ImageImageImageImageImage

artest/warriors rumor from Bucher

Moderators: KF10, codydaze

SacKingZZZ
RealGM
Posts: 24,085
And1: 1,084
Joined: Feb 19, 2005
Location: "Look at me, Dave, look. Come and touch it, Dave."

 

Post#21 » by SacKingZZZ » Thu Feb 7, 2008 6:47 am

Lightning Strike wrote:Why would the Warriors have traded veterian for Wright if 6 months later then just do it right back?

Much as I love it, I doubt it.


Well, I watch most Warriors games and they came into this season honestly thinking they had a shot at the western conference finals. That idea is starting to come crashing down around them, and the recent trades don't make it any better. I could see an Artest deal with Wright coming back being realistic. The TE idea doesn't make any sense at all because Artest is technically expiring anyway and we aren't over the tax as is so....
SacKingZZZ
RealGM
Posts: 24,085
And1: 1,084
Joined: Feb 19, 2005
Location: "Look at me, Dave, look. Come and touch it, Dave."

 

Post#22 » by SacKingZZZ » Thu Feb 7, 2008 6:50 am

rly723 wrote:artest will be gone either way, a 10mill TE + pick is better than any other rumors ive heard or read. that said, i think the kings might want warriors to pay more than some other team.


The TE + pick idea is interesting. The TE by itself, not so much. Still, probably not enough.
Smills91
Banned User
Posts: 23,364
And1: 2
Joined: Jun 05, 2005
Location: Ronald Reagan is my political hero.

 

Post#23 » by Smills91 » Thu Feb 7, 2008 6:53 am

SacKingZZZ wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



The TE + pick idea is interesting. The TE by itself, not so much. Still, probably not enough.


For Artest alone It'd have to be Wright/1st for Artest. Even then I'd be skeptical. Wright hasn't shown ANY promise this season and the 1st would be in the low 20's after they acquire Ron. I just don't think that's worth handing over Ron's 'bird rights' to a divisional rival. It'd suck to have to go up against him 4 times a year for the next 5 years. Send him eastward.
rly723
Junior
Posts: 457
And1: 0
Joined: Nov 29, 2005

 

Post#24 » by rly723 » Thu Feb 7, 2008 7:09 am

on the flipside, wright's potential upside is worth more than a couple months of artest, who could opt out at season's end even if he gets traded
User avatar
ethiosew
Rookie
Posts: 1,032
And1: 0
Joined: Aug 06, 2004

 

Post#25 » by ethiosew » Thu Feb 7, 2008 7:20 am

Smills91 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



For Artest alone It'd have to be Wright/1st for Artest. Even then I'd be skeptical. Wright hasn't shown ANY promise this season and the 1st would be in the low 20's after they acquire Ron. I just don't think that's worth handing over Ron's 'bird rights' to a divisional rival. It'd suck to have to go up against him 4 times a year for the next 5 years. Send him eastward.


I know what you're saying about not trading him to divisinal rival but who in their right mind would give up two 1st round picks for Artest? You are not going to get Wright and 1st for Artest period.
SacKingZZZ
RealGM
Posts: 24,085
And1: 1,084
Joined: Feb 19, 2005
Location: "Look at me, Dave, look. Come and touch it, Dave."

 

Post#26 » by SacKingZZZ » Thu Feb 7, 2008 7:21 am

rly723 wrote:on the flipside, wright's potential upside is worth more than a couple months of artest, who could opt out at season's end even if he gets traded


But does Wright fit into the time frame of the Warriors. We know from experience that it is nice to have solid prospects but if they aren't actually going to PLAY for you it really does nothing in the end. Like Gerald Wallace with us, he just wasn't going to get consistent time or a large role with us so us even having him helped us how exactly???

I'd say Wright has as much potential or was a similar type of pick to O'Bryant. Hey, POB might be a solid player but who would ever know!? If we had no intentions of using Spencer Hawes, and were trying to go for it now you better believe I would be demanding the Kings trade him for someone that fits and could help NOW.
DanLanghiOwnsAll
Veteran
Posts: 2,690
And1: 28
Joined: Dec 22, 2004

 

Post#27 » by DanLanghiOwnsAll » Thu Feb 7, 2008 7:21 am

Smills91 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



For Artest alone It'd have to be Wright/1st for Artest. Even then I'd be skeptical. Wright hasn't shown ANY promise this season and the 1st would be in the low 20's after they acquire Ron. I just don't think that's worth handing over Ron's 'bird rights' to a divisional rival. It'd suck to have to go up against him 4 times a year for the next 5 years. Send him eastward.


You'd rather have Jerome James than Wright? The Kings aren't anywhere near competing and Artest is as good as gone. Take Brandan Wright and put him alongside Spencer Hawes and you actually take a step forward in rebuilding.

Does it really matter if a divisional rival gets Artest? The Kings have bigger problems of their own to be worrying about the Warriors improving their team.

Kevin Martin and Brandan Wright isn't too bad of a start.

