What can Cleveland give for Ron Artest?

[DowJones]

It sounds like Ron wants to go, but what would you guys want in return? I know there is a deal surrounding Lamar Odom for Ron/Kenny. Do you guys really want Odom? I know he is a good player, but to you guys isn't he just an expiring contract? Or would you guys really look to re0sign the 30 year old PF to a long-term deal?

Cleveland has tons of expiring contracts, picks, and someone like Varejao to offer. I think you guys would be looking for expirings/young talent/picks as opposed to a guy like Odom that probably doesn't figure into your long-term plans.

And trading Artest to Cleveland means he doesn't go to Cleveland and you don't have to worry about him going against your team 4 times a year like he would with the Lakers.

[rpa]

Expiring contracts are pretty much useless to the Kings at this point; Cleveland's 1st rounders are going to be low ones (mid-late 1st); and Varejao just isn't anything special. Honestly I don't think there's anything that the Cavs can offer that can't be trumped [easily] by other teams that are interested in Artest. They (Cleveland) just don't have many (any) assets that are attractive to a rebuilding team.

[DowJones]

That is a good point. What are you guys looking to get for Artest? I don't see how Odom for Thomas/Artest would be attractive for a re-building team. If anything Odon would stunt your re-building process as he would take time away from young players and actually help you win a few games that you probably wouldn't. The last thing you want to do is win games you shouldn't because that hurts your draft status...and the draft is a major key towards re-building.

[rpa]

That is a good point. What are you guys looking to get for Artest? I don't see how Odom for Thomas/Artest would be attractive for a re-building team. If anything Odon would stunt your re-building process as he would take time away from young players and actually help you win a few games that you probably wouldn't. The last thing you want to do is win games you shouldn't because that hurts your draft status...and the draft is a major key towards re-building.

Odom was only rumored to be offered to the Kings not demanded by the Kings. I don't think the Odom trade makes any sense because expiring contracts aren't useful to the Kings and Odom isn't a longterm piece. In that regard the Kings basically trade Artest for nothing. Thus why I don't think the rumored deal will go down.

[Smills91]

That is a good point. What are you guys looking to get for Artest? I don't see how Odom for Thomas/Artest would be attractive for a re-building team. If anything Odon would stunt your re-building process as he would take time away from young players and actually help you win a few games that you probably wouldn't. The last thing you want to do is win games you shouldn't because that hurts your draft status...and the draft is a major key towards re-building.

The bare bones minimum offer I'd accept from the Cavs is:

Snow, Varejao, Wally, Smith, 2009 1st rounder
for
Miller, Artest, K9, SAR

unless of course there is a better offer out there(and there very well could be)

This gives the Kings 2 future assets in Varejao/1st rounder and wipes out all but Varejao's 5 million dollarish deal.

So you take Ron, Kenny, Brad off the books and potentially, Shelden and Douby and that's roughly 30 million off the books which would put the Kings roughly 20 million under the cap this next off-season in 2009.

[rpa]

So you take Ron, Kenny, Brad off the books and potentially, Shelden and Douby and that's roughly 30 million off the books which would put the Kings roughly 20 million under the cap this next off-season in 2009.

But there's no point to getting under the cap for the '09 offseason--the available players are horrible. Plus we'd obviously rather use that money on a 2010 free agent.

[Smills91]

So you take Ron, Kenny, Brad off the books and potentially, Shelden and Douby and that's roughly 30 million off the books which would put the Kings roughly 20 million under the cap this next off-season in 2009.

But there's no point to getting under the cap for the '09 offseason--the available players are horrible. Plus we'd obviously rather use that money on a 2010 free agent.

I haven't bothered to look at all the ETO's, RFA's and UFA's for 2009, but the fact is, hardly ANY teams are under the cap in 2009, while a significant amount WILL be in 2010. While their will be more FA's overall in 2010 and perhaps MORE and BETTER FA's in 2010 we'll be competing with MORE teams that have MORE money. There's no guarantee that we get some great FA in 2010 and if we did we may have to SEVERELY overspend to outbid other teams.

It only takes ONE Free Agent to make a splash in Free Agency and much like this off-season if one Baron Davis or one Elton brand exercises an ETO to get out of their contract, we're the BIG money bidder that off-season with little to no competition to bid us up above a more than reasonable price. There is some value in that.

I am looking at the Free Agency lists and a guy that pops out to me is Danny Granger...you offer him a front loaded deal just under 17 million or so and I see the Pacers having a VERY hard time matching that offer with their contract situations.

