Trading Our Cap Space

twslam07

twslam07

Starter
#1
#1
Trade #1
DEN Gets: Willie Cauley-Stein
DEN Gives: Kenneth Faried & 2019 DEN 1st Round Pick (top 10 protected in 2019, top 8 protected in 2020, top 5 protected in 2021, unprotected in 2022)
Why for DEN? They clear salary while also picking up a cheap backup C who can probably play alongside Jokic for stretches as well.

SAC Gets: Kenneth Faried & 2019 DEN 1st Round Pick (top 10 protected in 2019, top 8 protected in 2020, top 5 protected in 2021, unprotected in 2022)
SAC Gives: Willie Cauley-Stein
Why for SAC? Kings pick up a 2019 pick (Nuggets had #14 last year so there may be potential that it falls into the lottery) while only taking on a contract that expires next offseason. Moving Cauley-Stein now also allows the Kings to stay flexible from a cap perspective because they don't have to worry about resigning Cauley-Stein when he becomes a FA next year.

Trade #2
OKC Gets: Nothing
OKC Gives: Alex Abrines, Kyle Singler, & 2020 1st Round Pick (protected 1-11 & 21-30; otherwise OKC's 2020 2nd round pick & OKC's 2021 2nd round pick)
Why for OKC? They shed ~$10 mil to help with their tax bill.

SAC Gets: Alex Abrines, Kyle Singler, & 2020 1st Round Pick (protected 1-11 & 21-30; otherwise OKC's 2020 2nd round pick & OKC's 2021 2nd round pick)
SAC Gives: Nothing
Why for SAC? Kings add add an opportunity to land a 1st round pick if the Thunder land in the 12th-20th spot in the 2020 draft. Otherwise, they get a couple more 2nd round picks to work with. Abrines has a qualifying offer next season and Singler has a team option. Both players would be able to be off the books by next offseason if the Kings choose to do so.

----------------------------------------------------------

They aren't flashy deals but it gives us a 2019 1st (most likely) and the potential to have two 1st round picks in the 2020 draft. These trades would give the Kings ~$65 mil cap space next offseason with the following roster/assets

PG - Fox / Mason
SG - Hield
SF - Bogdanovic / Jackson
PF - Bagley / Labissiere
C - Giles
*2019 Den 1st
*2019 2nd (2nd least favorable of CLE, ORL, & HOU
*2019 2nd (least favorable of MIL & SAC)
*2019 2nd (most favorable of LAL & MIN)
 
rosa u podne

rosa u podne

Bench
#4
#4
Denver might do it, because they are looking to shed salary, but they already have backup center, so for them getting FM3 makes more sense. They need backup PG. They will probably sing Monta Morris, but they could use FM3 as a 3rd PG. Also, his contract is lower, so they would save more salary and probably would send unprotected pick.
 
ockingsfan

ockingsfan

Starter
#5
#5
Iced Espresso said:
Why would you want to give up a prospect in the first trade for a salary dump?
Click to expand...
Yep. Agreed.

If we are going to take back a bad contract (Faried), we do it for a first round pick and absorb his contract. We don't send out any of our young core prospects for taking on a salary dump, that makes no sense.

Plus we have no need for Faried. Wilson Chandler would had made more sense in a salary dump for us.

There is absolutely no reason for us to send out WCS and have to absorb a bad contract (Faried).

If anything, it would be Kenneth Faried (salary dump) and Denver's future 1st for "future draft consideration" ;) (i.e. contract absorbed).
 
Last edited:
twslam07

twslam07

Starter
#6
#6
ockingsfan said:
Yep. Agreed.

If we are going to take back a bad contract (Faried), we do it for a first round pick and absorb his contract. We don't send out any of our young core prospects for taking on a salary dump, that makes no sense.

Plus we have no need for Faried. Wilson Chandler would had made more sense in a salary dump for us.

There is absolutely no reason for us to send out WCS and have to absorb a bad contract (Faried).
Click to expand...
I guess you and I have a very different defintion of a "core prospect." He's going to be 25 at the start of this season & he only has 1 more year on his rookie deal. Not to mention he's been a net negative since stepping on the floor and hasn't improved in that area over his career.

