That #2 pick and Marcus Thornton

[Bricklayer]

First, an apology to Marcus: I always seem to be trying to trade you man, but I actually think you're underrated.


Okay, so here's the story: "sources" say that the Bobcats are looking to trade that #2 pick, and furthermore that they want to trade it for an established player and relative sure thing, and furthermore that their target is James Harden (think of the Kings trading the #2 for Mitch Richmond back in the day). Furthermore, presumably "other" sources have been feeding the chatter that the Thunder are going to have to trade one of Durant, Westbrook, Harden and Ibaka, because next season Harden and Ibaka get paid, and they both could be near max contract guys, and no team can support 4 max contract guys.

So that's the background. And if "sources" are accurate there could be something there, as insane as it seems for the Thunder to have to break up just as they get started. Here's the story on the Bobcat's interest BTW: http://www.cbssports.com/nba/blog/eye-on-basketball/19352135/charlotte-looking-to-deal-no-2-pick


So I was thinking, what if we inserted ourselves into the middle of said deal? The Thunder are in the middle of their contending window. Maybe they do have to move Harden before he gets paid max. Maybe. But they aren't going to want to replace him with a kid who might not even pan out. They need somebody they can count on, and they need a reasonable contract that they can count on staying reasonable for years to come.

Enter the Marcus Thornton. Thornton is due to be paid $7.6mil $8.2mil and $8.7mil over the next three years. His numbers (18.7pts (.438 .345. 865) 3.7reb 1.9ast 1.4stl 0.2blk) are not as efficient as Harden's (16.8pts (.491 .390 .846) 4.1reb 3.7ast 1.0stl 0.2blk) but are in the same general class of players. Because Harden has the (IMO possibly undeserved) hype we would have to add something. But what about:

Sac:
OUT: Marcus Thornton + ?
IN: #2 pick

OKC:
OUT: James Harden
IN: Marcus Thornton + ?

Charlotte:
OUT: #2 pick
IN: James Harden


You can fill in your own "?", but it can't be a major piece for us or it makes little sense, and it can't be a contract because OKC is doing this to reduce its contract load going forward. OKC would be losing some ballhandling with Harden, so Jimmer? Of course he can't defend or handle well. And Maynor will return. Our relativley high second could be part of the package. As a second round pick again would save them from more salary, and this entire structure only becomes possible if OKC itself believes it has to save money and avoid paying all 4 of its top guys. A future pick again? I dunno, and we'd better get this turned around fast if we keep giving away our future picks. But whatever "?" is, as long as its not Cousins, Reke, presumably IT, or our #5 we are adding not subtracting.

For us, we have a pick we can then do things with. We can try to control the draft, take the Drummond gamble and get our MKG too for instance. Or whoever. Except when either Cleve or Wsh take our guy and leave us scrambling. We can try to flip either the #2 or #5 ourselves for a vet more to our liking. The downside is that it likely again leaves us so so young that the playoffs would be hard to make. We'd be the college All Stars.

 

[The_Jamal]

I'd think OKC would rather take Beal who's going to be a lot better/cheaper than Thornton.

 

[Bricklayer]

I'd think OKC would rather take Beal who's going to be a lot better/cheaper than Thornton.

Says you. And maybe its true. On the other hand, maybe its not. And OKC is trying to contend for titles every year now and would be relying on a 19yr old rookie to be their third gun on a title team? That's shaky to say the least.

BTW, I should have mentioned the #2 pick in the draft last year (Derrick Williams), well, first averaged 8.8pts on .412 shooting for a lottery team -- can't count on surefire production out of kids that young. But just as importantly got paid $4.6mil, with following years being $5.0mil, $5.3mil and $6.7mil. So its not actually that that much cheaper than Thornton's deal.

 

[bajaden]

First, an apology to Marcus: I always seem to be trying to trade you man, but I actually think you're underrated.


Okay, so here's the story: "sources" say that the Bobcats are looking to trade that #2 pick, and furthermore that they want to trade it for an established player and relative sure thing, and furthermore that their target is James Harden (think of the Kings trading the #2 for Mitch Richmond back in the day). Furthermore, presumably "other" sources have been feeding the chatter that the Thunder are going to have to trade one of Durant, Westbrook, Harden and Ibaka, because next season Harden and Ibaka get paid, and they both could be near max contract guys, and no team can support 4 max contract guys.

