Otto Porter

[twslam07]

CHI Gets: Trevor Ariza, Cory Joseph, Harry Giles & 2020 SAC 1st (Top 10 protected in '20, Top 8 protected in '21, Top 5 protected in '22, or '22 & '23 2nd round picks if not conveyed)
CHI Gives: Otto Porter & Kris Dunn
Why for CHI? They move Porter to keep their cap flexible around their young core (White, Hutchinson, LaVine, Markkanen, Carter, & Gafford) while adding a couple of future assets (2020 SAC 1st & Giles). If Giles impresses the Bulls, they could give him a bigger deal than the Kings could (considering him being 21, he would fit in with the age of their core).

PG - Satoransky / White / Arcidiacono
SG - Lavine / Joseph / Valentine
SF - Ariza / Hutchinson
PF - Markannen / Young / Giles
C - Carter / Kornet / Gafford / Felicio

------------------------------------------

SAC Gets: Otto Porter & Kris Dunn
SAC Gives: Trevor Ariza, Cory Joseph, Harry Giles & 2020 SAC 1st (Top 10 protected in '20, Top 8 protected in '21, Top 5 protected in '22, or '22 & '23 2nd round picks if not conveyed)
Why for SAC? With the Kings deciding to lock up their cap space with mediocre vets, Vlade essentially has committed to the current core for the long haul, and knowing that Hield, Bogdan, Barnes, & Holmes are all 26-27, Porter at 26 fits in with that groups timeline. Then it's just a matter of Fox (21) & Bagley (20) developing into our stars while having these good, solid vets around them.

Keeping Fox, Hield, Bogdanovic, Barnes, Porter, Bagley, & Holmes long term could be difficult if Vivek is not willing to pay. However, if Bogdanovic & Porter are resigned to declining contracts (like Hield & Barnes) and can sign Holmes for the MLE (~$10 mil in the 2021 offseason), you're probably looking at a payroll 2-3 years from now of ~$150 mil across those 7 players alone (would probably need to rely on our 1st round picks and plethora of 2nd round picks to round out the roster). It's doable from a payroll standpoint, Vivek just needs to live up to his end of the agreement.

From a team standpoint, Porter would be a great stretch 4/SF to have. He's longer than Barnes which would help him handle the PFs when we decide to play both him & Barnes at the same time:

Barnes: 6'7" w/o shoes / 6'11.25" wingspan / 8'6" standing reach
Porter: 6'7.5" w/o shoes / 7'1.5" wingspan / 8'9.5" standing reach

You'd probably still have Bagley & Holmes start with 1 of Barnes/Porter coming off the bench (as Bagley, at this point, is not big enough to handle the bigger Cs for prolonged minutes), but you'd have a lot of differing finishing lineups to make sure you are matched up well or to make sure you have the hot hands out there:

Fox/Bogdan/Barnes/Porter/Bagley
Fox/Hield/Barnes/Porter/Bagley
Fox/Hield/Bogdan/Barnes/Bagley
Fox/Hield/Bogdan/Porter/Bagley

Or you could replace Holmes with Bagley if he's not yet the star we hope he becomes (or if we need more emphasis on defense/shotblocking).

I think Porter is like Barnes in some ways. They play within themselves, play efficiently, are okay with taking a lesser role to help the team, are all around players, etc. Having two glue guys like that who can space the floor, defend, and bring some offense when it's needed would be valuable to have especially in an era where wing defense is at a premium. It's one thing to have good wing defenders. It's another thing to have two good wing defenders who also aren't sieves on defense.

From an offensive standpoint, we'd have scoring threats all over the floor between Fox, Hield, Bogdan, Barnes, Porter, & Bagley. All of those guys can go get their own offense to some degree. With all of these threats and a read & react offense in place, it could lead to a lot of efficient looks for our team considering everyone out there would be able to take advantage of an open look.

