Rumor mill heating up June 19

Livinthedream said:
I agree both picks are a cop 0ut. You don't need to use the 8th pick on a role player or players with limited potential. They are safe picks, in that you know what you're going to get. Solid, but nothing that has the potential to transform your team. For all the talk of our front office being aggressive, if we go for either of these two players at the 8th spot, it will show that they're settling and I will have lost some faith.
Click to expand...

I agree that you don't use the #8 pick on McDermott or Stauskas as much as I like them. Now if we could trade down and get multiple picks then we are getting some value and it would be worth it. They are both great shooters, hard workers, and high basketball IQ guys which the Kings need. Defense will be an issue with both though. I think their team defense will be fine in the long run, but individually there most likely would be problems. I think one guy who would be a nice pick is Payton, big PG who creates and defends very well, needs to work on his shot, but it is not a broken shot at all.
 
funkykingston said:
To me it signals that the team has given up on McLemore which means both a wasted pick last year AND a huge indictment of this FO's ability to judge talent given how high on him they were last year. I think McLemore comes around this season. I really do. And he has the tools to be a good one-on-one defender where Stauskas doesn't. On the other hand, McLemore's biggest defensive issues were between the ears in terms of getting lost in the team scheme. He was in no man's land on WAY too many possessions last season. But I don't think he's a lost cause in that regard either. He just has to get to the point where things slow down for him on both sides of the ball.



Here's the thing with LaVine for me - based on the eye test he was horribly inconsistent and more often than not a complete non-factor for UCLA. I see the Westbrook comps but I never even saw him handling the ball enough to judge that aspect let alone trust him to run a team. So I think he's more of a 2 than a 1 and at that spot he has average height/length and his sleight build worries me.

And beyond the actual game film and measurables I have yet to find one stat or advanced metric that shows LaVine to be a good player. He shoots relatively well with a solid percentage from 3 but he struggles to get to the rim at his low FT attempts attest, has a poor assist/TO ratio, and his steals rate is WAY too low for an athletic guard/wing on the college level. Steals and steal rate are a couple of those overlooked stats that I think say a lot about how a guys game will translate. For all the talk about how Exum is a "man of mystery" I think LaVine is a much bigger gamble with a lower chance of paying off. I don't see how a slightly built SG with just an average shot, inability to penetrate or create his own shot consistently or play effective defense becomes a real factor on the NBA level, let alone a star.

If I were going to gamble on a guy Clint Capela would be a name I'd have in mind. I think he's probably a reach at #8 but I'd actually be happier with him than McDermott or Stauskas. Capela has a chance to be an Ibaka/Chandler type player and ideal next to Cousins. The issue is that he's incredibly raw and would need time to develop when this FO seems too impatient to take on such a project. Which is why they wouldn't take LaVine either.

And to me that's probably the biggest issue I have with the current Kings front office. Maybe I've become a glass half empty guy over the years but I don't have faith in PDA. I think his rush to build a winner right away is going to end up having this team spin its collective wheels for a few years until he's replaced and the next guy has to do the total rebuild that he should have done to begin with. Only at that point Cousins has moved on. Believe me, I hope I'm wrong, but all the talk from Mullin and D'Alessandro and the moves they've made so far mostly strike me as ones from a FO that just doesn't understand how to build a team.
Click to expand...

too much blind faith on this board. in pda we trust right? *rolls eyes*

vivek mentioned analytics alot before he made his hire. pda is pulling out all the stops on analytics and the eye test i presume is handled by mully.
 
Albatros said:
http://t.co/76vF2Gi3MM.

Apparently Chicago has "engaged" the Kings in talks about the 8, according to this person.
Click to expand...
Chicago has 16 and 19and then there is the Butler and Taj angle but I don't see them dealing those guys unless they are clearing salary to get Love or Melo....

The other guy on that roster that I know the staff loves is Tony Snell. Could be a combination of things going here
 
Big Cuz 15 said:
too much blind faith on this board. in pda we trust right? *rolls eyes*

vivek mentioned analytics alot before he made his hire. pda is pulling out all the stops on analytics and the eye test i presume is handled by mully.
Click to expand...

