OFFICIAL trade thread. Post trade proposals HERE! (merged)
- Thread starter CaminoChaos
- Start date
BobbyJ_for3!
Bench
Seeing as that the people in the organization (petrie, maloofs) like Peja a lot, I also don't seem them giving up a perenial all star for Chandler.
I wouldn't hate if they did, because I think it might very well be a good trade, especially if we can get someone else in the deal, depending on salaries, but I'd have my doubts.
I wouldn't hate if they did, because I think it might very well be a good trade, especially if we can get someone else in the deal, depending on salaries, but I'd have my doubts.
ParniValjak
All-Star
Well if the reported 6 year $60 million deal is corrent then it is the KINGS that would have to be sending someone else along with Peja to the Bulls for this trade to happen. Peja is due to get $7.6 million this season. Chandler will get around 9 or 10.BobbyJ_for3! said:
BobbyJ_for3!
Bench
Čarolija said:
my bad.
truthfully, I should make an effort to remember our players contracts better...I'm not an economics kind of guy at the moment though so...sorry
ok then id have alot more doubt in this trade, unless we also thru in corliss and got something back...that again involves contracts...why do i keep talking about things I don't know about? oh well, deal with it.
Čarolija said:
If we were trying to get a LEGIT all-star PF/C, we'd have to give up a lot more than Peja. There aren't that many 7-footers in the league, raw or not. I certainly can't dismiss this out of hand as being a possibility...and neither should anyone else.
The Maloofs want the jewelry. Bottom line is they're going to push Petrie to do whatever it takes to get it. And if it means moving Peja - or their own mother - I wouldn't be surprised.
Bballkingsrock
All-Star
Čarolija said:
If he isnt getting double digit rebounds and a "raw" player, answer me this:
Why is getting offered 60 million for 6 years like you said and who is getting MORE than Peja?
Maybe because he is a young, athletic, tall basketball player, who CAN get double digit rebounds and can get lik 15-20 points per game. He also has a pretty nice post game, has stregth, and a tough, tall guy the Kings need REAL BAD.
sactown_draftpick
G-League
how bout pedja and bibby for chandler n kinrich lets face it even though i know the kings are goin to finish with 50+ wins we are not going to get a ring this year so y not build a for the future. with cisco and k-mart developing we could b back to elite status in two to three years instead of our window completely closed by that time
ParniValjak
All-Star
Because talls are generally paid more. Is Dalembert worth his reported contract (roughly the same as Chandler???), What about a dud like Jerome James????? Why do teams draft 7 foot high schoolers who haven't showed a hell of a lot????? Its that "P" word again. Potential.Bballkingsrock said:
Why is Jonathan Bender paid more than Ron Artest????? Why isn't Chandler not getting the MAX when all indications are that Peja WILL get it at the end of next season when he opts for free-agency??????
Chandler has potential and he happens to be an athletic 7'2. Thats why he is getting that sort of contract.
Chandler has NO post game. He doesn't have a post move. He is just potentially a monster defender.
I would love Chandler on the kings. Make no doubt about it, BUT a proven GM such as Petrie doesn't make gambles. He is not trading away a 3 time all star for a tall skinny kid with potential and no offensive game. He doesn't operate like that and thats why he doesn't have many bust trades. He deals for proven veterans not kids with potential
ParniValjak
All-Star
I never said Peja alone will get us that legit all-star PF/C. All I said is that Kings would pull the trigger on trading Peja (as part of the deal) for a legit all-star PF/C. Clearly Chandler is not that.VF21 said:If we were trying to get a LEGIT all-star PF/C, we'd have to give up a lot more than Peja. There aren't that many 7-footers in the league, raw or not. I certainly can't dismiss this out of hand as being a possibility...and neither should anyone else.
The Maloofs want the jewelry. Bottom line is they're going to push Petrie to do whatever it takes to get it. And if it means moving Peja - or their own mother - I wouldn't be surprised.
I do agree that Peja is NOT untouchable and he should be traded if you are getting a better proven player in return. Chandler is not that player.
The reason Petrie is good at what he does is because he makes moves with low risks. If they blow up, he doesn't lose much. He has NEVER taken as big a punt as he would be taking by trading Peja for Chandler. Its not how he operates.
Chandler is a very nice player but he is NOT the difference between Kings winning a championship and getting knocked out in the 2nd round.
Čarolija said:
You did hear that we traded Chris Webber for Kenny Thomas, Brian Skinner and Corliss Williamson, right?
Sorry, but the jury is still out on whether or not that trade was any good. If Webber stays healthy and puts up GOOD numbers in Philly this year, it's not gonna look like such a wonderful trade after all. Especially if those "three flexible pieces" end up not being moved.
On the other hand, trading Peja (a known commodity with strengths AND weaknesses) for a 7-footer with raw potential could well be a much more easily explained trade. We know what we have with Peja, and there has to be doubt that he will ever be anything more than what he always has been - arguably the best pure shooter in the league but with some deficiencies that have cost us dearly over the years. IF we did the trade and Chandler bloomed under the Kings tutelage, then Petrie is once again considered a genius.