1531172646127.png

There has to be some assessment of the degree of "bad." Paying Faried $14 mil a year for the next 3 years is a horrible contract, paying Faried $14 mil a year for the next 2 years is a bad contract, paying Faried $14 mil a year for 1 year is a somewhat negative contract.

At the end of the day, it's a deal that lands us the most valuable asset in the entire trade (DEN's 2019 1st). If this deal was for a guy like Deng that has two years left on his contract, then yeah, including Cauley-Stein would be an overpay. We're talking about taking on an expiring contract.
 
ockingsfan

ockingsfan

Starter
#7
#7
twslam07 said:
I guess you and I have a very different defintion of a "core prospect." He's going to be 25 at the start of this season & he only has 1 more year on his rookie deal. Not to mention he's been a net negative since stepping on the floor and hasn't improved in that area over his career.

View attachment 8106

There has to be some assessment of the degree of "bad." Paying Faried $14 mil a year for the next 3 years is a horrible contract, paying Faried $14 mil a year for the next 2 years is a bad contract, paying Faried $14 mil a year for 1 year is a somewhat negative contract.

At the end of the day, it's a deal that lands us the most valuable asset in the entire trade (DEN's 2019 1st). If this deal was for a guy like Deng that has two years left on his contract, then yeah, including Cauley-Stein would be an overpay. We're talking about taking on an expiring contract.
Click to expand...
Regardless of how WCS is viewed as a young core asset or not, he has positive value.

In most salary dumps, it is pretty much the "Salary Dumped" player and a draft pick (preferably a 1st rounder) for "basically nothing" i.e. we have to pay the player and also absorb the contract into our salary cap.

You would want to give up nothing in taking back a salary dump, you are basically saving Denver $30 million in salary and Luxury tax by taking Faried. No need to give them anything of value in return.
 
twslam07

twslam07

Starter
#8
#8
ockingsfan said:
Regardless of how WCS is viewed as a young core asset or not, he has positive value.

In most salary dumps, it is pretty much the "Salary Dumped" player and a draft pick (preferably a 1st rounder) for "basically nothing" i.e. we have to pay the player and also absorb the contract into our salary cap.

You would want to give up nothing in taking back a salary dump, you are basically saving Denver $30 million in salary and Luxury tax by taking Faried. No need to give them anything of value in return.
Click to expand...
You literally just have to look at the most recent trade deadline for an example.

The Bulls just did a salary dump trade where they received Asik, a 1st round pick, and a 2nd round pick swap option WHILE sending out Mirotic (positive value) & a 2nd round pick (positive value) to the Pelicans. Let's not act like this is uncommon.
 
SacTownKid

SacTownKid

Hall of Famer
#9
#9
Iced Espresso said:
Why would you want to give up a prospect in the first trade for a salary dump?
Click to expand...

It much be highlighted that this prospect is already in his mid-20's and is going to be getting 15 million a year after next season most likely. There is so much money to be had next summer that some team will come knocking on Willie's door. Bank on it.
 
SacTownKid

SacTownKid

Hall of Famer
#10
#10
ockingsfan said:
Regardless of how WCS is viewed as a young core asset or not, he has positive value.

In most salary dumps, it is pretty much the "Salary Dumped" player and a draft pick (preferably a 1st rounder) for "basically nothing" i.e. we have to pay the player and also absorb the contract into our salary cap.

You would want to give up nothing in taking back a salary dump, you are basically saving Denver $30 million in salary and Luxury tax by taking Faried. No need to give them anything of value in return.
Click to expand...

At the deadline Willie's value will be nothing due to his contract status.
 
ockingsfan

ockingsfan

Starter
#11
#11
twslam07 said:
You literally just have to look at the most recent trade deadline for an example.

The Bulls just did a salary dump trade where they received Asik, a 1st round pick, and a 2nd round pick swap option WHILE sending out Mirotic (positive value) & a 2nd round pick (positive value) to the Pelicans. Let's not act like this is uncommon.
Click to expand...
This is trading one problem player for another problem player. Asik is a toxic asset and Mirotic fought with Bobby Portis and refused to play with him.

While WCS may not be an All-Star, he is far from a problem child.
 
SacTownKid

SacTownKid

Hall of Famer
#14
#14
ockingsfan said:
Come on guys. Even if you guys don't value WCS, he is not a throw in on a salary dump.