So that's the background. And if "sources" are accurate there could be something there, as insane as it seems for the Thunder to have to break up just as they get started. Here's the story on the Bobcat's interest BTW: http://www.cbssports.com/nba/blog/eye-on-basketball/19352135/charlotte-looking-to-deal-no-2-pick


So I was thinking, what if we inserted ourselves into the middle of said deal? The Thunder are in the middle of their contending window. Maybe they do have to move Harden before he gets paid max. Maybe. But they aren't going to want to replace him with a kid who might not even pan out. They need somebody they can count on, and they need a reasonable contract that they can count on staying reasonable for years to come.

Enter the Marcus Thornton. Thornton is due to be paid $7.6mil $8.2mil and $8.7mil over the next three years. His numbers (18.7pts (.438 .345. 865) 3.7reb 1.9ast 1.4stl 0.2blk) are not as efficient as Harden's (16.8pts (.491 .390 .846) 4.1reb 3.7ast 1.0stl 0.2blk) but are in the same general class of players. Because Harden has the (IMO possibly undeserved) hype we would have to add something. But what about:

Sac:
OUT: Marcus Thornton + ?
IN: #2 pick

OKC:
OUT: James Harden
IN: Marcus Thornton + ?

Charlotte:
OUT: #2 pick
IN: James Harden


You can fill in your own "?", but it can't be a major piece for us or it makes little sense, and it can't be a contract because OKC is doing this to reduce its contract load going forward. OKC would be losing some ballhandling with Harden, so Jimmer? Of course he can't defend or handle well. And Maynor will return. Our relativley high second could be part of the package. As a second round pick again would save them from more salary, and this entire structure only becomes possible if OKC itself believes it has to save money and avoid paying all 4 of its top guys. A future pick again? I dunno, and we'd better get this turned around fast if we keep giving away our future picks. But whatever "?" is, as long as its not Cousins, Reke, presumably IT, or our #5 we are adding not subtracting.

For us, we have a pick we can then do things with. We can try to control the draft, take the Drummond gamble and get our MKG too for instance. Or whoever. Except when either Cleve or Wsh take our guy and leave us scrambling. We can try to flip either the #2 or #5 ourselves for a vet more to our liking. The downside is that it likely again leaves us so so young that the playoffs would be hard to make. We'd be the college All Stars.

n

I think I'd do this trade. I like Thornton, but we have a lot of redunditcy with Thornton, Evans, Salmons, etc. We'd be young, but with the Maloofs not willing to spend the money they don't have, getting the best young players we can, may be the only avenue open to us to improve.

 

[gunks]

Love it.

But then, I'm a Thornton hater, so of course I love it.

 

[Kingster]

First, an apology to Marcus: I always seem to be trying to trade you man, but I actually think you're underrated.


Okay, so here's the story: "sources" say that the Bobcats are looking to trade that #2 pick, and furthermore that they want to trade it for an established player and relative sure thing, and furthermore that their target is James Harden (think of the Kings trading the #2 for Mitch Richmond back in the day). Furthermore, presumably "other" sources have been feeding the chatter that the Thunder are going to have to trade one of Durant, Westbrook, Harden and Ibaka, because next season Harden and Ibaka get paid, and they both could be near max contract guys, and no team can support 4 max contract guys.

So that's the background. And if "sources" are accurate there could be something there, as insane as it seems for the Thunder to have to break up just as they get started. Here's the story on the Bobcat's interest BTW: http://www.cbssports.com/nba/blog/eye-on-basketball/19352135/charlotte-looking-to-deal-no-2-pick


So I was thinking, what if we inserted ourselves into the middle of said deal? The Thunder are in the middle of their contending window. Maybe they do have to move Harden before he gets paid max. Maybe. But they aren't going to want to replace him with a kid who might not even pan out. They need somebody they can count on, and they need a reasonable contract that they can count on staying reasonable for years to come.

Enter the Marcus Thornton. Thornton is due to be paid $7.6mil $8.2mil and $8.7mil over the next three years. His numbers (18.7pts (.438 .345. 865) 3.7reb 1.9ast 1.4stl 0.2blk) are not as efficient as Harden's (16.8pts (.491 .390 .846) 4.1reb 3.7ast 1.0stl 0.2blk) but are in the same general class of players. Because Harden has the (IMO possibly undeserved) hype we would have to add something. But what about:

Sac:
OUT: Marcus Thornton + ?
IN: #2 pick

OKC:
OUT: James Harden
IN: Marcus Thornton + ?

