Rumor mill heating up June 19

Capt. Factorial said:
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.
Click to expand...

I think you are misunderstanding the trade a little bit.

We're giving up one first round pick. The other first round pick is already gone. It just depends on when it is awarded to the team that has the pick, and with Gibson and Afflalo coming aboard, I'm assuming that won't be a very high pick at all. If we are somehow still bad enough to have our 1st round pick (via the the Hickson trade) turn into a 2nd round pick in 2017, we deserve to lose Cousins at that point and start over.

Also, you seem to be forgetting something. We are trading away Thompson's and Landry's contract. That can be seen as a value add to us. I like Thompson as a third big, but sadly, he is overpaid. Landry...don't get me started. You really should be saying we're giving up a first round pick, Ben, & Ray for Gibson, Afflalo while ridding ourselves of Landry's contract and Thompson's contract.
 
Capt. Factorial said:
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.
Click to expand...
I'll second you . . . sort of. i think afflalo is a sub-optimal fit if we keep isaiah thomas. he's supposed to a be a decent defender, but he doesn't really put up rebounds, steals, etc, and he did a lot of scoring last year, so we'd have to worry about balance.
 
I don't think the FO is just going to dump the JT and Landry contracts for nothing. Both guys have value. There are very few Bigs coming out of the draft this year that can contribute now. The amount of the contracts are moveable. If Sac can't get true value on Landry like he played in Golden State when he was healthy , then they won't deal him.

Last year the Suns traded Luis Scola to Indiana for Gerald Green, Miles Plumlee and a protected 1st. Now I'm not saying we can get that type of haul but if we got half of that type of deal, but Scola, JT and Landry are about similar talent level with differing strengths.....and by the way, what a deal that turned out to be for PHX!!! I'd like to see us hold out for a deal where we are getting something that can help us in return.....ideally similar to the Scola deal.

JT for a Snell and 16 or 19 is not out of the question...I don't think this would happen with Chicago trying to acquire the mega-talents, but I'd use the Scola deal as a guide in value.
 
dude12 said:
I don't think the FO is just going to dump the JT and Landry contracts for nothing. Both guys have value. There are very few Bigs coming out of the draft this year that can contribute now. The amount of the contracts are moveable. If Sac can't get true value on Landry like he played in Golden State when he was healthy , then they won't deal him.

Last year the Suns traded Luis Scola to Indiana for Gerald Green, Miles Plumlee and a protected 1st. Now I'm not saying we can get that type of haul but if we got half of that type of deal, but Scola, JT and Landry are about similar talent level with differing strengths.....and by the way, what a deal that turned out to be for PHX!!! I'd like to see us hold out for a deal where we are getting something that can help us in return.....ideally similar to the Scola deal.

JT for a Snell and 16 or 19 is not out of the question...I don't think this would happen with Chicago trying to acquire the mega-talents, but I'd use the Scola deal as a guide in value.
Click to expand...

No disrespect to Landry, but we don't have time to wait and see if he regains value. The time to win is now. If he was a productive ill-fitting player eating 6.5 mil of our salary cap each year that would be one thing, but he is an unproductive ill-fitting player eating 6.5 mil of our salary cap each year. I don't feel as inclined as you to trade him for valuable pieces because we signed him without giving up any assets. We could simply trade him for expirings and try again. It's not that hard to grasp.

In regards to using the Scola trade as a guide in value, how about we use the report that the Kings were shopping Thompson at the trade deadline and could not find one taker as a guide in value instead? It seems more reasonable. Don't you think?
 
twslam07 said:
No disrespect to Landry, but we don't have time to wait and see if he regains value. The time to win is now. If he was a productive ill-fitting player eating 6.5 mil of our salary cap each year that would be one thing, but he is an unproductive ill-fitting player eating 6.5 mil of our salary cap each year. I don't feel as inclined as you to trade him for valuable pieces because we signed him without giving up any assets. We could simply trade him for expirings and try again. It's not that hard to grasp.

In regards to using the Scola trade as a guide in value, how about we use the report that the Kings were shopping Thompson at the trade deadline and could not find one taker as a guide in value instead? It seems more reasonable. Don't you think?
Click to expand...
Good point on the trade deadline with JT but I also think that with teams losing players to free agency now, that its a different point in time....Bobcats losing McRoberts to FA is an example, they are on record as looking for a big.
I'm just saying that veteran bigs have value...especially to teams trying to take the next step in the playoffs...which is what that Scola deal was about.
 
dude12 said:
Good point on the trade deadline with JT but I also think that with teams losing players to free agency now, that its a different point in time....Bobcats losing McRoberts to FA is an example, they are on record as looking for a big.
I'm just saying that veteran bigs have value...especially to teams trying to take the next step in the playoffs...which is what that Scola deal was about.
Click to expand...

I would agree to some extent. I've been on the record for saying that I think Thompson is a very solid third big off the bench. If he made no more than 4-4.5 mil a year, I would not want to move him. Unfortunately, he is overpriced (in my eyes) by a few million dollars. That doesn't mean he has no trade value, but it does decrease it.
 
