ImageImageImageImageImage

Kings Trade Thread

Moderators: codydaze, KF10, City of Trees

KF10
Forum Mod - Kings
Forum Mod - Kings
Posts: 24,699
And1: 4,990
Joined: Jul 28, 2006
 

Re: Kings Trade Thread 

Post#901 » by KF10 » Wed Sep 30, 2020 11:43 pm

SmellingColors wrote:Lol okay. I'm not talking about whether they should or shouldn't have contracts that size...they do. We have to start with the situation as it is, not as we think it should be. I just think the Kings need to squeeze as much out of their trade assets as they can and I'm simply asking is this the best we can get for Buddy? Is Haliburton worth moving up for instead of shopping Buddy to other teams and taking who we would get at 12?

Maybe I'm overrating Buddy's value or underrating Haliburton's (hence my genuine question about what I'm missing). But if we're moving him and 12 for Haliburton and an expiring, I think the two questions I outlined above are valid.

It's funny you mentioned Barnes because I was about to add that I think his contract is far more onerous and important to move because I don't think he has any trade value and is more like dead weight. I just don't see the Buddy and Barnes contracts as the same.


Like I said before, there is almost no reason the Kings continue to keep a contract like Buddy’s on roster. This team isn’t good enough to pay Buddy the amount of money he is currently getting. I’m looking at this entire situation as objectively as I can. The Kings were only 2 games away being a sub-30 win team (again). If it wasn’t the last couple of bubble games where the opponents played their scrubs, this team’s record would have been worse.

As it sits now, the Kings are a lottery team again. If there is an opportunity to move Buddy’s bloated contract for a decent (expiring) contract while moving up on the draft. You have to take it.
BoogieTime
Analyst
Posts: 3,114
And1: 1,141
Joined: Feb 09, 2017
 

Re: Kings Trade Thread 

Post#902 » by BoogieTime » Thu Oct 1, 2020 12:14 am

RipPizzaGuy wrote:
BoogieTime wrote:
RipPizzaGuy wrote:
That's not really true. I have no problem shipping off Barnes and Hield for cap space, and then moving Bjelica and Holmes for some value. Not really tied to anyone on this team but Fox.

None of us really know Monte, but coming from the school of Morey.. Bottoming out was never a Morey thing. I honestly don't think it should be a Sac thing either. Our team stinks of losing, tanking doesn't fix that. Making the playoffs and building off your core guys do. Right now we should be striving to be the Pacers, Jazz, or Rockets. I get most Kings fans are Championship or bust mentality, but right now we need to rid the stink of the last 15 years.

Either way, i'm on board with in Monte we trust right now. Whichever way he decides to go (as long as he doesn't get taken advantage of) ill wait a year or 2 before judging.


I think it was not a Morey thing out of circumstance. He was able to transition from TMac/Yao to Harden. If a franchise player became available im sure McNair would pursue

I don’t personally agree with having random vets help us to the 10th pick instead of the 4th in the coming years if the rebuild is on. IMO that hurts more long term than not having any possible culture change

The Kings just laid off more personnel today, team is bleeding financially which could further lead to a rebuild though


In 2010 the Rockets won 43 games with Hayes/Scola/Battier/Martin/Lowry.
2011 2 games over .500 with no stars at all.
2012 is when they made the play for Harden and jumped up to 45 wins.

Harden wasn't always Harden though. I think Monte may look at that route, and try to find the next dump of a guy like Brogdan. Or how Indiana did the same thing by instead of moving George to tank, grabbing 2 guys with untapped potential.

I'm far more interested in trying to get some young guys with untapped (or slightly tapped) potential like Divincenzo, LeVert, White, Thybulle, than I am fire selling the entire team for a bunch of draft picks. The method has proven to be largely unsuccessful with some outliers. It will lead Sac to 5 more years of awful play, and further cementing our 20 years as the Browns of the NBA.

Like I said, i'm not tied to any player individually. I also have no faith in the draft lottery talent or that even if we sell we would be worse than teams like Charlotte, Cleveland, NY, Pistons, Bulls, Wolves, Hawks, etc... Basically the same teams who have been bad for awhile.

Like I said, i'm all on board the Toronto, Miami, Indiana, and Houston route. WE can make moves that help us win now, and improve us in the future. The stink has got to go.