Charlotte:
OUT: #2 pick
IN: James Harden


You can fill in your own "?", but it can't be a major piece for us or it makes little sense. OKC would be losing some ballhandling with Harden, so Jimmer? Of course he can't defend or handle well. And Maynor will return. Our relativley high second could be part of the package. As a second round pick again would save them from more salary, and this entire structure only becomes possible if OKC itself believes it has to save money and avoid paying all 4 of its top guys. A future pick again? I dunno, and we'd betetr get this turned aroudn fast if we keep giving away our future picks. But whatever "?" is, as long as its not Cousins, Reke, presumably IT, or our #5 we are adding not subtracting.

For us, we have a pick we can then do things with. We can try to control the draft, take the Drummond gamble and get our MKG too for instance. Or whoever. Except when either Cleve or Wsh take our guy and leave us scrambling. We can try to flip either the #2 or #5 ourselves for a vet more to our liking. The downside is that it likely again leaves us so so young that the playoffs would be hard to make. We'd be the college All Stars.

I like your thinking. I just want to add a few random thoughts to the mix. First, if true, this confirms the thinking that above all the Bobs are looking for a scorer. So if they can't get this kind of deal, it's likely they go for Beal in this draft, as opposed to MKG or Robinson.

Second, you are correct that the Kings would know they could get whoever the desire out of the non-Davis players, whereas right now they don't know. If they thought that MKG was a cut above Robinson and Beal, then I see them being interested in doing this kind of deal. I just have my doubts that they believe that MKG is that much better than either one of the other guys, and if they don't think he's that much better they aren't going to pay up with Thornton just for the sake of getting a 3. On the other hand, if the Kings really think that they are going to be totally screwed and get neither MKG, Robinson, or Beal, then I think they should get motivated to do this kind of deal.

Third, there is no way in hell that the 2nd pick in this draft is worth Harden. So OKC would have to really be cash strapped desperate to do the deal, or the Bobs would have to add a major dose of sweetner to the pot. Problem is, the Bobs don't have anybody to sweeten the pot with. So, maybe the Bobs go with Thornton and Jimmer for the #2. Then the Bobs would have two potential scorers. If we wan't something back in return, then we get their #1 next year with some kind of top 5 protection for the Bobs.

Lastly, if OKC is desperate and want to get rid of Harden, why not deal with them directly? How about if the Kings get Harden? The Kings have a lot more in "flexible pieces" to give OKC than the Bobs. That scenario would have a big domino effect on this team, but it would give this team a great outside shooting 2-guard who would complement Cousins extemely well. But playing devil's advocate with myself, probably the last thing OKC wants to do is trade Harden to the Kings. But, nothing ventured....

 

[The_Jamal]

Says you. And maybe its true. On the other hand, maybe its not. And OKC is trying to contend for titles every year now and would be relying on a 19yr old rookie to be their third gun on a title team? That's shaky to say the least.

BTW, I should have mentioned the #2 pick in the draft last year (Derrick Williams), well, first averaged 8.8pts on .412 shooting for a lottery team -- can't count on surefire production out of kids that young. But just as importantly got paid $4.6mil, with following years being $5.0mil, $5.3mil and $6.7mil. So its not actually that that much cheaper than Thornton's deal.

Well, outside of Irving, last years draft was a complete anamoly of garbage. When Faried and IT are at the top of the class (and project as future 6th-7th man type guys) you know the draft had very little overall talent. This year is obviously a totally different animal. Derrick Williams might have not even cracked the top 10 in this year's draft if he was in the pool

The reason OKC would be more inclined to grab Beal is he's going to be a Harden/Manu/Ray Allen type of guy really early out of the gate. He has that same high level of B-ball IQ, range, ability to create for himself, and smoothness to his game that they have. Plus, he's already a pretty good defender with the work ethic/athleticism to be great at the NBA level.

But hey, count me in if OKC wants Thornton. We can grab Beal with #2 and have one of MKG/Robinson/Drummond fall to us at 5.

Reke
Beal
MKG
JT
Cousins
with
IT
T-will
Defensive big

Looks like a damn solid 8-man rotation moving forward to me

 

[DesertFox]

I don't really care for having the #2 pick in this draft, as it seems 2-6 are equivalent, and the real depth is the back of the lottery.

