SF Trades

I think there's some disagreement as to what the Kings need at SF.

The Oubre/Harris view is that you want a scorer at that spot. This seems to be what Vlade was thinking with that Lavine contract.

The Porter side feels the team needs a defensive guy to match up with bigger 3s and keep up the team's defensive focus.

I'm more on the Porter side. I feel like your bucket-getters and closers are established with Fox, Buddy and Bogi. You will also get more scoring from Bagley as he improves.
 
I think the problem is that we assume the Wizards would just dump him to avoid the luxury tax. I don't think they'd do that. If they're trading Porter, it means they're getting an equal asset back OR they're blowing up the entire team... and in that case, everyone would be on the trading block and I'm sure they could shift enough money around without giving up arguably their 2nd most valuable asset for free (John Wall is a very good player but that contract is horrendous).
It's always tough to predict what the other team's motivations are, and what the market is ready to offer for their players. However, among their top 4 earners (Wall, Beal, Porter, Mahinmi), other than for Beal, I don't see teams taking on those salaries, and giving up much value in return too. The salary cap savings highlighted by Macadocious are pretty huge even for rich owners.

One spanner is of course the sad state of the East. While some teams (Bucks and Raptors in particular) have played much better than expected, overall the bottom 3 playoff positions are likely to see fierce contention between average to bad teams most of the year. Owners will be reluctant to blow up the teams if they think they have a real shot of making the post season. Selling it to the fan base is tough (remember us when we traded DMC. We too were hovering around the 8th position).
 
Wasn’t too big on the idea of trading for Porter but this thread talked me into it lol. There are very few realistic SF options in FA that will fit our style and timeline, let alone if they even want to sign with us. Porter, although expensive, has several pluses:

• still young, enters prime in the next couple season (fits timeline)

• generally a good 3 point shooter, even if he has dropped off a bit this year

• provides versatility potential as a 3/4 for us

Overall, he shouldn’t be getting paid $26-27 million a year but he would probably be worth it for our team in particular, seeing as he plays a position of need, fits our style and is young. Anyone else we would sign in FA will also be overpaid, so why not go for Porter who we wouldn’t have to convince to come here.
Another advantage is that after this year, we will be on the hook for his contract for only two years. If we are to sign anyone decent as a FA, we'll likely have to offer 4 years. Our financial commitments over the next two years are very mild, so even his large contract won't be a problem for us.

True, we'll have to deal with it two years down the line. We'll hopefully have a slightly better idea at that time of where we stand in terms of some of our young players (we'll possibly have only one of JJ/Giles/Skal at that time, and might be able to convert them for something of value at other positions). Too much time between now and then to worry about right now.
 
I dont think you guys understand the cap hell they are in. Next season, with 6 players on the roster (that included Dwight Howard picking up his P/O) + adding a mid lottery pick they will be at about 123,00,000 in salary. They need to add 8 players to that, including Oubre who is an RFA that will probably get 15-18 per year on the open market.

Lets say they just add minimum players and a MLE. That will be another 20ish milling in salary depending on the years of service those players have. Putting them north of 140 million, their 3rd year of Luxury tax repeater penalties.

They would prefer to get rid of Ian, but they would have attach assets for that.


They can ask for players back, but that keeps them in the tax. WE absolutely provide their best option.

Like I said, say they want Skal and JJ instead of Ben so they have some young players who aren't expensive, sure, take them. Actually helps us out TBH.
We understand the cap hell they're in. I don't think that you understand that other teams will be bidding for their players and they'll likely have better trade packages than the Kings because they'll be able to provide not just expirings, but they'll provide real NBA players and picks as well. The Kings provide an option but they are far from being able to provide the best option unless they lump a core player in the trade package.

Teams aren't giving away rock solid players for expirings.
 
It's being reported by Kevin O'Connor that the Pelicans are thinking about an offer of Randle+1st round pick for Porter Jr.

