Trading Down

[Bricklayer]

Ok, this is not a concept I am fond of -- on the contrary, I want to trade up to nab one of the Brandon Wright/Horford/Jianlian trio. But there was an interesting report today that the Sixers were high on Spenser Hawes and looking to move up. The Sixers own the #12, #21, and #30 picks in the draft. We're sitting at #10. If Geoff for instance liked Jason Smith as much as Hawes, or Thornton as much as Green, or whatever, make the swap down for the #12 and #21 (they will of course offer #12 and #30), get our guy anyway, and get the extra pick?

 

[VF21]

I'd do it in a heartbeat. In fact, half a heartbeat.

Whomever we get isn't going to make an instant impact anyway. I'd rather have more pieces to work with for the future.

Get er' done!

 

[fnordius]

I've mentioned the idea before too, both because we need more than one player, and because it mitigates risk somewhat... you may get a dog at #10, but if you have 2-3 lower picks you're almost certain to have something positive to show for it. (It limits our potential upside, too, but that's the breaks.)

I'm not at all opposed to the idea, if Petrie is willing to have workouts for the potential sleepers and pick wisely. Which means he'd better get busy immediately.

 

[nbrans]

Yeah, there's also the possibility of trading down with Detroit (15, 27, 57), which I suggested in some thread or another.

If the non-Hawes bigs are gone I think it could be a smart move. I really don't like the Hawes/J. Wright/Green crew, and I think the raw guys with big potential (Jason Smith, Thad Young) are going to be there around 12-15, and then you have the intriguing guys like Fesenko, Taurean Green, Ali Traore around 30.

 

[BMiller52]

I wouldn't do it because I think we have a decent shot at Jianlian or Conley.

 

[artest93fan]

I wouldn't do it because I think we have a decent shot at Jianlian or Conley.

i agree plus i think that hawes will be there when they pick at 12

 

[nbrans]

Well, what you would do is have a contingency trade in place where you establish that if X person is available the Kings are going to keep the pick in case Jianlian or B. Wright is available, but if he's not then it triggers the trade. This is why these things always happen on draft day.

 

[HndsmCelt]

Well it's a nive plan B or maybe plan M. But I would hope that it is obvious to EVERYONE that the Kings really need to trade up. Ther really have a failry tallented roster to pick from and noting to loose by trading them off for high picks... heck if I could get rid of half the roster and get back 2 top 5 picks at this stage I'd do it.

 

[VF21]

Well it's a nive plan B or maybe plan M. But I would hope that it is obvious to EVERYONE that the Kings really need to trade up. Ther really have a failry tallented roster to pick from and noting to loose by trading them off for high picks... heck if I could get rid of half the roster and get back 2 top 5 picks at this stage I'd do it.

Unfortunately, in order for the Kings to trade up, someone at 1-9 has to trade down. And it's not looking real promising.

Let's be realistic. If our roster was that good, we wouldn't be in the fix we're in. We have ill-matched spare parts and no cohesion whatsoever. We have players making way too much money who will probably only leave if Petrie can get Ainge drunk and take compromising pictures. We just aren't in a good position to do much at this point. That's why I think Bricklayer's plan, which does give us another pick, is at least worth thinking about.

 

[mdme]

Unfortunately, in order for the Kings to trade up, someone at 1-9 has to trade down. And it's not looking real promising.

Let's be realistic. If our roster was that good, we wouldn't be in the fix we're in. We have ill-matched spare parts and no cohesion whatsoever. We have players making way too much money who will probably only leave if Petrie can get Ainge drunk and take compromising pictures. We just aren't in a good position to do much at this point. That's why I think Bricklayer's plan, which does give us another pick, is at least worth thinking about.

what about a hybrid plan? Trade someone from our roster for one of those 21-30picks? that way, we keep #10 and get another one at 21-30...maybe unload some salary in the process too.

 

[Sptsjunkie]

Ok, this is not a concept I am fond of -- on the contrary, I want to trade up to nab one of the Brandon Wright/Horford/Jianlian trio. But there was an interesting report today that the Sixers were high on Spenser Hawes and looking to move up. The Sixers own the #12, #21, and #30 picks in the draft. We're sitting at #10. If Geoff for instance liked Jason Smith as much as Hawes, or Thornton as much as Green, or whatever, make the swap down for the #12 and #21 (they will of course offer #12 and #30), get our guy anyway, and get the extra pick?

I like the idea in theory, but would want to wait until draft day to make the move. Every year it seems that one or two players randomly drop way too low. I would certainly want the 12 and 21 more than I would want Noah or Green; however, if we made that trade tomorrow and then Conley or Brewer dropped it could be a costly mistake.

