RealGM

God i hope petrie is on the phone with Riley trying to get that second pick, us being in the west gives us a better chance too. I will give them whatever they want if its realistic. What can you guys think to give them from our roster?

We probably do not have anything that miami would want except for Kevin...but i would offer them Artest+filler 08 1st rd pick some 08 2nd rd pick and a future 1st rd pick...but thats just me...

Ok, bear with me; this is going to completely gut the team, but it's worth it because we keep Martin, Hawes, Garcia and Douby.

Trade 1:
NYK Trade:
Zach Randolph
#6 pick

Kings Trade:
John Salmons
Mikki Moore
Shelden Williams

Why the Knicks do it: To dump some bad contracts, pick up two players who would excel in D'Antoni's system (with Moore being an expiring), and take a flyer on Shelden.

Marbury/Robinson
Crawford/Chandler
Salmons/Q.Rich
Lee/Shelden
Curry/James

Trade 2:
Heat trade:
Mark Blount
Udonis Haslem
Marcus Banks
#2 pick

Kings trade:
Ron Artest
Brad Miller
#6 pick

Why the Heat do it: They turn the #2 pick into possibly three starters, Artest is likely going to be a better player than either Rose and Beasley for a few years, and Brad is infinitely better than Blount. They can possibly leverage the #6 pick into a guy like Calderon, or pick Bayless/Mayo/Lopez. This completes their starting lineup really nicely, already set to compete in the East if they can upgrade their bench through the MLE or trades.

6th pick/Quinn? MLE?
Wade/Cook
Artest/Wright
Marion/Powell
Miller/Barron

Leaving us with, depending on who the Bulls pick:

(Rose)Beno/Banks
Martin/Douby
Garcia/#12
(Beasley)Randolph/Haslem/Kenny/SAR
Hawes/Blount

The following will expire in 2010:
Mark Blount: $7.9 mil
Udonis Haslem: $6.1 mil
Kenny Thomas: $7.9 mil
Shareef Abdur-Rahim: $5.5 mil

And in 2011:
Randolph: $13.4 mil
Banks: $4.0 mil

We would be THE players in the '10 FA market, with a solid young core to start out with.

I doubt we have enough for the 2nd pick artest would be offered but i doubt that is all riley would want i doubt seriously we would give up martin or hawes for that matter

possibly artest & douby but i doubt they would seriously consider our offer if we even gave one !

even though the bulls have the 1st pick already they have guys like ben gorden,l.deng ,hinrich & t.thomas they could offer & get the 1 & 2 pick

if the bulls take rose they will likely deal hinrich
if the bulls take beasley they will likely trade t.thomas

i hope we can do a deal if its smart without giving up the farm but i highly doubt it !

It will be very difficult to pull off, but Miami is really shopping it, I'd consider trading most of our guys for it.

Cruel_Ruin wrote:We would be THE players in the '10 FA market, with a solid young core to start out with.

Not really correct, there are far too many teams with their contracts all lined up to expire in 2010. Whether or not this means anything is a different question, but we would be something like 1 of 10 or so teams that have at least 10 million in salary or more.

Now, the majority of teams won't have cap space in 2011. Plus 2011>2010 in terms of free agents.

Campaign for being The Players in the '11 FA Market!!!

Mitch, when you say most of our guys would you include Spencer in that package?

Despite where Spencer was picked relative to where we would pick this year with that #2, I would find it very difficult to give him up considering he has the tools to become a special player. But I would do it...Rose or Beasley...You have to jump at that.

Especially if we still had the # 12 pick...man that would be sweet

deNIEd wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



Not really correct, there are far too many teams with their contracts all lined up to expire in 2010. Whether or not this means anything is a different question, but we would be something like 1 of 10 or so teams that have at least 10 million in salary or more.

Now, the majority of teams won't have cap space in 2011. Plus 2011>2010 in terms of free agents.

Campaign for being The Players in the '11 FA Market!!!

Not really. When you look at most of the teams that appear to have that lined up, they'll need to sign other players before then to fill out their rosters. That's not the case with us.

Mitch, when you say most of our guys would you include Spencer in that package?

Despite where Spencer was picked relative to where we would pick this year with that #2, I would find it very difficult to give him up considering he has the tools to become a special player. But I would do it...Rose or Beasley...You have to jump at that.

Especially if we still had the # 12 pick...man that would be sweet

Yeah, I wouldn't like it, but I think you have to be willing to do that. It would be gut-wrenching, but it would have to be done.