Porter Jr has a horrific contract. I've always been AGAINST him getting max money because I believe they should be reserved for actual stars. However, he still has good value as a legitimate good 3&D role player.

I would give up Bogdan+filler for him.
Do not trade Bogie period. Smh
 
We understand the cap hell they're in. I don't think that you understand that other teams will be bidding for their players and they'll likely have better trade packages than the Kings because they'll be able to provide not just expirings, but they'll provide real NBA players and picks as well. The Kings provide an option but they are far from being able to provide the best option unless they lump a core player in the trade package.

Teams aren't giving away rock solid players for expirings.
If they had a good offer for Porter he would already be gone.
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
1. Beal delivers value for his contract, and Porter is overpaid by about $9M per year (I’m ballparking).

2. Beal would cost us Buddy—whom I am sure we would extend next fall, and I don’t see this ownership group going into the luxury tax to do that. So, if we have Beal we have pretty set expenses for the next 2 years and can go shopping this summer. Porter + Buddy + Willie takes us out of the market next summer, I think.

Then we get into the hard to quantify, hoped for, soft skills of a guy like Beal recruiting for us this summer. I don’t think Porter is a draw, even if we are willing to spend. Lastly, I really don’t like a salary structure where you’re highest paid player, by a good margin, is your 5th best player. Even in a situation like ours, that will dent your chemistry sooner rather later—see under the Wizards. A major part of their narrative is that Wall was making less than Beal and Porter for a few seasons, and I’m sure that factored into Wall’s supermax. The type of thing where you are promising him and his agent the max to keep him happy, and then you get to the point where you have to give him the contract or risk burning a major agent and tanking the trade value of your top player. I’m not rabidly against getting Porter, I just think there are some better targets on the board.
So what your saying is the plus of going for Beal is we get rid of Buddy's salary extension and therefore have more money for freeagency. Not sure I follow the logic of losing a good player is a plus. The thing is, I'm not sure we gain much by substituting Beal for Buddy. Yeah, Beal is probably a better overall player, but how much more would he bring to the team. Especially since we don't really have a need at the SG position. We do have a need at the SF position, which Porter fills.

Beal is also a player that likes to take 15 to 20 shots a game. So does the fit on our current team. We now have a team that plays very unselfish basketball. Will Beal fit into that? Maybe he would, maybe he wouldn't. Team chemistry is a very elusive thing. Petrie once said, you know when you have it, and you know when you don't. But no one knows for sure how to get it. Point being, that when you have it, be very careful not to do something to lose it.

It's true that Buddy is available for an extension after this season, but he is under contract for another year, so we don't have to extend him and we can make him a restricted freeagent the following summer. So we would still have money to work with this coming summer even if we trade for Porter. Porter is the perfect fit for our team. He's not a ball hog, and is a team player. He would more than fill the void at that SF position, and he's also a player that can put the ball through the basket if needed. He's shot over 40% from the three for his career, and 48% overall for his career.

Beal would no doubt make us a little better overall. On the other hand, Porter would give us a huge boost from a position were getting next to nothing from at the moment. I'd rather pay the 27 mil a year for the latter than the former.
 
Another guy I really like and has been playing SF is from Memphis Dillon Brooks (currently injured) he's only like 6'5/6;6 but he's physical I think he would be a nice fit in terms of toughness and what he brings, also if Boston does not get there act together they got a number of options. The Magic might try move Simmons to open up time for Wesley Owundu and so either Gordon/Issac can slide to SF from PF to play them together or separately with Vuc/Bamba.

There is actually a lot of quality role players that are currently available imo to plug in that I have mentioned throughout the thread.

Also say if we want Porter and the Wizard will only do a trade if Harry Giles is involved would Kings fans do it?
 
So with no NBA today this trade has been dominating my thoughts. I listed to part of the Ringer podcast too and I think this is the trade that makes the most sense for both teams.
Screen Shot 2018-11-22 at 9.41.53 PM.png

We save them almost exactly 10 Million this year. We give them two relatively inexpensive young players for next year. We also throw in 2 2nd for this coming year. I say our best and worst. We keep the middle one. Those picks are probably worth the same as a bottom 1st rounder.