Spacing wise, Porter is a career 41% 3PT shooter and has topped out at 44% as his best season. His floor spacing along with Hield, Bogdan, & Barnes' shooting would really help Fox & Bagley.

Defensively, Fox, Barnes, Porter, & Holmes are all good defenders. Bogdan is average and Hield is below average. The jury is still out on Bagley if he can become a good defender, but we would have a lot of defensive pieces to hold our own on that end of the floor.

PG - Fox / Dunn / Ferrell
SG - Hield / Bogdanovic / James
SF - Barnes / Porter / Gabriel
PF - Bagley / Bjelica / Swanigan
C - Holmes / Dedmon

 

[upinsmoke]

I like Porter but he's really expensive and regularly injured. I would rather just go to the draft TBH.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

Please no to trading a draft pick especially one that takes years to convey.

Also feel like this ship sailed last year. We don't want his contract. We have Barnes. I am happy with this.

 

[twslam07]

I like Porter but he's really expensive and regularly injured. I would rather just go to the draft TBH.

He's expensive in the short term, yes, but it would be a similar situation as last year with Barnes.

Barnes was making $24 mil last season when we traded for him, and he had the ability to opt into $25 mil for this season. Instead he opted out, and signed a 4 year deal with the Kings.

Porter is making $27 mil this season (the season we trade for him), and he has the ability to opt into $28.5 mil next year. I'd be very surprised if Porter makes $27-28 mil per year in his next contract. Just like I said I would be surprised if Barnes would make $24-25 mil per year in his next contract (he's at ~$21 mil which I still think is a bit of an overpay).

The idea is to trade for him (overpaid & all), and resign him to a more manageable deal long term, so the whole argument of him being expensive is a little lost on me with that in mind.

 

[ESP47]

Hes lost whatever magic he had while with the Wizards. You're giving up a lot to roll the dice on a guy turning the clock back.

 

[twslam07]

Please no to trading a draft pick especially one that takes years to convey.

Also feel like this ship sailed last year. We don't want his contract. We have Barnes. I am happy with this.

Did you look at the protections of the pick? It'd be surprising if this took "years to convey." It is top 10 protected this year. We currently have the 10th worst record at the moment (meaning it wouldn't convey), but that's with Fox hurt, Bagley hurt, and without the upgrade that would be Porter. I would say it's pretty likely that the pick would convey this summer. Therefore, I wouldn't be concerned as you are in regards to the pick taking years to convey.

The point is not either Barnes or Porter. We can have both. With Porter's length, you can easily play both at the same time.

 

[jiimbob]

I like your trade scenario effort.
If it came down to Porter being interchangeable with Barnes and Bagley at SF and PF, and Bagley being able to spot Holmes at center then everyone should get good minutes. At this point in time I don’t expect much from Dedmon or Giles anyways.

 

[upinsmoke]

I don't give up the pick instead would put up Bogi,

 

[twslam07]

Hes lost whatever magic he had while with the Wizards. You're giving up a lot to roll the dice on a guy turning the clock back.

Why do you say that?

2017-18 WAS (per36): .602 TS% / .503 FG% / .441 3PT% / .828 FT% / 16.8 PPG / 7.3 RPG / 2.3 APG / 1.7 SPG / 0.6 BPG / 1.1 TOPG / 2.2 FPG
2018-19 WAS (per36): .551 TS% / .457 FG% / .369 3PT% / .766 FT% / 15.7 PPG / 7.0 RPG / 2.4 APG / 1.9 SPG / 0.7 BPG / 1.2 TOPG / 2.4 FPG
Career at WAS (per36): .579 TS% / .483 FG% / .399 3PT% / .786 FT% / 14.5 PPG / 6.7 RPG / 1.9 APG / 1.6 SPG / 0.6 BPG / 1.0 TOPG / 2.5 FPG
Career at CHI (per36): .590 TS% / .463 FG% / .458 3PT% / .846 FT% / 18.2 PPG / 5.7 RPG / 2.7 APG / 1.4 SPG / 0.6 BPG / 1.6 TOPG / 2.5 FPG