I don’t think it would be that hard to have one of the top picks in the next two drafts. Carmichael Dave often touts the Kings have the worst roster in the West now. West will be competitive.

I still think typical non FA small markets build through the draft, as the league is about top tier talent and it’s not easy to trade for it IMO

I don’t mind taking chances on young players, but bringing in vets like Hayward with no timeline to win games I personally wouldn’t be down with, and I’ll be surprised if McNair goes that route. But maybe your intent was just a contract to get picks from Boston and move Barnes
RipPizzaGuy
General Manager
Posts: 9,985
And1: 5,995
Joined: Sep 17, 2010
     

Re: Kings Trade Thread 

Post#903 » by RipPizzaGuy » Thu Oct 1, 2020 5:09 pm

BoogieTime wrote:
RipPizzaGuy wrote:
BoogieTime wrote:
I think it was not a Morey thing out of circumstance. He was able to transition from TMac/Yao to Harden. If a franchise player became available im sure McNair would pursue

I don’t personally agree with having random vets help us to the 10th pick instead of the 4th in the coming years if the rebuild is on. IMO that hurts more long term than not having any possible culture change

The Kings just laid off more personnel today, team is bleeding financially which could further lead to a rebuild though


In 2010 the Rockets won 43 games with Hayes/Scola/Battier/Martin/Lowry.
2011 2 games over .500 with no stars at all.
2012 is when they made the play for Harden and jumped up to 45 wins.

Harden wasn't always Harden though. I think Monte may look at that route, and try to find the next dump of a guy like Brogdan. Or how Indiana did the same thing by instead of moving George to tank, grabbing 2 guys with untapped potential.

I'm far more interested in trying to get some young guys with untapped (or slightly tapped) potential like Divincenzo, LeVert, White, Thybulle, than I am fire selling the entire team for a bunch of draft picks. The method has proven to be largely unsuccessful with some outliers. It will lead Sac to 5 more years of awful play, and further cementing our 20 years as the Browns of the NBA.

Like I said, i'm not tied to any player individually. I also have no faith in the draft lottery talent or that even if we sell we would be worse than teams like Charlotte, Cleveland, NY, Pistons, Bulls, Wolves, Hawks, etc... Basically the same teams who have been bad for awhile.

Like I said, i'm all on board the Toronto, Miami, Indiana, and Houston route. WE can make moves that help us win now, and improve us in the future. The stink has got to go.


I don’t think it would be that hard to have one of the top picks in the next two drafts. Carmichael Dave often touts the Kings have the worst roster in the West now. West will be competitive.

I still think typical non FA small markets build through the draft, as the league is about top tier talent and it’s not easy to trade for it IMO

I don’t mind taking chances on young players, but bringing in vets like Hayward with no timeline to win games I personally wouldn’t be down with, and I’ll be surprised if McNair goes that route. But maybe your intent was just a contract to get picks from Boston and move Barnes


Carmichael Dave... The West will be tough no doubt about it. People can say that all they want. Spurs are going down fast, Pelicans are relying on Zion who can't stay healthy and may trade Holiday away, PHX is the 2018-2019 Kings who everyone assumed was prime to make a jump and nothing is promised, no faith in the Wolves or KAT, Grizzlies again another team who did well to start the season and then fell off towards the end just like Sac in 2018-2019, Thunder will probably not retain Gallo and find a trade for CP3. And then we see teams get injured all the time.

This is not clear cut whatsoever. We aren't the Cavs with no serviceable NBA players.

I actually think its the opposite. Small market teams that try to continually build thru the draft never go anywhere. The benefit of a large market tanking is they can retain their guys, then trade for a superstar and retain them.

We got Fox, and hopefully Bagley stays healthy this year. We had some tradable pieces 2 years ago and never made our "splash move." Instead we got Barnes.

The idea of bringing in Hayward is that you can move long term salary, get Hayward, and get some assets. This likely makes us better in the short term and in the long term.

Something like Buddy/Holmes for Hayward/#26

Then if the reports Turner wants out are true... Barnes/Bjelica/#12 for Turner/McDermott/2021 Pacers 1st

Use 26 and #35 to move up to the teens and grab Saddiq Bey.

Next year we have the Pacers 1st and our 1st. While also having a much better team that can actually stay competitive. Collect assets while building a winning culture.

