What could Toronto give us to move up to 5 from 8 ?

Anthony1

Anthony1

Bench
Is there any chance Toronto would want to move up ? Reason I'm asking, is because it's possible that Petrie might think that Henson is the perfect pairing with Cousins. Taking Henson at 5, just seems a bit of a reach. I mean, I know you go get your guy, and you make sure you get your guy, but 5th overall for Henson? The thing is, Detroit at 9 is another team that could strongly consider Henson, so I think if Petrie wants to pretty much guarantee Henson, he could move down to 8, and should be able to get him with little difficulty.

The question is, would Toronto really be interested in moving up just a couple of spots? Would you give Toronto #5 overall and #36 overall for #8 and a future 1st rounder? I'm not sure what kind of deal we could squeeze out of them...
 
Why? We're going down a whole class of talent moving from 5th to 8th and we'd be picking up some other cast-off in the process. Even if you can somehow convince Toronto to give up a first round pick to move up 3 spots, it's going to be protected pick so we're probably still losing out on talent. Are two middling first round prospects better than one top 5 talent? Just look at our roster. The two guys who stand out are top 5 picks.
 
hrdboild said:
Why? We're going down a whole class of talent moving from 5th to 8th and we'd be picking up some other cast-off in the process. Even if you can somehow convince Toronto to give up a first round pick to move up 3 spots, it's going to be protected pick so we're probably still losing out on talent. Are two middling first round prospects better than one top 5 talent? Just look at our roster. The two guys who stand out are top 5 picks.
Click to expand...

Look.... This isn't my dream scenario. My dream scenario is we work out a deal with Portland and get 6 and 11. The only reason I'm bringing up the whole Toronto thing is if somehow Petrie is dead set on taking Henson. Taking Henson at 5th overall is a bit criminal imo. I think he would need to trade down, but I'm sure he wouldn't trade any farther than Toronto, because Detroit has been rumored to be interested in Henson. So, I'm guessing he would want to trade one spot ahead of Detroit. I'm just wondering what we could get out of the deal ? I think if we gave them 36 as well, we might be able to get a future first rounder, but it would likely be like top 12 protected or something like that. So it may be a few years before we could cash in on it. Still, If he's dead set on taking Henson anyways, might as well get something extra out of it.... right ?
 
hrdboild said:
Why? We're going down a whole class of talent moving from 5th to 8th and we'd be picking up some other cast-off in the process. Even if you can somehow convince Toronto to give up a first round pick to move up 3 spots, it's going to be protected pick so we're probably still losing out on talent. Are two middling first round prospects better than one top 5 talent? Just look at our roster. The two guys who stand out are top 5 picks.
Click to expand...

But all that is assuming that our scouts have the same view as you do on the prospects.

I think GP has shown in the past that he is not afraid to go against popular opinion and will back in his ability to pick talent. He picked Peja when everyone wanted John Wallace and he walked away laughing. Everyone thought that Peja was a reach at the time but he proved to be a lot better player than John Wallace. Similarly, everyone was crying foul when Petrie reached and picked Jason Thompson with pick 12 when he was considered a 20-30 pick yet he has been a very good pick up for us and one of the best from his draft class.

If Petrie thinks Henson is the best player for us then I will back his judgement and if he can trade down and dump a bad contract in the process it would be fantastic.

I have my own question marks on Henson, main being his frame and ability to gain weight and strength without losing athletic ability. Ignoring that concern for a moment, Henson is exactly the type of player you want next to Cousins. Great length, shot blocking, rebounding, quickness, defense and enough offensive skill not to be a liability at that end. I maintain if Henson was 230 lbs he would be looked at as a top 5 pick in this draft.

If GP thinks that he is our guy then I am cool with it. If he can get our guy AND dump a contract like Salmons or Hayes, then I am stoked. I have no reason to doubt Petrie's drafting ability.
 
Čarolija said:
But all that is assuming that our scouts have the same view as you do on the prospects.