 

[ParniValjak]

While our roster is made up of mis-matched parts that don't function well together, it doesn't mean that one or more of those mis-matched parts wouldn't function better in other environments. A lot of our players that are mis-matched here would function much better in other systems and their cuurent standing in our system doesn't neccessarily reflect their market value.

SAR might struggle a bit in our team but if you put him next to Ben Wallace and Lou Deng in Chicago he would be a much better fit there than here. Because he is not quite a good fit here, does that mean his value on the trade market is low? Of course not but its not over th etop either.

We have pieces that could be good fits in other systems and every GM worth their weight knows that and while they might try to get that piece on the cheap to start off with, they will eventually get that piece in what is a true reflexion of players worth.

As for trading down, why not if there is no one that slides from the PF group. If Hawes is there, I suspect we will draft him because he is your typycal Petrie player in that he is fundamentaly sound and has a good basketball IQ. If Petrie prefers Smith and Hawes is there at 10, there is no reason why we should given Philly a call and see if they would trade 12 and 21 for 10. I would even be happy with 12 and 30.

 

[ParniValjak]

I like the idea in theory, but would want to wait until draft day to make the move. Every year it seems that one or two players randomly drop way too low. I would certainly want the 12 and 21 more than I would want Noah or Green; however, if we made that trade tomorrow and then Conley or Brewer dropped it could be a costly mistake.

If that ttrade does happen, it won't happen before the draft. If it does happen it will be a case of us waiting and seeing whats there @ 10 and if we thing the player we like would still be @ 12, give Philly a call and do the deal.

 

[kupman]

I'd do it in a heartbeat. In fact, half a heartbeat.

Whomever we get isn't going to make an instant impact anyway. I'd rather have more pieces to work with for the future.

Get er' done!

I would be TOTALLY on board with this trade. The difference between #10 and #12 is negligible. Then double the chances of getting a good pick by getting two first round picks? - well, I love the idea.

However, I do not think that even the 76ers are dumb enough to do it.

 

[HndsmCelt]

Unfortunately, in order for the Kings to trade up, someone at 1-9 has to trade down. And it's not looking real promising.

Let's be realistic. If our roster was that good, we wouldn't be in the fix we're in. We have ill-matched spare parts and no cohesion whatsoever. We have players making way too much money who will probably only leave if Petrie can get Ainge drunk and take compromising pictures. We just aren't in a good position to do much at this point. That's why I think Bricklayer's plan, which does give us another pick, is at least worth thinking about.

Like I siad it is a nice back up plan IF indeed one of the 1-9 (realisticaly 1-5) picks just can not be had. Sure the current roster is a nightmare of mismatched parts who did not jell but there IS tallent there, not as much as we would like but to be honest this really was a team that with GOOD coaching could have been an number 8 seed. In a very twisted way Muss did the team a favor by being as bad as he was and improving our pick (sure a few more L's would have beena lot better). Not sure what we have that top pick teams may NEED or even want but Bibby, Artest, Martin all have trade value. SAR, Miller and Cisco might be moved to fill spesific needs of some teams bu not as likely.

But agin I have to agree that the chances of a trade that moves the Kings in to a top 5 pick are not good... just the BEST plan.

 

[Vlade4GM]

I still take Hawes over Smith and whoever we like at 21. I like Smith but he's getting vastly overrated here just because he's got good hops which for all we know he'll never get to use in the NBA and he'll never be a good defender.

 

[Vlade4GM]

Well it's a nive plan B or maybe plan M. But I would hope that it is obvious to EVERYONE that the Kings really need to trade up. Ther really have a failry tallented roster to pick from and noting to loose by trading them off for high picks... heck if I could get rid of half the roster and get back 2 top 5 picks at this stage I'd do it.

How are the kings going to trade up? We don't have anything with that much value that we'd be willing to give up.

 

[fnordius]

How are the kings going to trade up? We don't have anything with that much value that we'd be willing to give up.

(In other words, we've got nothing but Kevin Martin.)

 

[Bricklayer]

How are the kings going to trade up? We don't have anything with that much value that we'd be willing to give up.

Oh that's just being silly. We've got a #10 pick and all we have to do is move 5 spots.

Do we have anything that we could trade for the #5 directly? Mayhap no. But we've got multiple things that could, under the right circumstances, be worth 5 draft spots. Player + #10 for #5, #4, #3 etc. We ain't THAT bare.

 

[ParniValjak]

Oh that's just being silly. We've got a #10 pick and all we have to do is move 5 spots.

