Would you consider this deal with Hou?

[rainmaker]

First off, I'm not sure I would do this, as I'm not high on the idea of adding youth, but in this scenario it isn't just youth. This scenario also presumes Jeffery Taylor is there and I know a number of fans are high on him.

Sac Deals:
#5 pick
Thornton


Hou Deals:
Lowry
#14 pick
#16 pick


Why we do this? Aside from MKG, there might not be a better fit at SF for us than Taylor, and I am not high on Barnes at all, and doubt MKG falls to us. We also clear up problems at the 2 where it seems to be an either/or scenario with MT/Reke, gain a proven starting PG who's a great defender and fits in well with what we should be trying to do, and get both the 14th and 16th picks where we should be able to get Taylor and also Nicholson(who I like next to Cuz, long/defends/blocks shots/can hit open jumper) or Leonard. So we'd get a starting PG, possibly a starting SF, and depth in our frontcourt from one of two guys who are both smart(high basketball IQ), and love blocking shots.

Why does Hou do this? They get a malcontent in Lowry off their team, paving the way for Dragic to return. They get the 5th pick, where they'll hopefully find more of a difference maker than they would in the teens(for them. we don't need star talent) and maybe the take the risk and go for Drummond, maybe they like Barnes, maybe the go for Lillard who backs up Dragic and gives them arguably the top PG in the draft to replace Lowry who doesn't want to be there. They also get MT, who can move in and take Kev's spot who they aren't too pleased with, are trying to move, played like crap last year and has one year left on his contract. So instead of Kev at the 2, who's been more effected than any other player in the league from refs no longer calling the same fouls he used to live off, they get a younger and more explosive scorer.

I might be open to adding IT or Jimmer, or also having it known to Hou this would go down as long as MKG does not drop to 5. If he does, deals off and we take MKG.

 

[mac]

I think it's a good trade for us, provided MKG is not there at #5. Not sure if Houston would do it though, because I don't think they are that desperate for MT or the #5 pick.

 

[JMelho]

That is a good deal. Since its the Kings though, doubtful it comes to fruition.

 

[Bricklayer]

Problem with this deal is that you give up our two big trade assets in one deal that doesnt actually bring back anything to patch our gaping PF shotblocker and starting SF holes. So you better be able to address that with the #14 and #16 pick, but seriously, how many of those guys come in and really establish themselves off the bat? Last year #14 and #16 were Marcus Morris and Nikola Vucevic (sandwiched aroudn Kawhi Leonard however). The year before that they were Patrick Patterson and Luke Babbit. Before that it was Earl Clark and James Johnson.

I like Lowry, but I'm not giving up what could be 2 20pt scorers for him unless I come out of it with either our starting PF or SF too.

 

[Prince_XY]

I'll probably do this, but I'll give IT instead of MT. The only problem is Houston probably wouldn't want a very short PG.

 

[HndsmCelt]

If we are going to trade the #5 pick I would much rater see us bring back something much better than Taylor and another middle pick. I am compleetly down with trading the pick but only if we can trade up for MKG or trade OUT for an established talent. There are holes to be filled but any one we trade a pic OR Thorton for should fill them WELL. Any one we trade BOTH of them for better make a huge impact.

 

[Big Cuz 15]

#5, hayes, salmons, it for #14, #16, lowry, dalembert. Good deal for both sides. Both lowry and daly are enders soon so ic they dont work out, we save cap and push it towards reke, cousins, jt. Mt can be parlayed in another trade if he doesnt want to accept the 6th man role.

 

[lwc]

I do the trade BUT if I am giving the two biggest trade assets, I make them take a bad contract too. The easiest bad contract to drop would be Salmons.

 

[twslam07]

#5, hayes, salmons, it for #14, #16, lowry, dalembert. Good deal for both sides. Both lowry and daly are enders soon so ic they dont work out, we save cap and push it towards reke, cousins, jt. Mt can be parlayed in another trade if he doesnt want to accept the 6th man role.

In the other thread I proposed...

#5
Hayes
Garcia
Thomas

for

#16
Lowry
Dalembert

The salaries match in this deal very well. If we were to substitute Salmons for Garcia, it would make Houston take on a couple extra million. I think Garcia would be more valuable to an organization simply because of his contract so if we were able to make the deal "worse" for Houston by switching out Garcia with Salmons and adding their other first round pick, I'm all for it.