I don't know if I would give up Spencer and the #12 pick though....but I don't know. I don't think Miami would take that anyway.

I'd trade for it.

But as talented and exciting as it would be, I definitely don't want a Hawes/Beasley front-court for the long-term. Just not going to be the kind of winning-style PF/C pairing this team will eventually need. And which should be wanted. But on the other side, that would give us great options and value, and the pair would be fun for some time to watch, create intrigue around the team for a little while. Until that required (oh yes) quality defensive presence is found, then it would get really fun.

Obviously if Chicago doesn't pick Rose, that'd work out incredible. But I doubt they don't pick Rose.

Now would I give up Spencer in all likelyhood for Beasley? I don't know.

We would have to give up Hawes no doubt...Id rather go a different direction because getting the 2nd pick is not going to happen. Realistically, this should be the year we add another draft pick in the early first. So many teams are willing to trade their picks and I think the kings should be all over that. What better way to settle the disputes of who the kings should pick than to get two of the most discussed players? A PF and a PG sounds like a good deal to me, especially with the abundance of talent in this particular draft pool. Then everybody here on this forum would be happy and I know thats what kings management wants...

I would love to have either of those guys but I wouldnt want to put everyone on the table. I dont see us giving up Spencer or Kevin but, I think if we were willing to give up one of them then the first or second pick could be ours. I just dont see us making a deal to get a top two pick. I think we'll most likely stay where we are at and draft someone at #12.

I'd trade Artest for the 2nd pick if they'd do it (which they wouldn't)... otherwise i doubt we could get it without throwing out too much

Ron Artest
Brad Miller
Mikki Moore
Rights to #12 pick
Rights to #42 pick
Rights to #43 pick

for

Mark Blount
Marcus Banks
Udonis Haslem
Rights to #2 pick
Alexander Johnson
Daquan Cook


I'd do that for Derrick Rose.

Ballings7 wrote:I'd trade for it.

But as talented and exciting as it would be, I definitely don't want a Hawes/Beasley front-court for the long-term. Just not going to be the kind of winning-style PF/C pairing this team will eventually need. And which should be wanted. But on the other side, that would give us great options and value, and the pair would be fun for some time to watch, create intrigue around the team for a little while. Until that required (oh yes) quality defensive presence is found, then it would get really fun.

Obviously if Chicago doesn't pick Rose, that'd work out incredible. But I doubt they don't pick Rose.

Now would I give up Spencer in all likelyhood for Beasley? I don't know.

How is Beasley / Hawes not a winning combo? I think Hawes developed well and played better than expected last year especially defensively. Beasley is an incredible athlete, very good weakside shotblocker and with his athleticism can be a great defender if he commits to it.

Smills91 wrote:Ron Artest
Brad Miller
Mikki Moore
Rights to #12 pick
Rights to #42 pick
Rights to #43 pick

for

Mark Blount
Marcus Banks
Udonis Haslem
Rights to #2 pick
Alexander Johnson
Daquan Cook


I'd do that for Derrick Rose.

Its not realistic, but I would definitly do that to get Derrick Rose.

I think Rose is the only for sure thing in this draft.

UKF wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



Its not realistic, but I would definitly do that to get Derrick Rose.

I think Rose is the only for sure thing in this draft.

I don't think Heat would want a Haslem for Moore Swap...

I posted this a while ago...

R. Artest, B. Miller, J. Salmons, #12, #42, #44

for

M. Blount, M. Banks, # 2, Filler

For Miami, no it isn't as sexy as a Brand or Rose, but it makes them deep and strong at every position. (Outside of PG lol)

PG: J. Williams or B. Udrih/(D. Augustine)
SG: D. Wade/J. Salmons
SF: R. Artest/D. Wright
PF: S. Marion/U. Haslem
C : B. Miller/A. Mourning

Best 1-5 in the NBA. Beno/Wade/Artest/Marion/Miller, while making them deep as hell. Very scary. Similiar to the Boston movements.

For us
PG: D. Rose/_____
SG: K. Martin/_____
SF: _______/F. Garcia
PF: _______/S. Williams
C : S. Hawes/_______

Starting SF in 09 draft
Starting PF in '10 or '11 FA Market
Backup C in '10 draft
Backup SG and PF Petrie can find within 2-3 years via FA (J. Salmons, J. Jackson, E. House, B. Udrih, etc.)