I get the feeling the Kings will make a quick fix move and get a lesser veteran talent with multiple years left on a contract. Petrie is the Brian Sabean of basketball.
SacKingZZZ
RealGM
Posts: 24,085
And1: 1,084
Joined: Feb 19, 2005
Location: "Look at me, Dave, look. Come and touch it, Dave."

 

Post#28 » by SacKingZZZ » Thu Feb 7, 2008 7:28 am

DanLanghiOwnsAll wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



You'd rather have Jerome James than Wright? The Kings aren't anywhere near competing and Artest is as good as gone. Take Brandan Wright and put him alongside Spencer Hawes and you actually take a step forward in rebuilding.

Does it really matter if a divisional rival gets Artest? The Kings have bigger problems of their own to be worrying about the Warriors improving their team.

Kevin Martin and Brandan Wright isn't too bad of a start.

I get the feeling the Kings will make a quick fix move and get a lesser veteran talent with multiple years left on a contract. Petrie is the Brian Sabean of basketball.



Don't forget that the Kings opinion of Wright matters too. If they don't see the potential in him then they have no interest in him. Now, I do agree with what your saying. The reality is that the Warrior are closer to competing but it's also true that they are on the outside looking in with the battle for contention. Therefore in the same boat as the Kings when you break it down, out is out, period, end of story.

Now the Kings helping the W's by giving them more fire power sounds alright and if it helps the Kings rebuild than it sounds reasonable. Artest on the Warriors would certianly put them right up there IMO and even with his contract status could be worth it.
devwat12
Sophomore
Posts: 243
And1: 3
Joined: Nov 29, 2005

 

Post#29 » by devwat12 » Thu Feb 7, 2008 7:40 am

I think a lot of people are grossly exaggerating Artest's value on the trade market.

Unless a team is absolutely positive he will re-sign with them for a reasonable amount, there is no way a team like GSW is trading a 1st round pick or a young talent with a high ceiling for Ron, let alone both.

A top 20 pick and a solid prospect for a few months of Artest? Not happening.
rly723
Junior
Posts: 457
And1: 0
Joined: Nov 29, 2005

 

Post#30 » by rly723 » Thu Feb 7, 2008 7:44 am

expiring deals (pietrus,obryant, barnes etc)
10mill TE
1st rd pick
Al Harrington

thats my guess of the trade assets that warriors would be willing to trade in an artest deal
SacKingZZZ
RealGM
Posts: 24,085
And1: 1,084
Joined: Feb 19, 2005
Location: "Look at me, Dave, look. Come and touch it, Dave."

 

Post#31 » by SacKingZZZ » Thu Feb 7, 2008 7:50 am

Pietrus, O'Bryant, 1st round pick (top 10 protection) sounds fine to me.
User avatar
pillwenney
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 48,890
And1: 2,603
Joined: Sep 19, 2004
Location: Avidly reading pstyousuck.blogspot.com/
Contact:
 

 

Post#32 » by pillwenney » Thu Feb 7, 2008 9:40 am

devwat12 wrote:I think a lot of people are grossly exaggerating Artest's value on the trade market.

Unless a team is absolutely positive he will re-sign with them for a reasonable amount, there is no way a team like GSW is trading a 1st round pick or a young talent with a high ceiling for Ron, let alone both.

A top 20 pick and a solid prospect for a few months of Artest? Not happening.


That's fine. Then good luck competing right now with a now bolstered Western conference.
User avatar
crzy
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,224
And1: 0
Joined: Jan 10, 2006
Location: San Francisco

 

Post#33 » by crzy » Thu Feb 7, 2008 10:36 am

mitchweber wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



That's fine. Then good luck competing right now with a now bolstered Western conference.


The Warriors weren't winning a championship this season anyways. Nothing has changed for them. They're not going to make a panic move like Phoenix did. We have the fourth youngest team in the league, we can bide our time, develop our core, and explore other trade options in the future to improve.

If Sacramento thinks Artest is worth more than the 20th pick in the 2008 NBA Draft, then by all means, you can keep him.
Image
Smills91
Banned User
Posts: 23,364
And1: 2
Joined: Jun 05, 2005
Location: Ronald Reagan is my political hero.

 

Post#34 » by Smills91 » Thu Feb 7, 2008 12:55 pm

ethiosew wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



I know what you're saying about not trading him to divisinal rival but who in their right mind would give up two 1st round picks for Artest? You are not going to get Wright and 1st for Artest period.
That's fine, but I'm not trading him to a divisional rival then. I'd send him eastward for a lesser package at that point.
Smills91
Banned User
Posts: 23,364
And1: 2
Joined: Jun 05, 2005
Location: Ronald Reagan is my political hero.

 

Post#35 » by Smills91 » Thu Feb 7, 2008 12:58 pm

crzyyafrican wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



The Warriors weren't winning a championship this season anyways. Nothing has changed for them. They're not going to make a panic move like Phoenix did. We have the fourth youngest team in the league, we can bide our time, develop our core, and explore other trade options in the future to improve.