The more I look at this "type" of deal, the more I like it. We fill every starting position extremely well. A PG who is a good defender, ball handler, 3 point shooter, and distributor. A SF who is a great defender and 3 point shooter who doesn't demand shots. A PF who is long, athletic, and a great rebounder and shotblocker. This deal potentially sets us up for great success without even ridding ourselves of these owners. Who doesn't like a deal like this?

 

[captain bill]

No. There's a decent chance we pick up a franchise-level guy with the pick (or at least all-star level). That trade decreases the odds of that tremendously. We're already a terrible team and that trade would put us on a the treadmill, which is the last place we want to be.

We need a home run pick, not some minor assets.

 

[twslam07]

No. There's a decent chance we pick up a franchise-level guy with the pick (or at least all-star level). That trade decreases the odds of that tremendously. We're already a terrible team and that trade would put us on a the treadmill, which is the last place we want to be.

We need a home run pick, not some minor assets.

Cousins and Evans can both be franchise players with time, Thornton was ranked as the 5th best SG in the league this year, and Lowry was in all-star discussions before he got hit with his injury. We have our star power. They need time to mesh and develop further. What we need are glue guys to help bring the team together. Taylor and Dalembert would be those guys. We already have enough players who need to score adding another player with that similar nature would be detrimental to the team. Don't ever underestimate the power of the right role players.

 

[Big Cuz 15]

In the other thread I proposed...

#5
Hayes
Garcia
Thomas

for

#16
Lowry
Dalembert

The salaries match in this deal very well. If we were to substitute Salmons for Garcia, it would make Houston take on a couple extra million. I think Garcia would be more valuable to an organization simply because of his contract so if we were able to make the deal "worse" for Houston by switching out Garcia with Salmons and adding their other first round pick, I'm all for it.

The more I look at this "type" of deal, the more I like it. We fill every starting position extremely well. A PG who is a good defender, ball handler, 3 point shooter, and distributor. A SF who is a great defender and 3 point shooter who doesn't demand shots. A PF who is long, athletic, and a great rebounder and shotblocker. This deal potentially sets us up for great success without even ridding ourselves of these owners. Who doesn't like a deal like this?

Considering daly and disgruntled lowry and the fact they r getting players of value back, my proposal is very generous. They are moving 9 slots up to a top 5 pick in what is deemed a deep draft. Houston does not have a franchise player on their team. We have 2. Considering those factors we can be greedy. We are not a charity so giving up an ending contract in garcia is another valued tradeable asset. I see garcia possibly being attached to thornton to makr salaries work in another trade. Thornton plus garcia to a team like lets say atlanta for josh smith would help make the numbers work while helping them with their salary situation and we get that coveted vet.

 

[twslam07]

Considering daly and disgruntled lowry and the fact they r getting players of value back, my proposal is very generous. They are moving 9 slots up to a top 5 pick in what is deemed a deep draft. Houston does not have a franchise player on their team. We have 2. Considering those factors we can be greedy. We are not a charity so giving up an ending contract in garcia is another valued tradeable asset. I see garcia possibly being attached to thornton to makr salaries work in another trade. Thornton plus garcia to a team like lets say atlanta for josh smith would help make the numbers work while helping them with their salary situation and we get that coveted vet.

I see what you're saying and I agree with you. I would love to propose the trade idea you have but if Houston is not buying into it, I would still be interested in doing my deal. So for the record I do think we should propose your trade idea first and if negotiations come down to something like the deal I proposed, then I would do it.

 

[KingsFanSince85]

I'd pass. The Kings already have their Kyle Lowry of the future in Isaiah Thomas, whose rookie season was better than any of Lowry's first 4 seasons in the league.

I'm not understanding why anybody wants a player that essentially has the exact same skill set. Not only that, Thomas will likely develop into the better player in a season or two, if not sooner.

 

[Bricklayer]

I'd pass. The Kings already have their Kyle Lowry of the future in Isaiah Thomas, whose rookie season was better than any of Lowry's first 4 seasons in the league.

I'm not understanding why anybody wants a player that essentially has the exact same skill set. Not only that, Thomas will likely develop into the better player in a season or two, if not sooner.

Defense and physicality.

We were the worst defensive team in the league last year, Lowry is one of the best defensive PGs.

 

[KingsFanSince85]

Defense and physicality.

We were the worst defensive team in the league last year, Lowry is one of the best defensive PGs.