We also shed the need to deal with Skal and JJ's options.

We can extend WCS, overpay a 1 year deal on a Bojan, keep Shump. Honestly, the biggest issue with this roster is we have too many good players. We have money to extend Buddy and Bogi and then most of the salary falls off before we have to pay Fox and finally Bagley.

That team next year is the 4 seed. They will go as far as Fox/Buddy/Bagley take them after that.

Screen Shot 2018-11-22 at 9.59.04 PM.png
 
I think there's some disagreement as to what the Kings need at SF.

The Oubre/Harris view is that you want a scorer at that spot. This seems to be what Vlade was thinking with that Lavine contract.

The Porter side feels the team needs a defensive guy to match up with bigger 3s and keep up the team's defensive focus.

I'm more on the Porter side. I feel like your bucket-getters and closers are established with Fox, Buddy and Bogi. You will also get more scoring from Bagley as he improves.
Vlade also offered Porter his current contract.
 
So with no NBA today this trade has been dominating my thoughts. I listed to part of the Ringer podcast too and I think this is the trade that makes the most sense for both teams.
View attachment 8513

We save them almost exactly 10 Million this year. We give them two relatively inexpensive young players for next year. We also throw in 2 2nd for this coming year. I say our best and worst. We keep the middle one. Those picks are probably worth the same as a bottom 1st rounder.

We also shed the need to deal with Skal and JJ's options.

We can extend WCS, overpay a 1 year deal on a Bojan, keep Shump. Honestly, the biggest issue with this roster is we have too many good players. We have money to extend Buddy and Bogi and then most of the salary falls off before we have to pay Fox and finally Bagley.

That team next year is the 4 seed. They will go as far as Fox/Buddy/Bagley take them after that.

View attachment 8514
You did your homework, so thumbs up for that. However, I don't know if W agrees on that trade without picks involved and/or young inexpensive players with higher upside then Skal, Jackson.
About Bojan Bogdanovic, I like the confusion that would produce for coaches and announcers, having both BoBos on the same team.
 
This would probably be worth a separate thread, but a common assumption seems to be that we let Buddy get to RFA, which I think would be a colossal mistake. If you let a player like Buddy hit RFA you are flirting with some team throwing a max or near max at him—which is exactly why the player most commonly discussed here, Otto Porter, is now available via trade and the Wizards cannot find a trade partner yet.

IMO, Buddy must be extended this next fall both for goodwill and ability to lock in his cap number.
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
We understand the cap hell they're in. I don't think that you understand that other teams will be bidding for their players and they'll likely have better trade packages than the Kings because they'll be able to provide not just expirings, but they'll provide real NBA players and picks as well. The Kings provide an option but they are far from being able to provide the best option unless they lump a core player in the trade package.

Teams aren't giving away rock solid players for expirings.
The Kings are in a position that no other team is in. They have almost 11 mil in capspace, meaning they can send less back in terms of committed money than any other team, and the sole point of the Wiz trading any of their stars is to get cap relief. So no, I'm not giving them the bank. What I'll give them is an expiring like Randolph (11 mil), plus our capspace, and Jackson or Skal. If pressured, maybe I'll part with Giles, or throw in a high 2nd rd pick.

How many other teams have as many expirings that we have along with capspace to make a deal work where they get instant cap relief. That deal would save them around 26 mil this season when you combine the salary savings along with the luxury tax savings. Now that may be chump change to you, but to a team that's going nowhere, it's a lot of money. If they don't want that deal, then good luck somewhere else. Were not desperate.
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
If we want an actual quality starting SF, we have to give something up. Bogdan is a good player, but he's expendable.
I don't agree on Bog's being expendable. Top talent is never expendable. Bog's is also insurance at the SG position if anything were to happen to Buddy. A championship team has to have solid depth to win, and Bog's represents that. Team chemistry is also an important factor. When you have it, which it appears we do at present, you have to be careful not to screw it up. That's essentially the problem the Wiz have right now. They have plenty of talent, but no team chemistry. It's usually OK to add to team chemistry, because you can always get rid of it if it doesn't work. But when you take it away, it's not easy to get it back.
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
This would probably be worth a separate thread, but a common assumption seems to be that we let Buddy get to RFA, which I think would be a colossal mistake. If you let a player like Buddy hit RFA you are flirting with some team throwing a max or near max at him—which is exactly why the player most commonly discussed here, Otto Porter, is now available via trade and the Wizards cannot find a trade partner yet.

