Would you....

[Bricklayer]

And here I am just screwing around before bed -- nine of ten of my rebuilding plans center around Kevin Martin and our lottery pick. This would pretty much be the one option that doesn't. In light of recent events would you....?:

Trade 1:

Sacto Outgoing:
Kevin Martin $1.8mil
our lottery pick ($3-$5 mil first year)
Brad Miller $10.5 million
Kenny Thomas $7.3mil

Sacto Incoming:
Kevin Garnett $22.0mil

Trade 2:

Sacto Outgoing:
Shareef Abdur-Rahim $5.8 mil

Sacto Incoming:
Etan Thomas $6.4 mil

Lineup:
C- Etan Thomas
PF- Kevin Garnett
SF- Ron Artest
OG- Francisco Garcia
PG- Mike Bibby

6th- John Salmons
7th- Justin Williams (resign)
8th- MLE player
9th- Ronnie Price (resign)
10th- Corliss Williamson (resign)

 

[GoGoGadget]

Short answer: Yep!

Long answer: Oh, hells yeah.

 

[D-Mass]

I'm in. That front line is just nasty.

 

[fnordius]

Brick, you are SO MEAN!

After months, you finally get almost everyone convinced that we should blow it all up and build around youth.

Then you say, "Naah, I changed my mind, let's win the championship next year."



I don't know that the other teams would go for it, but I might.

 

[vytzka]

Oh heck, why not? This lineup looks very intimidating, if a bit thin on backcourt (though Ethan and KG would go a long way towards fixing Mike's defensive woes).

Should we be able to substitute Cisco for Baby Kevin, I'd give a tiny, tiny sliver of my own soul to help this deal to occur. Wolves' GM is a moron, right? He would fall for this.

 

[BMiller52]

MN probably wouldn't do it and I wouldn't. That team is a Ron Artest explosion away from being just a pretender. I think we just need to rebuild.

 

[Widowmaker2k]

Maybe. It would depend on exactly how high our lottery pick ended up being. If it's a top 3 pick, absolutely not. Beyond that, I'd consider it.

With Garnett and Artest (and the right coach), we'd be a defensive juggernaut. Garcia isn't half bad in that respect either. Mike, Artest, Garcia, and Garnett can all score the ball (and pass), so our offense would be at least decent.

Losing Martin would hurt, and if this team didn't win in 2 or 3 seasons, then you are stuck having to rebuild without Martin or a lottery pick in what could be the strongest draft in a decade.

 

[Troy]

Hell yeah, but I don't see the Pups doing it with K9 and Miller in the mix for KG. I sure hope they do. I love KMart, but you cannot pass up a HOFer big and KG is an amazing athlete...he's getting older, but he still has a bunch of good year ahead of him.

If our pick is in the top 3 it would be hard, but getting rid of Miller and K9 easily make this worth it. Sorry KMart. ;-(

 

[VF21]

Maybe. It would depend on exactly how high our lottery pick ended up being. If it's a top 3 pick, absolutely not. Beyond that, I'd consider it.

With Garnett and Artest (and the right coach), we'd be a defensive juggernaut. Garcia isn't half bad in that respect either. Mike, Artest, Garcia, and Garnett can all score the ball (and pass), so our offense would be at least decent.

Losing Martin would hurt, and if this team didn't win in 2 or 3 seasons, then you are stuck having to rebuild without Martin or a lottery pick in what could be the strongest draft in a decade.

I think I agree with Widowmaker2k. It would be a gutsy move, though, and if it worked... wow.

 

[Cal-Kings]

And here I am just screwing around before bed -- nine of ten of my rebuilding plans center around Kevin Martin and our lottery pick. This would pretty much be the one option that doesn't. In light of recent events would you....?:

Trade 1:

Sacto Outgoing:
Kevin Martin $1.8mil
our lottery pick ($3-$5 mil first year)
Brad Miller $10.5 million
Kenny Thomas $7.3mil

Sacto Incoming:
Kevin Garnett $22.0mil

That would make us the Minnesota Timberwolves, virtually. And where would that put us in the standings? Right where we are now.

KG with no Brad would make our front line no better than the T-Wolves now, maybe not as good.

KG with Bibby? Eh. I'm not seeing it. Maybe if we keep Artest. But it's not knocking my socks off.