But if the price is Thornton and a 2nd rounder or other low end filler (Whiteside/Jimmer/Honeyuctt), I can't complain. I'd much rather have Harden than the pick though. Talk about perfect backcourt with Tyreke.

 

[MassachusettsKingsFan]

I'd do something along these lines as well. As a matter of fact, I'd do just about any deal that doesn't involve Evans and Cousins that would bring in Dummond and MKG. THAT is how you build a core, with 3 of those core 4 having fantastic defensive potential.

I just think, like you said, Thornton doesn't have that value around the league. HE SHOULD, but he's so low key, so out of the spotlight, I just don't know how we get #2 for him unless we add one or two of our secondary pieces. I don't see how this gets done without us adding a guy like IT, our best asset left that I would actually trade. His contract would really help a team like OKC. I'd try and get Maynor back to help them shed a few more dollars. Always liked him.

However, I think they'd trade Perkins and do all they can to keep Ibaka and Harden... just looking at their cap quickly, if they can shed Perkins, Cook, and possibly Aldrich while letting there FA's go .. they may be able to retain Harden and Ibaka. I think thats what they would prefer to do. And if they ARE trading Perkins .. I'd take a look at a move for him as well.

 

[Bricklayer]

I'd do something along these lines as well. As a matter of fact, I'd do just about any deal that doesn't involve Evans and Cousins that would bring in Dummond and MKG. THAT is how you build a core, with 3 of those core 4 having fantastic defensive potential.

I just think, like you said, Thornton doesn't have that value around the league. HE SHOULD, but he's so low key, so out of the spotlight, I just don't know how we get #2 for him unless we add one or two of our secondary pieces. I don't see how this gets done without us adding a guy like IT, our best asset left that I would actually trade. His contract would really help a team like OKC. I'd try and get Maynor back to help them shed a few more dollars. Always liked him.

However, I think they'd trade Perkins and do all they can to keep Ibaka and Harden... just looking at their cap quickly, if they can shed Perkins, Cook, and possibly Aldrich while letting there FA's go .. they may be able to retain Harden and Ibaka. I think thats what they would prefer to do. And if they ARE trading Perkins .. I'd take a look at a move for him as well.

You are forgetting Westbrook gets paid this summer as well.

The fear, or theory for the fear at least, is that Durant, Westbrook, Harden and Ibaka (via big men's standard overpay) are collectively going to be paid $60+mil after next year, meaning you can't effectively field a team for less than maybe $85 to $90 mil or so (9-10 more players), with the super luxury tax, in Okalahoma City for a market.

I dunno where they are on it. I just know everyone has been chattering about it for months, and the numbers really don't add up for them. I'm also thinking there is a decent chance Charlotte may already have called us about Tyreke for the #2. So we may already have contact/a dialogue going, and if they want Harden, I'm all for helping them get him as long as we get Charlotte's pick out of it.

 

[Uncia03]

I don't really care for having the #2 pick in this draft, as it seems 2-6 are equivalent, and the real depth is the back of the lottery.

But if the price is Thornton and a 2nd rounder or other low end filler (Whiteside/Jimmer/Honeyuctt), I can't complain. I'd much rather have Harden than the pick though. Talk about perfect backcourt with Tyreke.

I think what you're missing in this proposal is that if it went down we'd have both the #2 pick and the #5 pick. Since though picks 2-6 might all be equivalent, what is important is that they are all high quality.

I like Thornton, but I'd also do this deal.

The real big question is the ? in regards to additions in the trade. I think that Harden has more value than the #2 pick, so you'd really have to sweeten it for OKC to bite.

So perhaps the Kings would include their 2nd round pick and the Bobcats would include their 2nd round pick, with both of them going to the Thunder. I'd be fine including our 2nd round pick and pretty much any piece outside Tyreke/Cousins to get the deal done. (Jimmer/Whiteside/IT/Garcia expiring, ect.)

Would you do this deal if the Thunder wanted both Sac's and Charlotte's 2nd round picks, and Charlotte agrees provided that we trade Garcia's expiring for Tyrus Thomas?

 

[DesertFox]

I think what you're missing in this proposal is that if it went down we'd have both the #2 pick and the #5 pick. Since though picks 2-6 might all be equivalent, what is important is that they are all high quality.