2018-19 RAPM = +2.29 (44th in the league)
2018-19 RPM = +1.24 (87th in the league)
2018-19 PIPM = +1.75 (55th in the league)
2018-19 On/Off (WAS) = +2.9 (8th on team)
2018-19 On/Off (CHI) = +10.4 (1st on team)

2019-20 PIPM = -0.21 (164th in the league)
2019-20 On/Off (CHI) = +6.1 (4th on team)

Now if you want to argue this from an injury prone standpoint, that's fine, but when healthy, he's been a quality player. He's had a multitude of issues to start the season (mostly things stemming from the left foot):

10/12: Left hamstring soreness
10/26: Elbow to the face - stitches
10/28: Hip soreness
11/03: Sprained left ankle
11/20: Bone bruising in left foot
12/06: Bone edema in left foot

I'd think we'd be more willing to take on his injury risk knowing we have players that can take his minutes if/when he's out (Barnes, Bagley, Bjelica).

And to put it in perspective...

Porter has played in 86% of his games (if we exclude his rookie season where he was getting DNP-CD)
Bagley is at 61%
Fox is at 88% (and will likely end up being lower than 86% by the time he's back from his injury)
Bogdanovic is at 90%
Barnes is at 94%
Hield is at 99%

He's no Hield, but he was at 93% before the start of last season. I'm going to holdoff on giving him the "injury prone" tag (not saying you did) for awhile.

 

[Sactown ExPat]

I don’t terribly mind the structure of the trade, but have no interest in Porter.

 

[twslam07]

I like your trade scenario effort.
If it came down to Porter being interchangeable with Barnes and Bagley at SF and PF, and Bagley being able to spot Holmes at center then everyone should get good minutes. At this point in time I don’t expect much from Dedmon or Giles anyways.

Yeah, there would be plenty of minutes to go around. The question is really do you want Bogandovic as the backup PG or do you want him paired with a backup PG. I would prefer to have a more formal backup PG, but below is how the minute distribution could work either way.

Fox (36 min) / Bogdan (12 min)
Hield (30 min) / Bogdan (18 min)
Barnes (30 min) / Porter (18 min)
Bagley (36 min) / Porter (12 min)
Holmes (30 min) / Dedmon (18 min)

Fox = 36 min
Bagley = 36 min
Hield = 30 min
Bogdan = 30 min
Barnes = 30 min
Porter = 30 min
Holmes = 30 min
Dedmon = 18 min

OR

Fox (36 min) / Backup PG (12 min)
Hield (30 min) / Bogdan (18 min)
Barnes (30 min) / Bogdan (12 min) / Porter (6 min)
Bagley (24 min) / Porter (24 min)
Holmes (30 min) / Bagley (12 min) / Dedmon (6 min)

Fox = 36 min
Bagley = 36 min
Hield = 30 min
Bogdan = 30 min
Barnes = 30 min
Porter = 30 min
Holmes = 30 min
Backup PG = 12 min
Dedmon = 6 min

As you can see, the rotation would be pretty solid, and our core (Fox, Hield, Bogdan, Barnes, Porter, Bagley, & Holmes) would have plenty of minutes to stay happy.

 

[twslam07]

I don't give up the pick instead would put up Bogi,

Why would the Bulls do it? Bogdan is older than Porter, and they already have LaVine at SG. You'd have to make it a 3-team.

The idea was for them to move the 26 year old Porter to get a future asset to align with their young core. Not to get older and add an asset at a position that is already covered.

 

[upinsmoke]

Why would the Bulls do it? Bogdan is older than Porter, and they already have LaVine at SG. You'd have to make it a 3-team.

The idea was for them to move the 26 year old Porter to get a future asset to align with their young core. Not to get older and add an asset at a position that is already covered.

Yes I figured that.

