Thought Experiment: Klay Thompson

Yes? No?

  • Yes

    Votes: 10 40.0%

  • No

    Votes: 12 48.0%

  • I'm torn. Waffling. I have no spine and will just writhe around in the mud till a bird spots me.

    Votes: 3 12.0%
  • Total voters
    25
Bricklayer

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
#1
#1
Disclaimer: I have always considered the alleged targeting by us of Klay earlier in the year as silliness. Why would Golden State give him up? Still do, mostly. Here is an interesting attempt though. I'll mention Golden State's excuse, but mostly the question is:

Would you do it?

Sacto Trades
Ben McLemore $3.0mil/$3.2mil(team option)/$4.0mil(team option)
#7-9 pick (i.e. we don't make Top 3) -- we would have to make the trade on draft day, draft for G.S.
Carl Landry $6.8mil/$6.8mil/$6.8mil

Golden State trades
Klay Thompson $4.5mil ending (restricted F.A.)
Marressee Speights $3.7mil/#3.8mil (team option)

I'll just throw out the G.S. excuse: with 3 huge contracts on the books, won't be able to pay Klay after next season. Clear room for Barnes to start next to Iggy. Get Ben as the prospect to assume the position, and the #7-#9.

Then for us:
The Bad: lose Ben, lose the pick
The Good: gain maybe the perfect fit as spacer for Cuz, free ourselves of the Landry contract (Speights is basically an ender)
 
ockingsfan

ockingsfan

Starter
#2
#2
Ben and the number 7 pick is too much. plus why would GW want Landry's bloated contract? They can save the money and just resign Thompson.

I think Barnes is more attainable than Thompson.
 
R

randymoss1881

Starter
#3
#3
I still don't get why people think Klay will be available any time soon. His contract extension (he will get one) won't kick in untill Lee is off the books which means they will have enough money. Plus we have our own Klay
 
TyFreak Evans

TyFreak Evans

Bench
#4
#4
Bricklayer said:
Disclaimer: I have always considered the alleged targeting by us of Klay earlier in the year as silliness. Why would Golden State give him up? Still do, mostly. Here is an interesting attempt though. I'll mention Golden State's excuse, but mostly the question is:

Would you do it?

Sacto Trades
Ben McLemore $3.0mil/$3.2mil(team option)/$4.0mil(team option)
#7-9 pick (i.e. we don't make Top 3) -- we would have to make the trade on draft day, draft for G.S.
Carl Landry $6.8mil/$6.8mil/$6.8mil

Golden State trades
Klay Thompson $4.5mil ending (restricted F.A.)
Marressee Speights $3.7mil/#3.8mil (team option)

I'll just throw out the G.S. excuse: with 3 huge contracts on the books, won't be able to pay Klay after next season. Clear room for Barnes to start next to Iggy. Get Ben as the prospect to assume the position, and the #7-#9.

Then for us:
The Bad: lose Ben, lose the pick
The Good: gain maybe the perfect fit as spacer for Cuz, free ourselves of the Landry contract (Speights is basically an ender)
Click to expand...
If you can find a way to replace Ben with someone on the roster not named DeMarcus or Ray, I may consider the proposal to be legit. Until that happens, however, I don't want any part of your proposal.
 
K

KingMilz

Guest
#7
#7
Nah no way, better off trading for Harrison Barnes if Gay leaves and keeping the pick as well as Mclemore. No way is Klay Thompson worth two top 7 picks honestly right now there's not a SG in the NBA worth that for us looking at it long term (do not want James zero defense/heart Harden)
 
funkykingston

funkykingston

Super Moderator
Staff member
#8
#8
I said no, but the reality is that it depends on the situation. If Gay were to opt out and IT leave via free agency then yeah, I'd consider it.

If Rudy and Isaiah are back next season then I don't see the value in giving up that much to acquire another scorer who needs shots. Better to deal the pick and possibly McLemore and whatever else to acquire a defensive big as you can pick up wing shooters that would give you 80% of what Thompson would for MUCH less considering how much Klay will command when he's up for an extension. Two guys I wanted to see the Kings pickup last offseason (Dorrell Wright and Anthony Morrow) signed for around $3 million and $1 million respectively.

Maybe not a popular opinion around here but I'd still prefer to go after Larry Sanders, especially if the Bucks would be willing to deal him for cap relief/ending contracts at this point.
 
MassachusettsKingsFan

MassachusettsKingsFan

All-Star
#13
#13
Leaning towards no.