Everything I've seen and read about and from D'Alessandro points to him feeling like he has a keen scouting eye so I'm sure he does a lot more than rely on analytics. But I think everyone thinks they have the eye to spot talent. Regardless, the only way to judge a front office is on results. And obviously I WANT to be wrong about our GM. I want him to make me apologize for doubting him by building a winner in Sacramento.

This is his offseason to really put his stamp on this team.
 
dude12 said:
Chicago has 16 and 19and then there is the Butler and Taj angle but I don't see them dealing those guys unless they are clearing salary to get Love or Melo....

The other guy on that roster that I know the staff loves is Tony Snell. Could be a combination of things going here
Click to expand...

Bingo!
 
sdballer said:
But like I mentioned in the other thread, we can't help them clear salary (unless like someone else said we get a 3rd team involved). We don't have the space to take those salaried player without sending contracts back.
Click to expand...

Yah there would have to be a 3rd team, which would allow us to dump some salary as well hopefully.
 
Gary said:
Yah there would have to be a 3rd team, which would allow us to dump some salary as well hopefully.
Click to expand...

I just question how we'll end up with the pieces we want while also dumping salary on someone else. Unless someone is really intrigued by JT, Dwill, etc more so than just taking the Chicago pieces straight up.
 
sdballer said:
I just question how we'll end up with the pieces we want while also dumping salary on someone else. Unless someone is really intrigued by JT, Dwill, etc more so than just taking the Chicago pieces straight up.
Click to expand...

Chicago doesn't have to necessarily dump salary outright. If they are interested in Love, they don't really need to drop salary. They just need to swap salary. Gibson, Butler, Dunleavy, & Snell should be enough salary to match Love's contract.

It really just depends on what the Bulls want to do. They can create space (amnesty Boozer, trade away Dunleavy, Snell, Smith, #16, #19, & #49 for future picks, and release Brewer, James, & Amundson) to sign Melo ($22.1 mil in cap space). This would give them a starting unit of Rose, Butler, Anthony, Gibson, Noah. Or they could trade for Love which will most likely cost them Gibson and Butler. In this scenario their team will pretty much be Rose, Love, Noah.

Which core would your rather try to win a championship with? I lean towards the one that signs Melo. In this case, it'll be hard for us to trade for Gibson or Butler.
 
I assume you guys saw, or have been discussing this report:

http://basketball.realgm.com/wireta...bson-Snell-Two-Picks-To-Wolves-For-Kevin-Love

Which is pretty much exactly how the ideas to get a Gibson, Butler, to get rid of the encumbered pick etc. were supposed to play out. Chciago makes its best offer, which as expected is pretty much the above. We step in with our #8, and offer it to Chicago in exchange for a vet defender, maybe one of their later picks, and certainly in exchange for unencumbering our future picks. Then Chicago can sweeten its offer with the #8.
 
Bricklayer said:
I assume you guys saw, or have been discussing this report:

http://basketball.realgm.com/wireta...bson-Snell-Two-Picks-To-Wolves-For-Kevin-Love

Which is pretty much exactly how the ideas to get a Gibson, Butler, to get rid of the encumbered pick etc. were supposed to play out. Chciago makes its best offer, which as expected is pretty much the above. We step in with our #8, and offer it to Chicago in exchange for a vet defender, maybe one of their later picks, and certainly in exchange for unencumbering our future picks. Then Chicago can sweeten its offer with the #8.
Click to expand...

But how can we take a salary like gibson's without sending something somewhere else (even a .3rd team)? That's where it falls apart for me. It's not impossible but I just don't think our salaried options are that attractive.
 
sdballer said:
But how can we take a salary like gibson's without sending something somewhere else (even a .3rd team)? That's where it falls apart for me. It's not impossible but I just don't think our salaried options are that attractive.
Click to expand...

DWill, Landry, JT all work in that range I think
 
Bricklayer said:
DWill, Landry, JT all work in that range I think
Click to expand...

I get that part. I just don't know that a team like Minnesota would rather have JT and 8 than Gibson and 16 (for example).