 

[KingsFanSince85]

Fans still pining for Otto Porter? Seriously?? It’s become an unhealthy obsession.

You’d think the guy was a 1st team all NBA’er or something. SMH.

 

[tastyburger]

Redundant.

 

[VF21]

...

10/12: Left hamstring soreness
10/26: Elbow to the face - stitches
10/28: Hip soreness
11/03: Sprained left ankle
11/20: Bone bruising in left foot
12/06: Bone edema in left foot

I'd think we'd be more willing to take on his injury risk knowing we have players that can take his minutes if/when he's out (Barnes, Bagley, Bjelica).

An risk on any other team could easily translate to career-ending injury on the Kings. We do not need to bring in anyone else who might or might not be able to play when we need him the most. No thanks.

 

[tastyburger]

I'll be frank. Who could we use right now? Koufos instead of dedmon.

 

[jellyfish]

I would prefer Marcus Morris and his one year deal and he brings a thug element we don't have and would be like a better bigger Shumpert

 

[twslam07]

Fans still pining for Otto Porter? Seriously?? It’s become an unhealthy obsession.

You’d think the guy was a 1st team all NBA’er or something. SMH.

So what was your reasoning for not wanting him again? It’s not communicated above.

 

[twslam07]

Redundant.

Redundant means that he’s not needed or useful. What’s your reasoning?

 

[twslam07]

An risk on any other team could easily translate to career-ending injury on the Kings. We do not need to bring in anyone else who might or might not be able to play when we need him the most. No thanks.

I’m not sure I’m understanding your post.

You’re saying if someone is hurt and we trade for him that he could end up with a career ending injury because we are the kings and have some sort of curse over our heads?

 

[twslam07]

I would prefer Marcus Morris and his one year deal and he brings a thug element we don't have and would be like a better bigger Shumpert

You can find tough, hard nosed players that aren’t bad people (like Holmes). We got a group of good guys. I wouldn’t want a Morris around them.

 

[Kangztillidie]

Sure let's get Porter and pay him 25 mill so we are capped out and cant keep Bogie/Fox/Bagley. Smh.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

Did you look at the protections of the pick? It'd be surprising if this took "years to convey." It is top 10 protected this year. We currently have the 10th worst record at the moment (meaning it wouldn't convey), but that's with Fox hurt, Bagley hurt, and without the upgrade that would be Porter. I would say it's pretty likely that the pick would convey this summer. Therefore, I wouldn't be concerned as you are in regards to the pick taking years to convey.

The point is not either Barnes or Porter. We can have both. With Porter's length, you can easily play both at the same time.

Yes, but if it doesn't convey this year then we can't do any pick trades until it does convey. We've been burned by this before. Several times. It created a snowball effect.

Also this is paying far more than we ever would have paid last year and Porter hasn't gotten better. I am not sure I'd do the trade without the pick.

 

[DesertFox]

This seems like a lateral move, an upgrade on Ariza for some potential in a pick and Giles. I have a hard time seeing the team hold on to Porter with Barnes, so it's a marginal win now move that may not make up for the disruption in team chemistry.
The ship has sailed on Porter unless the Kings can steal him for nothing.

 

[twslam07]

Sure let's get Porter and pay him 25 mill so we are capped out and cant keep Bogie/Fox/Bagley. Smh.

What makes you think we can’t keep them? I outlined in my original post how it would work. Making comments like this without reading the OP baffles me.

 

[twslam07]

Yes, but if it doesn't convey this year then we can't do any pick trades until it does convey. We've been burned by this before. Several times. It created a snowball effect.

Also this is paying far more than we ever would have paid last year and Porter hasn't gotten better. I am not sure I'd do the trade without the pick.

I understand how it works but I’ll ask you again (since you avoided the question the first time around). Do you think that the kings wouldn’t end up above #10 at the end of the year by adding Porter and with Fox & Bagley getting healthy?

We’re at #13 right now without those 3 talented players. Do you really think we’re going to get worse by adding Fox, Bagley, & Porter?