Do we have anything that we could trade for the #5 directly? Mayhap no. But we've got multiple things that could, under the right circumstances, be worth 5 draft spots. Player + #10 for #5, #4, #3 etc. We ain't THAT bare.

Agreed.

Celtics reportedly like Thornton and he will be there @ 10. Whats to say that we can't trade pick 10 and a player for pick 5 with or without another player coming our way?!

To move up 5 spots wouldn't cost us crown jewels.

 

[Spike]

Guess it depends on how bad the Celtics want to keep Paul Pierce. Would they take Bibby for the #5 straight up? Sounds crazy, but PP may not want to be part of a total rebuild. That's a pretty solid duo in the East (again, in the East). There's also a bit of youthful talent on that roster as well. Delonte West, a starter he is not...at least not yet.

 

[Gary]

Ok, this is not a concept I am fond of -- on the contrary, I want to trade up to nab one of the Brandon Wright/Horford/Jianlian trio. But there was an interesting report today that the Sixers were high on Spenser Hawes and looking to move up. The Sixers own the #12, #21, and #30 picks in the draft. We're sitting at #10. If Geoff for instance liked Jason Smith as much as Hawes, or Thornton as much as Green, or whatever, make the swap down for the #12 and #21 (they will of course offer #12 and #30), get our guy anyway, and get the extra pick?

Would do that with the quickness.

I have been liking what I have seen from Jason Smith. He isn't your run of the mill unathletic white guy... He has size, rebounding, and athleticism. Plus this is someone that will go about 12-16. If we were to draft for another team at #10, and then they were to draft for us and give us that extra pick I would be all for that. Even if it was a #30. We could nab my favorite... NICK FAZEKAS

 

[Gary]

i agree plus i think that hawes will be there when they pick at 12

Not if we were to take him and then hold him for ransom. That could blow up in our face, but I would think it would all be pre-arranged.

 

[Kingster]

I wouldn't do it because I think we have a decent shot at Jianlian or Conley.

Well then, maybe Petrie would make the trade on draft day only if those guys aren't there. I'd like to see him get an extra #1 and extra #2 on a trade like this.

 

[Kingster]

what about a hybrid plan? Trade someone from our roster for one of those 21-30picks? that way, we keep #10 and get another one at 21-30...maybe unload some salary in the process too.

Or trade someone (Bibby) in a deal that involves getting a top 10 pick. Or, we could do both - trade down to get 2 #1s, trade Bibby to get another #1. Then end up with three #1s on draft day.

 

[Jerichoholic]

Or trade someone (Bibby) in a deal that involves getting a top 10 pick. Or, we could do both - trade down to get 2 #1s, trade Bibby to get another #1. Then end up with three #1s on draft day.

From what I understand Bibby can't be involved in any trades prior to draft day because of his ETO clause in his contract. However I believe another #1 could be had in an Artest trade and then trading down from #10 to anyone who might want Hawes or Conley could net us another, still ending up with 3 #1 picks.

Their seems to be much more trade talk with the Bulls at #9 however because it is believed they are also in interested in Hawes and Yi and if either is available they will be gone at #10 anyway.

That being said if the Kings could trade down they should because IMO there are 8 solid players in this draft and then probably 12-14 players after that which are all pretty equal. So if the Kings would have gotten one of them with the #10 pick anyway, they could end up with two or three of them if they trade down.

 

[Ryle]

Wave the magic wand.....

Miller for Dalembert(I know his contract sucks but it's only a year longer than Brad and he just turned 26 and can block shots and rebound) than give Philly the #10 pick and we take the #12 and either of the other 1st round picks they get.

 

[Vlade4GM]

Oh that's just being silly. We've got a #10 pick and all we have to do is move 5 spots.

Do we have anything that we could trade for the #5 directly? Mayhap no. But we've got multiple things that could, under the right circumstances, be worth 5 draft spots. Player + #10 for #5, #4, #3 etc. We ain't THAT bare.

I really don't think the 10th makes that much of a difference. Who's going to trade down for Bibby? That's about all we have to offer

 

[fnordius]

I really don't see how we'd move Bibby before the draft (due to his ETO). So I'm looking at more like: Bucks decide they want Artest, exercise their team option on Brian Skinner, and give us Skinner, Lynn Greer + the #6 for Artest and the #10.

That's just an unlikely-seeming example... there's no reason for Milwaukee to want Artest. I'd post a likely-seeming one, but none come right to mind.

 

[JoMama]

I would be TOTALLY on board with this trade. The difference between #10 and #12 is negligible. Then double the chances of getting a good pick by getting two first round picks? - well, I love the idea.

However, I do not think that even the 76ers are dumb enough to do it.

They bit on CWebb's contract. They are definitely dumb enough.