The Sacramento Kings are fielding offers from three teams for the No. 8 pick in Thursday's NBA draft, sources with direct knowledge told ESPN Monday.

Sources said the Kings have two deals that could be done prior to Thursday's 2 p.m. trade deadline to change the draft order and one would be a draft night deal, depending on which players are available when the Kings select.
Click to expand...

http://espn.go.com/nba/draft2014/story/_/id/11125620/sacramento-kings-fielding-offers-no-8-pick


Interesting..
 
twslam07 said:
I would agree to some extent. I've been on the record for saying that I think Thompson is a very solid third big off the bench. If he made no more than 4-4.5 mil a year, I would not want to move him. Unfortunately, he is overpriced (in my eyes) by a few million dollars. That doesn't mean he has no trade value, but it does decrease it.
Click to expand...
Im more pro Evans and a healthy Landry but we will find out if or when they move JT as to what his value is...I think for a vet big at the price, it's not unreasonable....maybe not optimal but it's not an $8-12 mill contract either.

Channing Frye is opting out in PHX where his deal was for $6.8 mill so that he can get a longer term contract....I'm going to guess he may get something around $6-8 mill per year, doesn't do anything well except he can knock down some 3's.

Anyway, my original point is that I think they can acquire some useful pieces(s) for JT instead of giving an asset away to a team to take him off our hands.
 
twslam07 said:
Well we would need to get a 1st round pick in return since we aren't allowed to trade #8. We can trade the player we select at #8, but we can't trade the actual pick itself without getting a 1st back.

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong Capt...
Click to expand...

No, I'm pretty sure you're right. If we are trading the pick I hope we're at least getting another first rounder back as well as the immediate help.
 
twslam07 said:
I think you are misunderstanding the trade a little bit.

We're giving up one first round pick. The other first round pick is already gone. It just depends on when it is awarded to the team that has the pick, and with Gibson and Afflalo coming aboard, I'm assuming that won't be a very high pick at all.
Click to expand...

Granted on the removing protection bit. But you're proposing a team that is basically this:
(IT?)/??
Afflalo/Outlaw/Terry?
Gay/DWill
Gibson/Acy
Cousins/Evans

I'm not at all certain that team makes the playoffs. We'd still be putting ourselves one Cousins injury away from that previously protected pick being the #5 lotto slot.

Also, you seem to be forgetting something. We are trading away Thompson's and Landry's contract. That can be seen as a value add to us. I like Thompson as a third big, but sadly, he is overpaid. Landry...don't get me started.
Click to expand...

I disagree. I think Thompson's contract is a reasonable value. He's certainly tradeable if we can find a good fit, but he's not a player we should be desperate to dump. And frankly, I put far less value on dumping Landry's contract than other people seem to do. For instance, I would not give up the protection on the Hickson pick in exchange for dumping the Landry contract.

You really should be saying we're giving up a first round pick, Ben, & Ray for Gibson, Afflalo while ridding ourselves of Landry's contract and Thompson's contract.
Click to expand...

It was not so long ago that some around here were balking at the idea of #8 and Ben for Kevin Love. This is clearly giving up more and getting back less. I'm not opposed to getting either Gibson or Afflalo, but not at that price.
 
twslam07 said:
Well we would need to get a 1st round pick in return since we aren't allowed to trade #8. We can trade the player we select at #8, but we can't trade the actual pick itself without getting a 1st back.

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong Capt...
Click to expand...

Nope, that's right.

So if we have a deal lined up to "change the draft order" then it's either a swap (#8 for ??) or it's us acquiring a pick. I'd be more inclined to imagine that the draft-day trade depending on which player is available involves the #8. But that's just a guess.

Edit: actually the context looks like all three of these are potential trades for the #8 pick, so the first two would have to be swaps.
 
Last edited:
CurseOfTheSalmons said:
there's a trade deadline on thursday?!
Click to expand...

A trade of a draft pick has to be executed a certain time before the draft if the draft order is to be changed. Otherwise the original team "makes the pick" and the trade is announced after all picks in the trade are complete. I thought the deadline to change the draft order was the night before, but perhaps this year it is 2 PM on the day of the draft.
 
Capt. Factorial said:
Granted on the removing protection bit. But you're proposing a team that is basically this:
(IT?)/??
Afflalo/Outlaw/Terry?
Gay/DWill
Gibson/Acy
Cousins/Evans

I'm not at all certain that team makes the playoffs. We'd still be putting ourselves one Cousins injury away from that previously protected pick being the #5 lotto slot.
Click to expand...

It's a very good point, but at some point we're going to need to take a risk. It could just be me, but I still don't think a team that has Thomas, Afflalo, Gay, and Gibson on it is a bottom 5 team. Maybe that's just me though.

Capt. Factorial said:
I disagree. I think Thompson's contract is a reasonable value. He's certainly tradeable if we can find a good fit, but he's not a player we should be desperate to dump. And frankly, I put far less value on dumping Landry's contract than other people seem to do. For instance, I would not give up the protection on the Hickson pick in exchange for dumping the Landry contract.
Click to expand...