I am not saying this deal will happen. But if it did, I could see the justification.
ParniValjak
All-Star
The Webber deal was a minimizing risks rather than getting better. Whether thats a good trade remains to be seen. At this stage it doesn't look like a good trade.VF21 said:
The difference between 2 is that you are trading a superstar on decline with a bung knee for 3 average players. The second trade is about trading a proved all star (with weaknesses, no one is perfect) at his peak for unproven raw 7 footer with no offensive game and potential to be a top noth defender in the league. Thats the sort of risk Petrie has never taken in the past and I doubt he will take in the future. Thats why he is good at what he does. He doesn't take big risks.
I am not saying that sort of deal is 100% not going to happen. I am just saying, that based on Petrie's history and on his style of managment, its very much unlikely. Peja for Chandler deal would be the first move Petrie makes that goes against his key principle in trading, which is to trade for proven veterans.
ForlornKing
Starter
VF21 said:You are convinced - and with some justification - that Petrie will stay within his normal parameters. I am no longer convinced that is true.
We shall see.
At least we still have things to talk about.
I agree. Petrie won't trade with the same style any more. He wants this team to win a championship and first he tried it with all offense and he failed. Next year, Bye bye Bibby.
ParniValjak
All-Star
Thats trueVF21 said:You are convinced - and with some justification - that Petrie will stay within his normal parameters. I am no longer convinced that is true.
We shall see.
At least we still have things to talk about.
Gary
All-Star
I just cant see us trading Peja for Chandler.. Now if Chandler had not played in the league and we were looking to get his "potential" than I could see us doing this.. But people, please!!! Chandler is not going to solve our problems. He cant even keep a starting job with Chicago!
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
Gary said:
The value of Peja's offense to us has declined further with the new all offense linuep. Furthermore, he is about a year away from costing us a max contract. Chandler would be a NICE move.
Tyson Chandler is 22 yrs old. 22. Looking at him now and saying he's not worth it is something like looking at Peja in Yr2, who was not a starter, who only averaged 11.9ppg on 45% shooting, and saying nope. Never going to be much. He is not KG -- the closer comparison might be to a bigger Marcus Camby with more upside. Chandler's per 48 this year at 22? 14pts 17rebs 3.1blks.
Chandler is EXACTLY what this team needs. The perfect complement to our team -- blocks shots, huge rebounder, incredibly long, athletic, extremely active and keyed one of the best defenses in the league last year. He is a future perennial All-Defense team type contender. (Chicago likes to claim a future DPOY winner, but we'll see -- may be lacking the mean steak for that). Stays out of the way offensively and does not take bad shots. No fighting with all the shooters over number of shots. As much as anything else his minutes were limited by foul trouble -- which again might be a GOOD thing in that it shows aggression, and in any case is likely to get better with experience and reputation. The man is a walking one man patch for nearly everything the Kings lack at the moment.
P.S. Carolija, I of course have long been championing the idea that Geoff/Maloofs are unnaturally attached to Peja for reasons that have little to do with basketball and will refuse to trade him under any circumstances. That they will pay him the max and sell the franchise down the river for him before they let the golden boy go. Nonetheless, your team has a problem you fix it. Or at least I'd like to think so.
Last edited:
ParniValjak
All-Star
Bricklayer, I am all for improving this team and if that means trading Peja so be it. All I am saying is that Petrie's history suggests that he trades for proven veterans. Chandler has proven pretty much nothing in this league. He has a great potential and would be exactly the type of player that we need. However, I just don't think Kings would pull the tigger on that move. Thats just my opinion based on Petrie's history as a GM.
Gary
All-Star
Exactly. It's like Kwame Brown. That has to be the best comparison for Chandler. Players that proved nothing, and that were "full of potential". Rather than comparing to Peja, why not compare to Kwame Brown? Peja in year two was a bench player. He was not supposed to start that year. Chandler WAS supposed to start, and kept losing his job. To compare Chandler's situation along side of Peja's is like comparing apples and walnuts.
I would NEVER accept a trade for Chandler. Just does not make sense. A guy that has been in the league 4 years and that has been as inconsitant as he has does not scream "Trade an allstar for meeeeee!".
Since we are on the topic why not trade Brad Miller for Kwame Brown, Bibby for Darko Milicic, and SAR for DeShawn Stevenson. We can have a whole team of POTENTIAL!
Forgive the sarcasm, I was just trying to make a point.
I would NEVER accept a trade for Chandler. Just does not make sense. A guy that has been in the league 4 years and that has been as inconsitant as he has does not scream "Trade an allstar for meeeeee!".
Since we are on the topic why not trade Brad Miller for Kwame Brown, Bibby for Darko Milicic, and SAR for DeShawn Stevenson. We can have a whole team of POTENTIAL!