But it probably depends on who is on the board at 8.

Should be an interesting couple weeks.
 
sdballer said:
I get that part. I just don't know that a team like Minnesota would rather have JT and 8 than Gibson and 16 (for example).

But it probably depends on who is on the board at 8.

Should be an interesting couple weeks.
Click to expand...

Oh that's not the idea though. At least not mine.

It would be take this:
#16, #19, Gibson, Snell

and turn it into this:
#8, #16, #19, Thompson

Then for Chicago, the deal barely gets any more expensive. They are still sending out #16, #19, Gibson and Snell, except now Gibson and Snell are going to Sacto instead. Their extra cost is the ending of the future pick encumbrance we've been owing them.

And for us, we leverage the #8 into Taj Gibson, Tony Snell, dumping a bad contract, and ending the pick encumbrance. Not the sort of sexy deal that is going to blow you away on its face, but one full of subtleties opening future possibilities.
 
sdballer said:
I get that part. I just don't know that a team like Minnesota would rather have JT and 8 than Gibson and 16 (for example).

But it probably depends on who is on the board at 8.

Should be an interesting couple weeks.
Click to expand...

The trade would probably be along these lines.

Kings send:
Landry/Thompson
#8

Kings receive:
Gibson

Bulls send:
Gibson
Butler
Snell
#16
#19

Bulls receive:
Love

Wolves send:
Love

Wolves receive:
Landry/Thompson
Butler
Snell
#8
#16
#19
 
twslam07 said:
The trade would probably be along these lines.

Kings send:
Landry/Thompson
#8

Kings receive:
Gibson

Bulls send:
Gibson
Butler
Snell
#16
#19

Bulls receive:
Love

Wolves send:
Love

Wolves receive:
Landry/Thompson
Butler
Snell
#8
#16
#19
Click to expand...


No thanks, throw in #16 to us and it's more realistic.
 
twslam07 said:
The trade would probably be along these lines.

Kings send:
Landry/Thompson
#8

Kings receive:
Gibson

Bulls send:
Gibson
Butler
Snell
#16
#19

Bulls receive:
Love

Wolves send:
Love

Wolves receive:
Landry/Thompson
Butler
Snell
#8
#16
#19
Click to expand...
One of our bigs AND the 8 for Gibson......we get the short end of that. Landry and JT don't have negative value.
 
Dime Dropper said:
No thanks, throw in #16 to us and it's more realistic.
Click to expand...

I'm not really saying that we should do this deal. I'm just replying to sdballer's comment about how he/she doesn't see how a deal could be worked out. This deal is doable and close to say the least. Is it a final draft? I would say no, but the framework is there for a deal to be done.
 
dude12 said:
One of our bigs AND the 8 for Gibson......we get the short end of that. Landry and JT don't have negative value.
Click to expand...

I agree that Thompson doesn't have negative value, but Landry most certainly does at this point. The only reason I included Thompson in this scenario is because sdballer mentioned sending Thompson to Chicago and getting Gibson back.

This is just a framework deal to prove that a deal can be done. Switch around a few parts and it becomes more doable.
 
Since we're on the topic of working out a deal to get Gibson to Sac, I saw this interesting proposal on RealGM last week. I thought I might as well post it here. I tweaked it a little bit, but it's basically the same deal.

SAC In:
Gibson & Afflalo
SAC Out:
#8, Protection removed from 2015 1st rounder, McLemore, McCallum, Outlaw, Thompson, & Landry

ORL In:
#16, Moute, & Outlaw
ORL Out:
Afflalo

UTA In:
#8, #19, Kings' 2015 1st, & Thompson
UTA Out:
#5

CHI In:
Love
CHI Out:
#16, #19, Kings' 2015 1st, Gibson, Butler, Snell, & Mirotic

MIN In:
#5, Butler, McLemore, Snell, Mirotic, McCallum, & Landry
MIN Out:
Love & Moute


This would leave the Kings with a pretty competitive team next year with or without resigning Thomas. It would also clear up a lot of our long term salary and give us the opportunity to surround our core with some useful role players next offseason.