If our lottery pick will have the impact everyone has been claiming it will have all season, then let's grab it and see.

 

[Kingster]

Nope.

Go young, not old.

Go for character, not nutcases.

Don't go for the quick buck; go for the long haul.

 

[Smills91]

In trade 2, I'd prefer Brendan Haywood to Etan Thomas. I think he'd be a better fit for that team.

 

[nbrans]

No, I wouldn't do this, especially with giving away both Martin and the pick. As Cal-Kings pointed out, this really wouldn't make the Kings a whole lot better than the Timberwolves are now.

Now, if the Kings were to somehow get Oden or Durant, if they could find a taker for Bibby, get a quick point guard, and trade Artest for some value, and you had a nucleus going into this trade of something like (hypothetically speaking):

PG: Mo Williams
SG: Maggette
SF: Salmons
PF: ???
C: Oden

Then yeah, maybe you can afford to trade Martin for KG. Otherwise, you're just wasting the tail end of KG's prime, not to mention sacrificing the future in giving up Martin.

 

[Gary]

Nah, I am not liking it too much. Garnett might be passing his prime, and Thomas really hasnt proven much in the league. He is pretty much a career backup.

Plus our draft pick might be worth a lot this year.. I dunno.. I am on the fence with this one. Tell me why we sho9uld do this? Why Etan would thrive here when he hasnt really thrived much at all.

 

[Packt]

I've moved away from this plan because coaching would make or break the team, and for a short window, it's a big gamble. Still if the opportunity arises I'd probably do it. Minny certainly won't because it still leaves them in cap hell and doesn't give them any room to rebuild. I wanted us to move our expirings for contracts that lasted another year so we could use them as assets this summer, specifically for something like this, but that didn't happen.

Our potential team would be much better than the wolves right now, and much more balanced. All you'd need is another shooter on the perimeter, which could be Garcia.

 

[beb0p]

I wouldn't do this deal. We get KG for two seasons and lose KMart and the #1 pick. Pretty much throwing away the future for short term competitiveness. This trade won't make us a championship team and two yrs from now we're back to rebuilding.

 

[Bricklayer]

That would make us the Minnesota Timberwolves, virtually. And where would that put us in the standings? Right where we are now.

KG with no Brad would make our front line no better than the T-Wolves now, maybe not as good.

KG with Bibby? Eh. I'm not seeing it. Maybe if we keep Artest. But it's not knocking my socks off.

If our lottery pick will have the impact everyone has been claiming it will have all season, then let's grab it and see.

I wasn't going to particularly post in this thread because it was just a musing type deal , but this...

1) it would make us the TWolves? Are you nuts? There is NO comparison, other than the presence of KG. Better #2 player (Ron), better #3 player (Mike), defense and rebounding all over the board. And balance for that matter. Oh yeah, and passion. Not only in the forward line, but in the energy roleplayers (Cisco, Thaoms, Justin, Price) all over the place.

2) That team is 15-20 wins better than this one, guaranteed. What is not guaranteed is whether it is a title team. Actually not quite guaranteed simply because of the Artest factor.

3) KG with Bibby has long been an ideal potential pairing -- KG being Webb all over again, Bibby being Terreel Brandon/Sam Cassel, and the duo being an ideal and devastating pick and roll combo.

In any case, as a mere musing I'm fine with people taking it or leaving it, and am aware that the warm and fuzzies toward Kevin make it a hard sell. But I'm certainly going to defend the superstar + 2 star rebounding/hustle/defensive monster I just created above from claims that its just the TWolves over again. I mean, that's ridiculous. Talentwise and versatility wise that team can go toe to toe with the Mavs (Thomas/Dampier, KG/Dirk, Artest/Howard, Cisco/Harris, Bibby/Terry).

 

[nbrans]

I wasn't going to particularly post in this thread because it was just a musing type deal , but this...

1) it would make us the TWolves? Are you nuts? There is NO comparison, other than the presence of KG. Better #2 player (Ron), better #3 player (Mike), defense and rebounding all over the board. And balance for that matter. Oh yeah, and passion. Not only in the forward line, but in the energy roleplayers (Cisco, Thaoms, Justin, Price) all over the place.

2) That team is 15-20 wins better than this one, guaranteed. What is not guaranteed is whether it is a title team. Actually not quite guaranteed simply because of the Artest factor.