IMO, Buddy must be extended this next fall both for goodwill and ability to lock in his cap number.
I'm not against signing Buddy to an extension this fall, but of course, he has to agree to it. If he's demanding the max with no wiggle room, then its to the Kings advantage to just pick up his option and make him a restricted free agent the following summer. The worse that can happen is that we end up paying him the max anyway, but we also get to find out what the market is, and we can match anything offered. Plus we would get one more year to see him play and decide what he's worth to the team.

In any event, it wouldn't affect any other signings we might possibly make this next off season because the extension wouldn't kick in until the end of his rookie contract, which would be the following year. And we would have between July 1st and Oct 31st to get an extension done. The salary cap is projected to go up to 109 mil this next summer and up to 118 mil the following summer. So one advantage to signing him to and extension this next off season is the Max would be a bit lower than it would be the following summer and we would get back some money through inflation.

If I'm wrong about that I'm sure that the Capt will correct me.......:)
 
I don't agree on Bog's being expendable. Top talent is never expendable. Bog's is also insurance at the SG position if anything were to happen to Buddy. A championship team has to have solid depth to win, and Bog's represents that. Team chemistry is also an important factor. When you have it, which it appears we do at present, you have to be careful not to screw it up. That's essentially the problem the Wiz have right now. They have plenty of talent, but no team chemistry. It's usually OK to add to team chemistry, because you can always get rid of it if it doesn't work. But when you take it away, it's not easy to get it back.
One reason why I think he is expendable is because we have 2 starting SGs, him and Buddy. If you asked me last season who was worth more to our team, I'd say Bogdan because he's able to take ball handling duties off of Fox, but this season, Fox has made gigantic strides and leads as a playmaker.

We have a better overall team with Bogdan, but an interesting thing to look at is our record. We are 7-4 without him, and 3-4 with him. Another reason why I think he is expednable is because we were able to play at a high level of basketball going 7-4 when he wasn't here. I'm assuming that we can still play at a high level of basketball without Bogdan. So if we're able to trade Bogdan for a legitimate starting quality SF, why not? It fills in our biggest need. I'm not talking just Porter Jr. There are many good SFs out there who could elevate our play to a whole new level.
 
This would probably be worth a separate thread, but a common assumption seems to be that we let Buddy get to RFA, which I think would be a colossal mistake. If you let a player like Buddy hit RFA you are flirting with some team throwing a max or near max at him—which is exactly why the player most commonly discussed here, Otto Porter, is now available via trade and the Wizards cannot find a trade partner yet.

IMO, Buddy must be extended this next fall both for goodwill and ability to lock in his cap number.
Agree. We might see the same with Willie this summer. That said, the decision to not extend Willie was correct at that time. His performance was quite inconsistent, and even though I like him, I was not sure if he'll ever "get" it.

The downside. We'll likely need to overpay this summer, or risk losing him for nothing. Not something we can really afford, since despite several bigs on the roster, no one can play C like Willie, not yet at least.
 
I'd be willing for kings to put in a 2021 1st pick with top 5 protection to get porter if necessary. I dont think it's likely we find a better fit. Middleton isn't leaving Milwaukee.

After his experience as a wizard I would wager Porter would be kissing vlades feet for rescuing him from that wiz team. Seems like an awful lockerrrom to be in day in day out. Work over there is all work and no joy. We would get a lot mom or out of him than the wiz
 
If we want an actual quality starting SF, we have to give something up. Bogdan is a good player, but he's expendable.
Perhaps I would consider trading Bogdan but not for a player averaging 10/6. I would trade him for a star only.