PG - ???/Thomas
SG - Afflalo/Terry
SF - Gay/Williams
PF - Gibson/Evans/Acy
C - Cousins/???
 
twslam07 said:
Since we're on the topic of working out a deal to get Gibson to Sac, I saw this interesting proposal on RealGM last week. I thought I might as well post it here. I tweaked it a little bit, but it's basically the same deal.

SAC In:
Gibson & Afflalo
SAC Out:
#8, Protection removed from 2015 1st rounder, McLemore, McCallum, Outlaw, Thompson, & Landry

ORL In:
#16, Moute, & Outlaw
ORL Out:
Afflalo

UTA In:
#8, #19, Kings' 2015 1st, & Thompson
UTA Out:
#5

CHI In:
Love
CHI Out:
#16, #19, Kings' 2015 1st, Gibson, Butler, Snell, & Mirotic

MIN In:
#5, Butler, McLemore, Snell, Mirotic, McCallum, & Landry
MIN Out:
Love & Moute


This would leave the Kings with a pretty competitive team next year with or without resigning Thomas. It would also clear up a lot of our long term salary and give us the opportunity to surround our core with some useful role players next offseason.

PG - ???/Thomas
SG - Afflalo/Terry
SF - Gay/Williams
PF - Gibson/Evans/Acy
C - Cousins/???
Click to expand...

I like this trade! Especially because it looks a lot like the 2k14 Kings I built in the association mode... And, of course, I won the ring!

I also had Lowry at PG, but Afflalo and Gibson were in my starting 5 too! :D

Anyways, I like this trade even if we are sending out a lot. 2 picks, Ben and Ray. But the good thing is we would get rid of both Landry and JT, and I believe Gibson and Afflalo are exactly what this team need to make the next step. If this trade was on the table, I think I would do it.
 
Big Cuz 15 said:
too much blind faith on this board. in pda we trust right? *rolls eyes*

vivek mentioned analytics alot before he made his hire. pda is pulling out all the stops on analytics and the eye test i presume is handled by mully.
Click to expand...
What's this? What planet am I on?
 
Mass said:
I like this trade! Especially because it looks a lot like the 2k14 Kings I built in the association mode... And, of course, I won the ring!

I also had Lowry at PG, but Afflalo and Gibson were in my starting 5 too! :D

Anyways, I like this trade even if we are sending out a lot. 2 picks, Ben and Ray. But the good thing is we would get rid of both Landry and JT, and I believe Gibson and Afflalo are exactly what this team need to make the next step. If this trade was on the table, I think I would do it.
Click to expand...

Haha well if you won a ring in 2k14 with this team, I think we should be the favorites in the upcoming season! :P

Usually 5 team trades are not very realistic and are most likely not fair, but this trade seems to make sense for all teams involved and it has pretty equal value across all teams.
 
twslam07 said:
SAC In:
Gibson & Afflalo
SAC Out:
#8, Protection removed from 2015 1st rounder, McLemore, McCallum, Outlaw, Thompson, & Landry
Click to expand...

So we are giving up not one, but two first round picks, Ben, Ray, and more...for Gibson and Afflalo?!?!

Don't get me wrong, I think both Gibson and Afflalo could help us, but that is WAY overvaluing them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

twslam07
Eric Bledsoe & Thad Young
Replies
12
Views
696
Joshoua
J
Tetsujin
  • Poll Poll
[Game] Game 14: Sacramento Kings @ New Orleans Pelicans, 11/25/14 5 PST, 8 EST
14 15 16
Replies
468
Views
24K
King Baller
King Baller
CruzDude
NBA Summer League 2014 in Las Vegas
9 10 11
Replies
309
Views
41K
Mr. S£im Citrus
Mr. S£im Citrus
Y
NBA Playoff Picture Update: Raptors soar past Rockets (Ball Don't Lie)
Replies
0
Views
376
Yahoo! Sports - NBA -
Y
Y
BDL's Most Interesting Power Rankings: The Cavs send a new message (Ball Don't Lie)
Replies
0
Views
461
Yahoo! Sports - NBA -
Y
Back
Top