Id love to see the Kings trade up and get that 2nd pick from Miami, but are the prospects greater for trading up to #4 from the Sonics? The wirtetap article says they are considering shopping the pick, but with Beasley off the board, would #4 be enough to be excited about given what we'd likely part with?

Sacramento_King wrote:How is Beasley / Hawes not a winning combo? I think Hawes developed well and played better than expected last year especially defensively. Beasley is an incredible athlete, very good weakside shotblocker and with his athleticism can be a great defender if he commits to it.

Neither are going to be a quality or better defensive player. Thus as a tandem won't be enough defensively for what a contending team needs, down the line. Which is why team's rebuild or develop, to have a good chance to win a championship.

Weak-side shotblocking doesn't make a big man a notable defensive player, it makes him an effective weak-side shotblocker.

Both are offensively-biased players also, and won't make for a balanced type of front-court.

Beasley's not a traditional kind of power foward, also. He's more like a bigger Carmelo Anthony.

I also question Beasley's defensive focus, regardless of how good he'll be defensively - is he still going to try and be smart on defense, if call(s) don't go his way, or is off offensively? Also, regardless of that, how good of a defender in general, mentally and physically, is Beasley going to be? Those questions are there not just because he hasn't played in the NBA yet, but also because of the kind of player he favors to be, and what I've read about him.

I'm not nearly as questionable with Hawes defensive focus, based on what I've read and seen of him already. As well as being a convential big man, with his overall size situation.

Also, there's just the vibe I get from Beasley, and that may well stay present to an extent later on. Which is basically "highly talented, athletic score-first player, but isn't going to be too much defensively, and has a questionable defensive mentality".

Specifically with Beasley, will he learn to be a relatively disciplined defender, in the way of not relying too much on his athleticism/shotblocking, knowing when to go for a block and when not to? Because consistently going for blocks, whether it's on your man, or helping, can and will lead to being out of position for rebounds, picking up unecessary fouls, and at times being beat because of gambling.

That also ties in with Beasley's defensive focus question, and not being known for his defensive play as a prospect.

I can just tell by Beasley's style and make-up as a player, he's probably not going to be a significant defensive player. And I kind of doubt his defensive mind-set being right.

He's just not really a true-type of "big man", which is good in ways and not so good in others.

Thus, this is why I said he'll need a few players around him up front who will legitimately complement him. Miami will no doubt have those pieces, and more.

Anyway, sooner or later, this team is going to need a big man next to Hawes who will be that stand-out defender for us. To complement Hawes (who will be decent defensively), and combine for a strong defensive situation at PF/C.

Open question: When you see Beasley, and you think about him at times - do you think "Yeah, he's going to be one of the better defensive PFs in the league in the future"?

Doesn't mean he can't turn out like that as a defender, but just overall, I lean to that not happening. I'd be pleasantly surprised.

That probably won't be a top expectation for Miami, because of the other players they're going to have. But moreso based on relating to us hypothetically, and individually living up to being a well-rounded player.

Ballings7 wrote:Open question: When you see Beasley, and you think about him at times - do you think "Yeah, he's going to be one of the better defensive PFs in the league in the future"? .

I would agree that as of right now he would not be one of the better defensive PF's in the league. Does he have the ability to be one of the better ones, yes. He is tremendously gifted athletically and if given the proper motivation, from our coaches as well as from within himself, he could be. We agree he is an excellent weakside shotblocker and does probably get beat due to being to aggressive but he is a great rebounder so he must not be in the wrong place to many times. A great offensive rebounder as well. I think he has the tools as long as he is put in the right situation to be a good defensive player.

Oh and I would do that deal with Miami (artest, miller for picks) if Rose was there but not if Beasley was there.

This is how we get the 2nd pick:

Kings deal:
Kenny Thomas
SAR

Knicks deal:
Zach Randolph
#6 pick

Why for Kings, the get the #6 pick but add 17 million in salary

Why for Knicks they shed 17 million in salary

Next:

Kings deal:
Mikki Moore
#6
#12

Heat deal:
#2
Marcus Banks

Why for the Kings:
They get one of Rose/Beasley

Why for the Heat:
They get TWO lotto picks to build around Wade/Marion while dumping Banks' contract with Moore's who's essentially an expiring with Marion to give the Heat a TON of capspace in 2009.

Wade/#6/#12/FA 2009 looks like a nice roster for a few years to come