Bogdan is probably our smartest player, a great leader, terrific fit and a great bargain at the price. I would only give him up for a truly great player. He and Fox are IMO our best assets.
 
One reason why I think he is expendable is because we have 2 starting SGs, him and Buddy. If you asked me last season who was worth more to our team, I'd say Bogdan because he's able to take ball handling duties off of Fox, but this season, Fox has made gigantic strides and leads as a playmaker.

We have a better overall team with Bogdan, but an interesting thing to look at is our record. We are 7-4 without him, and 3-4 with him. Another reason why I think he is expednable is because we were able to play at a high level of basketball going 7-4 when he wasn't here. I'm assuming that we can still play at a high level of basketball without Bogdan. So if we're able to trade Bogdan for a legitimate starting quality SF, why not? It fills in our biggest need. I'm not talking just Porter Jr. There are many good SFs out there who could elevate our play to a whole new level.
Actually no it’s not that interesting and here’s why.

For the record I’m not too much into stats analysis; I prefer the eye test. The eye test tells me that Bogdan is a vital player due to team chemistry. His value far exceeds his statistical production IMO.

Remember he was on a minutes restriction (he has played only 23 mins per game) so his potential impact was mitigated plus he was a bit rusty coming off an injury.

I’m saying is Bogdan is not expendable and I would not trade him unless the trade was really, very lopsided in favor of the Kings. Bogdan is a key player who brings stability, confidence, intelligence and most importantly extreme clutchness when it matters most.
 
Last edited:
The Kings are in a position that no other team is in. They have almost 11 mil in capspace, meaning they can send less back in terms of committed money than any other team, and the sole point of the Wiz trading any of their stars is to get cap relief. So no, I'm not giving them the bank. What I'll give them is an expiring like Randolph (11 mil), plus our capspace, and Jackson or Skal. If pressured, maybe I'll part with Giles, or throw in a high 2nd rd pick.

How many other teams have as many expirings that we have along with capspace to make a deal work where they get instant cap relief. That deal would save them around 26 mil this season when you combine the salary savings along with the luxury tax savings. Now that may be chump change to you, but to a team that's going nowhere, it's a lot of money. If they don't want that deal, then good luck somewhere else. Were not desperate.
Expirings plus end of benchers isn't going to get it done. Plain and simple. I'm not saying the Kings should trade any core pieces. I'm just saying that the Kings aren't going to get the best 3&D SF for absolutely nothing like a lot of people are thinking could happen. Teams will wind up offering them expirings + a serviceable player/first round pick and that's going to beat our trade offers of expirings + guys that might not even be NBA players. Porter has a lot of value and teams are going to compete for that with better offers than the Kings can throw out there unless they add in a Buddy or Bogdan.
 
Hey what do you guys think about this buy-low trade?


Kings receive; Josh Jackson

Suns receive: Harry Giles, Justin Jackson, 2nd rd pick, filler.

(it works in the machine)


With the 4 position and Fox providing more floor spacing than expected Josh could fit here better than ppl realize. He's an uber athlete with the positional flexibility and defensive potential we could use, and there'd be little reason to rush him along given the Kings early success and the 3 guard lineup. The pace here suits his game extremely well. He's rather feisty too.

the GM that drafted Josh has been fired, he's not getting much minutes this year, their rookie Mikal Bridges seems to be quickly stealing his spot... Maybe they'd let him go if they got the right young pieces back?

No offense to Troy Williams but as far as I'm concerned at-worst Josh is like a taller, younger more badass version..
 