Fox/
Bogdan/James
Hayward/Bey
Bagley/McDermott
Turner/Len
User avatar
City of Trees
Forum Mod - Kings
Forum Mod - Kings
Posts: 13,580
And1: 3,580
Joined: Dec 23, 2009
Location: Roseville, CA
   

Re: Kings Trade Thread 

Post#904 » by City of Trees » Thu Oct 1, 2020 6:25 pm

I have it costing Sac Buddy/12 to get Turner alone. Even then I can see other teams like the Warriors outbidding Sac. I can't imagine the Pacers would ever include a future 1st in a deal with sac if the foundation is Buddy or Barnes + 12.

But I'd love to be wrong!

Sent from my Pixel 4a using RealGM mobile app
SmellingColors
Senior
Posts: 599
And1: 94
Joined: Dec 14, 2010

Re: Kings Trade Thread 

Post#905 » by SmellingColors » Thu Oct 1, 2020 7:28 pm

KF10 wrote:
SmellingColors wrote:Lol okay. I'm not talking about whether they should or shouldn't have contracts that size...they do. We have to start with the situation as it is, not as we think it should be. I just think the Kings need to squeeze as much out of their trade assets as they can and I'm simply asking is this the best we can get for Buddy? Is Haliburton worth moving up for instead of shopping Buddy to other teams and taking who we would get at 12?

Maybe I'm overrating Buddy's value or underrating Haliburton's (hence my genuine question about what I'm missing). But if we're moving him and 12 for Haliburton and an expiring, I think the two questions I outlined above are valid.

It's funny you mentioned Barnes because I was about to add that I think his contract is far more onerous and important to move because I don't think he has any trade value and is more like dead weight. I just don't see the Buddy and Barnes contracts as the same.


Like I said before, there is almost no reason the Kings continue to keep a contract like Buddy’s on roster. This team isn’t good enough to pay Buddy the amount of money he is currently getting. I’m looking at this entire situation as objectively as I can. The Kings were only 2 games away being a sub-30 win team (again). If it wasn’t the last couple of bubble games where the opponents played their scrubs, this team’s record would have been worse.

As it sits now, the Kings are a lottery team again. If there is an opportunity to move Buddy’s bloated contract for a decent (expiring) contract while moving up on the draft. You have to take it.


Again, I get your point. I'm not arguing in favor of keeping Buddy nor that we should keep him. I'm saying the idea of moving salary simply because it's a bad contract is not going to improve this team now or in the future. That was essentially Vlade's first move. You have to maximize your trade assets, not dump them because we suck and think we shouldn't be paying someone because of it. You move him, yes, but in a way that is going to improve our team long-term. I don't see the trade mentioned really doing that.

The idea presented was as Buddy/12 for Randle/8. Do we really think Randle will be so much worse than Buddy that we won't treadmill next year? I'm not sold. And do we think Haliburton is going to make us that much better long term? Maybe, but not in the way I think trading him for a younger player that either isnt appreciated or can be moved. DiVincenzo and Turner are the ones I'm looking at right now. Young, talented, and have potential.

Normally, I would be all for trading up in the draft, but this one seems flat after the top. I think they're going to get just as good a player at 8 as they would at 12 if they do their homework. Just my opinion. The only one I'd be interested in making that trade for would be Patrick Williams, but considering how much development he may need (and having layoffs affecting the Stockton team), I'm not sure I trust our development enough to risk that either.
BoogieTime
Analyst
Posts: 3,114
And1: 1,141
Joined: Feb 09, 2017
 

Re: Kings Trade Thread 

Post#906 » by BoogieTime » Thu Oct 1, 2020 7:43 pm

RipPizzaGuy wrote:
BoogieTime wrote:
RipPizzaGuy wrote:
In 2010 the Rockets won 43 games with Hayes/Scola/Battier/Martin/Lowry.
2011 2 games over .500 with no stars at all.
2012 is when they made the play for Harden and jumped up to 45 wins.

Harden wasn't always Harden though. I think Monte may look at that route, and try to find the next dump of a guy like Brogdan. Or how Indiana did the same thing by instead of moving George to tank, grabbing 2 guys with untapped potential.

I'm far more interested in trying to get some young guys with untapped (or slightly tapped) potential like Divincenzo, LeVert, White, Thybulle, than I am fire selling the entire team for a bunch of draft picks. The method has proven to be largely unsuccessful with some outliers. It will lead Sac to 5 more years of awful play, and further cementing our 20 years as the Browns of the NBA.