If Sacramento thinks Artest is worth more than the 20th pick in the 2008 NBA Draft, then by all means, you can keep him.


That's what we're saying. We'd more than deal him for the 20th pick to a team out east, but to a team 90 miles a way, you're gonna have to pony up near full value then. Noone's saying we should get full value here, we're saying we should get full value from a damn divisional rival. To a team out east, we'll take .50 cents on the dollar most likely. Get it, yet?
User avatar
crzy
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,224
And1: 0
Joined: Jan 10, 2006
Location: San Francisco

 

Post#36 » by crzy » Thu Feb 7, 2008 1:24 pm

Smills91 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



That's what we're saying. We'd more than deal him for the 20th pick to a team out east, but to a team 90 miles a way, you're gonna have to pony up near full value then. Noone's saying we should get full value here, we're saying we should get full value from a damn divisional rival. To a team out east, we'll take .50 cents on the dollar most likely. Get it, yet?


I understand completely. I'm not a fan of trading good players to division rivals either.
Image
rpa
RealGM
Posts: 15,074
And1: 7,893
Joined: Nov 24, 2006

 

Post#37 » by rpa » Thu Feb 7, 2008 5:14 pm

crzyyafrican wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



The Warriors weren't winning a championship this season anyways. Nothing has changed for them. They're not going to make a panic move like Phoenix did. We have the fourth youngest team in the league, we can bide our time, develop our core, and explore other trade options in the future to improve.
.


Just because you have a bunch of young guys who don't see any time (Wright @ 20, Bellineli @ 21, POB @ 21, Perovic @ 22, Watson @ 23) doesn't mean, as you infer, that your team will be good for a long time.

How old are Baron Davis & Stephen Jackson? Answer: Baron will be 29 before the season's over and Jackson will be 30 by that time as well. Those are the 2 players that matter the most to your team and they're both up there in age.
chriswebb86
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,839
And1: 0
Joined: Mar 03, 2006
Location: Reno / Australia
Contact:

 

Post#38 » by chriswebb86 » Thu Feb 7, 2008 5:26 pm

devwat12 wrote:I think a lot of people are grossly exaggerating Artest's value on the trade market.

Unless a team is absolutely positive he will re-sign with them for a reasonable amount, there is no way a team like GSW is trading a 1st round pick or a young talent with a high ceiling for Ron, let alone both.

A top 20 pick and a solid prospect for a few months of Artest? Not happening.
I think his value has gone up with the two trades in the last week. Teams are going to get desperate in the west and they will make a move. So thats why I think the Kings could get more for him.

If the Warriors really want a shot at winning this year they are going to have to make some move and at this point making a move for Artest could actually be the type of the move that puts them in contention for the title. So while I understand you think its too much to give up a late first round pick or a young player, honestly do you see those young players on your roster or that 1st round pick having a shot at playing a lot in the next few years? Like one poster stated, it is nice to have young talent, but usually when you are contending for a title they get little playing time, ie Gerald Wallace. Because of this, I could see the Warriors making a move to get Artest. I think a Barnes, Wright, and POB type move might giving up a little to much for Artest, but at least you guys would get his Bird Rights and have the front track in resigning him over a lot of teams. However, if he wants to move onto another team after this year, you guys could end up getting decent value in a sign in trade, since I highly doubt Artest signs for the MLE.
chriswebb86
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,839
And1: 0
Joined: Mar 03, 2006
Location: Reno / Australia
Contact:

 

Post#39 » by chriswebb86 » Thu Feb 7, 2008 5:28 pm

SacKingZZZ wrote:Pietrus, O'Bryant, 1st round pick (top 10 protection) sounds fine to me.
See thats something I would consider. While I would love to get Wright from them, I think POB still has a lot of talent and could end up being a key part in our rebuilding.
User avatar
crzy
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,224
And1: 0
Joined: Jan 10, 2006
Location: San Francisco

 

Post#40 » by crzy » Thu Feb 7, 2008 5:35 pm

rpa wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



Just because you have a bunch of young guys who don't see any time (Wright @ 20, Bellineli @ 21, POB @ 21, Perovic @ 22, Watson @ 23) doesn't mean, as you infer, that your team will be good for a long time.

How old are Baron Davis & Stephen Jackson? Answer: Baron will be 29 before the season's over and Jackson will be 30 by that time as well. Those are the 2 players that matter the most to your team and they're both up there in age.


That's your opinion. And how could you forget our two most important young players?

The future of our team is obviously not Baron Davis and Stephen Jackson, it's Monta Ellis (22), Andris Biedrins (21), and Brandan Wright (20). All three have the potential to be something very special. That's as good as of a young three-player core as you'll find around the league.

As for the rest of our young players. Marco Belinelli is a giant question mark. Patrick O'Bryant likely won't be on this team next year. Kosta Perovic is a 2nd round scrub. CJ Watson and Azubuike are fringe bench players.
Image

Return to Sacramento Kings