John Salmons deals

[LPKingsFan]

If the Kings wise up and do the Brad Miller for Gerald Wallace deal (which they should... immediately) then John Salmons would be the odd man out in Sac. He's playing extremely well on both sides of the floor, averaging nearly 20 per game, with over 3.5 boards, 3 assists, and a steal, shooting almost 50%. Teams like New Orleans and Toronto come to mind, but I imagine there are others out there too that would be interested. Kings are looking for something similar to the Artest package (expirings+picks and/or prospects). Let the bidding commence...

[Nutty Nats Fan]

Denver offers: Atkins + Hunter + 1st for Salmons.

Salmons has three years left? So a lot of teams won't want him, messes up the magically 2010. Hunter has two years left and Atkins' next year can be bought out for 700k. Gets the Kings a 1st and more cap space for 2010.

Someone on the Nuggets board thinks the Kings would do that.

Different version: LK + Hunter for Salmons.
Or a larger trade: LK + Hunter + Atkins + 2nd for Salmon and Shelden Williams.

Gets the Kings LK, whom they wanted for Atrest last year. Second deal would provide Denver with some more front court depth, though Karl wouldn't play Williams unless forced to by injury.

[SacKingZZZ]

Denver offers: Atkins + Hunter + 1st for Salmons.

Salmons has three years left? So a lot of teams won't want him, messes up the magically 2010. Hunter has two years left and Atkins' next year can be bought out for 700k. Gets the Kings a 1st and more cap space for 2010.

Someone on the Nuggets board thinks the Kings would do that.

Different version: LK + Hunter for Salmons.
Or a larger trade: LK + Hunter + Atkins + 2nd for Salmon and Shelden Williams.

Gets the Kings LK, whom they wanted for Atrest last year. Second deal would provide Denver with some more front court depth, though Karl wouldn't play Williams unless forced to by injury.

I doubt it, if anything he's a reason for a FA to consider that team. He makes like 4.5 million, that for a 20 ppg scorer with the ability to play the PG, SG, and SF is a steal.

I don't think the Kings consider any of those trades. The Kings wanted Kleiza but that ship has sailed.

[loserX]

I posted one a while ago...response was mixed, but here it is again (I think I got the details right) if only to generate more discussion:

Clippers trade
DeAndre Jordan
Brian Skinner
Jason Hart
protected 1st

Clippers receive
John Salmons

The Clips get a nice fit...Salmons isn't a star, but doesn't need to be on that team. He can defend pretty well and score just enough, plus he can play either wing position. The cost is end-of-the-bench scrubs, a big man who while talented won't see many minutes behind Camby/Kaman for a few years anyway, and a pick (the year and protection would be negotiable).

Kings trade
John Salmons
$3M cash

Kings receive
DeAndre Jordan
Brian Skinner
protected 1st
$3.29M TPE

The Kings move Salmons and get back a young big and a future 1st rounder. (Again, the year and protections could be negotiated so as to be palatable for both teams.) Skinner even provides veteran interior toughness...he could fill in if the Kings trade Miller and/or Moore, or might even be desirable himself at the deadline. They also save money every year of Salmons deal, including this one...that allows them to throw in the cash (see below).

Grizzlies use
capspace (i.e. nothing)

Grizzlies receive
Jason Hart
$3M cash

The Grizzlies use their apparently unutilized capspace and extra roster spot to help out...the Kings thereby do not have to cut anyone to make this trade. Hart's contract is only $2.48M this year; the Griz waive him immediately and keep the leftover money as a prize for doing essentially nothing.

It's not entirely perfect...the Clips might demand a little more (a 2nd rounder? they can't take back more salary, though), and of course much is dependent on the conditions of the pick.

[xxSnEaKyPxx]

Salmons doesn't have the value around the league, that he has to the Kings. No trade would satisfy the Kings, therefore, nothing happens.

[Jajwanda]

What would it take from the Lakers?

He would seem to be an ideal fit at SF for the Lakers if he were to gain just a few more pounds and get up to about 215 or so. Could do a deal around Trevor Ariza or a deal around Lamar Odom. We'd prefer the latter.

