Lakers - Kings ( Miller/Salmons for Odom/Mihm )

P

Prince_XY

Starter
I know the Lakers is a complete and balanced team now, but this trade might interest them.

It will open up starter minutes for Hawes and Thompson at #5 and #4 respectively according to the wishes of a lot of fans. We will also gain a more-than-solid player who plays at an all-star level ( in Odom ) even for the rest of the season only.

And who knows?

Maybe the supposed-to-be franchise type player Odom can be the savior of the Kings who can make the big difference for the Kings this time, just like Webber was for the old glorious Kings?

IMO, it is worth the try since Odom's contract expires at the end of the season anyways.

SALARIES:

Miller = $ 11.375 M
Salmons = $ 5.10 M
or
Moore = $ 5.63 M

TOTAL = $ 16.4 - 17 M

Odom = $ 14.15 M
Mihm = $ 2.50 M

TOTAL = 16.65 M

PROS and CONS:

Lakers:
Odom's contract expires at the end of the season and I don't see the Lakers extending his expensive contract when they have a lot of good small forward ( Radmanovic, Walton, and Ariza ) to man the #3 and Gasol able to play excellently at the #4. Actually and currently, they can afford to use Odom coming off the bench with Radmanovic on hand.

Miller ( coming off the bench for Bynum, or at times for Gasol ) will assure them of having a potent frontline for at least upto 2010. Unlike Odom who gives the Lakers the clear advantage of flexibility at #3 and #4 where they really don't need much now, Miller can give them flexibility at #4 and #5 which I think the Lakers need more because of the likelihood of injury to Bynum.

Salmons ability to penetrate will give the Lakers the needed back-up at shooting guard for Kobe.

Kings:
It is apparent that a lot of fans are tired of these 3 veteran players ( Miller, Salmons, and Moore ) and we need to get rid two of these three in a meaningful trade. I personally can wait for these 3 to change their ways and make the Kings the team that we want, but for the sake of a lot of fans that are never contented and seemed impatient, lets get rid of these veteran players.

Getting rid of Miller and Salmons will pave the way for Hawes and Thompson to start at #5 and #4 respectively according to what a lot of fans want for the development of the youth. With Odom starting at #3 and Mihm providing the limited back-up role at #5, the frontline is still as tall and promising as we want it to be.

At the end of the season, we can either opt to extend Odom's contract or let him walk out of it, or sign and trade.

Kings Major Rotation/Minutes:

#5 - Hawes ( 7' 0" ) 36 min ; Mihm ( 7' 0" ) 12 min
#4 - Thompson ( 6' 11" ) 36 min ; Odom ( 6' 10" ) 12 min
#3 - Odom ( 6' 10" ) 24 min ; Greene ( 6' 11" ) 18 min ; Garcia ( 6' 7" ) 6 min
#2 - Martin ( 6' 7" ) 36 min ; Garcia ( 6' 7" ) 12 min
#1 - Udrih ( 6' 3" ) 30 min ; Brown ( 6' 2" ) 9 min ; Garcia ( 6' 7" ) 9 min

The rest of the players will get spot/garbage time minutes.
 
Plus the lakers aren't going to be into adding that much guaranteed salary after this year. I'm betting that they just let Lamar go and take the cap relief.
 
Prince_XY said:
It is apparent that a lot of fans are tired of these 3 veteran players ( Miller, Salmons, and Moore ) and we need to get rid two of these three in a meaningful trade. I personally can wait for these 3 to change their ways and make the Kings the team that we want, but for the sake of a lot of fans that are never contented and seemed impatient, lets get rid of these veteran players.
Click to expand...

I find it highly unlikely that the front office will "get rid" of players, veteran or not, because of impatient fans posting on web forums.

That said, I don't see any chance for a trade like this (from our side) if the rumors of an open offer from Miami of Marion for Miller/Thomas are true. That Miami offer does the same thing this trade does, but it does it better by dumping Thomas' useless salary instead of Salmons' affordable contract. I would argue that Salmons' contract is actually under market value (despite some of the views about him around here) so I would certainly exclude it from any "salary dump" trades unless absolutely necessary. He's not untouchable by any means, but if we decide to trade him I think we can afford to be a bit greedy in what we get back.
 
Capt. Factorial said:
I find it highly unlikely that the front office will "get rid" of players, veteran or not, because of impatient fans posting on web forums.

That said, I don't see any chance for a trade like this (from our side)......
Click to expand...

I myself find it stupid for anyone to think and for anyone to think that my ONLY reason why the front office may make this kind of trade is to make those fans posting on web forums happy. Please, no more of this kind of "smart a** crafty" comments just to make one's point to stand out and other ideas look so stupid. Other more significant reasons were offered in my post other than the most stupid reasoning of making the posters on web forums happy.

It is always coincidental that if fans are not happy which actually reflects on the dwindling attendance in the games ( and not just on web forums ), it means that the team is not doing good and maybe something has to be changed for the better. Not all fans are dumb. There are more who can really see the situation more objectively. That is why it is also important to mention the fans' thoughts regarding the necessity of any trade too.