Worse case, he could be a valuable 3rd big rotation player for a lot of teams.

To just throw him away after spending 3 years developing him is insane.
Click to expand...

His contract will be the problem because he's an impending free agent and it's exactly the point that other teams in just a few short months will be throwing money at him like it's going out of style. No team is going to sink value in him with the threat that he might leave at the end of the season. Also that team would probably want more than a brief audition. A full year is way different than the last few months of a season.
 
SacTownKid

SacTownKid

Hall of Famer
#15
#15
LPKingsFan said:
He's not just a rental, though, as an acquiring team would still have the ability to tender a qualifying offer and then have rights to match offers from other teams.
Click to expand...
And as we've seen, plenty of teams are having to sign those very same players to deals larger than they'd want to even with a shallow market of teams. Next year almost every team has money to spend so that almost guarantees massive overpays if you want to keep your FA's.
 
G

Gguod

Bench
#18
#18
ockingsfan said:
This is trading one problem player for another problem player. Asik is a toxic asset and Mirotic fought with Bobby Portis and refused to play with him.

While WCS may not be an All-Star, he is far from a problem child.
Click to expand...
Mirotic was a positive asset. Mirotic as player is on a different level compared to Portis and ifthey just wanted to get rid of a problem, they would've sent out Portis who was the one to hit Mirotic.

The thing with Wcs is that we need to know wether he is a part of our future plans. If hes not he needs to be traded for something so we dont lose him for nothing. The FO needs to evaluate the market for him in the next years free agency and decide wether they want to keep him at market value. If not, absolutely trade him as a part of salary dump.

Teams are getting smarter and 1st rounders arent just thrown out to sweeten deals. Brooklyn and Kings set the bad example on those and now you have to send something back to get a mid 1st rounder or you have to take in a truly horrible contract.
 
2

206Fan

All-Star
#19
#19
ockingsfan said:
Regardless of how WCS is viewed as a young core asset or not, he has positive value.

In most salary dumps, it is pretty much the "Salary Dumped" player and a draft pick (preferably a 1st rounder) for "basically nothing" i.e. we have to pay the player and also absorb the contract into our salary cap.

You would want to give up nothing in taking back a salary dump, you are basically saving Denver $30 million in salary and Luxury tax by taking Faried. No need to give them anything of value in return.
Click to expand...
Salary dumps don't work like they used to. 1st rounders are very valuable. Look at all the good late players in last year's draft.
19: Collins
22: Allen
23: OG
27: Kuzma
30: Hart

Teams have learned from the terrible Kings dump. I don't see the Nuggets trading their 1st round pick next year just to save $15million in luxury tax. Their owner is filthy rich...they aren't a small market team. They can actually afford to pay it. If it comes down to it, it wouldn't surprise me if the Hawks were fine absorbing his contract for future 2nds.

Faried only has 1yr left.

To balance out the trade, you'd need to include something back of value. Flip roles, if you're the Kings, would you trade a pick between 15-25 to dump Zach Randolph?
 
ockingsfan

ockingsfan

Starter
#22
#22
206Fan said:
Salary dumps don't work like they used to. 1st rounders are very valuable. Look at all the good late players in last year's draft.
19: Collins
22: Allen
23: OG
27: Kuzma
30: Hart

Teams have learned from the terrible Kings dump. I don't see the Nuggets trading their 1st round pick next year just to save $15million in luxury tax. Their owner is filthy rich...they aren't a small market team. They can actually afford to pay it. If it comes down to it, it wouldn't surprise me if the Hawks were fine absorbing his contract for future 2nds.

Faried only has 1yr left.

To balance out the trade, you'd need to include something back of value. Flip roles, if you're the Kings, would you trade a pick between 15-25 to dump Zach Randolph?
Click to expand...
Gguod said:
Mirotic was a positive asset. Mirotic as player is on a different level compared to Portis and ifthey just wanted to get rid of a problem, they would've sent out Portis who was the one to hit Mirotic.

The thing with Wcs is that we need to know wether he is a part of our future plans. If hes not he needs to be traded for something so we dont lose him for nothing. The FO needs to evaluate the market for him in the next years free agency and decide wether they want to keep him at market value. If not, absolutely trade him as a part of salary dump.