3) KG with Bibby has long been an ideal potential pairing -- KG being Webb all over again, Bibby being Terreel Brandon/Sam Cassel, and the duo being an ideal and devastating pick and roll combo.

In any case, as a mere musing I'm fine with people taking it or leaving it, and am aware that the warm and fuzzies toward Kevin make it a hard sell. But I'm certainly going to defend the superstar + 2 star rebounding/hustle/defensive monster I just created above from claims that its just the TWolves over again. I mean, that's ridiculous. Talentwise and versatility wise that team can go toe to toe with the Mavs (Thomas/Dampier, KG/Dirk, Artest/Howard, Cisco/Harris, Bibby/Terry).

It probably would make the Kings better, but championship better? I seriously doubt that. There's no comparison to the Mavs. Dampier is way better than Thomas, KG=Dirk, Howard=Artest, Harris is way better than Cisco and Terry is way better than Bibby. Meanwhile, the Mavs also have a very strong bench. They'd get blown off the floor just like everyone else. And meanwhile, there's no potential for forward movement since you've given up Martin and the draft pick, just mediocrity.

 

[Bricklayer]

There's no comparison to the Mavs. Dampier is way better than Thomas,

probably better, or at least bigger. Way better? No. Same style player, just larger and slower. Thoams gets you 6 and 6 and 1.3 blocks in 19min, Dampier 7 and 7.5 and 1.1blocks in 25.

KG=Dirk,

sure. Well..maybe. KG can still do more things, but Dirk's good enough that the draw will suffice.

Howard=Artest

not really

Harris is way better than Cisco

the wildcard.

and Terry is way better than Bibby

and just no.

Meanwhile, the Mavs also have a very strong bench.

Seems to be a popular opinion. Until you actually look at it. Mavs main bench: Stackhouse, Diop, Buckner, George, Croshere. That's not exactly trembling in my boots stuff.


In any case, I wasn't really worried that you were going to like it, as I knew beforehand where you stood on Kevin, Reef, Cisco and Bibby. But KG, Ron and Mike are every bit as good a trio as Dirk, Howard and Terry. Similar in fact in a lot of ways. Thomas is a similar player to Dampier (and Justin similar to Diop). Only in the rangy multifacted OG combo of Cisco/Salmons do you get much of a split from Devon Harris/Stack. I should go figure out who that MLE guy would be to add spice. Maybe an old vet looking for a ring. PJ Brown. Grant Hill. Hey..Webb will be out there too.

 

[LPKingsFan]

Perhaps a better comparison:

KG, Bibby, Artest = KG, Cassell, Spree (in mental states, if nothing else)

That's WCF-level core at least.

 

[Entity]

then you look at the bench. our 6,7,8 guys over dallas. Price, Salmon, Williams depending on the MLE pick up. What Brick is doing that is kind of hidden is giving us a chance to win now with some luck for 2 or 3 years then if it doesn't work we get a chance to completly rebuild which we can't now becuase of the cap.

 

[nbrans]

probably better, or at least bigger. Way better? No. Same style player, just larger and slower. Thoams gets you 6 and 6 and 1.3 blocks in 19min, Dampier 7 and 7.5 and 1.1blocks in 25.



sure. Well..maybe. KG can still do more things, but Dirk's good enough that the draw will suffice.


not really


the wildcard.



and just no.


Seems to be a popular opinion. Until you actually look at it. Mavs main bench: Stackhouse, Diop, Buckner, George, Croshere. That's not exactly trembling in my boots stuff.


In any case, I wasn't really worried that you were going to like it, as I knew beforehand where you stood on Kevin, Reef, Cisco and Bibby. But KG, Ron and Mike are every bit as good a trio as Dirk, Howard and Terry. Similar in fact in a lot of ways. Thomas is a similar player to Dampier (and Justin similar to Diop). Only in the rangy multifacted OG combo of Cisco/Salmons do you get much of a split from Devon Harris/Stack. I should go figure out who that MLE guy would be to add spice. Maybe an old vet looking for a ring. PJ Brown. Grant Hill. Hey..Webb will be out there too.

The big difference between Etan Thomas and Dampier is man defense (Thomas is too small), and besides, if you don't like Dampier you could always bring in Diop.