I think if the Lakers agree, this kind of trade would be a plus for the Kings and their fans. But as nbrans and Vlade4GM says, it would be highly unlikely for the logical reasons they've stated.

But who really knows for sure what kind of blunders will happen in the negotiating table?
 
Last edited:
Prince_XY said:
I myself find it stupid for anyone to think and for anyone to think that my ONLY reason why the front office may make this kind of trade is to make those fans posting on web forums happy. Please, no more of this kind of "smart a** crafty" comments just to make one's point to stand out and other ideas look so stupid. Other more significant reasons were offered in my post other than the most stupid reasoning of making the posters on web forums happy.
Click to expand...

Okay, if you want to play that kind of game, here's the deal. No one else is making your ideas look stupid. You can post comments, etc. without dissolving into personal confrontations with others. Please make at least a token attempt to do so.
--------------------------------------------------------

Now, back to this trade suggestion. It's been pretty objectively pointed out already that the Lakers are NOT going to make this kind of deal. Why would they? Your rationale not withstanding, a deal like this between the Kings and the Lakers is just not going to happen for the simple reason it doesn't make the Lakers better.
 
VF21 said:
Okay, if you want to play that kind of game, here's the deal. No one else is making your ideas look stupid. You can post comments, etc. without dissolving into personal confrontations with others. Please make at least a token attempt to do so.
--------------------------------------------------------

Now, back to this trade suggestion. It's been pretty objectively pointed out already that the Lakers are NOT going to make this kind of deal. Why would they? Your rationale not withstanding, a deal like this between the Kings and the Lakers is just not going to happen for the simple reason it doesn't make the Lakers better.
Click to expand...

I don't know if you're being biased, or you just hate me because we have some disagreement before. :p But just the same, it is sickening to see people smartly picking alone the least important reason of the post and omitting the more important ones just to make it look so stupid.:D

And I apologize to capt factorial for being somewhat personal on this one. It is just sickening I can't help but point out what's wrong with his smart response and it does make the whole point of the trade stupid.

Well, whatever and let us just forget about it. ;)

But back to this trade idea, I think the Lakers will be better on this trade. They get rid of the seldom used and just back from injury Mihm in exchange for a double-double threat and healthy back-up center Miller. And Salmons as capt factorial says is undervalued for his contract which will make the deal more attractive to the Lakers. He would be a very good back-up for Kobe if ever.

Also, I remember reading an article that the Lakers may not have Odom after 2009 because they are fine with Radmanovic at #3 and they have some very good players coming off the bench to sub for Radmanovic. Maybe an offer of Miller and Salmons maybe attractive to them NOW after all.
 
Last edited:
Prince_XY said:
I don't know if you're being biased, or you just hate me because we have some disagreement before. :p But just the same, it is sickening to see people smartly picking alone the least important reason of the post and omitting the more important ones just to make it look so stupid.:D

And I apologize to capt factorial for being somewhat personal on this one. It is just sickening I can't help but point out what's wrong with his smart response and it does make the whole point of the trade stupid.
Click to expand...

I would like to be clear that I was NOT playing a game of "gotcha" with my response. Just because I did not respond to every section of your post does not mean I was singling out something to try to make you look stupid. I was singling out what I wanted to reply to.

The first paragraph where you list the reasons why the Kings would make the trade seems to suggest that the front office make personnel decisions to appease the most vocal fans. I wanted to voice my opposition to that sentiment. If that's being a smart-alec, so be it.

I then went on to state why I didn't think this would be a good trade from the Kings' side, which was the majority of my response. Where I come from, that's not called trying to make your ideas "look stupid", it's called a discussion. I'm sorry you felt otherwise.
 
Do we need to take into account that Salmons is horrible as a backup? We've seen his antics one too many times with us already, particularly last year.

I don't see this trade as accomplishing much IMO. I mean, if we want cap space yes, but I'd prefer draft picks and young player combinations rather than expirings. I mean, get that full throttle rebuild going rather than take on one-year rentals, especially since next year's FA class doesn't look too enticing. And we'd never trade with our rivals--no matter how much the Lakers may love Salmons after their lack of defense made him look by all accounts awesome, there's too much bad blood between us that may never go away.
 
Last edited:
I didn't read the other posts in this thread, but this has more than likely been said. If the Lakers feel they'll lose Odom for nothing this offseason, then they may think about this trade (that's unless they WANT to lose him for nothing). But to be honest, they really have no use for Salmons. Aside from Salmons being terrible in a reserve role, they have Ariza, who plays minutes for them at the same position and is more effective. Bynum, Gasol and Miller is a nice frontcourt rotation, but its a very expensive one as well. Miller would fit in well in the triangle offense, but really, I'd have the phone unplugged right now if I'm Kupchak. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

EDIT: I like the deal from our perspective if we let Odom walk at seasons end. How long is Mihm's contract?
 
There is one advantage to the trade for the Lakers. Kobe wouldn't have to face Salmons anymore. I'm sure he's very worried about their next meeting.:rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top