[SacKingZZZ]

I posted one a while ago...response was mixed, but here it is again (I think I got the details right) if only to generate more discussion:

Clippers trade
DeAndre Jordan
Brian Skinner
Jason Hart
protected 1st

Clippers receive
John Salmons

The Clips get a nice fit...Salmons isn't a star, but doesn't need to be on that team. He can defend pretty well and score just enough, plus he can play either wing position. The cost is end-of-the-bench scrubs, a big man who while talented won't see many minutes behind Camby/Kaman for a few years anyway, and a pick (the year and protection would be negotiable).

Kings trade
John Salmons
$3M cash

Kings receive
DeAndre Jordan
Brian Skinner
protected 1st
$3.29M TPE

The Kings move Salmons and get back a young big and a future 1st rounder. (Again, the year and protections could be negotiated so as to be palatable for both teams.) Skinner even provides veteran interior toughness...he could fill in if the Kings trade Miller and/or Moore, or might even be desirable himself at the deadline. They also save money every year of Salmons deal, including this one...that allows them to throw in the cash (see below).

Grizzlies use
capspace (i.e. nothing)

Grizzlies receive
Jason Hart
$3M cash

The Grizzlies use their apparently unutilized capspace and extra roster spot to help out...the Kings thereby do not have to cut anyone to make this trade. Hart's contract is only $2.48M this year; the Griz waive him immediately and keep the leftover money as a prize for doing essentially nothing.

It's not entirely perfect...the Clips might demand a little more (a 2nd rounder? they can't take back more salary, though), and of course much is dependent on the conditions of the pick.

Depends on the protection, I think the Clipps get close the 8th seed anyway but it would have to be no more than top 8. I don't think the Kings are that hard up for another 1st rounder though.

[SacKingZZZ]

What would it take from the Lakers?

He would seem to be an ideal fit at SF for the Lakers if he were to gain just a few more pounds and get up to about 215 or so. Could do a deal around Trevor Ariza or a deal around Lamar Odom. We'd prefer the latter.

Actually I think he'd make an ideal PG for the Lakers. That big role playing defensive PG with an added ability to score is exactly the type of player I could see Jackson coveting.

I still think Odom is the perfect PF for the Kings system, how about:

Lakers trade:

Lamar Odom
Chris Mihm

Kings trade:

John Salmons
Kenny Thomas

[loserX]

Depends on the protection, I think the Clipps get close the 8th seed anyway but it would have to be no more than top 8. I don't think the Kings are that hard up for another 1st rounder though.

No team is going to trade a pick with that little protection in a season where they're currently 8-19 for John Salmons. You are, in all likelihood, not going to get a pick that could be anywhere in the lotto for him. You'll have to set your sights lower than that, I think.

[SacKingZZZ]

Depends on the protection, I think the Clipps get close the 8th seed anyway but it would have to be no more than top 8. I don't think the Kings are that hard up for another 1st rounder though.

No team is going to trade a pick with that little protection in a season where they're currently 8-19 for John Salmons. You are, in all likelihood, not going to get a pick that could be anywhere in the lotto for him. You'll have to set your sights lower than that, I think.

Well then to be honest that package is TERRIBLE. What's the incentive for the Kings do it if not for the pick??? A big like Skinner to "fill in if the Kings trade Miller and/or Moore..." is nowhere close to a reason, least of our worries in this scenario.

[loserX]

Depends on the protection, I think the Clipps get close the 8th seed anyway but it would have to be no more than top 8. I don't think the Kings are that hard up for another 1st rounder though.

No team is going to trade a pick with that little protection in a season where they're currently 8-19 for John Salmons. You are, in all likelihood, not going to get a pick that could be anywhere in the lotto for him. You'll have to set your sights lower than that, I think.

Well then to be honest that package is TERRIBLE. What's the incentive for the Kings do it if not for the pick??? A big like Skinner to "fill in if the Kings trade Miller and/or Moore..." is nowhere close to a reason, least of our worries in this scenario.

You may have missed the young big man and the salary relief part IN ADDITION TO the pick. You may have noticed that moving 2010-plus contracts for full value isn't exactly easy these days. You're getting a pick a prospect and BETTER-than-expirings for Salmons...and now you want the pick to be in the lotto? That's not going to happen, not from any team.

You didn't get a lotto pick for Mike Bibby, you didn't get one for Ron Artest, you're not getting one for Brad Miller and you're in all likelihood not getting one for John Salmons. You can possibly get a pick, but it's not going to be in the lotto. He's not worth that, sorry.