I like Thornton, but I'd also do this deal.

The real big question is the ? in regards to additions in the trade. I think that Harden has more value than the #2 pick, so you'd really have to sweeten it for OKC to bite.

So perhaps the Kings would include their 2nd round pick and the Bobcats would include their 2nd round pick, with both of them going to the Thunder. I'd be fine including our 2nd round pick and pretty much any piece outside Tyreke/Cousins to get the deal done. (Jimmer/Whiteside/IT/Garcia expiring, ect.)

Would you do this deal if the Thunder wanted both Sac's and Charlotte's 2nd round picks, and Charlotte agrees provided that we trade Garcia's expiring for Tyrus Thomas?

I know people here hate Tyrus Thomas, and its understandable, but if he plays like he did the 2 years before last, he'd be a great fit playing next to Cuz. But having 3 bad contracts (Salmons/Chuck/Tyrus) hurts, even if they should end right when the 2nd wave of youngsters (IT/2 rookies) will need big bucks.

Instead of Garcia, if they take Outlaw, a longer deal but still cheaper than Tyrus (and plays a similar position), then I'd be for it.

It's more of a balancing lateral move than a step forward, but I wouldn't hate it, provided they re-sign JT.

Then you can take any combination of BPA at 2 and 6.

 

[Glenn]

I don't know how all the details of any trade or series of trades/picks can be worked out but the key for me is to trade Thornton. I have said this for months and no one has backed me up or so it seems. I would trade him because he is great. I would trade him because he might get us a starting SF of quality or might get us a decent big man. Trade him for whatever we don't get in the draft. Thornton has value and he is also a part of what I think is an overstaffed guard group.

Most notes involving guards ignore the fact that Jimmer is on the team. It is as if he has been written off as a bust. That's premature. Perhaps if he had a set role, he could learn it and play it. That didn't happen last year which I think was partially his fault for having his confidence shot full of holes early in the season and then Smart's fault at the end of the year. Or maybe better put, he was the victim of an overloaded number of guards. Jimmer is not useless. Should I say, Jimmer will not be useless. He is a shooter on a team lacking shooters.

This is the problem of having a young team. When you think of trading and what the future holds, you don't even know the value of your own players. They are kids.

 

[upinsmoke]

Counting on Beal to produce big in the NBA may be a mistake. I'm not saying he won't but I don't see a OJ Mayo or Ray Allen type talent there more like Gary Neal. To count on Beal replacing our cold blooded game closer & leading scorer with a unproven rookie is nothing short of foolish.

K-Mart > Landry > MT > Beal?

 

[DesertFox]

I don't know how all the details of any trade or series of trades/picks can be worked out but the key for me is to trade Thornton. I have said this for months and no one has backed me up or so it seems. I would trade him because he is great. I would trade him because he might get us a starting SF of quality or might get us a decent big man. Trade him for whatever we don't get in the draft. Thornton has value and he is also a part of what I think is an overstaffed guard group.

Most notes involving guards ignore the fact that Jimmer is on the team. It is as if he has been written off as a bust. That's premature. Perhaps if he had a set role, he could learn it and play it. That didn't happen last year which I think was partially his fault for having his confidence shot full of holes early in the season and then Smart's fault at the end of the year. Or maybe better put, he was the victim of an overloaded number of guards. Jimmer is not useless. Should I say, Jimmer will not be useless. He is a shooter on a team lacking shooters.

This is the problem of having a young team. When you think of trading and what the future holds, you don't even know the value of your own players. They are kids.

As long as you go into the season with him as the 4th guard (ie not top 8), I think that will be perfect. He will get 10 min a game to show what he's got, and will have his chances for longer with injuries and matchups and such. But at the same time, you are not relying on him to contribute next year.

Similarly for Whiteside, except put him in the 5th big role with a chance to compete for the 4th spot. Because at least with guards, if there's an injury you can slide a Garcia/Salmons/Twill over there to take pressure off Jimmer. If you hand Whiteside the 4th big spot, you're one injury away from relying on him for 25+ min.

 

[SacTownKid]

Not enough shooting with that team left. You go from one of the better shooting shooting guards to a combo guard who can't shoot filled out with a small forward who can't shoot. If you want to survive in the NBA these days you have to be able to shoot the ball. Evans/MKG/Drummond will not get it done, they'd be lucky to score 80 points a game and Evans would croak half way through the season with all the work he'd have to put in to drive to the rim.

