Kings discussing Murphy with Pacers?

rwheeler · Post #1 » by **rwheeler** » Wed Feb 10, 2010 7:02 pm

According to wiretap: http://www.realgm.com/src_wiretap_archi ... or_murphy/

I also found more detailed information on the SacBee Kings Blog website:

http://www.sacbee.com/static/weblogs/sports/kings/

Thoughts anybody???

rwheeler · Post #2 » by **rwheeler** » Wed Feb 10, 2010 7:07 pm

Originally, by just reading the article from wiretap I had the feeling they might have been interested in Hawes or Thompson since the article also claimed they were interested in Hickson (CLE). But the SacBee goes on to claim that this could be a three-way deal involving Dallas receiving Martin...

Without putting too much thought into it, I just can't imagine what could possibly be a good deal for us out of this.

Website · Post #3 » by **Nicky Nix Nook** » Wed Feb 10, 2010 7:17 pm

Hate it, but wouldn't be surprised.

Would LOVE to get Amare here, I really think the Maloofs could convince him (unlimited access to palms, Kings dancers, grow with Tyreke?)

cuad · Post #4 » by **cuad** » Wed Feb 10, 2010 7:33 pm

Noooo I went Kevin to stay.

JSrose115 · Post #5 » by **JSrose115** » Wed Feb 10, 2010 7:53 pm

cuad wrote:Noooo I went Kevin to stay.

the only bright side is his offensive game, he is a terrible defender, let along couldnt contain wilson chandler to score his career high.

rwheeler · Post #6 » by **rwheeler** » Wed Feb 10, 2010 7:54 pm

Nicky Nix Nook wrote:Hate it, but wouldn't be surprised.

Would LOVE to get Amare here, I really think the Maloofs could convince him (unlimited access to palms, Kings dancers, grow with Tyreke?)

Yeah I hate the trade idea so far myself. But Murphy does fit the type of player Petrie usually covets so your right it would not be surprising.

Regarding Amare, Sam Amick talks in the same SacBee article about how the Maloofs are big Stoudemire fans. Supposingly there is some sort of relationship between them and Amare. I think you are absolutely right that if we could land him, he'd be convinced to stay.

rwheeler · Post #7 » by **rwheeler** » Wed Feb 10, 2010 7:56 pm

JSrose115 wrote:
cuad wrote:Noooo I went Kevin to stay.

the only bright side is his offensive game, he is a terrible defender, let along couldnt contain wilson chandler to score his career high.

Seriously! Sorry to burst your bubble cuad, but by the sound of of all these recent trade talks.....BYE BYE KEVIN :lol:

a-rod · Post #8 » by **a-rod** » Wed Feb 10, 2010 8:02 pm

I am not interested in trading martin now, maybe on draft night or in the off season if the right deal comes along...

Moving Andres Nocioni for expiring it should be our top priority at the deadline....

dozencousins · Post #9 » by **dozencousins** » Thu Feb 11, 2010 12:08 am

I will be both mad & sad if the KINGS got murphy !

cdt3 · Post #10 » by **cdt3** » Thu Feb 11, 2010 12:41 am

KThomas expiring could be traded for 1 year on Murphy. Ind would get rid of Murphy's salary and the Kings could use a good vet big to take pressure off Thompson and Hawes.

Amare? JT even after a month of struggling has as many double-doubles as Amare. Amare is 27, had knee surgery, costs $16mil and avgs a 21/9/1 on 14 touches. Thompson is 23, costs $2mil, and is avgs a 13/9/1 on 11 touches. Thompson is the same size as Amare, rebounds and blocks the same. Thompson has already proven this year he could put up 17pts when he had 13 touches.

Why would you take more expensive guy on the way down over a less expensive guy on the way up?

Post #11 » by **pillwenney** » Thu Feb 11, 2010 1:37 am

JSrose115 wrote:
cuad wrote:Noooo I went Kevin to stay.

the only bright side is his offensive game, he is a terrible defender, let along couldnt contain wilson chandler to score his career high.

Huh...didn't know Kevin was guarding Chandler the whole game. I could have sworn that wasn't remotely the case, but maybe it was because I watched the Kings-Knicks game last night. You must have been watching something else.

Silver Man · Post #12 » by **Silver Man** » Thu Feb 11, 2010 1:56 am

It still doesn't change things.

Kevin Martin isn't a good defender in any way you look at it.

artest420 · Post #13 » by **artest420** » Thu Feb 11, 2010 5:32 am

cuad wrote:Noooo I went Kevin to stay.

Because of his artest like defense or his nash like playmaking or his d wade type clutchness?

Bac2Basics · Post #14 » by **Bac2Basics** » Thu Feb 11, 2010 6:04 am

If the Kings were interested in Murphy, there should be no need to include Martin to get him if Murphy's the best thing that Sacramento gets in the deal.

cuad · Post #15 » by **cuad** » Thu Feb 11, 2010 8:53 am

artest420 wrote:
cuad wrote:Noooo I went Kevin to stay.

Because of his artest like defense or his nash like playmaking or his d wade type clutchness?

Because we raised him.

MUpacersSIC · Post #16 » by **MUpacersSIC** » Thu Feb 11, 2010 8:02 pm

According to Marc Stein the Kings offered Jason Thompson and Kenny Thomas for Murphy, and the Pacers are just waiting it out for possible better offers. Would the Kings really do this? I love Murphy as a scorer and good player, but Thompson is much younger and also pretty productive.

MUpacersSIC · Post #17 » by **MUpacersSIC** » Thu Feb 11, 2010 8:02 pm

rpa · Post #18 » by **rpa** » Thu Feb 11, 2010 8:09 pm

MUpacersSIC wrote:According to Marc Stein the Kings offered Jason Thompson and Kenny Thomas for Murphy, and the Pacers are just waiting it out for possible better offers. Would the Kings really do this? I love Murphy as a scorer and good player, but Thompson is much younger and also pretty productive.

Calling BS.

EDIT: Sounds like it's more along the lines of Thomas straight up for Murphy at this point.

JSrose115 · Post #19 » by **JSrose115** » Thu Feb 11, 2010 8:11 pm

MUpacersSIC wrote:According to Marc Stein the Kings offered Jason Thompson and Kenny Thomas for Murphy, and the Pacers are just waiting it out for possible better offers. Would the Kings really do this? I love Murphy as a scorer and good player, but Thompson is much younger and also pretty productive.

wow, just wow if this is true.

Post #20 » by **KF10** » Thu Feb 11, 2010 8:13 pm

Link?

..........

Anyways, I don't like it. Why are we trading away a young productive player in Thompson and cap flexability in Thomas for a forward that's almost 30 years old? It doesn't makes sense according to the state of affairs for the Kings IMO. Unless, they seriously believe Murphy is a significant piece for going forward. I don't believe we are at the level to challenge a playoff seed. In 2-3 years? Yes. Next year? I'm not too sure about that.