Danny Granger RFA
Raymond Felton RFA
Paul Millsap RFA
Marvin Williams RFA
Chris Wilcox UFA
CARLOS BOOZER ETO
Mehmet Okur ETO
DERON WILLIAMS RFA

Not really interested in either of these two
Shawn Marion UFA
Lamar Odom UFA

But if we landed a Deron Williams, Danny Granger, Carloss Boozer via Free Agency that would be a COUP for our franchise and we could move forward with one of those players/Martin/Hawes as the core of the future. We'd also have nice frontcourt depth with Thompson/Varejao on the roster.

[DowJones]

I agree with rpa. I think Sacramento should shop Artest and get the best combination of young talent they can, whether that be picks or an actual player. You should also see about getting a little bit of cap-relief. That won't help the team out, but financially it is enticing to the owners.

The problem with that is everyone knows that Sacramento would have to trade Artest soon or else they get nothing at all as Ron will certainly go somewhere else in 2009. Another thing dragging down his value is that he will be a FA in 2009, which means he "may" only be a rental.

So when you look at that, I don't see many teams willing to give up much young talent. I think many contenders will be willing to give up a draft pick or 2 in addition to expirings, but since Cleveland is in the East, and they aren't as good as teams like L.A., San Antonio, New Orleans, etc, I think Cleveland can offer the best draft pick/picks.

So it comes down to whether or not you want to dump Ron for a future pick, even if it is low. You may decide to keep him and let him walk, but to me even a low pick is better than nothing.

[Smills91]

I agree with rpa. I think Sacramento should shop Artest and get the best combination of young talent they can, whether that be picks or an actual player. You should also see about getting a little bit of cap-relief. That won't help the team out, but financially it is enticing to the owners.

The problem with that is everyone knows that Sacramento would have to trade Artest soon or else they get nothing at all as Ron will certainly go somewhere else in 2009. Another thing dragging down his value is that he will be a FA in 2009, which means he "may" only be a rental.

So when you look at that, I don't see many teams willing to give up much young talent. I think many contenders will be willing to give up a draft pick or 2 in addition to expirings, but since Cleveland is in the East, and they aren't as good as teams like L.A., San Antonio, New Orleans, etc, I think Cleveland can offer the best draft pick/picks.

So it comes down to whether or not you want to dump Ron for a future pick, even if it is low. You may decide to keep him and let him walk, but to me even a low pick is better than nothing.

It's just the opposite. There's only one Ron Artest and if he's 'just a rental' that means he'll be on his best behavior and performance to earn that last contract. THAT'S EXTREMELY enticing to a contender or wanna-be contending team. Ron is the answer for MANY of these teams woes. The Lakers, Rockets, Suns, Raptors, Nuggets, Celtics, Cavs, etc ALL could have a HUGE role for Artest on their roster. As the deadline draws nearer and nearer that only increases Ron's value because the clock begins to dwindle on title hopes which Ron brings to these teams. I think the longer we hold out the more potential value we could get from Artest.

[DowJones]

2 things though...

1. The longer you keep Ron, the more chance there is of him acting like an idiot because he clearly doesn't want to be there. We all know how much of a loose cannon Ron can be. If he explodes, his value goes WAY down.

2. What was the market for him last year? The same teams needed him last year that will need him this year. What were offers like from teams like Houston (who has Battier anyway-not sure why they need Ron), L.A., Phoenix, Toronto, Denver, Boston, etc? The only thing I remember is that Denver turned down a deal involving Kleiza.

At least last year Sacramento had the leverage of that extra year on his contract. Sacramento could have told teams that if we don't like what we see, we just keep Ron for another year. Other teams also would have have been willing to give more last year because, like I said, Ron did have that extra year. Now everyone knows that Sacramento HAS to get rid of him, or else they lose nothing.

Another thing to look at is what can those contenders give? There isn't tons of available young talent on those contending rosters. San Antonio? Houston? Boston? Cleveland? Detroit? New Orleans? I just don't see it.

[rpa]

I am looking at the Free Agency lists and a guy that pops out to me is Danny Granger...you offer him a front loaded deal just under 17 million or so and I see the Pacers having a VERY hard time matching that offer with their contract situations.

