Brad Miller to LA

Moderators: pacers33granger, BullyKing, HartfordWhalers, Texas Chuck, Andre Roberstan, MoneyTalks41890, loserX, Trader_Joe, Mamba4Goat

User avatar
dockingsched
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 56,682
And1: 24,003
Joined: Aug 02, 2005
     

 

Post#61 » by dockingsched » Tue Jan 22, 2008 8:06 pm

LPKingsFan wrote:-= original quote snipped =-




Not if Kwame's poor play with Bynum out starts costing them playoff position.


yup, makes a lot of sense to acquire a 2.5 year bad commitment for a 7 week problem.
"We must try not to sink beneath our anguish, Harry, but battle on." - Dumbledore
User avatar
Cruel_Ruin
Head Coach
Posts: 6,091
And1: 767
Joined: Nov 05, 2006
Location: The intersection of intellect, imagination and insanity
   

 

Post#62 » by Cruel_Ruin » Tue Jan 22, 2008 9:39 pm

realball wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



The only problem with making trades for the Kings is that it's impossible to appease you guys, mainly because of this pseudo-rebuilding/contending phase that the Kings have going on. Which is why you can't create a trade "that fits along those lines". Everytime there is a trade suggesting rebuilding and getting worse (by getting expirings), Kings fans say no because they aren't getting enough value for their players. But fact is, these player's really don't have great value: they still aren't a perennial playoff team, and they all either have a big contract, baggage, or injury problems. It'd be better for the Kings to give them away for "less value" rather than to keep them and go nowhere.


This is true that the Kings are going through a phase where their identity for the next few years will be determined in a few months. I can see from a fan's perspective why one would want the Kings to rebuild because it's obvious that Bibby/Martin/Artest core isn't going to yield a championship contender, not now nor in three years.

That being said, I can also see why management would want to keep up this disguise of "playing hard" to generate fan excitement, because last year was the worst year to watching Kings basketball for at least a dozen years, for me anyways. They need to get the fans back on their side, especially with a new arena deal hanging in the balance.

About the trade value of our players, I personally think that when performing up to their abilities, their value is better than what the general fan would assume. Bibby is capable of putting up 20/5 type averages when healthy. His contract may make things difficult, but his value should be at least that of an expiring, a late pick, and a young player who is at least good enough to play a bench role in the future. Artest is worth even more because he can single-handedly turn an entire season around, especially in the East. His talent should yield expirings, a young roleplaying starter for the future, and a mid-level first. But he's emotionally unstable, so we may have to settle for less than that. That's what I personally percieve their trade values to be, and most trades here on the board give us less than that.

Brad Miller is a completely different animal. Unlike Bibby and Artest, where we have NBA-ready replacements in the wings such as Udrih and Garcia, we have no stopgap at the center position if he's gone. Our only option is Spencer Hawes, who's body is not ready for a full-time starting job, and will be murdered nightly by bigger, more physical players or smaller and more athletic players alike. Not only that, but our offense runs through Brad, and when it didn't, the Kings were borderline unwatchable. So while Kwame/1st may be good value on paper, I just don't see enough incentive there to make the deal.

Well, there you have it, inside the mind of a Kings fan today.
SacKingZZZ
RealGM
Posts: 24,085
And1: 1,084
Joined: Feb 19, 2005
Location: "Look at me, Dave, look. Come and touch it, Dave."

 

Post#63 » by SacKingZZZ » Wed Jan 23, 2008 7:28 am

realball wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



The only problem with making trades for the Kings is that it's impossible to appease you guys, mainly because of this pseudo-rebuilding/contending phase that the Kings have going on. Which is why you can't create a trade "that fits along those lines". Everytime there is a trade suggesting rebuilding and getting worse (by getting expirings), Kings fans say no because they aren't getting enough value for their players. But fact is, these player's really don't have great value: they still aren't a perennial playoff team, and they all either have a big contract, baggage, or injury problems. It'd be better for the Kings to give them away for "less value" rather than to keep them and go nowhere.

And for the Lakers, late first round picks can mean a lot. They used one to select Farmar, who is quite possibly their best guard after Kobe on the team. And the Kings also used a late draft pick to get Kevin Martin. The Lakers are better off letting Kwame's contract expire and replacing him with a center with the pick instead of handicapping themselves with Miller's contract for the next three years.


All players only have "great" value to the teams that could realistically use them. It's not about appeasing anyone either. But, don't come on here and tell me expirings and a Farmar level prospect (which may be better than average) is too much for a 20 ppg level player.

Return to Trades and Transactions