And you don't think Jason Terry is better at this point than Bibby? Really? On what basis is Bibby better? Terry is quicker, shoots a higher percentage and plays way better defense. Let's see,
Terry: 17 points on 49% shooting, 44% from three, 5.2 assists
Bibby: 17 points on 40% shooting, 35% from three, 4.8 assists

I mean, yeah, Bibby is young enough to bounce back from this horrific season, but he'd be hard pressed to match Terry's productivity. Meanwhile, when you throw in defense (as in, Terry has learned to play it, Bibby has not), it's no contest at all.

Aside from the fact that Josh Howard apparently has Artest's number offensively, if you want to combine intangibles and effect on the team, I'd say they're at least equal, and you could easily make the argument that Howard has a much better positive effect on his team than Artest, whatever their talent levels. Their numbers are similar. Talent? Artest by a landslide. But if the Mavs offered Josh Howard for Artest, would you pull the trigger? I know I would, in approximately two seconds flat.

If you're going to gamble by trading young for old with Kevin and the draft pick, you'd better have a good plan going forward. No doubt this makes the Kings better, but I don't think this team is a Kevin Garnett away from contention, even before you start talking about mortgaging the future. This team needs an overhaul. I'd be willing to trade Kevin away to get Garnett if there's a reasonable hope of contending in a couple of years, but not Kevin AND the draft pick, and not when we're going to cross our fingers with Bibby, Artest and KG as a nucleus.

 

[Superman]

The big difference between Etan Thomas and Dampier is man defense (Thomas is too small), and besides, if you don't like Dampier you could always bring in Diop.

Dampier and Diop are bigger than Thomas, but I'd rather have Thomas than either of those two. Plus, if you're putting 7-foot Kevin Garnett in at the four, it's okay that Thomas is only 6'10".

And you don't think Jason Terry is better at this point than Bibby? Really? On what basis is Bibby better? Terry is quicker, shoots a higher percentage and plays way better defense. Let's see,
Terry: 17 points on 49% shooting, 44% from three, 5.2 assists
Bibby: 17 points on 40% shooting, 35% from three, 4.8 assists

I mean, yeah, Bibby is young enough to bounce back from this horrific season, but he'd be hard pressed to match Terry's productivity. Meanwhile, when you throw in defense (as in, Terry has learned to play it, Bibby has not), it's no contest at all.

I don't think it's fair to take Bibby's worst season and compare it to Jason Terry's best. Especially when Terry's role on his team is lightened in a way it never was before he joined the Mavs. He's looking world's better than Mike Bibby because he's on the best team in the League. Compare the two over the past three years or so, and the only thing Terry beats Bibby out in is probably defensive activity. Neither of them are good defenders; Terry isn't as slow Bibby is, and can therefore stay in front of his man a bit better. But I'd rather have Bibby than Terry, as long as Bibby is playing with a dominant big man. Which he would be, if Garnett were here.

Aside from the fact that Josh Howard apparently has Artest's number offensively, if you want to combine intangibles and effect on the team, I'd say they're at least equal, and you could easily make the argument that Howard has a much better positive effect on his team than Artest, whatever their talent levels. Their numbers are similar. Talent? Artest by a landslide. But if the Mavs offered Josh Howard for Artest, would you pull the trigger? I know I would, in approximately two seconds flat.

Intangibles sway this argument in Howard's direction, but the fact is that Ron Artest - on his best behavior - trumps Josh Howard. Regardless of their head-to-head numbers, Artest is just a better player, all around. I would trade Artest for Howard, straight-up, especially if we had a player like Kevin Garnett, but the point is that we could easily be compared to a team like the Mavs when you have KG-Artest-Bibby as your big three. It's definitely a wash, comparing them to Dirk-Howard-Terry. The tables start to tilt in the Mavs direction when you start to think about age/salaries, and if chemistry becomes an issue, but the hope is that you're good enough to contend in the next three seasons, and if that's the case, then chemistry is likely a non-factor.

If you're going to gamble by trading young for old with Kevin and the draft pick, you'd better have a good plan going forward. No doubt this makes the Kings better, but I don't think this team is a Kevin Garnett away from contention, even before you start talking about mortgaging the future. This team needs an overhaul. I'd be willing to trade Kevin away to get Garnett if there's a reasonable hope of contending in a couple of years, but not Kevin AND the draft pick, and not when we're going to cross our fingers with Bibby, Artest and KG as a nucleus.