[SacKingZZZ]

You may have missed the young big man and the salary relief part IN ADDITION TO the pick. You may have noticed that moving 2010-plus contracts for full value isn't exactly easy these days. You're getting a pick a prospect and BETTER-than-expirings for Salmons...and now you want the pick to be in the lotto? That's not going to happen, not from any team.

You didn't get a lotto pick for Mike Bibby, you didn't get one for Ron Artest, you're not getting one for Brad Miller and you're in all likelihood not getting one for John Salmons. You can possibly get a pick, but it's not going to be in the lotto. He's not worth that, sorry.

You may have missed the part that the "young big man" was a 2nd round pick that fell for some reason and has no place on the team he is on anyway for the next few years. Not to mention that he is at least 3rd in line behind the bigs they already have in terms of role and development time. And I doubt the Kings are looking for salary relief on a contract that is below the MLE, they paid Beno Udrih more than that for craps sake!

We didn't get a lotto pick for Ron Artest and? The trade included a player (Donte Greene) that the Kings were considering taking in the lotto themselves, AND they got another 1st rounder out of it to boot, I don't know if they could've gotten a lotto pick or not but this was obviously a package they liked. The same basic structure and value as the trade that almost sent Ron to Denver. The assumption here is that the Clippers would want John Salmons because the Kings clearly wouldn't be knocking on the door of the Clippers and be asking for this. The bag on Artest was that he could walk, Bibby made too much and was in decline, I can understand it but John Salmons is tied up in what may very well be the best contract in the league and isn't on the decline. I thought it was funny on NBA TV the other night Kamla, Smith, and C. Miller were going through the highlights and during some of Salmons she made a remark about how Salmons is getting a pay increase or he's "getting paid now!", well, not anytime soon. If the Kings are indeed looking for salary relief they are looking in the wrong place. Plenty of places to start before they move John Salmons for that very reason.

And wherever the pick may land is up to the Clippers, all I know is if the Clippers are making this trade and don't make the playoffs then they need to just quit and go home. In fact they maybe even should without the trade. The Kings aren't going to make that trade unless the chances are they see that pick this year, wherever it may land. Top 8 to top 10 seems reasonable considering they get nothing of real necessity or value in the trade otherwise. They need some sort of guarantee on that return package. The only other option for the Clipps would be to wait, draft someone, and hope to hell the Kings really, really like that player.

[loserX]

You may have missed the part that the "young big man" was a 2nd round pick that fell for some reason

The trade included a player (Donte Greene) that the Kings were considering taking in the lotto themselves,

So DeAndre Jordan's fall in the draft counts against him, but Donte Greene's fall in the draft doesn't. Gotcha.

I don't know if they could've gotten a lotto pick or not

Clearly they could not. Teams out of the playoffs weren't about to risk a lottery pick on Artest, and they're not going to for Salmons either.

And wherever the pick may land is up to the Clippers, all I know is if the Clippers are making this trade and don't make the playoffs then they need to just quit and go home.

Great. If they're going to make the playoffs so assuredly, then (at least) lotto protection on the pick shouldn't be a problem for you.

In fact they maybe even should without the trade. The Kings aren't going to make that trade unless the chances are they see that pick this year, wherever it may land.

The only way for that to happen is if the pick is completely unprotected, and there's no way that's happening either. Not from a team that's 8-19. That's suicide.

[SacKingZZZ]

So DeAndre Jordan's fall in the draft counts against him, but Donte Greene's fall in the draft doesn't. Gotcha.

Great. If they're going to make the playoffs so assuredly, then (at least) lotto protection on the pick shouldn't be a problem for you.

The only way for that to happen is if the pick is completely unprotected, and there's no way that's happening either. Not from a team that's 8-19. That's suicide.

Once again, the Kings WANTED Donte Greene so where he was drafted was insignificant in their eyes, luckily he landed in Houston I guess. If they really valued Jordan (which I assume they don't enough to make him the crux of a trade involving John Salmons since the pick isn't 100% guaranteed) then it wouldn't matter either, but if they are trading for him they have to get some type of alternate value with him. If they don't get the pick it would have to be the extra trade value Jordan would bring him, so as a result, him falling does factor in because you can assume he fell because when you fall from as high as pick 5 to the 2nd round that says a lot about his "value" to the other GM's in the NBA.

The protection or lack thereof is a big part because the Kings need to safegaurd themselves from ending up with nothing which this trade provides absolutely no guarantees other than Brian Skinner bringing donuts to practice in case Brad is traded.