Like I said, i'm not tied to any player individually. I also have no faith in the draft lottery talent or that even if we sell we would be worse than teams like Charlotte, Cleveland, NY, Pistons, Bulls, Wolves, Hawks, etc... Basically the same teams who have been bad for awhile.

Like I said, i'm all on board the Toronto, Miami, Indiana, and Houston route. WE can make moves that help us win now, and improve us in the future. The stink has got to go.


I don’t think it would be that hard to have one of the top picks in the next two drafts. Carmichael Dave often touts the Kings have the worst roster in the West now. West will be competitive.

I still think typical non FA small markets build through the draft, as the league is about top tier talent and it’s not easy to trade for it IMO

I don’t mind taking chances on young players, but bringing in vets like Hayward with no timeline to win games I personally wouldn’t be down with, and I’ll be surprised if McNair goes that route. But maybe your intent was just a contract to get picks from Boston and move Barnes


Carmichael Dave... The West will be tough no doubt about it. People can say that all they want. Spurs are going down fast, Pelicans are relying on Zion who can't stay healthy and may trade Holiday away, PHX is the 2018-2019 Kings who everyone assumed was prime to make a jump and nothing is promised, no faith in the Wolves or KAT, Grizzlies again another team who did well to start the season and then fell off towards the end just like Sac in 2018-2019, Thunder will probably not retain Gallo and find a trade for CP3. And then we see teams get injured all the time.

This is not clear cut whatsoever. We aren't the Cavs with no serviceable NBA players.

I actually think its the opposite. Small market teams that try to continually build thru the draft never go anywhere. The benefit of a large market tanking is they can retain their guys, then trade for a superstar and retain them.

We got Fox, and hopefully Bagley stays healthy this year. We had some tradable pieces 2 years ago and never made our "splash move." Instead we got Barnes.

The idea of bringing in Hayward is that you can move long term salary, get Hayward, and get some assets. This likely makes us better in the short term and in the long term.

Something like Buddy/Holmes for Hayward/#26

Then if the reports Turner wants out are true... Barnes/Bjelica/#12 for Turner/McDermott/2021 Pacers 1st

Use 26 and #35 to move up to the teens and grab Saddiq Bey.

Next year we have the Pacers 1st and our 1st. While also having a much better team that can actually stay competitive. Collect assets while building a winning culture.

Fox/
Bogdan/James
Hayward/Bey
Bagley/McDermott
Turner/Len


Just from my read on your posts, I think you naturally have the "go getter" personality that always wants to compete etc, which is admirable, but as a GM McNair will have to evaluate all possibilities

Carmichael Dave is just one voice, I think a lot of fans and non fans agree with his state of the team. Keep in mind, that this would be before we got rid of many of our "servicable" players. We'd be starting with Fox/Bagley, who arent yet a proven foundational combo, maybe Holmes and some youth. I think we could take a poll in the main forum if youd like, but at the very least, many people feel if we got rid of our vets and went young we 'could' be in the top half of the lottery next year playing in the tougher west than the eastern doormats.

Your trades in the thread Ive found favorable to the Kings. Buddy was just benched on his extension when the cap maybe hitting because of Covid. I think we could get some value him still. Im not sure Barnes has positive value etc. I think our main trade pieces are Fox/Bagley/12 (which isnt that high a pick) and some value here/there for the rest. But since your of the mindset that youd like to trade for established players, what would help your possibility greatly to have high picks in the next touted drafts.
RipPizzaGuy
General Manager
Posts: 9,985
And1: 5,995
Joined: Sep 17, 2010
     

Re: Kings Trade Thread 

Post#907 » by RipPizzaGuy » Thu Oct 1, 2020 8:13 pm

City of Trees wrote:I have it costing Sac Buddy/12 to get Turner alone. Even then I can see other teams like the Warriors outbidding Sac. I can't imagine the Pacers would ever include a future 1st in a deal with sac if the foundation is Buddy or Barnes + 12.

But I'd love to be wrong!

Sent from my Pixel 4a using RealGM mobile app


It all depends. Did he ask out?

Centers generally aren't super valuable. We just saw with Capela and Drummond. I agree Turner is more valuable, but in general not a whole lot of teams have a hole at center and assets/cap to pay and match. The Warriors could outbid us, but it would include them adding Wiggins. The Pacers have shown they don't bottom out. Again they turned down multiple top 5 picks for George and instead opted for Sabonis and Dipo (neither of which were super proven at the time).