I haven't looked at the contracts, but I'm assuming that all of those parts that Brick suggested would be moveable if it became necessary. Mortgaging the future is acceptable if you're giving yourself a chance to win now, with a way to strip down and do a full rebuild in a couple of years if necessary. Which is what we're probably going to wind up doing this year anyways. At least you'd have a team of players who you know would play their hardest and go out to win every single night.

That's easily a 50 win team, you should be able to compete with Dallas, Phoenix and San Antonio, and that's good enough to at least try it out for a couple of years.

 

[nbrans]

I don't think it's fair to take Bibby's worst season and compare it to Jason Terry's best. Especially when Terry's role on his team is lightened in a way it never was before he joined the Mavs. He's looking world's better than Mike Bibby because he's on the best team in the League. Compare the two over the past three years or so, and the only thing Terry beats Bibby out in is probably defensive activity. Neither of them are good defenders; Terry isn't as slow Bibby is, and can therefore stay in front of his man a bit better. But I'd rather have Bibby than Terry, as long as Bibby is playing with a dominant big man. Which he would be, if Garnett were here.

ok, so, fine, Bibby had an off-year this year. Except I'd say Terry also had a better year than him last year, too. Bibby's ppg went up because he shot more, but Terry still shot for a higher percentage and, of course, still played better defense. Terry has shown he can be a 20 ppg scorer on a bad team (or at least 19.7), but for the Mavs he's been awesome, shooting a high percentage (over 40% from 3 the last three seasons, over 47% from the field last three seasons).

Again, I'm not ruling out the possibility that Bibby can bounce back, but he had a seriously horrendous year this year, and to me it's a Peja thing -- it wasn't a big deal that Peja was slow when there weren't many good athletic small forwards in the league, but last year things started getting ugly. It's the same with Bibby -- when Bibby came into the league point guards were relatively slow and his lack of quickness wasn't a big deal. Now his lack of quickness is killing him with the new crop of point guards, and I think the Kings need to find a quicker point guard if they hope to be a contender.

 

[Smills91]

ok, so, fine, Bibby had an off-year this year. Except I'd say Terry also had a better year than him last year, too. Bibby's ppg went up because he shot more, but Terry still shot for a higher percentage and, of course, still played better defense. Terry has shown he can be a 20 ppg scorer on a bad team (or at least 19.7), but for the Mavs he's been awesome, shooting a high percentage (over 40% from 3 the last three seasons, over 47% from the field last three seasons).

Again, I'm not ruling out the possibility that Bibby can bounce back, but he had a seriously horrendous year this year, and to me it's a Peja thing -- it wasn't a big deal that Peja was slow when there weren't many good athletic small forwards in the league, but last year things started getting ugly. It's the same with Bibby -- when Bibby came into the league point guards were relatively slow and his lack of quickness wasn't a big deal. Now his lack of quickness is killing him with the new crop of point guards, and I think the Kings need to find a quicker point guard if they hope to be a contender.

I'd seriously consider grabbing Mike Conley Jr. if he stays in the draft and is still on the board.

 

[Löwenherz]

I think Martin and our Number 1 Pick would be a good start in getting KG. But there is no way they would accept Brad and Kenny's contracts. From everything I've read about what they're looking for Post-KG, it would have to be all young guys, cap relief and draft picks.

Meaning, we'd probably have to construct some kind of three-way trade.

Something like us sending Martin and the Number 1 to Minny, Sending Brad, SAR and filler to Chicago. And having them send the NY Pick, Ty Thomas and Luel Deng to Minny. ( I just don't think anyone is taking K9 no matter what)

I don't know if that works for all sides cap wise or not (prob not), that's just a hypothetical of what I think it would take for us to land KG.

The T-Wolves would probably also be looking to unload some of their bad contracts, so any trade would surely have to include those.

As for Etan Thomas, I've never understood the fascination with him.

He can't even start in front of Haywood and seems to bring pretty much what K9 brings with a similar contract.

Plus, Wiz fans seem to talk about him with the same sense of admiration that WE have for K9.

 

[Venom]

I'm not interested. Garnett has proven he is not a leader, and so have Artest and Bibby. That roster would have a lot of yelling, staring, and chest-thumping, but no leadership. If that's what we're after we may as well keep the pick and draft Joakim Noah.