Forgive the sarcasm, I was just trying to make a point.
foretaz
Bench
i have a feeling the chandler issue is a moot point...
i can see no scenario where chicago trades him for someone like peja...
eddy curry is a question mark.....antonio davis is in the final year of his contract....theyre gonna lock chandler up for a long time...
and would have zero reason to give him up....especially for anything other than another quality bigman....of which, given how chicago feels about him, there are very few....
its one thing to want a player....and odds are the reasons u want him are the reasons the other team wont want to give him up....
so with that in mind.....why would chicago contemplate even for a second trading chandler, let alone for peja....
i can see no scenario where chicago trades him for someone like peja...
eddy curry is a question mark.....antonio davis is in the final year of his contract....theyre gonna lock chandler up for a long time...
and would have zero reason to give him up....especially for anything other than another quality bigman....of which, given how chicago feels about him, there are very few....
its one thing to want a player....and odds are the reasons u want him are the reasons the other team wont want to give him up....
so with that in mind.....why would chicago contemplate even for a second trading chandler, let alone for peja....
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
Gary said:
Unfortunately the point you seem to have made is that you are unfamiliar with Chandler's career. There is no similarity to Darko at all, and next to none to Kwame. He is ALREADY an impact player. Already one of the best defenders in the league. One of the best rebounders. One of the best 6th men. A major part of a good young playoff team. And he's 22. Penalizing a guy because gee, at age 19 he wasn't ready to become an NBA stud is rather silly. He's here NOW. Averaged 27min per game last year. Helped key a great defense. Was a Top 10 rebounder in the league in by FAR the fewest minutes of any of the other players on the list. And while we're blundering on about how we wouldn't trade an All-Star for him, the fact of the matter is its highly unlikely the Bulls would ACCEPT a mere borderline All-Star for him unless he forces their hand. They've got something like a young Ben Wallace on their team -- why would you ever let that go? And why wouldn't you want that?
Last edited:
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
foretaz said:
As I see it, they would not...UNLESS he either demands more than they are willing to pay, or demands a trade (and means it). Or both. On a much lower level obviously, its like the KG situation. Practically untouchable UNLESS the player in question wants to go elsewhere and asks/demands to be moved.
Only reason to even speculate is the strange and potentially dangerous way Chicago has gone about "negotiating" with him. Taken a long long time, don't seem to have good communication, want to throw incentives into his contract that he may find insulting etc.
As for the Peja angle -- that was always primarily because Skiles has a connection to him, there are amny Serbian fans in Chicago, and now more recently upon the implication that the Buills want to have a lot of capspace next summer. Its just enough to build the semi-logical offseason rumor over.
foretaz
Bench
Bricklayer said:As I see it, they would not...UNLESS he either demands more than they are willing to pay, or demands a trade (and means it). Or both. On a much lower level obviously, its like the KG situation. Practically untouchable UNLESS the player in question wants to go elsewhere and asks/demands to be moved.
Only reason to even speculate is the strange and potentially dangerous way Chicago has gone about "negotiating" with him. Taken a long long time, don't seem to have good communication, want to throw incentives into his contract that he may find insulting etc.
As for the Peja angle -- that was always primarily because Skiles has a connection to him, there are amny Serbian fans in Chicago, and now more recently upon the implication that the Buills want to have a lot of capspace next summer. Its just enough to build the semi-logical offseason rumor over.
lol...ok...gotcha...u agree he aint leaving chicago
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
foretaz said:lol...ok...gotcha...u agree he aint leaving chicago
Not unless he wants to. I KNOW Chicago doesn't want him to leave, at least at their price, so its likely all about the benjamins now.
bozzwell
Starter
Bricklayer said:
Blocking. Don't forget shot-blocking. Like when he toyed with KG with two blocks and a changed (almost a block) shot in the last 2 minutes of a close game (Bulls won).
The only reason that it took Chandler "so long" to arrive was a missed year due to inuuries and "developement" under Tim Floyd.
Gary
All-Star
Bricklayer said:
We are going to have to agree to disagree on this guy then.
I just think there is too much hype surrounding a guy that has never put up 10 rebounds, 10 points, or 2 blocks average in a single year. Never even averaged more than an assist a game, been benched numerous times for inconsistant play, and is not (in my mind) one of the best defenders in the league (I get league pass every year, and watched a lot of his games).
I was comparing him to a lot of other players that have done nothing in the league that had that "P" word surrounding them. I agree he is getting BETTER though.
But he is still a foul machine in my mind that overcommits on defense.
captain bill
All-Star
Čarolija said:
Mike Bibby. Granted, he was aquired for a player of the same age, but JWill at the time had "proven" more by taking the Kings into the playoffs and having some great success. The fact that GP has not traded for a young kid is probably just an accident of chance, as it is very rare for any vet to be traded for a young kid. Look at all the "big" trades in the NBA- almost all notable trades are for proven vets, because that is why they are notable. Just this year GP traded for the young Jason Hart. Granted, Hart is not Chandler, but the Hart deal, barring some huge emergence, will be a footnote of GP's history. There are so few opportunities to aquire great young talent that I doubt any GM in the history of the NBA, or any sport, can gain a history of trading talented vets for young talent.
Similar threads
