So... we're trading back right ? Otherwise, why are they working out these guys?

Anthony1

Bench
The Kings seem to be working out quite a few guys that aren't expected to go 5th overall. Kings worked out Zeller, Lillard, Henson, and are going to have T. Jones work out (not sure if that's already happened or not). All of these guys are skilled players that will be drafted in the top 20 picks, but would we seriously consider any of these guys at No.5 overall ?

Either the Kings plan on trading back somehow, or they are going to overreach in spectacular fashion.

What say you ?
 
You prepare for any possiblity. Doesn't mean you'll make a trade, but if the opportunity presents itself, you have to have a clear idea who'll you'll draft at a lower position.
 
It's just a smart way to conduct the draft. If we absolutely love Terrence Jones, then why not try and trade back to 8 and maybe get an Ed Davis out of Toronto or trade back to 10 and grab Ariza or Okafor from NO. I really hope we don't trade back, but we should certainly try and get more assets if we fall in love with a guy like Jones or Lillard who will be available 5 picks later
 
Still, I'd like to see Robinson, Barnes, MKG, Beal in here. Sullinger, too. Hopefully we get that done in the next week...
 
JT was projected as late first rounder when we scooped him early. So you never know.

There are also several teams after us that we could get serviceable SF via trade.
Toronto(Derozan), New Orleans(Ariza)

I could think of several trades for this that could work for us.
1.) Toronto: IT/Salmons/Thornton/5th for Calderon/Derozan/8th
2.) New Orleans: Ariza/Okafor/10th for Salmons/Garcia/Hayes/5th

1) No way. We're giving away too much.
2) I like it, but the magoof won't ever allow it. Too much money on those contracts.
 
It's just doing our due diligence to keep an open mind about every opportunity or scenario.

Having said that, I would not be surprised in the least if we do trade down or reach for a player at pick 5 that that is expected to go a bit later. I just get this feeling that we like Henson a heck of a lot!
 
You prepare for any possiblity. Doesn't mean you'll make a trade, but if the opportunity presents itself, you have to have a clear idea who'll you'll draft at a lower position.

This for the most part. My guess is they'll try to get Barnes/MKG/Robinson in here but I'm not sure any of those guys would be in a hurry to come in here and work out considering our franchise's current position. I remember Chad Ford said some agents of top prospects might try to position their players to go to other teams because of our ownership situation and stuff. The ironic thing is I wouldn't be upset at all if we picked a guy like Terrence Jones, I think he has just as much talent as some of these guys we're debating and could be a great fit because he's a 4 with 3 skills who can board and block shots. Could open up space for Cousins to go to work and help on D.
 
if a guy like barnes/beal/t-rob/MKG didnt want to come workout for us does geoff petrie normally take a dim view of this or does he just think "f um i will pick them anyway"???
 
if a guy like barnes/beal/t-rob/MKG didnt want to come workout for us does geoff petrie normally take a dim view of this or does he just think "f um i will pick them anyway"???


After drafting Gerald Wallace without seeing him workout, Petrie has said he won't do it again. So presumably we will take someone that has worked out for us, or that we have at least seen workout for another team.
 
After drafting Gerald Wallace without seeing him workout, Petrie has said he won't do it again. So presumably we will take someone that has worked out for us, or that we have at least seen workout for another team.

oh ok :) do you honestl think it whould be the case of somone so well known like a davis ect...
 
After drafting Gerald Wallace without seeing him workout, Petrie has said he won't do it again. So presumably we will take someone that has worked out for us, or that we have at least seen workout for another team.
These are different times. As the saying goes, Maloofs can't be choosers.
 
With Petrie over the years it has been one big chess game. No one seems to know what he is going to do and he is the most secretive GM. With 4 teams having multiple 1st round picks there are a bunch of possibilites as the Kings need an experienced starter at the 1 and 3 spots more than another rookie who would contribute off the bench for a year or two. Lets not give up on Outlaw just yet at the 3. And the two big question marks are still Honeycutt and Whiteside at the 3 and 4/5 respectively. So trading down for a good starter and a 10-20 slot could make sense for the right player in return.
 
oh ok :) do you honestl think it whould be the case of somone so well known like a davis ect...