 

[Big Cuz 15]

I don't know how all the details of any trade or series of trades/picks can be worked out but the key for me is to trade Thornton. I have said this for months and no one has backed me up or so it seems. I would trade him because he is great. I would trade him because he might get us a starting SF of quality or might get us a decent big man. Trade him for whatever we don't get in the draft. Thornton has value and he is also a part of what I think is an overstaffed guard group.

Most notes involving guards ignore the fact that Jimmer is on the team. It is as if he has been written off as a bust. That's premature. Perhaps if he had a set role, he could learn it and play it. That didn't happen last year which I think was partially his fault for having his confidence shot full of holes early in the season and then Smart's fault at the end of the year. Or maybe better put, he was the victim of an overloaded number of guards. Jimmer is not useless. Should I say, Jimmer will not be useless. He is a shooter on a team lacking shooters.

This is the problem of having a young team. When you think of trading and what the future holds, you don't even know the value of your own players. They are kids.

Ive been pushing to trade mt. He can score in bunches but thats it. He would be great coming off the bench not in the first unit. We need to have reke and cuz as the focal points and the rest of the team play off them. Mt could possibly fetch us that sf we need.

 

[mac]

Counting on Beal to produce big in the NBA may be a mistake. I'm not saying he won't but I don't see a OJ Mayo or Ray Allen type talent there more like Gary Neal. To count on Beal replacing our cold blooded game closer & leading scorer with a unproven rookie is nothing short of foolish.

K-Mart > Landry > MT > Beal?

Huh??? When did Beal come into the picture? We'd use our two picks to get MKG and either Drummond or Robinson.

 

[Sac.1989]

Solid proposal though I'd rather we attempt to sell Thornton on coming off the bench. That to me is the best proposition and our way to the top. If that fails then we can look into trading him

 

[ParniValjak]

I would do it in a heartbeat! We won't have the money to get better via free agency so our best approach would be to load up with talented kids a d grow together. We also address the backcourt overload by trading MT

 

[pshn80]

When do we read about it in the paper? Let's do it and move on. Draft day is coming.

 

[gunks]

I don't know how all the details of any trade or series of trades/picks can be worked out but the key for me is to trade Thornton. I have said this for months and no one has backed me up or so it seems. I would trade him because he is great. I would trade him because he might get us a starting SF of quality or might get us a decent big man. Trade him for whatever we don't get in the draft. Thornton has value and he is also a part of what I think is an overstaffed guard group.

Most notes involving guards ignore the fact that Jimmer is on the team. It is as if he has been written off as a bust. That's premature. Perhaps if he had a set role, he could learn it and play it. That didn't happen last year which I think was partially his fault for having his confidence shot full of holes early in the season and then Smart's fault at the end of the year. Or maybe better put, he was the victim of an overloaded number of guards. Jimmer is not useless. Should I say, Jimmer will not be useless. He is a shooter on a team lacking shooters.

This is the problem of having a young team. When you think of trading and what the future holds, you don't even know the value of your own players. They are kids.

Hey man, I've been on the trade Thornton bandwagon since we resigned him! And for exactly the reasons you mentioned. He is redundant, and also has the most value outside of Reke or Cousins.

 

[kingsfan101]

You are forgetting Westbrook gets paid this summer as well.

The fear, or theory for the fear at least, is that Durant, Westbrook, Harden and Ibaka (via big men's standard overpay) are collectively going to be paid $60+mil after next year, meaning you can't effectively field a team for less than maybe $85 to $90 mil or so (9-10 more players), with the super luxury tax, in Okalahoma City for a market.

I dunno where they are on it. I just know everyone has been chattering about it for months, and the numbers really don't add up for them. I'm also thinking there is a decent chance Charlotte may already have called us about Tyreke for the #2. So we may already have contact/a dialogue going, and if they want Harden, I'm all for helping them get him as long as we get Charlotte's pick out of it.

I'm okay with trading MT. Like him, but there's just no place for 3 small guards on the team. Jimmer hasn't shown much yet, and would like to see IT show it once teams scout him more, still feel that we have too many people at that position (Cisco/Salmons can also play that, particularly if we bring TW back to play SF). Given that he's the best of our 3 small guards, we might get something out of it.