Danny Granger RFA
Raymond Felton RFA
Paul Millsap RFA
Marvin Williams RFA
Chris Wilcox UFA
CARLOS BOOZER ETO
Mehmet Okur ETO
DERON WILLIAMS RFA

Not really interested in either of these two
Shawn Marion UFA
Lamar Odom UFA

But if we landed a Deron Williams, Danny Granger, Carloss Boozer via Free Agency that would be a COUP for our franchise and we could move forward with one of those players/Martin/Hawes as the core of the future. We'd also have nice frontcourt depth with Thompson/Varejao on the roster.

No way is Granger a max player; that's just ludicrous.
The Kings don't need Marvin, Okur, Wilcox, or Felton.
Deron is going to definitely get extended.
That leaves Boozer. I'd like to get Boozer but consider:
a) The Jazz are going to beat just about any Kings offer (in both years & dollars)
b) The Jazz are much better set up to win longterm than the Kings are.

Realistically the Kings don't have any shot at players that would HELP them in 2009 and, for players that might be able to help (e.g. Granger) they'd have to extremely overpay just to have a chance.

[KM44]

Well, I would have to say that taking ron is a risk, and a possible rental, but he can bring that missing piece. I think that cleveland does have pieces that the kings can use and I would give an offer that looks something like this

Artest for Varejo, West and 2009 First rounder.

That would probably be the best deal that the kings could get from cleveland and I think (think) that cleveland would take that in hopes of taking their team to the next level. Sure, there's a risk, but if there wasn't a risk, then he would be much harder to get.

[rhp1990]

wow you guys act like expiring contracts mean nothing, Financially it's the best way to go for Sacramento, if their looking to get under the cap 010 and not 09, what differences is it going to make if their under the cap both years? Oh ya they MAKE MORE MONEY, and they'll end up getting BETTER PICKS in the lotto.

[deNIEd]

If you're under the cap, it doesn't mean you have to spend money.

However, I'd take Wally over Odom any day, simply because he's in the east and that I would like LeBron to stay in Cleveland and have more small market teams do better than the big market teams.

I would say some deal netting the Kings expirings + 09 and possibly '11 picks. Kings would most likely give up Artest and Moore I believe.

[rpa]

wow you guys act like expiring contracts mean nothing, Financially it's the best way to go for Sacramento, if their looking to get under the cap 010 and not 09, what differences is it going to make if their under the cap both years? Oh ya they MAKE MORE MONEY, and they'll end up getting BETTER PICKS in the lotto.

The King are already going to be under the cap in 2010, genius.

The Maloofs have never made money a primary concern either.

Expiring contracts to the Kings = useless at this point.

[KF10]

Eh, like I said the Cavs board. I would take the Cavs deal over the Lakers deal. I agree with deNIEd. But the deal have to be at least respectable though. Even though, the Cavs don't have the ideal assets to net Artest.

[Smooth32]

Our coach (Mike Brown) would love Ron Artest in Cleveland and I'm sure the Indy connection will help. Mike was sort of designated as Ron-Ron's "babysitter" in Indy and I think Ron respected him.

The Cavs desperately need a player like Artest and I hope we can get something done.

I would have to think the Kings would want Anderson Varejao in any deal. I remember Geoff Petrie insisting on us giving him up in the Bibby deal and I don't think a year will change much.

I'd do a Delonte West + Anderson Varejao + Sasha Pavlovic for Ron Artest + Mikki Moore, if the Cavs could get a point guard for Wally's contract. If not, I'd also do a Wally + Varejao + Sasha for Artest + Moore/Thomas.

I think giving up a 1st round pick is out of the question with the lack of youth on this team, with Artest likely being a 1-year rental and with us having to take on a bad contract.

I, personally, would love to take back Mikki Moore instead of Kenny Thomas, but I know that's not going to happen.

[KF10]

Giving up a first rounder isn't out of the question during a trade of Artest. But I do see your point. You can probably leave the first out. I would be happy with a Wally/AV/West trade or something like that. But probably the best deal should be principles of Wally/West and filler. But that leaves you a gap in the PG position. So, it gets complicated. Either way, I deal the Cavs first than the Lakers IMO.

[rpa]

I don't think the Kings could NOT take a 1st rounder back from Cleveland, especially in that deal. You're talking about trading Artest for expiring contracts (useless) and 2 guys who will NEVER be legitimate starters in this league. At least with a 1st (and Petrie's draft record) the Kings have a chance for a starter.

[KM44]

I understand the 1st rounder thing, so there would be a second rounder involved.

Ron, Mikki, and Thomas for Wally, West, Varejo, (possibly pavlovic) and a 2nd rounder.

That is the most likely trade of going down.