Last edited:

bajaden

Hall of Famer
Expirings plus end of benchers isn't going to get it done. Plain and simple. I'm not saying the Kings should trade any core pieces. I'm just saying that the Kings aren't going to get the best 3&D SF for absolutely nothing like a lot of people are thinking could happen. Teams will wind up offering them expirings + a serviceable player/first round pick and that's going to beat our trade offers of expirings + guys that might not even be NBA players. Porter has a lot of value and teams are going to compete for that with better offers than the Kings can throw out there unless they add in a Buddy or Bogdan.
Well, you could be right, but I think you might be missing one point, or underestimating it, and that is that the Kings can do what no other team can do, and that's get them out from under the luxury tax this season. The Wiz committed salaries are at 131 mil and the luxury tax for this year is at 123 mil. That puts them 8 mil over the luxury tax, and this is not the first year, so their at least into double that, maybe triple that. Sorry, I didn't look it up. Every other team may be able to offer a first rd pick, or perhaps a better player in return, but they can't get the Wiz out from under the tax, and the Kings can because of that 11 mil they have under the cap.

Maybe your right, and that may not be as important as I think it is. And maybe your right about what the Kings would have to throw in to get a deal done. But personally, I wouldn't do it. I'll take my chances this summer in free agency or perhaps a lesser trade before giving up a core player. I'll amend that by saying if that player I'm trading for is Kevin Durant, or Paul George, then I'll up the anti..:p
 
Porter has a bad contract. That drives down the Porter value. If Washington is serious about r3booting the team, they start with Porter and that contract. Unless they want to attach a first round pick to Mahinmi but that can’t be what they want to do.

The current Washington roster makeup has failed and the only reason Porter got this contract was a belief they needed to keep him to make a deep playoff run. I expect Porter to be moved and I expect one of Beals or Wall to be moved.
 
If we are interested in getting a late first round pick and Dillion Brooks the Grizzlies are looking for a back up center and Parsons has 2 years left on his deal (this year included), if we can't pull off any trades to get who we want and this next draft is stacked with SF (someone said on the forum) maybe we can get the Grizz pick and eat a awful contract and get a quality young player.

Maybe like KK/ZB0/Jackson or Skal for Parsons/Brooks/1st rounder.

Also keep in mind as well as the Grizz are currently doing Marc and Conley are always injury prone so the pick (being unprotected) could be better a lot better.
 
Last edited:

bajaden

Hall of Famer
Hey what do you guys think about this buy-low trade?


Kings receive; Josh Jackson

Suns receive: Harry Giles, Justin Jackson, 2nd rd pick, filler.

(it works in the machine)


With the 4 position and Fox providing more floor spacing than expected Josh could fit here better than ppl realize. He's an uber athlete with the positional flexibility and defensive potential we could use, and there'd be little reason to rush him along given the Kings early success and the 3 guard lineup. The pace here suits his game extremely well. He's rather feisty too.

the GM that drafted Josh has been fired, he's not getting much minutes this year, their rookie Mikal Bridges seems to be quickly stealing his spot... Maybe they'd let him go if they got the right young pieces back?

No offense to Troy Williams but as far as I'm concerned at-worst Josh is like a taller, younger more badass version..
I'm going to be honest with you, I'm not the biggest Josh Jackson fan, and I predicted to my son that Bridges would eventually take his minutes. Bridges is a better player right now. I watched Josh Jackson play in summer league up close and personal two years in a row, and for the most part, except maybe one game I can remember, he was downright terrible. The dude cannot shoot the basketball, and I doubt he's any stronger than Justin.

Another thing that bothered me was that I saw him standing right next to Justin and he appeared to be an inch or more shorter than Justin. I admit it was hard to tell with his hair. He has at times been a good defender, but other times not so much. So you'd be betting on potential. So the question is, is Josh Jackson's potential greater than Giles potential? I'm not sure it is, and if not, then I don't do the trade. Frankly I don't care where a player was drafted and never use that as a measuring stick when attaching a value to a player.

So I guess I'd say that if you could get him for Justin Jackson and Skal, who has feasted on the Sun's a couple of times, then I would do it. But I'm not sure I would give up on Giles just yet. We have a lot invested in him and I'd like to see it play out.