Kings | Nets | Knicks | Pacers ... swapping big contracts!

Oomph · Post #1 » by **Oomph** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 4:02 am

Sacramento Trade Breakdown

Incoming Players
Richard Jefferson
David Lee
Malik Rose
Stephon Marbury
Troy Murphy

Outgoing Players
Shareef Abdur-Rahim
Ron Artest
Kenny Thomas
Brad Miller
Mike Bibby

New Jersey Trade Breakdown

Incoming Players
Jermaine O'Neal

Outgoing Players
Jason Collins
Richard Jefferson
2008 #1 pick

New York Trade Breakdown

Incoming Players
Ron Artest
Kenny Thomas
Jason Collins
Jamaal Tinsley

Outgoing Players
David Lee
Malik Rose
Stephon Marbury

Indiana Trade Breakdown

Incoming Players
Shareef Abdur-Rahim
Brad Miller
Mike Bibby
2008 #1 pick from NJN

Outgoing Players
Jamaal Tinsley
Troy Murphy
Jermaine O'Neal

Why?

Kings get rid of all their unwanted long term contracts and recieve 2 great forwards in RJ and Lee, while Marbury, Rose and Murphy provide leadership to the remaining young core.

Nets finally get JO without giving up their young frontcourt duo and if Krstic gets healthy they can become a big surprise team in the East.

Knicks get their defensive stopper Artest while getting rid of Marbury. Colins gives them some defense at the C spot and has only 2 year on his contract. With Tinsley they finally get a passfirst PG, although his contract is nasty.

Pacers upgrade their PG position and hope Bibby gets healthy again, and perhaps resign for a reasonable deal. Miller returns home and will be a good C in the new offense, a better version of Murphy. Pacers lose some on the defensive side giving up JO but gets a little bit of salary cap relief.

rpa · Post #2 » by **rpa** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 4:11 am

Kings pass.

Murphy's contract is far worse than any of the bad deals the Kings give up. Jefferson makes no sense with Salmons & Garcia already on the Kings (plus he's a huge injury risk on a huge contract). Lee is OK and all but he doesn't fit next to Hawes. In no way are Lee & Jefferson worth Bibby, Artest, Miller, AND trading Kenny Thomas & Shareef for a WORSE contract.

Post #3 » by **VintaGe36** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 4:12 am

The 2008 Knicks pick, will NOT be dealt, especially if all they get is Artest ,while asorbing Tinsley AND KT.

Post #4 » by **moocow007** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 4:31 am

You have got to be kidding about NY including their 2008 1st rounder to do this. :lol:

I mean honestly...

Why on Michale Jordan's green earth would NY include their lottery pick (along with David Lee) for a half year rental on an unstable player while also having to take on longer contracts of Kenny Thomas and Jamaal Tinsley (who have become deadweights to their own respective hardly perfect teams)?!?!?!?!?!?

Before anyone starts with the "to dump Marbury cause he's a cancer " if that's the goal they can just wait until Marbury is ready to return (which may not be until the start of next season) and then buy him out.

Collins is such a player that the Nets are forced to play two rookies most of the time.

And remember the adage "oh he's a Knick so he sucks more than he does" doesn't work cause once this trade is completed, those players would become Knicks and therefore suck more. And in this case, because of their longer contracts, they'd be around to suck longer.

Rasheed36 · Post #5 » by **Rasheed36** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 4:35 am

Horrible for the Kings. If Kings trade everyone it won't be for RJ. And we would never trade everyone in one deal. Kings get 10x value by trading each piece on its own.

OGSactownballer · Post #6 » by **OGSactownballer** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 6:53 am

You lost me at the point you used "Marbury" and "leadership" in the same sentence related to one another. :lol:

bringinhinkie · Post #7 » by **bringinhinkie** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 6:57 am

not trading lee for artest
not taking on longer contracts
..
..

Oomph · Post #8 » by **Oomph** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:04 am

VintaGe36 wrote:The 2008 Knicks pick, will NOT be dealt, especially if all they get is Artest ,while asorbing Tinsley AND KT.

The Knicks keep their 2008 pick, it's the Nets pick that goes to the Pacers!

Getting rid of Marbury and obtaining some good players like Artest and Tinsley seems like a steal to me.

Post #9 » by **Scoot McGroot** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 4:29 pm

Pacers pass as well. There really isn't any great incentive to do this deal for them...no youth, and Bibby is, quite frankly, wasted on the Pacers without JO.

old rem · Post #10 » by **old rem** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 4:51 pm

Scoot McGroot wrote:Pacers pass as well. There really isn't any great incentive to do this deal for them...no youth, and Bibby is, quite frankly, wasted on the Pacers without JO.

Should be an easy no for Indy with Sac very reluctant. NJ would be the happy campers as this makes them a contender.