Point taken about the defense. However, I don't believe Lowry's defense is worlds better than Thomas, who showed flashes of being able to defend his position adequately despite being an undersized rookie. Was Lowry, as a rookie, a better defender than Thomas is now? I'm not so certain. And Thomas, like many young players that display defensive hustle on the court, will undoubtedly improve as he matures and learns the game. In a season or two, you may not notice much, if any, difference between the two defensively.

As of this upcoming season, I just don't believe that Lowry's defense is so much better that it warrants the Kings actively pursuing him. Also consider that the Kings would likely have to seriously overpay to keep Lowry beyond the 13/14 season, which is the same offseason they'd have to make a decision on Thomas. I'd like to see Thomas get as much time as possible so they have as much data as possible before making that decision. Adding Lowry hinders the ability to accomplish that.

Lastly, if Tyreke is moved back to the position, as he should be, then the point is moot. Thomas can be brought off the bench while he continues to develop all aspects of his game and the defense doesn't suffer much.

 

[ParniValjak]

I'd pass. The Kings already have their Kyle Lowry of the future in Isaiah Thomas, whose rookie season was better than any of Lowry's first 4 seasons in the league.

I'm not understanding why anybody wants a player that essentially has the exact same skill set. Not only that, Thomas will likely develop into the better player in a season or two, if not sooner.

Repeat after me slowly...D-E-F-E-N-S-E!

Lowry is arguably the 2nd best defensive PGs in the league (behind Rondo) and he is strong enough to play on the bigger players on the switch!

I kniw its difficult for some Kings fans to understand but defense wins but it seems to me we would rather lose pretty than win ugly!

 

[Big Cuz 15]

Point taken about the defense. However, I don't believe Lowry's defense is worlds better than Thomas, who showed flashes of being able to defend his position adequately despite being an undersized rookie. Was Lowry, as a rookie, a better defender than Thomas is now? I'm not so certain. And Thomas, like many young players that display defensive hustle on the court, will undoubtedly improve as he matures and learns the game. In a season or two, you may not notice much, if any, difference between the two defensively.

As of this upcoming season, I just don't believe that Lowry's defense is so much better that it warrants the Kings actively pursuing him. Also consider that the Kings would likely have to seriously overpay to keep Lowry beyond the 13/14 season, which is the same offseason they'd have to make a decision on Thomas. I'd like to see Thomas get as much time as possible so they have as much data as possible before making that decision. Adding Lowry hinders the ability to accomplish that.

Lastly, if Tyreke is moved back to the position, as he should be, then the point is moot. Thomas can be brought off the bench while he continues to develop all aspects of his game and the defense doesn't suffer much.

Cmon man, get real. It was severly hyped by the magoofs. They need to back the **** up and let the basketball minds actually do what they r paid to do. If that was the case maybe these doofs wouldn't be paying 2 coaches at the same time instead of getting it rt the first time.

 

[KingsFanSince85]

Cmon man, get real. It was severly hyped by the magoofs. They need to back the **** up and let the basketball minds actually do what they r paid to do. If that was the case maybe these doofs wouldn't be paying 2 coaches at the same time instead of getting it rt the first time.

Not really sure where you are going with your reply. What was severely hyped? The rookie of the year campaign? I never mentioned anything about that or the Maloofs. I could care less what they were doing in that regard. Thomas' stats and production speak for themselves. While he wasn't ROY material, his first year production was better than anything Lowry managed his first 4 years in the league. Defensively, Thomas wasn't great, but he wasn't all that bad either considering his size and rookie status. Just as Lowry improved, there's no reason to believe Thomas can't or won't be able to do the same. The effort and desire seem to be there and that's half the battle.

If you don't think Thomas has the ability to get there, fine. We just have different opinions. I prefer not to chase after marginal players like Lowry when the Kings have a player that is pretty much at the same level already, if not defensively. Perhaps we'll get lucky and Thomas will become an even better player.

If we're talking about a Chris Paul or Deron Williams type player, I'd understand. But Kyle Lowry? Sorry, I'd prefer to take my chances hoping one of our existing players develops.

 

[rainmaker]

If you don't think Thomas has the ability to get there, fine. We just have different opinions. I prefer not to chase after marginal players like Lowry when the Kings have a player that is pretty much at the same level already, if not defensively. Perhaps we'll get lucky and Thomas will become an even better player.

If we're talking about a Chris Paul or Deron Williams type player, I'd understand. But Kyle Lowry? Sorry, I'd prefer to take my chances hoping one of our existing players develops.