I'm sure if Davis fell he would take him. I wasn't taking that into account simply because it has zero chance of happening. :) Who knows, maybe he made that comment in passing. He could well take someone he hasn't seen workout (ie. Beal), but I just wouldn't count on it. As has been pointed out, it's very difficult to know what GP is thinking. Sometimes it's obvious who will be taken (last three years were reasonably predictable), but other times, he'll do things you won't expect.
 
if a guy like barnes/beal/t-rob/MKG didnt want to come workout for us does geoff petrie normally take a dim view of this or does he just think "f um i will pick them anyway"???

C. Webb at first refused to come here, but it didn't stop Petrie from bringing him in anyway.

I'm referring to the trade of course, not the draft.
 
we'll make a trade and pick up a player in the mid first round



The 14th (HOU), 15th (PHI) and 16th (HOU) pciks are interesting given their potential links to names like Lowry, Dalembert, and Igoudala. Actually if you could find us a way to nab all three of those names I would declare our defensive woes largely a thing of the past.
 
After drafting Gerald Wallace without seeing him workout, Petrie has said he won't do it again. So presumably we will take someone that has worked out for us, or that we have at least seen workout for another team.

Considering where Wallace was drafted, he was one of the better picks Petrie ever made. Based on Wallace, Petrie should draft more players that he hasn't worked out, not less.
 
The 14th (HOU), 15th (PHI) and 16th (HOU) pciks are interesting given their potential links to names like Lowry, Dalembert, and Igoudala. Actually if you could find us a way to nab all three of those names I would declare our defensive woes largely a thing of the past.

I think that getting one will be difficult, all 3 would be impossible!

It would certainly make us a lot better but it all comes down to the same old chesnut...money!

Dalembert could happen since his deal is only partially guaranteed next season. Lowry could also happen since he is probably underpaid for what he brings but Iggy is too steep for our pockets!
 
At the risk of hi-jacking a thread, I don't think our plan is to trade down. I must admit that I am injecting a lot of "me" into that statement. I think you always go for quality, BPA, or whatever you want to call it. No matter how clever you work the trade, the over all skill of the team level drops by trading down. Get the skill and fight, scratch, and cheat to keep the skill. There could be a super star or two in the top 5 and trading down means we don't think we need a super star.

It is interesting who we have worked out now that Sacre has left. Maybe I have forgotten someone of the 2nd tier but Drummond, Henson, Zeller, and Sacre have been worked out in pretty short order. AND .... none other of the top 5. No, I don't think it means we aren't going to resign JT because I think that would be a major mistake but it shows we want a big guy and maybe a little of it is for insurance in case we can't resign JT because of money. (Damn Maloofs!) More likely, it is a solid rebuke of small ball.

Although I am 100% a follower of the "we need a defense, shotblocker" type of big guy, I also think that if we can't get one, we need a big guy anyway. We may be placed at an awkward position. Drummond may go before we pick and Henson would be a big reach at #5. All is not lost as we still have Hassan who I have confidence can play ball some day. Let's not forget that we have a shot blocker already. It is interesting we haven't brought in Robinson but it's way early in the work out process so let's not start to hyperventilate. We have to bring in Robinson, though, as he is the only guy besides Drummond within reach.

I smell a trade but I do not think it is a trade down. There are a couple teams with two first round picks, right? I say we go after one of those. That is as much a reason to work out guys who might be mid lottery picks as trading down.

I wish we needed offense or just a big competent center. When I was scouting Henson, Zeller caught my eye. This guy is fundamentally solid and as much as I dislike the term BBIQ, he's got it. He is quick posting up and a rough tough offensive player. As the videos I have seen didn't show his defense - do they ever? - my dirty little secret is that I would be happy with Zeller. Yes, Tyler Zeller. No one has discussed him and it is as if he is totally off the KingsFans radar. He is a legitimate 7' and 250 pounds. He passed college teammate Henson in the mock drafts or at least when I last looked. Makes no difference. You get what you see. He is not a project. I am talking about the illogical attraction to a certain player that I am sure all of us have. Did I mention he is 7'? :) Don't know his reach and don't care. This IS illogical, remember.

In closing, my fellow Americans and the stray non-American so sadly attracted to this team, we seem to be targeting a big man and that is OK by me. I also think there is a high chance that we are keeping #5 but trying to trade to get a lower pick in the lottery range.
 
SITUATION: MKG OFF THE BOARD
If we indeed trade down the most logical/realistic thing to do is a deal with our usual trading partner Houston send them #5/Hayes) for Dally/#14 and pick T. Jones.
 
Back
Top