I know it may be a bad comparison but if Eddy Curry can get two unprotected picks I can see the Kings getting one from the Clippers who look to be on the way up. The Kings should have the advantage in regards to the pick, not the Clippers since that pick is supposed to tilt the trade in somewhat of a fair light for the Kings. In fact now that you mention it, that pick should most likely be unprotected, if I'm the Kings I would certainly demand at most top 10. It's up to the Clippers to lose it since they get the only guaranteed commodity in the deal, not for the Kings to take on the uncertainty of even getting it or not.

[Jajwanda]

You're right in a sense my friend, but with one differentiation. Salmons would be our PG per say but he'd be our defensive 3 unless we play against extremely tough SFs that only Kobe can handle or we need Ariza to help on.

He's just an ideal fit. Unfortunately I don't think they'd do a trade involving taking Kenny Thomas' deal back. I would counter your offer with one for Bobby Jackson being included. However, I do feel we're pretty close. I do think in a fairly free-flowing offense like Sacramento Lamar would be ideal. When he starts he still puts up some very nice numbers and is a plus PF.

After such a trade the Lakers would probably look to deal Chris Mihm (if you want him in the deal that's fine as well, but it's probably just an extra cost to Sacramento). They'd try to Joe Smith or someone of that stature to rebuild the front court depth (Josh Powell is also very solid).

[SacKingZZZ]

You're right in a sense my friend, but with one differentiation. Salmons would be our PG per say but he'd be our defensive 3 unless we play against extremely tough SFs that only Kobe can handle or we need Ariza to help on.

He's just an ideal fit. Unfortunately I don't think they'd do a trade involving taking Kenny Thomas' deal back. I would counter your offer with one for Bobby Jackson being included. However, I do feel we're pretty close. I do think in a fairly free-flowing offense like Sacramento Lamar would be ideal. When he starts he still puts up some very nice numbers and is a plus PF.

After such a trade the Lakers would probably look to deal Chris Mihm (if you want him in the deal that's fine as well, but it's probably just an extra cost to Sacramento). They'd try to Joe Smith or someone of that stature to rebuild the front court depth (Josh Powell is also very solid).

I am sure the Kings would demand Kenny be included because the other incentive in the package is that if Lamar leaves that gives the Kings some cap room to make up some of the loss.

[loserX]

him falling does factor in because you can assume he fell because when you fall from as high as pick 5 to the 2nd round that says a lot about his "value" to the other GM's in the NBA.

Once again, Donte Greene also fell considerably from his rumoured draft position. So I imagine that says a lot about his "value" to the other GM's in the NBA. What's sauce for the goose...

The protection or lack thereof is a big part because the Kings need to safegaurd themselves from ending up with nothing which this trade provides absolutely no guarantees other than Brian Skinner bringing donuts to practice in case Brad is traded.

Good grief, have you been assuming that if the pick isn't transferred in '08 then the Kings get nothing? That NEVER happens. The pick, like every other protected pick, would get carried forward, possibly with decreasing protections. (Lotto in '08, top-12 in '09, unprotected in '10...whatever. Something like that.)

As for the Salmons + Kenny to the Lakers for Odom idea, that's not going to happen. The Kings tried to tack Kenny on to Artest in an Odom trade last year, and the Lakers said absolutely not. Can't see why it would change now.

[SacKingZZZ]

Once again, Donte Greene also fell considerably from his rumoured draft position. So I imagine that says a lot about his "value" to the other GM's in the NBA. What's sauce for the goose...


Good grief, have you been assuming that if the pick isn't transferred in '08 then the Kings get nothing? That NEVER happens. The pick, like every other protected pick, would get carried forward, possibly with decreasing protections. (Lotto in '08, top-12 in '09, unprotected in '10...whatever. Something like that.)

As for the Salmons + Kenny to the Lakers for Odom idea, that's not going to happen. The Kings tried to tack Kenny on to Artest in an Odom trade last year, and the Lakers said absolutely not. Can't see why it would change now.

Did you read what I wrote? With Donte Greene his trade value or overall value didn't matter in that particular circumstance because to the KINGS he was worth a lotto pick since they considered taking him that high if Thompson had not been available. Jordan clearly doesn't have that same thing going for him in regards to the Kings.