IT is nowhere near Lowry's level. Lowry is a borderline All Star and arguably a top 5 defender at his position in the league. And you're sitting here saying both are on the same level, if not defensively? There's a reason Reke was put on Westbrook the final two matchups, which was because Westbrook abused IT. There's a reason Parker abused IT. There's a reason Felton abused IT. There's a reason Dragic had his way with IT. He struggles on that end. He'll never get past the height issue, where guys can jsut shoot over him or have easy passing lanes passing over him, despite his effort which is always great. Nature of the draw.

Plus, our team sucks, and we shouldn't be banking on getting lucky in the hope that IT will become a top 5 defensive PG, or a near AS.

 

[Gary]

What about;

Rockets out---
#14 (Kendall Marshall)
Sammy D

Kings out---
#5 (whoever the Rockets want with our pick)
Garcia or Greene

 

[Big Cuz 15]

What about;

Rockets out---
#14 (Kendall Marshall)
Sammy D

Kings out---
#5 (whoever the Rockets want with our pick)
Garcia or Greene

Why? Would we do that to move down 9 spots to pick a expiring contract. So when daly bolts we burned a top 5 pick for nothing.

 

[Gary]

Just so we don't have to pick Drummond lol.. No but really. I am high on Marshall and would want to trade down with someone to grab him, but I don't think he would be there at 14. As for Sammy D you would hope we could resign him, not to mention we get rid of Greene or Garcia.

I am probably the only one here that would think hard about taking Marshall if we had to choose between Barnes and Drummond.

 

[Big Cuz 15]

Not really sure where you are going with your reply. What was severely hyped? The rookie of the year campaign? I never mentioned anything about that or the Maloofs. I could care less what they were doing in that regard. Thomas' stats and production speak for themselves. While he wasn't ROY material, his first year production was better than anything Lowry managed his first 4 years in the league. Defensively, Thomas wasn't great, but he wasn't all that bad either considering his size and rookie status. Just as Lowry improved, there's no reason to believe Thomas can't or won't be able to do the same. The effort and desire seem to be there and that's half the battle.

If you don't think Thomas has the ability to get there, fine. We just have different opinions. I prefer not to chase after marginal players like Lowry when the Kings have a player that is pretty much at the same level already, if not defensively. Perhaps we'll get lucky and Thomas will become an even better player.

If we're talking about a Chris Paul or Deron Williams type player, I'd understand. But Kyle Lowry? Sorry, I'd prefer to take my chances hoping one of our existing players develops.

I dont think hes starter material. He has some pluses but there is his physical limitations that cannot be hidden. If houston wants to give up a starting pg in lowry for it and some change, we'd have to seriously take a look at it. One is proven and the other is not. The magoofs did a good job on selling him for the roy push.

 

[Big Cuz 15]

Just so we don't have to pick Drummond lol.. No but really. I am high on Marshall and would want to trade down with someone to grab him, but I don't think he would be there at 14. As for Sammy D you would hope we could resign him, not to mention we get rid of Greene or Garcia.

I am probably the only one here that would think hard about taking Marshall if we had to choose between Barnes and Drummond.

Highly doubt daly will want to resign. Even still, hes past 30, i dont know how kuch he has.left.in the tank or whether we.would want a long term xommittment to him with all the other players coming up for extensions.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

What about;

Rockets out---
#14 (Kendall Marshall)
Sammy D

Kings out---
#5 (whoever the Rockets want with our pick)
Garcia or Greene

No. No, no, no. You don't trade down 9 spots unless you get something excellent in return. You really, really don't trade down 9 spots so you can add a fourth PG to your roster (sure as far as Gary's concerned it's only 3 PGs, but still).

 

[Gary]

No. No, no, no. You don't trade down 9 spots unless you get something excellent in return. You really, really don't trade down 9 spots so you can add a fourth PG to your roster (sure as far as Gary's concerned it's only 3 PGs, but still).

It's 1 PG.. IT is our only PG.. Don't consider Jimmer a PG at all.

I was going to put Lowry but the whole idea was to get Marshall. But like I said above, if it was a choice between Drummond, and Barnes I would think hard about taking Marshall. Drummond will suck, and I like Barnes, but I like Marshall more. It's the stupid draft idiots that think Marshall will be so much lower so everyone else has to think it as well..

I was also thinking Sammy D had a team option for the second year but it was my mistake.

 

[KingsFanSince85]

IT is nowhere near Lowry's level. Lowry is a borderline All Star and arguably a top 5 defender at his position in the league.