Teams are getting smarter and 1st rounders arent just thrown out to sweeten deals. Brooklyn and Kings set the bad example on those and now you have to send something back to get a mid 1st rounder or you have to take in a truly horrible contract.
Click to expand...
Just last summer, Toronto traded Demarree Carroll for 2018 first round and a second round pick to Brooklyn in a salary dump. Plus Carroll was still a serviceable small forward, but not many teams had cap space to absorb his contract, so Toronto had to give up a first and a second.

Also, the Luxury tax hit would be about $30 million for Denver because you would have to pay the player and the tax, for a player that won't be in their rotation. Denver just traded Chandler with a second rounder and a pick swap. Chandler would be considered a positive asset in a salary dump and still useful to Denver or Philly.

If Atlanta is willing to take a 2nd rounder in a salary dump, go ahead. I'm not going to include my starting Center (WCS) from last year so I can take on a salary dump to get a future mid-to late first rounder.

If I'm going to trade WCS, I'm trading him to get a potential starting small forward (i.e. Oubre). I'm not just going to toss him in to take another teams salary dump.
 
Last edited:
G

Gguod

Bench
#23
#23
ockingsfan said:
Just last summer, Toronto traded Demarree Carroll for 2018 first round and a second round pick to Brooklyn in a salary dump. Plus Carroll was still a serviceable small forward, but not many teams had cap space to absorb his contract, so Toronto had to give up a first and a second.

Also, the Luxury tax hit would be about $30 million because you would have to pay the player and the tax, for a player that they won't be in the rotation. Denver just traded Chandler with a second rounder and a pick swap. Chandler would be considered a positive asset in a salary dump and still useful to Denver or Philly.

If Atlanta is willing to take a 2nd rounder in a salary dump, go ahead. I'm not going to include my starting Center (WCS) from last year so I can take on a salary dump to get a future mid-to late first rounder.

If I'm going to trade WCS, I'm trading him to get a potential starting small forward (i.e. Oubre). I'm not just going to toss him in to take another teams salary dump.
Click to expand...
Demare Carroll (trade that I desperately advocated us to do btw) netted a late 1st, not a mid 1st but to me it would've been an awesome trade to do. Also people in here tried to argue me telling Carroll is a complete bum ect and mid 20's picks are worthless. But I agree, if we can get a trade like that I would do it in a heart beat. Unfortunately I'm not seeing those kind of trades since teams have smarten up and not just dumping their first rounders anymore.

And then there is that whole thing where we need to decide wether we are going to keep wcs or not. If not, trading him is a no brainer. Its hard to trade center for a starting caliber wing since wings are way more valuable than centers so I'm not holding my breath for that. If Washington for some reason is willing to trade Wcs for Oubre, I would absolutely do that. Im just not seeing why Washington would do it. If we cant get a player for him and we decide we wont lock him up for long term, then we need to include him in a salary dump. Its lot better than losing him for nothing.

In Willys defense, our coaches for three years have categorically refused to play him in his best role: pick setting rim runnign center surrounded by 4 shooters. We have had a player for three years that on paper would prosper in that offensive role and also as a switch all defender but in those three years, for some ridiculous reason we havent tried that. For that reason Willies trade value is very low and its unfortunate. We also drafted a guy at #2 that will basically be his replacement, have hyped another young big man and other teams know that and therefore arent valuing him very high in trade scenarios.
 
twslam07

twslam07

Starter
#24
#24
Gguod said:
Demare Carroll (trade that I desperately advocated us to do btw) netted a late 1st, not a mid 1st but to me it would've been an awesome trade to do. Also people in here tried to argue me telling Carroll is a complete bum ect and mid 20's picks are worthless.
Click to expand...
I was on the same boat (wishing we would have done the deal for Carroll & a 1st). The Nets took Musa with that pick this year. I remember many here were hoping he was going to slip to #37. People like to act like late 1sts don't mean much but that's not reality.
 
ockingsfan

ockingsfan

Starter
#25
#25
Gguod said:
If we cant get a player for him and we decide we wont lock him up for long term, then we need to include him in a salary dump. Its lot better than losing him for nothing.
Click to expand...
If we are tossing in WCS in on a salary dump trade plus taking on someone elses unwanted salary dump player and have to pay him $14 million (Faried), we would be basically losing WCS for less than nothing.