I think GP has shown in the past that he is not afraid to go against popular opinion and will back in his ability to pick talent. He picked Peja when everyone wanted John Wallace and he walked away laughing. Everyone thought that Peja was a reach at the time but he proved to be a lot better player than John Wallace. Similarly, everyone was crying foul when Petrie reached and picked Jason Thompson with pick 12 when he was considered a 20-30 pick yet he has been a very good pick up for us and one of the best from his draft class.

If Petrie thinks Henson is the best player for us then I will back his judgement and if he can trade down and dump a bad contract in the process it would be fantastic.

I have my own question marks on Henson, main being his frame and ability to gain weight and strength without losing athletic ability. Ignoring that concern for a moment, Henson is exactly the type of player you want next to Cousins. Great length, shot blocking, rebounding, quickness, defense and enough offensive skill not to be a liability at that end. I maintain if Henson was 230 lbs he would be looked at as a top 5 pick in this draft.

If GP thinks that he is our guy then I am cool with it. If he can get our guy AND dump a contract like Salmons or Hayes, then I am stoked. I have no reason to doubt Petrie's drafting ability.
Click to expand...

No reason? That Peja pick was 16 years ago. Jason Thompson? He's been a decent backup big but wouldn't you rather have Roy Hibbert, Ryan Anderson, Serge Ibaka, or Nicolas Batum? Ibaka wasn't on my radar but I had Hibbert and Batum at least rated higher than Thompson. You can cherry pick Petrie's draft successes if that makes you feel better but remember he also passed on Paul Pierce and Rajon Rondo when both of them filled a need for us and had obvious potential. He passed on both DeJuan Blair and Marcus Thornton to draft Jon Brockman. He's not infallible. He's left a championship team on the floor like any other GM who's been at it this long. Am I not allowed to call them like I see them because he's made a handful of smart picks over the last 18 years?

Henson is a great fit next to Cousins if he can replicate his college production in the NBA, but that's a big if. Ed Davis and Brandon Wright came out of UNC recently as similarly skinny shotblocking PFs with even more hype than Henson and they haven't exactly set the league on fire. No we don't need another scoring guard right now but if Bradley Beal is still on the board at 5, to pick just one example, and he's going to be a much better player you'd be a fool to go with John Henson because of some perceived need.

The simple fact that you would consider trading down if we could somehow dump Hayes' or Salmons' contracts doesn't speak highly of Petrie's ability to evaluate talent lately. He sought out and committed to both of those players in the past off-season alone, along with passing on 5 of the 7 players on the All-Rookie first team and an athletic shot-blocking specialist so we could trade down and pick Jimmer.
 
I hate di idea of trading down. I'd trade the 5th just with Portland for the 6th and 11th, or maybe for a SF like Batum (and I know it is not possible because he's a RFA). Don't mess with our pick Geoff, last year was more than enough.
 
I'd gladly trade the 5th pick for Valanciunas. They wouldn't do it though. He's going to be excellent for them, they'll be delighted they waited for him.
 
Section 101 said:
Toronto is trying to trade their pick for a vet.
Click to expand...

And if they think that the #8 is worth a Rudy Gay or an Andre Iguodala level player (you'd have to assume some of this is the hope that teams want to dump salary) then we don't have the assets to even begin to tempt them. No way I trade Tyreke for the #8; nothing else we have would fulfill their expectations.
 
Capt. Factorial said:
And if they think that the #8 is worth a Rudy Gay or an Andre Iguodala level player (you'd have to assume some of this is the hope that teams want to dump salary) then we don't have the assets to even begin to tempt them. No way I trade Tyreke for the #8; nothing else we have would fulfill their expectations.
Click to expand...

Who said anything about trading Evans for the #8? They are looking for a SF anyways. They have DeRosan as the 2 guard .
 
The only players I would want from the Raptors are Calderon or Bayless. Both are good passing pgs and take their shots when needed. But the Raptors are getting Valanciunas and they already have Bargnani. They are going all out Euro ball. The Kings have nothing to really offer them except Thornton or Evans. I doubt they want Henson or really need him since Amir Johnson and James Johnson did the dirty work for them.