 

[Gary]

probably better, or at least bigger. Way better? No. Same style player, just larger and slower. Thoams gets you 6 and 6 and 1.3 blocks in 19min, Dampier 7 and 7.5 and 1.1blocks in 25.



sure. Well..maybe. KG can still do more things, but Dirk's good enough that the draw will suffice.


not really


the wildcard.



and just no.


Seems to be a popular opinion. Until you actually look at it. Mavs main bench: Stackhouse, Diop, Buckner, George, Croshere. That's not exactly trembling in my boots stuff.


In any case, I wasn't really worried that you were going to like it, as I knew beforehand where you stood on Kevin, Reef, Cisco and Bibby. But KG, Ron and Mike are every bit as good a trio as Dirk, Howard and Terry. Similar in fact in a lot of ways. Thomas is a similar player to Dampier (and Justin similar to Diop). Only in the rangy multifacted OG combo of Cisco/Salmons do you get much of a split from Devon Harris/Stack. I should go figure out who that MLE guy would be to add spice. Maybe an old vet looking for a ring. PJ Brown. Grant Hill. Hey..Webb will be out there too.

You can compare player to player until the cows come home, but if the team play isnt there than the team will be no better than last year.

If there was a way to keep Martin, and Miller and somehow get Garnett than all would be fine. We need team players to play along side of Garnett.. Not guys that would fight for the shots against him... Bibby, and Artest hit the road in exchange.

C-Miller
PF-Garnett
SF-Garcia
SG-Martin
PG-(use our pick to draft a PG)

With this lineup we would have a 5-6 year window minus Brad Miller in a couple to three years for a replacement.

 

[Löwenherz]

I'm not interested. Garnett has proven he is not a leader, and so have Artest and Bibby. That roster would have a lot of yelling, staring, and chest-thumping, but no leadership. If that's what we're after we may as well keep the pick and draft Joakim Noah.

I'm sorry, how has Garnett not shown he's a leader? Because his team hasn't won anything?

How about bringing a level of intensity to every play we haven't had all season. Or handeling himself with class, dignity and loyalty while stuck with a completely inept GM and organization. He plays on All-Madden level no matter what the situation is, rarely is injured and truely shows a respect for his teammates, fans and the game.

He single-handedly took the T-Wolves to a string of playoffs when they had no business being anywhere but the lottery. And the one time he actually got help, they went to the WCF.

Bibby's a side kick and Artest is insane, so you'll get no arguement from me on that duo.

But there is no single archetype of leadership -- and KG undoubtedly leads by example.

Being against the trade idea because it delays rebuilding even longer for a risky "Win Now" situation that could blow up in our face is perfectly fine.

But KG's leadership qualities should not be among the sticking points.

 

[Bricklayer]

You can compare player to player until the cows come home, but if the team play isnt there than the team will be no better than last year.

If there was a way to keep Martin, and Miller and somehow get Garnett than all would be fine. We need team players to play along side of Garnett.. Not guys that would fight for the shots against him... Bibby, and Artest hit the road in exchange.

C-Miller
PF-Garnett
SF-Garcia
SG-Martin
PG-(use our pick to draft a PG)

With this lineup we would have a 5-6 year window minus Brad Miller in a couple to three years for a replacement.

Actually that was exactly why the team was constructed the way it was.

Kevin would just be a prerequisite to getting KG -- no way to do to without him. And even if you could, having him in that lineup instead of Cisco/Salmons would just be problematic -- too may shooters. Keviun needs shots in order to contribute. Cisco does not. Brad needs the ball to be effective, Thomas does not. This is a mere muse, but its also one of the few ways I would keep around Ron -- he's our best overall player, and if you can actually bring in an even greater player he respects, and create an all time great defensive forward combo, you do it and cross your fingers.

In any case not only was the proposal made with shots in mind, it rather explicitly follows nearly the EXACT plan of a very successful team. Not too far off of our own teams of the past either. #1 option (who is also unselfish BTW) and then a clear #2 (Artest) and #3 (Bibby, who has the additional benefit of being a pick and rolll PG, meaning he can score out of 2 man plays run with the #1 option rather than need separate sets). Then everybody else stays out of the way and are guys who contribute without scoring. That is an absolutely classic structure for a great team. Dallas's included.