We would be actually be paying $14 million (Faried unwanted player) and WCS for a mid to late first round pick. To me, that is a ridiculous price to pay for a mid to late future first round pick.
 
Last edited:
G

Gguod

Bench
#26
#26
ockingsfan said:
If we are tossing in WCS in on a salary dump trade plus taking on someone elses unwanted salary dump player and have to pay him $14 million (Faried), we would be basically losing WCS for less than nothing.

We would be actually be paying $14 million (Faried's unwanted player) and WCS for a mid to late first round pick. To me, that is a ridiculous price to pay for a mid to late future first round pick.
Click to expand...
Taking in one year of bad salary doesnt get you a mid first rounder. Thats why you would include wcs. If you have decided he is not worth keeping at market price, you are exchanging him to more valuable asset (mid 1st rounder)+ one year of bad salary. If you value one year of production from him before we let him go more than a mid 1st round pick+bad salary, thats your business. But you arent getting that type of deal without including him. If you are unwilling yo move him, you would need to take on a guy like Ryan Anderson (who many people here wanted with that cobtract) with worse contract and getting a worse pick.
 
ockingsfan

ockingsfan

Starter
#27
#27
Gguod said:
Taking in one year of bad salary doesnt get you a mid first rounder. Thats why you would include wcs. If you have decided he is not worth keeping at market price, you are exchanging him to more valuable asset (mid 1st rounder)+ one year of bad salary. If you value one year of production from him before we let him go more than a mid 1st round pick+bad salary, thats your business. But you arent getting that type of deal without including him. If you are unwilling yo move him, you would need to take on a guy like Ryan Anderson (who many people here wanted with that cobtract) with worse contract and getting a worse pick.
Click to expand...
I would rather keep WCS this year and see how he develops, than to include him on a salary dump.

Maybe having Giles and Bagley around lights a fire under his butt and he develops into a more consistent player. If he becomes a solid 15 points and 8 rebound per game (he's already averaging 13 points, 7 rebounds a game) big man, then I would try my best to re-sign him next summer and he is still a Restricted Free Agent.

Why sell low on WCS? He has already shown to be a rotation big and still has upside to become more.

A big man rotation of WCS, Giles, and Bagley could develop into one of the best young big men rotations in the NBA.
 
G

Gguod

Bench
#28
#28
ockingsfan said:
I would rather keep WCS this year and see how he develops, than to include him on a salary dump.

Maybe having Giles and Bagley around lights a fire under his butt and he develops into a more consistent player. If he becomes a solid 15 points and 8 rebound per game (he's already averaging 13 points, 7 rebounds a game) big man, then I would try my best to re-sign him next summer and he is still a Restricted Free Agent.

Why sell low on WCS? He has already shown to be a rotation big and still has upside to become more.

A big man rotation of WCS, Giles, and Bagley could develop into one of the best young big men rotations in the NBA.
Click to expand...
You could see him develope and you can lose him for nothing. You have two young bigs atm, other supposed to be your franchise player since hes drafted #2 and other that complements him a lot better than WCS. Are you going to construct your roster in a way that you pay big money to your backup center, the position that is literally the least valuable since you can allways find quality production very cheaply. In a salary cap sport, if you put money in that, its money away from somewhere else.

To me drafting Bagley is a clear sign we wont resign Willy unless its very cheap team friendly deal. My point is: IF we know we probably wont resign him, you need to get something by trading him rather than losing him for nothing. If you personally want to keep him long term, thats fine by me. I understand he has some unique abilities and would've wanted to see him utilized correctly. I'm still quite bitter this franchise just tanked his value and handled him so poorly. But if the options are either to let him walk or get something, I want something. To me, mid 1st round pick is so valuable to us that I would include him in a heart beat. Im sure that we could find a minimum guy or even Faried to hold his own at backup C.
 
pdxKingsFan

pdxKingsFan

So Ordinary That It's Truly Quite Extraordinary
Staff member
#29
#29
While teams are still figuring things out, it appears that RFAs aren't seeing teams make high bids because it ties up cap space for a week during the free agent frenzy. My guess is that moving forward many will just sign one year qualifying offers and become unrestricted after year 5. So we may have two years of WCS if we want it. Or someone may see a ton of value in him - in which case it would be privy to move him at the trade deadline for picks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.