Revised Proposal: NJN-LAL-SAC

ecuhus1981 · Post #1 » by **ecuhus1981** » Thu Jan 3, 2008 1:30 pm

This is an offshoot of the "SAC/NJ/LA" thread, but I wanted to start a new one to get a final opinion on some of the things we talked about in that thread.

Trade ID #4382914

New Jersey Trade Breakdown
Incoming Players: Coby Karl, Lamar Odom, Quincy Douby, Shareef Abdur-Rahim, Ron Artest
Outgoing Players: Sean Williams, Jamaal Magloire, Jason Collins, Richard Jefferson, future 1st to SAC
NJ goes for a more half-court-oriented style, and brings in a couple of veteran stars that bring defense and versatility to the roster. Stefaneski's gone, so hopefully Shareef holds no ill will for the Nets FO.
Kidd, Carter, Artest, Odom, (Krstic)
Williams, Wright, Nachbar, Rahim, Boone

L.A. Lakers Trade Breakdown
Incoming Players: Richard Jefferson, Mikki Moore
Outgoing Players: Coby Karl, Javaris Crittenton, Lamar Odom, future 2nd to SAC
LA adds a true 2nd option alongside Kobe, and a cleanup guy / quality defender / poor-man's Rodman in Moore.
Fisher, Bryant, Jefferson, Moore, Bynum
Farmar, Pavlovic, Walton, Turiaf, Brown

Sacramento Trade Breakdown
Incoming Players: Sean Williams, Jamaal Magloire, Jason Collins, Javaris Crittenton, future 2nd from LAL, future 1st from NJN
Outgoing Players: Quincy Douby, Mikki Moore, Shareef Abdur-Rahim, Ron Artest
SAC sheds salary, and adds youth to surround Martin for the future. (Future trades of Bibby, Miller and Thomas may be forthcoming to complete the rebuild, but not in this deal.)
(Bibby), Martin, Salmons, Williams, Miller
Udrih, Crittenton, Garcia, Thomas, Collins

OGSactownballer · Post #2 » by **OGSactownballer** » Thu Jan 3, 2008 2:49 pm

NO.

Moving Shareef is not the priority that moving Kenny is, and definately not giving up on Moore (who is cheap and fits what we are doing right now) and Douby while also giving Artest for FUTURE picks that will probably be low in the draft anyway. This is not much of a deal.

ecuhus1981 · Post #3 » by **ecuhus1981** » Thu Jan 3, 2008 2:51 pm

NJ will take Thomas instead of SAR and you can keep Douby then, but we will keep our 1st. Better?

Smills91 · Post #4 » by **Smills91** » Thu Jan 3, 2008 4:33 pm

ecuhus1981 wrote:NJ will take Thomas instead of SAR and you can keep Douby then, but we will keep our 1st. Better?

There no point in trading Ron for such aggregate talent. He's worth more to us than that package.

ecuhus1981 · Post #5 » by **ecuhus1981** » Thu Jan 3, 2008 5:41 pm

Timeout. You'd rather have Nate Robinson and Renaldo Balkman (or even Lee, which you couldn't get), than Javaris Crittenton and Sean Williams?! :crazy:

I cannot help but assume this conclusion, since you created an Artest trade today for the two Knicks' youngsters, but you're panning this one. This proposal actually gives you more financial relief than the other, too.

I don't validate your "aggregate" comment either. What Artest doesn't have multiple players returning? Certainly yours meets that criteria. You get an expiring, a two-year deal, two stud youngsters and two picks.

Post #6 » by **dockingsched** » Thu Jan 3, 2008 5:46 pm

he never said the kings would accept. he left himself an escape clause :lol:

anywhoo, since the lakers are involved (even though they don't get artest), you should khow that the asking price is andrew bynum

ecuhus1981 · Post #7 » by **ecuhus1981** » Thu Jan 3, 2008 5:55 pm

dcash4 wrote:he never said the kings would accept. he left himself an escape clause

anywhoo, since the lakers are involved (even though they don't get artest), you should khow that the asking price is andrew bynum

Yeah, it was just a few weeks ago, but I already miss those entertaining Artest-for-Bynum proposals! :lol:

But dcash4, as our LA rep, what do you think of the revision? I think it's really solid for the Lakers as well. Would you be amenable to upgrading the 2nd to a 2010 protected 1st?

Post #8 » by **dockingsched** » Thu Jan 3, 2008 6:07 pm

i wouldn't trade odom for jefferson so i don't think u want to hear my opinion on this one. :lol:

ecuhus1981 · Post #9 » by **ecuhus1981** » Thu Jan 3, 2008 6:16 pm

OK, well, you know my idea of RJ's value (25/5/3 2nd option > 14/9/2 roleplayer), but just for the purpose of argument ( :roll:

), let's take RJ and Odom out of the equation.

Moore for Crittenton, Karl and a 2008 2nd (or a protected 2010 1st) is a very nice deal, too. Come to think of it, man, LA really should be able give SAC that protected 1st, dang!

Put your preferences aside, and take a subjective look at this deal. On second glance, it's sweet for LA, and they are better built to contend.

RIPskaterdude · Post #10 » by **RIPskaterdude** » Thu Jan 3, 2008 6:18 pm

ecuhus1981 wrote:Timeout. You'd rather have Nate Robinson and Renaldo Balkman (or even Lee, which you couldn't get), than Javaris Crittenton and Sean Williams?!