I'm likely not as high on Thompson as most. And I'm even less of a McLemore fan, but Ben's ceiling is probably higher. And the pick. I don't know.

If that's the package I rather target Rondo. Or someone else. That's what I'm getting hung up on, really. If we want to trade Ben and the pick - fine! but I think we can get more than Thompson for it.

And the Landry dump is what it is. His value is in the tank right now, and for good reason, but I still think he can be an effective bench scorer when he's healthy. I'd love to dump the contract, but I don't think we NEED to dump it. He'll play next year and probably be just fine.

One of Landry or Thompson likely needs to go. Just too much money hung up on backup 4's. Thompson is much easier to trade, and while certain aspects of his game are certainly better, and he is the player I prefer, I do think both players overall production is comparable. As long as one of them leaves, I'm fine with the other.
 
rainmaker

rainmaker

Hall of Famer
#15
#15
It wouldn't be my first option. I'd prefer turning a sub-top 3 pick into a defensive PF to put next to Cuz. I'd also use that pick in a package to try to get a starting PG. Sign and trade for Bledsoe perhaps?

But, I'd consider it. I've probably watched more Klay than most here being in the GS media market. He'd spread to floor, is an underrated defender and continues to add to his game. Has improved his ability to get into the post and get some tough baskets. He also however passes less than just about any player in the NBA. Pretty sure he's top 5 in the league in fewest passes per touch.

My problem with it is starting SG ranks third on our list of needs. I'm not confident in Ben but IMO our two next vital steps are a starting PG and a defensive PF. Bring back our current PG's and put Klay out there, he too won't have much of a role as currently our PG's when combined with Rudy/Cuz are out there, there is no role for our SG's. If we go after Klay, we need a PG which makes much more sense next to a Klay/Rudy/Cuz trio. Put Klay in a position where he's getting far fewer touches and only 6-8 shots up, it's quite a waste of an acquisition. He needs more than the Ben role but our current makeup doesn't allow that.

Get a Sean Livingston or Rubio, then Klay makes much more sense next to either of them and Rudy/Cuz. Not sure we could do it, but if we could somehow get Asik which Hou will not get good offers for given his salary next year, combined with Lin also having a huge bump in salary, and sign Livingston in free agency, a

Livingston
Klay
Rudy
Asik
Boogie

lineup would a huge step in the right direction compared to where we currently are. Not sure if that's possible with our cap situation though. If we let IT walk and run Ray as the backup PG, might be doable.
 
Last edited:
P

pshn80

Starter
#16
#16
randymoss1881 said:
The real question would be would you trade 7 and one of JT for Barnes.



I still believe every shooter struggles there first year
Click to expand...
But not in so many ways - mishandling passes, missing layup after layup for the same reason, going too fast, making bad passes, screwing up simple dribbling assignments, going the wrong on defense when on a man, I'm sure I have not covered them all. Sometimes it looks like he played baseball instead of basketball during his coffe stop in college. With his hand size and speed he would be a great candidate for the outfield in MLB. So how well he might shoot someday doesn't seem to have much to do with it. Maybe I 'm wrong but the clues have been enormous.
 
King Baller

King Baller

All-Star
#17
#17
I don't do it and here is why:

Ben - Pete and crew spent a First on Ben. When you do that you should plan to spend 3 years developing that player.
This years pick - While I have no problem trading this pick, this deal is not the right one IMO.
Landry - I would like to see at least half a season of how he would be utilized in the current Kings team before I pass judgement

Klay - While some fans see him as Mitch Richmond 2.0 I don't think he will look as good away from the GSW.
 
P

pshn80

Starter
#18
#18
I voted 'yes' but I don't look for him to be a King and it won't hurt my feelings if we don't. As someone else said he may leave some of his effectiveness in Golden State.
 
Hadlowe

Hadlowe

Starter
#20
#20
I like Klay on the team. Klay functions mostly as a catch and shoot guy, but has added a respectable post-up game this year, something I always wanted to see from Tyreke. Use that size advantage over the smaller 2 guards out there. If Gay stays, that gives you three excellent half-court options in Gay, Cousins, or Thompson.

I still think there is a missing piece there. IT is respectable but not great from three. Ditto Rudy. That leaves the 2 as the only reliable floor spacer. That still leaves Sacramento pretty far behind in the western conference three pointer arms race. IOW, Klay is a good first step, but I don't know that he is enough to open up the floor for the Kings.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.