As for getting number 2 for him and some filler, I doubt it. Some people believe that OKC shall let Ibaka go before Harden, but given their lack of depth without him (I really like Collison, and Perkins is also decent, but Ibaka is their best big guy, and can't be replaced easy), I think they keep him before Harden. Along with Thabo, Maynor back next year, and Fisher (if he resigns), they may be able to replace Harden more easily.

I just don't see MT in that role. Harden accepted coming off the bench, and play within the team structure. MT might not. Plus, he's too much of a gunner. It's fine for us, where he is our best perimeter threat. On a team with Durant (and others who can stroke well), that might not be so acceptable. Plus, he gambles a lot on defense, something, which might not be acceptable in OKC.

Can he overcome these deficiencies with proper structure and leadership around him? Maybe. However, I feel that OKC shall be looking for a lot more than MT plus a filler/low draft pick for him.

 

[Mass]

MT for the 2nd pick? Where do I sign? And I like Thornton, I think he is a very clutch player on a reasonable contract, but if we have a chance to add MKG and Drummond together, we can't pass on it.

 

[ParniValjak]

MT for the 2nd pick? Where do I sign? And I like Thornton, I think he is a very clutch player on a reasonable contract, but if we have a chance to add MKG and Drummond together, we can't pass on it.

With picks 2 and 5, you MUST walk away with more than just super role players (MKG) and a high risk high reward prospect (Drummond). One of those picks has to be a safe potential all-star at best, very productive player at worst type pick otherwise in 5 years time you might have nothing than a great role player to show for your trouble.

 

[Mass]

So, who would you pick? I'd get MKG before Barnes and Beal, and Drummond before Robinson. In my opinion Drummond has the potential to be a beast. If we have #2 and #5, we can go with the safe pick at 2 and with the high risk high reward pick with the 5. If everything works out well, we have our starting lineup for the next 15 years.

Personally, I don't see any "safe potential all star at best players" in the draft, maybe just Davis, but we won't get a shot at him. If there were, Charlotte wouldn't trade the pick.

 

[ParniValjak]

So, who would you pick? I'd get MKG before Barnes and Beal, and Drummond before Robinson. In my opinion Drummond has the potential to be a beast. If we have #2 and #5, we can go with the safe pick at 2 and with the high risk high reward pick with the 5. If everything works out well, we have our starting lineup for the next 15 years.

Personally, I don't see any "safe potential all star at best players" in the draft, maybe just Davis, but we won't get a shot at him. If there were, Charlotte wouldn't trade the pick.

I like both players. MKG is the glue guy and a leader that this team desperately needs. In terms of leadership, he can walk in and just lead by example and set the tone for the rest and he is still a teenager. However, he is never going to be an all-star type of player. His offensive game is limited in a major way. His shot is just all wrong I very much doubt it can every be fixed. Tyreke's action is ugly but his jumpshot can improve. Just as Kevin Martin's jumpshot is ugly but he has improved it significantly from his first season in the NBA.

With MKG, his action is just all wrong. His elbow is always out and by a fair margin. He has that hitch where he throws the ball out rather than release it. There is just way too many things to fix in that action for it to ever be a dependable jump shot.

MKG's value is in the intangibles that he brings and for a team like us that is gold but that's not what superstars or perennial all-stars are built on and that is something I think MKG will lack.

Drummond is a high risk, high reward pick and lets be honest, he is a greater chance to bust than he is to be superstar. He has all the physical tools but what he lacks is something that has prevented many players from reaching their potential. If you give Drummond MKG's worth ethic, intensity and passion for the game, the dude will be a mega star. But the lack of those things often leads to flops.

If you are losing MT, then you have to find a 3rd option type of guy in one of those 2 picks. Someone that can come in, stay out of the way for Cousins and Tyreke and get his 18ppg by being a good efficient shooter who plays off others, rather than create for them. If you don't get that guy, you are one offensive "specialist" short.

In this scenario, I would probably go with Barnes and Drummond (not in particular order). I am in no way a huge Barnes fan but I do think than in right system he is a borderline all-star type player (think Sacramento version of Peja -though not as good a shooter as Peja - , a good version of Rashard Lewis). Those guys are good 2nd or 3rd offensive option on good teams but not the guys that are all stars on average teams). So that would be some of the shooting and scoring replaced with MT's departure and a better balanced offensive trio as you now have C - SF - G trios as opposed to 1 big man and 2 guards. Barnes also has good size for position and he does have a good defensive potential so a better balanced team in the end.