My thinking is that Buddy will carry value to the right team. A Career 40+% 3pt shooter has value, he just isn't being used properly. A team like the Pacers who have Brogdan, Warren, Sabonis could use a guy like that spotting up for 3s. Barnes/Bjelica are also valuable pieces as good fits next to Sabonis.

Either way, maybe we sell off Buddy and Barnes without much coming back. Barnes is nothing more than a good 4th/5th piece. Doesn't make a ton of mistakes, but also shouldn't be asked to do much more be a 3&D. However, Id wager that in the right spot Buddy will quickly turn back into a valuable asset. I've never seen a team mismanage a player worse than we did with him this year.
RipPizzaGuy
General Manager
Posts: 9,985
And1: 5,995
Joined: Sep 17, 2010
     

Re: Kings Trade Thread 

Post#908 » by RipPizzaGuy » Thu Oct 1, 2020 8:14 pm

BoogieTime wrote:
RipPizzaGuy wrote:
BoogieTime wrote:
I don’t think it would be that hard to have one of the top picks in the next two drafts. Carmichael Dave often touts the Kings have the worst roster in the West now. West will be competitive.

I still think typical non FA small markets build through the draft, as the league is about top tier talent and it’s not easy to trade for it IMO

I don’t mind taking chances on young players, but bringing in vets like Hayward with no timeline to win games I personally wouldn’t be down with, and I’ll be surprised if McNair goes that route. But maybe your intent was just a contract to get picks from Boston and move Barnes


Carmichael Dave... The West will be tough no doubt about it. People can say that all they want. Spurs are going down fast, Pelicans are relying on Zion who can't stay healthy and may trade Holiday away, PHX is the 2018-2019 Kings who everyone assumed was prime to make a jump and nothing is promised, no faith in the Wolves or KAT, Grizzlies again another team who did well to start the season and then fell off towards the end just like Sac in 2018-2019, Thunder will probably not retain Gallo and find a trade for CP3. And then we see teams get injured all the time.

This is not clear cut whatsoever. We aren't the Cavs with no serviceable NBA players.

I actually think its the opposite. Small market teams that try to continually build thru the draft never go anywhere. The benefit of a large market tanking is they can retain their guys, then trade for a superstar and retain them.

We got Fox, and hopefully Bagley stays healthy this year. We had some tradable pieces 2 years ago and never made our "splash move." Instead we got Barnes.

The idea of bringing in Hayward is that you can move long term salary, get Hayward, and get some assets. This likely makes us better in the short term and in the long term.

Something like Buddy/Holmes for Hayward/#26

Then if the reports Turner wants out are true... Barnes/Bjelica/#12 for Turner/McDermott/2021 Pacers 1st

Use 26 and #35 to move up to the teens and grab Saddiq Bey.

Next year we have the Pacers 1st and our 1st. While also having a much better team that can actually stay competitive. Collect assets while building a winning culture.

Fox/
Bogdan/James
Hayward/Bey
Bagley/McDermott
Turner/Len


Just from my read on your posts, I think you naturally have the "go getter" personality that always wants to compete etc, which is admirable, but as a GM McNair will have to evaluate all possibilities

Carmichael Dave is just one voice, I think a lot of fans and non fans agree with his state of the team. Keep in mind, that this would be before we got rid of many of our "servicable" players. We'd be starting with Fox/Bagley, who arent yet a proven foundational combo, maybe Holmes and some youth. I think we could take a poll in the main forum if youd like, but at the very least, many people feel if we got rid of our vets and went young we 'could' be in the top half of the lottery next year playing in the tougher west than the eastern doormats.

Your trades in the thread Ive found favorable to the Kings. Buddy was just benched on his extension when the cap maybe hitting because of Covid. I think we could get some value him still. Im not sure Barnes has positive value etc. I think our main trade pieces are Fox/Bagley/12 (which isnt that high a pick) and some value here/there for the rest. But since your of the mindset that youd like to trade for established players, what would help your possibility greatly to have high picks in the next touted drafts.