I cannot help but assume this conclusion, since you created an Artest trade today for the two Knicks' youngsters, but you're panning this one. This proposal actually gives you more financial relief than the other, too.

I don't validate your "aggregate" comment either. What Artest doesn't have multiple players returning? Certainly yours meets that criteria. You get an expiring, a two-year deal, two stud youngsters and two picks.

Yeah, but he didn't have to throw in Mikki Moore and Douby to get Robinson and Balkman/Lee.

Post #11 » by **dockingsched** » Thu Jan 3, 2008 6:20 pm

moore isn't worth a first at all. two first round picks is horrible.

ecuhus1981 · Post #12 » by **ecuhus1981** » Thu Jan 3, 2008 6:32 pm

xx_skaterdude_xx wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Yeah, but he didn't have to throw in Mikki Moore and Douby to get Robinson and Balkman/Lee.

Yes, I understand. Shedding the extra salary while bringing in a better long-term option at PF than either Lee or Balkman, plus adding the other pick, plus the upgrade from Nate to Critt, is fair.

ecuhus1981 · Post #13 » by **ecuhus1981** » Thu Jan 3, 2008 6:35 pm

dcash4 wrote:moore isn't worth a first at all. two first round picks is horrible.

LA isn't giving two picks. NJ is giving one, and LA is giving the other. And in the context of the deal (aka, spinning Lamar into Richard), a 1st is warranted.

Let's settle this like men: meet me in the Player Comparisons Forum! En garde! :lol:

Post #14 » by **dockingsched** » Thu Jan 3, 2008 6:37 pm

ecuhus1981 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

LA isn't giving two picks. NJ is giving one, and LA is giving the other. And in the context of the deal (aka, spinning Lamar into Richard), a 1st is warranted.

Let's settle this like men: meet me in the Player Comparisons Forum! En garde!

u called moore for critt/karl/2010 1st a good deal too. its not. moore isnt even worth critt.

Post #15 » by **dockingsched** » Thu Jan 3, 2008 6:43 pm

ecuhus1981 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

LA isn't giving two picks. NJ is giving one, and LA is giving the other. And in the context of the deal (aka, spinning Lamar into Richard), a 1st is warranted.

Let's settle this like men: meet me in the Player Comparisons Forum! En garde! :lol:

, i'll go argue a bit but u mistook trade value or trade "fit" for which player is better.

ecuhus1981 · Post #16 » by **ecuhus1981** » Thu Jan 3, 2008 6:53 pm

dcash4 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

u called moore for critt/karl/2010 1st a good deal too. its not. moore isnt even worth critt.

Let's be real. Mikki is no superstar. He's old, and he was a Coach Frank conversation away from out of the league two years ago. We paid SEA an '09 2nd-rounder (and a TE) for him at the time. Since then, he had a surprisingly good year (with Kidd) in NJ, and still puts up respectable #'s in Sactown. He's surely raised his value since then. Maybe not to the level of a 1st on his own, but certainly you have to appreciate what the brings. 8 and 6 on 54% shooting ain't half bad.

A Fisher/Bryant/Jefferson/Moore/Bynum lineup would win more games than your current one. Is it worth Critt, Karl and a pick? You decide. See you in the Finals...

deNIEd · Post #17 » by **deNIEd** » Thu Jan 3, 2008 7:01 pm

Wouldn't KT be more appealing to NJ than Shareef.
King's can throw in some extra cash, to cover part of the differences of their contracts.
Shareef is currently injured, so he won't help NJ this year. Also, i'm not sure if shareef wants to go to nj considerding what had happened with his potential signing with nj.

ecuhus1981 · Post #18 » by **ecuhus1981** » Thu Jan 3, 2008 7:03 pm

^

I know, that's why I mentioned Stefanseki's departure.

NJ wouldn't kill this deal over swapping SAR to KT, but we'd modify our offer.

Post #19 » by **dockingsched** » Thu Jan 3, 2008 7:07 pm

ecuhus1981 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
He's surely raised his value since then. Maybe not to the level of a 1st on his own, but certainly you have to appreciate what the brings.

so moore isn't worth a 1st on his own?

ecuhus1981 wrote:Moore for Crittenton, Karl and a 2008 2nd (or a protected 2010 1st) is a very nice deal, too. Come to think of it, man, LA really should be able give SAC that protected 1st, dang!

so moore is worth two first round picks (critt/2010 1st)?

i'm officially confused.

ecuhus1981 · Post #20 » by **ecuhus1981** » Thu Jan 3, 2008 7:57 pm

I stepped down from my original argument somewhat, to say that maybe Moore isn't worth a 2010 1st, but he's surely worth more than a 2009 2nd. But I do think a mid-first round rookie, an undrafted rookie and a 2nd-rounder for Moore is fair, at least.

I see you're counting Critt as one of the "two first round picks". I see what you mean, but I don't count current players as "picks". I'd call them "recent draftees" or something. That doesn't mean I don't value Critt similarly as you do, it just means your use of the term is confusing. I mean, if we follow your definition, Jamaal Maglorie and Jason Collins are both "first round picks" too, I suppose! :lol:

ANYWAY, I think a logical midway point between an 2010 LAL 1st and a 2008 LAL 2nd is the 2008 CHA pick owed to you. Top-40 Protected, shall we say?