And I am sure the pick would have declining protection but it doesn't change the uncertainty factor with the pick. Maybe or maybe not getting a pick for 3 years isn't a positive on the trade side. Look at that Atlanta pick the Suns got 3 years later. It turned from a pick that could have landed them Brandon Roy or Rudy Gay in '06 , or Al Horford in '07, to Robin Lopez in '08. Thanks to that declining protection the pick got worse, much worse. And who knows if 3 years from now the Kings will even have a big need for the pick. Probably less then now since they will most likely have some type of solid rotation by then and not much room for another draft pick on top of their own. Nope, the Kings need something tangible and your trade includes very little in the way of tangible assets.

I remember reading on this board time and time again how the Lakers wouldn't take on Kenny Thomas in an Artest trade because a) Artest could bolt and they'd be stuck with Kenny, and b) Kenny still had 2 years left on his deal. You ask what's changed? Well, Salmons is tied up in a GREAT contract, can't leave, won't leave, and Kenny has one less year on his deal, so....yeah some things have changed.

Just about every negative brought up in the Artest situation is different or non-existent in this one, not only that but I think the value of Odom to the Lakers is much less since Bynum is back and healthy plus the ever growing possibility that the gap between the Lakers and Celtics is widening. Then you have to factor in whether or not Odom will just bolt at the end of the season himself and leave the Lakers high and dry. If they don't trade him and he walks they get nothing. So, in a lot of ways it's like a reversal of the Artest to the Lakers scenario, they have the asset that they need to get some value for that could sign elsewhere. Not only all that, but I have my doubts they even consider re-signing Odom to the kind of money he'll demand so he can strengthen their bench, let alone the doubt that he'd even consider the role long term anyway.

So...what was that about the sauce?

[loserX]

Nope, the Kings need something tangible and your trade includes very little in the way of tangible assets.

Fair enough. But if you continue to look for a lotto pick, it's not going to happen, that's all. You can get a tangible pick this year, but it's not going to be until much later in the round...and you already have the Houston pick this year, as you know. It's a gamble...would you rather get a worse pick now, or try to get a better pick later? I don't blame you for taking either route, frankly...but I think the Kings are bad enough that taking a few home run swings might not be a bad idea rather than talking walks.

Then you have to factor in whether or not Odom will just bolt at the end of the season himself and leave the Lakers high and dry.

You've missed the point. The Lakers wouldn't actually have much problem with that. They have already committed his money to Bynum's extension next year, so unless he comes back at a big pay cut, he's probably gone. They WANT as much money of his as possible off the cap next year. And THAT'S why the Lakers wouldn't trade Odom's 2009-ending contract for Kenny Thomas when Artest was being discussed, and they still won't with Salmons being discussed.

[SacKingZZZ]

Fair enough. But if you continue to look for a lotto pick, it's not going to happen, that's all. You can get a tangible pick this year, but it's not going to be until much later in the round...and you already have the Houston pick this year, as you know. It's a gamble...would you rather get a worse pick now, or try to get a better pick later? I don't blame you for taking either route, frankly...but I think the Kings are bad enough that taking a few home run swings might not be a bad idea rather than talking walks.

You've missed the point. The Lakers wouldn't actually have much problem with that. They have already committed his money to Bynum's extension next year, so unless he comes back at a big pay cut, he's probably gone. They WANT as much money of his as possible off the cap next year. And THAT'S why the Lakers wouldn't trade Odom's 2009-ending contract for Kenny Thomas when Artest was being discussed, and they still won't with Salmons being discussed.

Which it might be anyway but the Kings shouldn't have to accept many strings attached to that pick when it's the foundation of the entire trade basically. If losing proven talent like John Salmons for uncertainty and most likely a worse and worse pick is a "home run" swing I'd hate to see a grand slam. Since the only reason for the Kings to do this deal is most likely the value of that pick (dumping Salmons deal as a positive is just a rediculous notion IMO) the strings attached to it shouldn't be a hindrance in any way to the Kings unless the odds are they see that pick sooner. It needs to be more fair and balanced to where it's up to the Clippers to lose that pick, not for the Clippers to lose it for the Kings.

And they wouldn't have much of a problem with that? Wow, that should make Kobe pretty happy. Contenders shedding talent like that...interesting. And don't forget that Kenny Thomas is an expiring contract, they could even use him later on in another deal. Either way the Lakers are going to be a tax paying team, just as they are now. As always it depends on the Kings preference in terms of how much they value Odom but I am sure they would demand the alternate route of cap space in case Odom doesn't either work out or return, and that means Kenny Thomas most likely.