the MVP would naturally surface. And who cares if the league views one of our players as an MVP? That doesn't mean ****. Dirk and Nash have the last 3 MVP's right? And how many rings do they have collectively?

Just because a young talented player is a role player at one point in his career, doesn't mean he will be that for his entire career. It is called something like developing or something. If you want to view the potential of those players as nothing but a lottery team then you are entitled to that. But that is no different than Smills saying there are multiple stars in that lineup.

 

[dude12]

i love that trade for the Rockets...Murphy fits better than scola imo..he brings more to the table also....and is exactly how Adelman likes his bigs

Yes agreed on Murphy being an Adelman type...your open so shoot it....but Scola impressed me a little bit during the World Games just recently. A hard-nosed player.

 

[beb0p]

I think with a lineup like that, a franchise player would naturally emerge. That lineup would be stacked with talent, and that is what I think Smills was getting at. With the exception of LeBron James, there is no one that is born an MVP, players work hard to become an MVP. So a lineup stacked with young talent would not have an MVP until they played together and emerged as a force. Then the MVP would naturally surface. And who cares if the league views one of our players as an MVP? That doesn't mean ****. Dirk and Nash have the last 3 MVP's right? And how many rings do they have collectively?

Just because a young talented player is a role player at one point in his career, doesn't mean he will be that for his entire career. It is called something like developing or something. If you want to view the potential of those players as nothing but a lottery team then you are entitled to that. But that is no different than Smills saying there are multiple stars in that lineup.

Talk about high expectations.... you seriously expect KMart to be the next Kobe? Hawes the next Duncan? Granger the next Marion? I wouldn't count on it.

Last season's team was stacked with talent too. And Ron Artest clearly emerged as the "go to" guy (whether the coach wanted it or not), and where did that take us?

It's silly to count on role players developing into franchise stars. How many did? Your Lebron, Yao, Oden, Shaq, Melo, AI, Duncan, Amare, and Brand all entered the league pegged as the franchise players. The last 30+ championships are all won by teams with at least one player drafted with the top three pick. Basketball isn't like soccer where teamwork can overcome individual talent; in basketball you need to get that franchise player. Period. Without him, you may as well just keep on rebuilding until you find one.

I'm not disputing that Smills' creation doesn't have several borderline "stars." I'm saying that's not enough to get us anywhere.

And I'm not saying that one or two players in a role-players filled teams wouldn't emerge and put up good stats, but there's a big difference between a good player putting up stats on an average team (Mike James anyone?) and having a true franchise player to carry your team.

 

[VF21]

Last season's team was stacked with talent too.

Sorry, but I don't think any team with Kenny Thomas and SAR at the 4 can be considered "stacked with talent."

 

[beb0p]

Sorry, but I don't think any team with Kenny Thomas and SAR at the 4 can be considered "stacked with talent."

Look, I understand the hating on KT. But give SAR a break. The dude was an All-Star and put up 20+ pts against Duncan in our last playoffs. I still have faith in SAR bouncing back from his injuries. Last season we had two former All-Stars at the 4 and 5 (SAR and Miller), one of the league's best defender at the 3, a 20 pt scorer at the 2 and Bibby at the 1. On paper it's a good lineup, but in reality it was weak. And that's my point - you can't put five good but not great role-players together and expect good things.

 

[VF21]

I'm not hating on SAR. He's getting older and his knees are breaking down. This happens even with players who DON'T have documented problems with their legs. And "FORMER" all-stars are just that - former all-stars. I'm a former 19-year-old. Means about the same thing.

And I disagree that on paper we had a good lineup. We had holes you could drive a truck through right from the beginning.

 

[perezident]

Yes agreed on Murphy being an Adelman type...your open so shoot it....but Scola impressed me a little bit during the World Games just recently. A hard-nosed player.

yea i agree...but i'm just not sold on this scola kid. Bastia(spelling) the center who plays/played for atl was oh so impressive aswell... but we all know he gets dogged up and thrown around in the nba sooo you know where i'm coming from huh?

 

[dude12]

yea i agree...but i'm just not sold on this scola kid. Bastia(spelling) the center who plays/played for atl was oh so impressive aswell... but we all know he gets dogged up and thrown around in the nba sooo you know where i'm coming from huh?

Maybe...but I think Scola will be a good NBA player. I think he's in a better environement in Houston and with a good veteran team with a good veteran coach.

 

[venom_7]

i'd rather garcia start over granger

 

[Smills91]

Right, so who's your franchise player? Who's good enough to be the MVP or even the BDP that leads us to the promise land? There is none. Just a bunch of role players pieced together in a lottery-bound team.

2008 draft could land use anyone of Beasley, Rose, Mayo, Arthur etc. 2010 the Kings will have Miller/SAR/K-9 all off the books to dip into FA.

THe point is...get AS MUCH talent as possible and sort it out later...if we had that roster it's VERY likely that when the next 'disgruntled' star demands a trade we HAVE the pieces to land him, a la Boston and KG.

And the team I've built is patterned after the Pistons 04 team...which is really the best we can do w/o getting that star player.

Tell me this...what would you do to acquire this 'star' player that is different from what I have suggested...

It's easy to find fault, show me the solution then.