 

[pdxKingsFan]

I understand how it works but I’ll ask you again (since you avoided the question the first time around). Do you think that the kings wouldn’t end up above #10 at the end of the year by adding Porter and with Fox & Bagley getting healthy?

We’re at #13 right now without those 3 talented players. Do you really think we’re going to get worse by adding Fox, Bagley, & Porter?

No I don't but I thought we'd make the playoffs at some point with Cousins too.

And yes, I would argue this could make us worse, since it's removing depth pieces to make a splash. One that we likely don't need when we return to full health. Screams panic move.

 

[twslam07]

This seems like a lateral move, an upgrade on Ariza for some potential in a pick and Giles. I have a hard time seeing the team hold on to Porter with Barnes, so it's a marginal win now move that may not make up for the disruption in team chemistry.
The ship has sailed on Porter unless the Kings can steal him for nothing.

Well if the idea was to not keep Porter past his current contract then yeah of course it’s a no deal from us.

As far as disruption to chemistry, I’m not sure I understand the argument? Are you just saying we should never add a new player because of chemistry? If we were adding someone who can’t seamlessly fit into any offense or adding someone who isn’t okay with taking a lesser role, I would agree, but with Porter, you’re talking about a guy who has a good all around game and plays within himself and plays unselfishly. Chemistry would be the least of my concerns.

If I’m being fair the only arguments against this type of trade would be his injury history and the possibility of him walking after his contract. I see how you could keep Fox, Bogdan, Hield, Barnes, Porter, Bagley, & Holmes long term (even with the extensions for Fox & Bagley). He’s still a very good player when healthy. He’s a a good defender, shooter, and 4th/5th option. He can play minutes at PF with his length (7’1.5” wingspan & 8’9.5” standing reach) and play alongside Barnes. Having two good wing defenders who don’t hurt you offensively is an excellent thing to have. You can have fresh legs guarding a LeBron, Doncic, Leonard, George, Giannis, Durant, Tatum, Butler, Harris, Simmons etc.

 

[twslam07]

No I don't but I thought we'd make the playoffs at some point with Cousins too.

And yes, I would argue this could make us worse, since it's removing depth pieces to make a splash. One that we likely don't need when we return to full health. Screams panic move.

Okay so we agree that the issue is not the pick taking a long time for the pick to convey, but now we're creating another reason why not to do it...

What depth are we removing? Dunn & Porter for Joseph, Ariza, & Giles.

Dunn has been playing better (or at least on par) with Joseph this year. They are similar PGs in that they aren't strong shooters but very good defenders, and Dunn is a better passer/playmaker as well. Ferrell has outplayed Joseph in my opinion this year too, so what depth are we losing at PG? Doesn't sound like any. We may actually be improving our PG rotation.

Porter for Ariza is an obvious upgrade but you're forgetting that Porter will get time at PF as well and is typically a 30 mpg player. Ariza is averaging 22 mpg and Giles 7.4 mpg (if he even gets on the floor), and Giles typically has only seen the floor while Ariza has been out. He's only played in 3 games when Ariza has been healthy. You'd have to imagine that when Fox & Bagley are back, he'll never see the floor. So you're really talking about losing depth by moving a PF/C that barely sees the floor (e.g. injuries or foul trouble) while upgrading Ariza significantly.

Fox (36 min) / Dunn (12 min) / Ferrell
Hield (30 min) / Bogdan (18 min) / James
Barnes (30 min) / Bogdan (12 min) / Porter (6 min) / Gabriel
Bagley (24 min) / Porter (24 min) / Bjelica / Swanigan
Holmes (30 min) / Bagley (12 min) / Dedmon (6 min)

Now you essentially have Bjelica in Giles role. That's a decent player that can fill in if injuries hit again. You have Ferrell who tends to always produce when his number is called and you have James who has looked productive in his short stints.

So again, how can you argue that this trade makes us worse this season?