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree about Thompson's contract. Personally, I would prefer to not pay over the MLE for a third big. Anything above that price, and you should be starting on my team.

You mention he is tradeable which I don't necessarily disagree with, but I think the reports that we were shopping him at the trade deadline are revealing. We weren't able to find one taker for him. Not one. Was it us overvaluing Thompson? Was it other teams wanting no part of him? We can't be sure.

When it comes to Landry, I put a good amount of value in getting rid of his contract. First off, 6.75 mil is starters pay as far as I'm concerned. Secondly, he's a poor fit with Cousins which means he shouldn't start next to Cousins (making his contract an overpay). Thirdly, he has been very unproductive since coming here. Lastly, he had a serious injury which makes it still unknown if he can get back to where he used to be.

That 6.75 mil is money that we need to spend on complimentary role players. We can't wait 3 more years for him to expire because we need to put the best team possible around Cousins as soon as possible. This team, with Landry on the books, is much more likely to be worse than if he wasn't on the books.

Capt. Factorial said:
It was not so long ago that some around here were balking at the idea of #8 and Ben for Kevin Love. This is clearly giving up more and getting back less. I'm not opposed to getting either Gibson or Afflalo, but not at that price.
Click to expand...

Wow, Love for McLemore and #8? Sign me up! Obviously I would do that steal of a trade in a heartbeat over this currently constructed trade, but I honestly don't think that is realistic at all.
 
twslam07 said:
Wow, Love for McLemore and #8? Sign me up! Obviously I would do that steal of a trade in a heartbeat over this currently constructed trade, but I honestly don't think that is realistic at all.
Click to expand...

I would personally fly out to Sacramento and bow down in front of PDA, proclaiming him to be the new savior, if that trade ever happened. Considering what Minny wanted from the Warriors, their asking price is quite high.
 
twslam07 said:
No disrespect to Landry, but we don't have time to wait and see if he regains value. The time to win is now. If he was a productive ill-fitting player eating 6.5 mil of our salary cap each year that would be one thing, but he is an unproductive ill-fitting player eating 6.5 mil of our salary cap each year. I don't feel as inclined as you to trade him for valuable pieces because we signed him without giving up any assets. We could simply trade him for expirings and try again. It's not that hard to grasp.

In regards to using the Scola trade as a guide in value, how about we use the report that the Kings were shopping Thompson at the trade deadline and could not find one taker as a guide in value instead? It seems more reasonable. Don't you think?
Click to expand...
Your argument concerning JT does not impress. You think every FO is ready to move at every instant? No. Has JT any value? Hell yes.


J
 
pshn80 said:
Your argument concerning JT does not impress. You think every FO is ready to move at every instant? No. Has JT any value? Hell yes.


J
Click to expand...

Did I say he has no value? No. Can he be looked at as an inconvenient piece on a team? Yes.

His contract can create problems. He is an overpaid third big off the bench. He can be affordable to some teams (e.g. teams who have a starting big on a rookie deal), but if you're trying to put a Cousins ($13.7 mil) and Gibson ($8 mil) frontcourt on the floor, you should probably have a cheaper third big off the bench in order to redistribute the rest of your cap to positions of need. In this case particular case, Thompson can be viewed as a problem for us.

Now is he a valuable player? Yes, he is. Like I said, he would be a great third big. I don't think he is as valuable as you make him sound ("Has JT any value? Hell yes.") but he could possibly net an okay return if you're talking with the right team. If you're second guessing adding Gibson and Afflalo while shedding Landry because you don't want to give up Thompson, then you need to reassess your priorities.
 
twslam07 said:
Did I say he has no value? No. Can he be looked at as an inconvenient piece on a team? Yes.

His contract can create problems. He is an overpaid third big off the bench. He can be affordable to some teams (e.g. teams who have a starting big on a rookie deal), but if you're trying to put a Cousins ($13.7 mil) and Gibson ($8 mil) frontcourt on the floor, you should probably have a cheaper third big off the bench in order to redistribute the rest of your cap to positions of need. In this case particular case, Thompson can be viewed as a problem for us.

Now is he a valuable player? Yes, he is. Like I said, he would be a great third big. I don't think he is as valuable as you make him sound ("Has JT any value? Hell yes.") but he could possibly net an okay return if you're talking with the right team. If you're second guessing adding Gibson and Afflalo while shedding Landry because you don't want to give up Thompson, then you need to reassess your priorities.
Click to expand...
.... and where is your Gibson and Afflado who make
JT a problem? He is what he is and we have him as a starter moe often than not for some years. And, I might add, not a major reason why we haven't won more.
 
pshn80 said:
.... and where is your Gibson and Afflado who make
JT a problem? He is what he is and we have him as a starter moe often than not for some years. And, I might add, not a major reason why we haven't won more.
Click to expand...

One can make a strong case he's the worst starting PF in the west right now and with his contract it's not easy finding a trade partner to take him. But hey it could be worse we could of ended up with Ryan Anderson(sarcasm).
 
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