I'd guess Barnes will be the pick anyway and JT is resigned.
 
If the Raptors are looking for a SF and Barnes is there at 5, maybe we could give them 5 and a bad contract, get 8, and take Henson. I'm not saying that I actually want Henson, it's just that if we go the Henson route, then we need to trade back, because taking him at 5 would be a bit bonkers.
 
Once you trade down from #5, you have no chance of getting MKG, Robinson, or Beal. And after those guys I think most would agree there is a fall-off in this draft (some would include Drummond in that group; I wouldn't). My guess is Petrie would be more willing to trade the pick on Draft Day when he knows who is available, but not before. At least I hope not before.
 
Kingster said:
Once you trade down from #5, you have no chance of getting MKG, Robinson, or Beal. And after those guys I think most would agree there is a fall-off in this draft (some would include Drummond in that group; I wouldn't). My guess is Petrie would be more willing to trade the pick on Draft Day when he knows who is available, but not before. At least I hope not before.
Click to expand...

That burned him last year or B. Knight would be on the roster.
 
Anthony1 said:
If the Raptors are looking for a SF and Barnes is there at 5, maybe we could give them 5 and a bad contract, get 8, and take Henson. I'm not saying that I actually want Henson, it's just that if we go the Henson route, then we need to trade back, because taking him at 5 would be a bit bonkers.
Click to expand...

I'd rather we have taken Jimmer at #7 than have Salmons on our team at the moment. Not too big a fan of trading down ...
 
mac said:
I'd rather we have taken Jimmer at #7 than have Salmons on our team at the moment. Not too big a fan of trading down ...
Click to expand...

Of course, in principle you're supposed to get something good in return when you trade down. Just because it didn't work last time doesn't mean it can't work in the future.
 
Kingster said:
Once you trade down from #5, you have no chance of getting MKG, Robinson, or Beal. And after those guys I think most would agree there is a fall-off in this draft (some would include Drummond in that group; I wouldn't). My guess is Petrie would be more willing to trade the pick on Draft Day when he knows who is available, but not before. At least I hope not before.
Click to expand...

Couldn't the trade be contingent on whether "our guy" is there at 5 ? I mean, why would you trade the pick before hand, without knowing for sure if MKG slips ? Of course it would be contingent.... RIGHT ?
 
Anthony1 said:
Couldn't the trade be contingent on whether "our guy" is there at 5 ? I mean, why would you trade the pick before hand, without knowing for sure if MKG slips ? Of course it would be contingent.... RIGHT ?
Click to expand...

It doesn't have to be. I don't think the trade last year was contingent.
 
Kingster said:
It doesn't have to be. I don't think the trade last year was contingent.
Click to expand...

Yeah, which was beyond stupid. I was yelling and screaming at my TV when that whole thing went down last year. I was a big fan of B.Knight being a King, but in hindsight, I think that maybe B.Knight wouldn't have been the greatest choice. After seeing him play with the Pistons, I'm not convinced that he's anything super special. My second choice was Leonard, and that would have been much better than the Jimmer fiasco, but that's neither here nor there...


Bottom line... if we do something like this again this year, they better have some contingencies hammered into the deal, because if MKG slips to 5 and we have already packaged 5 away with no contingency plan, then I'll probably have a freaking aneurysm!
 
Last edited:
Kings should just take one of the two remaining players left from top-6, preferrably Drummond. :) I doubt Beal is there so everyone Kings draft will fit in nicely.
P.S. Kawhi Leonard would've been nice. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

twslam07
[Drastic Edition] “THE” Trade Deadline Move to Make…
2
Replies
39
Views
2K
twslam07
twslam07
Spike
  • Poll Poll
Power Rankings, Week of 12/5
Replies
0
Views
161
Spike
Spike
B
We need to go streaking.
Replies
9
Views
1K
bball_nomad
B
Spike
What Do The Kings Mean to You?
Replies
6
Views
464
Siranthony
S
KingsFanSince85
Hypothetical: Draft Bronny James and try to woo LBJ?
Replies
12
Views
1K
megapoxy
megapoxy
Back
Top