Borderline all-star? Really? On what kind of curve? The past 2 seasons (coincidentally the 2 most productive seasons of his career), Lowry is averaging 13.9 ppg (41.7% 2pt, 37.5% 3pt) , 6.6 apg, 4.3 rpg, 1.5 steals, and 2.4 turnovers in 33 minutes per game. How many all-stars do you normally see with comparable numbers? He excels at nothing, except for defense according to some. Hell, Tyreke has better overall production and most here want to trade him despite the fact that he's half a foot taller, younger, and has more potential.

Compare IT's rookie stats to Lowry's stats as a 6th year vet then tell me again with a straight face that they aren't on the same level or at least close.

Lowry:

G GS MPG FG% 3P% FT% OFF DEF RPG APG SPG BPG TO PF PPG
47 38 32.1 0.409 0.374 0.864. 0.8 3.7 4.5 6.6 1.6 0.3 2.77 2.83 14.3

Thomas:

G GS MPG FG% 3P% FT% OFF DEF RPG APG SPG BPG TO PF PPG
65 37 25.5 0.448 0.379 0.832 0.7 1.8 2.6 4.1 0.8 0.1 1.62 1.86 11.5


Where's the huge difference from a vet with 5 years more experience? Thomas shoots better, takes better care of the ball, and isn't all that far off in PPG and APG. Yes, I understand that Thomas played in more games this year. But Lowry's numbers were almost identical the previous season when he played in 75 games. And let's not forget that Thomas' numbers took off once he started getting consistent time. His averages were hurt early in the season when he saw little to no time. Compare their numbers as starters and the needle goes further in IT's direction.

So where exactly does IT not come close to Lowry's level? It seems like defense is the only thing you can point to. Again I ask, where was Lowry's defense his first season or two?

To sum up, Lowry is nowhere near all-star level with the numbers he's put up the past couple seasons. His shooting is terrible and his assists aren't at all good enough. His defense isn't stellar enough to make up the defense.

There's a reason Reke was put on Westbrook the final two matchups, which was because Westbrook abused IT. There's a reason Parker abused IT. There's a reason Felton abused IT. There's a reason Dragic had his way with IT. He struggles on that end. He'll never get past the height issue,

He was a rookie. A rookie that had no training camp to boot. How many pg's aren't abused by Westbrook and Parker, let alone rookie defenders? You're acting as if Lowry and others came into the league as defensive stoppers. They struggled too. Hell, Kyrie Irving got abused on the defensive end by Thomas one game. He's a rookie. It happens. They'll get better.

Back to Thomas, I saw many occasions where bigger players tried to post Thomas up but had difficulty doing it. Furthermore, Lowry overcomes his smallish size, as have other players, so how are you so certain Thomas can't do the same?

I'm in no way suggesting Thomas is going to become a great defender. But neither of us know for certain he can't become a fairly capable one...especially after seeing only one shortened season. But let's assume you are right and he never gets any better. His lone season, offensively, is comparable to, and in some cases better, than Lowry's best years thus far. The numbers don't lie.

Lastly, I don't think either IT or Lowry are starter material. Both would be better suited as a 3rd guard. Bobby Jackson was better than either player, by far, and he didn't start for us. Sure, he could have started on lesser teams, but on a contending team he was a 3rd guard. Same should be the case for Lowry and an improving Thomas.

 

[Gary]

Actually IT's PG vs PG stats were pretty damn good for a little guy. I think they were better than Evans PG vs PG stats.. I forgot who posted them though =/

The only think that I am afraid of with IT is the help D he could provide on bigger opponents and when there is a switch. Other than that his opp FG% was in the 30%s.

 

[Bricklayer]

Have you actually ever SEEN Lowry? He's a mini version of Bonzi Wells. He's listed at the same weight as Thornton, more than Cisco, and only 2lbs off of Salmons and Outlaw. There is a reason he is in a different class from IT, who is a very good athlete (I actually think the best athletes in the world are guys in that 5'8 to 5'11" 180-190lb range -- NFL cornerbacks and such). Lowry is a physical beast, and can just stone most of the tall skinny sticks walking around the NBA with superior leverage and strength. He's shortish for a PG, but its not extreme, and nobody south of the LeBron class of SFs can just overpower him. He's just flat a tough defender, and I remain mystified at how exactly people intend to get better defensively if they refuse to actually get defensive players to play any of our positions. Its like talking about the national debt after awhile. Everybody agrees its a bad thing, but nobody is willing to sacrifice THEIR programs/players to fix it. Always has to be somebody else's.