Drummond would be the high risk high reward pick. At worst, he is a big body with great defensive potential and a role player next to Cousins. At best, he is a beast. With those 2 picks, you probably walk away from the draft happy and in 5 years time you either look solid or you basically cleaned up with a superstar and a borderline all-star.

 

[Big Cuz 15]

I like both players. MKG is the glue guy and a leader that this team desperately needs. In terms of leadership, he can walk in and just lead by example and set the tone for the rest and he is still a teenager. However, he is never going to be an all-star type of player. His offensive game is limited in a major way. His shot is just all wrong I very much doubt it can every be fixed. Tyreke's action is ugly but his jumpshot can improve. Just as Kevin Martin's jumpshot is ugly but he has improved it significantly from his first season in the NBA.

With MKG, his action is just all wrong. His elbow is always out and by a fair margin. He has that hitch where he throws the ball out rather than release it. There is just way too many things to fix in that action for it to ever be a dependable jump shot.

MKG's value is in the intangibles that he brings and for a team like us that is gold but that's not what superstars or perennial all-stars are built on and that is something I think MKG will lack.

Drummond is a high risk, high reward pick and lets be honest, he is a greater chance to bust than he is to be superstar. He has all the physical tools but what he lacks is something that has prevented many players from reaching their potential. If you give Drummond MKG's worth ethic, intensity and passion for the game, the dude will be a mega star. But the lack of those things often leads to flops.

If you are losing MT, then you have to find a 3rd option type of guy in one of those 2 picks. Someone that can come in, stay out of the way for Cousins and Tyreke and get his 18ppg by being a good efficient shooter who plays off others, rather than create for them. If you don't get that guy, you are one offensive "specialist" short.

In this scenario, I would probably go with Barnes and Drummond (not in particular order). I am in no way a huge Barnes fan but I do think than in right system he is a borderline all-star type player (think Sacramento version of Peja -though not as good a shooter as Peja - , a good version of Rashard Lewis). Those guys are good 2nd or 3rd offensive option on good teams but not the guys that are all stars on average teams). So that would be some of the shooting and scoring replaced with MT's departure and a better balanced offensive trio as you now have C - SF - G trios as opposed to 1 big man and 2 guards. Barnes also has good size for position and he does have a good defensive potential so a better balanced team in the end.

Drummond would be the high risk high reward pick. At worst, he is a big body with great defensive potential and a role player next to Cousins. At best, he is a beast. With those 2 picks, you probably walk away from the draft happy and in 5 years time you either look solid or you basically cleaned up with a superstar and a borderline all-star.

cuz, drummond, mkg, reke, jimmer or twill would be nasty. won't happen... lol

3 guys who can play good defense in drummond, mkg and reke.

 

[roasthawg]

Hey man, I've been on the trade Thornton bandwagon since we resigned him! And for exactly the reasons you mentioned. He is redundant, and also has the most value outside of Reke or Cousins.

He's only redundant if Jimmer is ready to play. Not enough shooters on this team as is.

 

[HighFlyingMonkey]

I may be in the minority but I'm not a fan of this proposal.

In my opinion the Kings already have a nucleus of talent that could get to the playoffs if surrounded by the right roleplayers. We honestly don't need BOTH the #2 and #5 picks to get those roleplayers. All we really need is a 3&D SF and a rim protecting big to the current nucleus. Lets say we grab Drummond with #5.

Isaiah/Jimmer
Evans/Thornton
???/Williams
Drummond/Thompson
Cousins/Hayes

Where the ??? can be filled by either one of the roster stepping up (Outlaw? Honeycutt?), or by trade/FA. Thats three main guards (Jimmer being the situational guy), three main bigs (Hayes being the situational guy), and two wings. Thornton actually has a valuable role in that rotation being the sparkplug bench anchor. Losing him would just create another hole because a Jimmer/Williams/Thompson bench would lack scoring punch. You would be hoping for Jimmer to take huge leaps that I don't think he's ready to make. If you trade him for #2, you could fill another roleplayer gap but thats just a waste for the #2 pick.

Its not worth it for the Kings in my opinion, especially since its year 3 for DMC, and year 3 is when players usually make their superstar leap. This team needs to be balanced because DMC alone could carry us to the playoffs with the right roleplayers. Add in a Tyreke with a jumper? Who knows.