Again I'm all on board with whatever Monte has in store. I just don't think you rush to become even worse. If we get overpaid with draft picks of course you take it. But generally speaking the direction should follow where we can maximize our assets.
KF10
Forum Mod - Kings
Forum Mod - Kings
Posts: 24,699
And1: 4,990
Joined: Jul 28, 2006
 

Re: Kings Trade Thread 

Post#909 » by KF10 » Sat Oct 3, 2020 12:13 am

Read on Twitter
rmfc
Analyst
Posts: 3,461
And1: 740
Joined: Jul 19, 2009
     

Re: Kings Trade Thread 

Post#910 » by rmfc » Sat Oct 3, 2020 8:06 pm

For Buddy Hield, what would the Kings want from the Pistons?
KF10
Forum Mod - Kings
Forum Mod - Kings
Posts: 24,699
And1: 4,990
Joined: Jul 28, 2006
 

Re: Kings Trade Thread 

Post#911 » by KF10 » Sun Oct 4, 2020 12:37 am

rmfc wrote:For Buddy Hield, what would the Kings want from the Pistons?


It’s hard to match contracts because the Pistons have one large contract in Griffin, 2 medium sized ones in Snell and Rose and the rest are small contracts.

I guess something like Snell, Rose and a protected first rounder from next year? Not saying I would do that if I was the Kings but I don’t see much trading options with your team imo.
User avatar
City of Trees
Forum Mod - Kings
Forum Mod - Kings
Posts: 13,580
And1: 3,580
Joined: Dec 23, 2009
Location: Roseville, CA
   

Re: Kings Trade Thread 

Post#912 » by City of Trees » Sun Oct 4, 2020 3:31 am

KF10 wrote:
rmfc wrote:For Buddy Hield, what would the Kings want from the Pistons?


It’s hard to match contracts because the Pistons have one large contract in Griffin, 2 medium sized ones in Snell and Rose and the rest are small contracts.

I guess something like Snell, Rose and a protected first rounder from next year? Not saying I would do that if I was the Kings but I don’t see much trading options with your team imo.
Agreed.

Protection top 4 or something too. Probably flip Rose to a 3rd team as well.

Sent from my Pixel 4a using RealGM mobile app
BoogieTime
Analyst
Posts: 3,114
And1: 1,141
Joined: Feb 09, 2017
 

Re: Kings Trade Thread 

Post#913 » by BoogieTime » Sun Oct 4, 2020 4:34 am

City of Trees wrote:
KF10 wrote:
rmfc wrote:For Buddy Hield, what would the Kings want from the Pistons?


It’s hard to match contracts because the Pistons have one large contract in Griffin, 2 medium sized ones in Snell and Rose and the rest are small contracts.

I guess something like Snell, Rose and a protected first rounder from next year? Not saying I would do that if I was the Kings but I don’t see much trading options with your team imo.
Agreed.

Protection top 4 or something too. Probably flip Rose to a 3rd team as well.

Sent from my Pixel 4a using RealGM mobile app


That seems excessive that a rebuilding team would give up their pick for Buddy

Id settle for getting a top 22 pick in this coming draft

But hopefully your right on his value!
User avatar
tski1972
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,910
And1: 2,565
Joined: May 24, 2011
Location: Wow-saw, WI
Contact:
     

Re: Kings Trade Thread 

Post#914 » by tski1972 » Thu Oct 15, 2020 6:13 pm

Bucks are reportedly interested in getting Bogdan. It’d have to be a sign and trade. Any scenarios you see that would work?
http://twitter.com/MarkIsOld

Image

"Because of Giannis, the once lousy Bucks are back in the NBA conversation." - 60 Minutes
RipPizzaGuy
General Manager
Posts: 9,985
And1: 5,995
Joined: Sep 17, 2010
     

Re: Kings Trade Thread 

Post#915 » by RipPizzaGuy » Thu Oct 15, 2020 8:07 pm

tski1972 wrote:Bucks are reportedly interested in getting Bogdan. It’d have to be a sign and trade. Any scenarios you see that would work?


Going to be tough to match salary with Milwaukee. Id imagine Sacramento wants to bring Bogdan back and move Hield but for the right trade anyone could be had.

Ersan/Wilson/DDV might be enough to match salary? I imagine we ask for DDV back at minimum and sounds like Milwaukee wants to keep him.
kb02
Pro Prospect
Posts: 764
And1: 399
Joined: Jun 06, 2017
 

Re: Kings Trade Thread 

Post#916 » by kb02 » Thu Oct 15, 2020 8:25 pm

tski1972 wrote:Bucks are reportedly interested in getting Bogdan. It’d have to be a sign and trade. Any scenarios you see that would work?


