Kings waiving papa morphed into Vlade sucks

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jkbiker

Jkbiker

Starter
#31
#31
I dont get it! if we were waiving Papa then why trade Malachi at all? Malachi was better than Papa or Caboclo?

What the heck you doing Vlade? He wants to sign Jakaar? before someone else does?

only thing that makes sense Jakaar better than all three
 
T

The_Jamal

Hall of Famer
#33
#33
[B]FantasyLabs NBA[/B]‏Verified account @[B]FantasyLabsNBA[/B] 3m3 minutes ago
More
FantasyLabs NBA Retweeted FantasyLabs NBA
Updated transaction note: Bruno Caboclo won’t be released by the Kings.
FantasyLabs NBA added,
FantasyLabs NBA

OK, so this intrigues me a bit more. If we're betting on a long-shot, give me the guy who actually can fit in a role in today's NBA unlike Papa. And you got 4 years of pro basketball/development under his belt. Still atrocious asset management, but Bruno is the better "Long-shot and pray" player than Papa
 
Capt. Factorial

Capt. Factorial

ceterum censeo delendum esse Argentum
Staff member
#35
#35
Čarolija said:
Maybe the Kings are looking to give Sampson a roster spot going forward? Makes sense to do it if possible!
Click to expand...
That's one possibility, but given the (presumably) imminent buyout of Joe Johnson, we won't need a roster spot for Sampson if we want to up-size him to a full NBA contract. Somebody needed to get waived for the Hill salary dump to go through. We thought it was Caboclo, but it probably was just Papa and we're keeping Caboclo. I mean, if the world makes sense. (Not always a guarantee around KingsLand.)

(Edit: And while I was typing that comes confirmation that we apparently are keeping Caboclo. The world continues to make small amounts of sense, thankfully.)
 
kingsfan1984

kingsfan1984

Starter
#37
#37
not happy about Malachi leaving for nothing. Has the size, good work ethic, showed flashes in rookie year of being a decent NBA guard. Don't know much about Cabocolo yet, but if he isn't a young prospect with arguably equal value of Malachi then I'm not happy. Who cares if he gets little minutes? We had him on a rookie deal that would keep him on the cheap and he just turned 22. Could become decent by then. Oh well spilt milk now i guess
 
ockingsfan

ockingsfan

Starter
#40
#40
Čarolija said:
Maybe the Kings are looking to give Sampson a roster spot going forward? Makes sense to do it if possible!
Click to expand...
Sampson is under our control for the time being, no need to make a roster spot for him now. We can do that in the summer.

Also, we will most certainly waive JJ, so Sampson would have a roster spot there if needed.
 
SacTownKid

SacTownKid

Hall of Famer
#43
#43
Oddly enough it would be funny if they gave Coboclo the shot he's never gotten to play at the NBA level while removing players they did the same to.
 
SLAB

SLAB

Hall of Famer
#44
#44
Well... small glimmer of redemption.

Why couldn't they just buy out Joe Johnson and keep both? Dude isn't needed within 50,000 feet of this franchise.
 
T

The_Jamal

Hall of Famer
#45
#45
andjel said:
I will bite.
Which of the 2016 draft class picked #8 and later would you trade Bogdan and Skal for?
Click to expand...
You're asking the wrong question. Bogdan and Skal looking like good pick-ups don't make us wasting #13 and #22 acceptable. You can't say "Well, we got two good picks from that trade, who cares what happens with Papa and Malachi?"
 
T

The_Jamal

Hall of Famer
#49
#49
SLAB said:
Well... small glimmer of redemption.

Why couldn't they just buy out Joe Johnson and keep both? Dude isn't needed within 50,000 feet of this franchise.
Click to expand...
They are buying out Joe Johnson.

Fox || Mason
Bogdan || Hield || Shump
Jackson || || Temple || Vince || Bruno
ZBO || Skal || Giles
WCS || Koufos

So there's the 14 contracts we have right now with an open roster spot. Someone remind me... Can we give Jakkar a full-roster spot? Or do two-way players count against our 15-player roster limit?
 
Section 101

Section 101

All-Star
#50
#50
The_Jamal said:
They are buying out Joe Johnson.

Fox || Mason
Bogdan || Hield || Shump
Jackson || || Temple || Vince || Bruno
ZBO || Skal || Giles
WCS || Koufos

So there's the 14 contracts we have right now with an open roster spot. Someone remind me... Can we give Jakkar a full-roster spot? Or do two-way players count against our 15-player roster limit?
Click to expand...
It can be converted to full. Suns did it with James then waived him 2 weeks later.
 
upinsmoke

upinsmoke

All-Star
#52
#52
The_Jamal said:
Nope, this is just an excuse. You had a 13th pick and a 22nd pick and they're gone a year and a half later for nothing. No matter how weak the class is, it's an utter failure of the organization and an utter waste of two assets.
Click to expand...
What do you mean the strength of the draft class doesn't matter? It's literally the biggest factor.
 
Capt. Factorial

Capt. Factorial

ceterum censeo delendum esse Argentum
Staff member
#55
#55
fansinceday1 said:
You forgot a step.

FIRST let's pick up his option. THEN we let him go.
Click to expand...
We picked up his option 2/3 of a season ago, at the deadline for picking up that option. And it was a cheap option at $2.4M. He was a developing player. You hold on to those guys until you find a reason to get rid of them. Apparently we decided that, given the option of having $15+M more in our pockets, or Papa, we went with the $$$. I don't think you're going to find a team that is going to think the opposite - i.e. sign Papa to a contract worth $15M. Would we rather have $2.4M or Papa? Hey, you take your chances. But when the question is $15M or Papa, it's a different story.

Now, I'm not sure I do the entire trade in the first place, because I think over the summer Hill could fetch more than a second rounder. Plus, I didn't see the urgency of getting rid of him, considering we just gave him his money over the summer. But once that trade is decided on, cutting Papa (or Malachi) is the move you HAVE to do, and you don't look back at the completely-NBA-standard-in-almost-every-case pick-up of that year three option and use it as an excuse not to waive him.
 
T

The_Jamal

Hall of Famer
#58
#58
Capt. Factorial said:
We picked up his option 2/3 of a season ago, at the deadline for picking up that option. And it was a cheap option at $2.4M. He was a developing player. You hold on to those guys until you find a reason to get rid of them. Apparently we decided that, given the option of having $15+M more in our pockets, or Papa, we went with the $$$. I don't think you're going to find a team that is going to think the opposite - i.e. sign Papa to a contract worth $15M. Would we rather have $2.4M or Papa? Hey, you take your chances. But when the question is $15M or Papa, it's a different story.

Now, I'm not sure I do the entire trade in the first place, because I think over the summer Hill could fetch more than a second rounder. Plus, I didn't see the urgency of getting rid of him, considering we just gave him his money over the summer. But once that trade is decided on, cutting Papa (or Malachi) is the move you HAVE to do, and you don't look back at the completely-NBA-standard-in-almost-every-case pick-up of that year three option and use it as an excuse not to waive him.
Click to expand...

Can you elaborate on this? Why is the figure $15 Mil in savings?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.