Assuming Bogi signs around $20M, Hill + DDV + Wilson + #24 for Bogi (S&T). Kings would need to turn around and punt Joseph and/or Hill to a third team.
KF10
Forum Mod - Kings
Forum Mod - Kings
Posts: 24,699
And1: 4,990
Joined: Jul 28, 2006
 

Re: Kings Trade Thread 

Post#917 » by KF10 » Fri Oct 16, 2020 7:22 pm

We knew this will happen. Other teams will be inquiring about Bogdan. Hield is unhappy with his role here.

I say pay Bogdan and offload Hield somewhere else.
User avatar
FutureKnicksGM
Head Coach
Posts: 6,461
And1: 1,147
Joined: Sep 26, 2005
 

Re: Kings Trade Thread 

Post#918 » by FutureKnicksGM » Sat Oct 17, 2020 1:15 am

BoogieTime wrote:


City of Trees wrote:


KF10 wrote:


RipPizzaGuy wrote:


How about a trade where Kings get a second lotto pick in this draft?

#43, SAC 2021 First Round Pick (protected top 4 in 2021/2022/2023/2024, protected top 1 in 2025)

for

#8.

SAC, who already have a young star in Fox, get another lotto pick to speed up obtaining a solid core around him. Could be looking at someone like Haliburton, Vassell or Okoro at #8? Mabe someone else falls? Still have #12 to draft a young forward. Give up next years pick, but it is protected if you get an unlucky bounce in the lotto.

NYK, who are still looking for their player to build around, hope they can potentially draft a higher upside player with SAC's projected late lotto pick next year. Pick up a second in this draft too.
KF10
Forum Mod - Kings
Forum Mod - Kings
Posts: 24,699
And1: 4,990
Joined: Jul 28, 2006
 

Re: Kings Trade Thread 

Post#919 » by KF10 » Sat Oct 17, 2020 1:21 am

FutureKnicksGM wrote:
BoogieTime wrote:


City of Trees wrote:


KF10 wrote:


RipPizzaGuy wrote:


How about a trade where Kings get a second lotto pick in this draft?

#43, SAC 2021 First Round Pick (protected top 4 in 2021/2022/2023/2024, protected top 1 in 2025)

for

#8.

SAC, who already have a young star in Fox, get another lotto pick to speed up obtaining a solid core around him. Could be looking at someone like Haliburton, Vassell or Okoro at #8? Mabe someone else falls? Still have #12 to draft a young forward. Give up next years pick, but it is protected if you get an unlucky bounce in the lotto.

NYK, who are still looking for their player to build around, hope they can potentially draft a higher upside player with SAC's projected late lotto pick next year. Pick up a second in this draft too.


I value next year's draft a lot higher than this year's draft.

The Kings are likely to be pretty bad for the next couple of seasons, imo. Teams like the Kings shouldn't trade 1st rounders in the future unless it is a home run deal.

I say no.
User avatar
FutureKnicksGM
Head Coach
Posts: 6,461
And1: 1,147
Joined: Sep 26, 2005
 

Re: Kings Trade Thread 

Post#920 » by FutureKnicksGM » Sat Oct 17, 2020 7:48 am

KF10 wrote:
FutureKnicksGM wrote:
BoogieTime wrote:


City of Trees wrote:


KF10 wrote:


RipPizzaGuy wrote:


How about a trade where Kings get a second lotto pick in this draft?

#43, SAC 2021 First Round Pick (protected top 4 in 2021/2022/2023/2024, protected top 1 in 2025)

for

#8.

SAC, who already have a young star in Fox, get another lotto pick to speed up obtaining a solid core around him. Could be looking at someone like Haliburton, Vassell or Okoro at #8? Mabe someone else falls? Still have #12 to draft a young forward. Give up next years pick, but it is protected if you get an unlucky bounce in the lotto.

NYK, who are still looking for their player to build around, hope they can potentially draft a higher upside player with SAC's projected late lotto pick next year. Pick up a second in this draft too.


I value next year's draft a lot higher than this year's draft.

The Kings are likely to be pretty bad for the next couple of seasons, imo. Teams like the Kings shouldn't trade 1st rounders in the future unless it is a home run deal.

I say no.


Fair enough.

Return to Sacramento Kings