The Trade Thread

SWedd523 · Post #121 » by **SWedd523** » Sat Dec 1, 2012 6:51 pm

CHA_77_Bobcats wrote:Would Ben Grdon paired with something else (possibly the future 1st we have from Portland) interest you at all for D-Will? We can take back Roy's contract or something as well.

We'd be giving too much

HornetJail · Post #122 » by **HornetJail** » Sat Dec 1, 2012 7:03 pm

We can take back another piece too. I'd like Budinger even if he's injured right now. He's a good scorer and is on an awesome contract.

doc.end · Post #123 » by **doc.end** » Sat Dec 1, 2012 11:43 pm

CHA_77_Bobcats wrote:Would Ben Grdon paired with something else (possibly the future 1st we have from Portland) interest you at all for D-Will?

I don't think Brooklyn would do that.

HornetJail · Post #124 » by **HornetJail** » Sun Dec 2, 2012 1:15 am

Derrick not Deron. :lol:

shrink · Post #125 » by **shrink** » Sun Dec 2, 2012 5:07 pm

CHA_77_Bobcats wrote:Would Ben Grdon paired with something else (possibly the future 1st we have from Portland) interest you at all for D-Will? We can take back Roy's contract or something as well.

I think that's more along the lines of the talent level MIN would be looking for. They are desperate to win now, with Kahn and Adelman having a very short window to impress Kevin Love. I think there might be concern about taking the $13.2 mil salary next year, since MIN needs the money to re-sign Pek and Buddinger.

Let me take it to the MIN boards, and let you know.

lmcguir5 · Post #126 » by **lmcguir5** » Sun Dec 2, 2012 7:36 pm

I don't think it would be a bad idea to shop around Mullens just to see what we could pull from him. He is an asset to someone who needs some height and scoring off the bench. Teams that fit that would be the Kings, Blazers, Jazz and a few others. Even if we grab a pick we allow ourselves to add to our depth.

JMAC3 · Post #127 » by **JMAC3** » Sun Dec 2, 2012 7:48 pm

lmcguir5 wrote:I don't think it would be a bad idea to shop around Mullens just to see what we could pull from him. He is an asset to someone who needs some height and scoring off the bench. Teams that fit that would be the Kings, Blazers, Jazz and a few others. Even if we grab a pick we allow ourselves to add to our depth.

I agree that Mullens might actually have some good trade value right now. Many teams will look at his size, athleticism, and ability to shoot the ball and overpay for him. I would not be opposed to that at all, it doesnt hurt to look. Especially if it could get us another lottery pick.

However, the Jazz don't seem like an ideal fit with their surplus of bigs in Kanter, Jefferson, Millsap, and Favors. Also, Kings are pretty set at the post position as well with Cousins, Robinson, Thompson, Chuck Hayes, and James Johnson.

Maybe those teams will accept Mullens for what he is.... a 7 foot shooting guard. Then I could see him being a much better fit for them.

lmcguir5 · Post #128 » by **lmcguir5** » Sun Dec 2, 2012 8:00 pm

Sure maybe those teams have bigs, but what they have right now sure isn't working, especially for the Kings. They lack depth on their team as they have close to no bench scoring. Mullens outright is a better scorer than Chuck Hayes and Cousins can't play 45 minutes a game, he'll lose his legs real fast througout the season. Thompson is the best scorer out of the guys you listed and I don't think he's that much better of a midrange shooter than Mullens. I think the Kings would be remiss in not at least entertaining the idea seeing as their record isn't indicative of success.

JMAC3 · Post #129 » by **JMAC3** » Sun Dec 2, 2012 8:21 pm

lmcguir5 wrote:Sure maybe those teams have bigs, but what they have right now sure isn't working, especially for the Kings. They lack depth on their team as they have close to no bench scoring. Mullens outright is a better scorer than Chuck Hayes and Cousins can't play 45 minutes a game, he'll lose his legs real fast througout the season. Thompson is the best scorer out of the guys you listed and I don't think he's that much better of a midrange shooter than Mullens. I think the Kings would be remiss in not at least entertaining the idea seeing as their record isn't indicative of success.

The point is Kings are not looking to upgrade their frontcourt. They have a borderline allstar in Cousins, A top five pick Robinson, and they just payed Chuck Hayes and Jason Thompson new contracts averaging 6 million a piece over the next four seasons or so.

The problem with the kings are their guards, they have no real answer at point guard. Marcus Thornton is an alright player, but may be better suited for coming off the bench. And it wont be long before they decide Tyreke is better suited to play Power Forward, with the way they keep moving him around.

mrknowitall215 · Post #130 » by **mrknowitall215** » Sun Dec 2, 2012 9:51 pm

JMAC3 wrote:The problem with the kings are their guards, they have no real answer at point guard. Marcus Thornton is an alright player, but may be better suited for coming off the bench. And it wont be long before they decide Tyreke is better suited to play Power Forward, with the way they keep moving him around.

You mean to tell that after all that talk I had to hear about Isaiah Thomas last year coming along as the steal of last year's draft, that the Kings don't have a real answer at PG? Not to mention, all the rave I heard about Tyreke Evans two years ago about having the best rookie season only comparable to Michael Jordan, LeBron James, & Oscar Robertson, that the Kings don't have a answer at SG either? I guess we can't buy into rookie stock. Excuse my light sarcasm.

JT2006 · Post #131 » by **JT2006** » Mon Dec 3, 2012 7:53 am

maybe the kings should just give up, move to sacremento, and get new management/ownership/players

Marino · Post #132 » by **Marino** » Mon Dec 3, 2012 8:29 pm

JT2006 wrote:maybe the kings should just give up, move to sacremento, and get new management/ownership/players

That would be quite the move.

catch20two · Post #133 » by **catch20two** » Mon Dec 3, 2012 8:58 pm

JT2006 wrote:maybe the kings should just give up, move to sacremento, and get new management/ownership/players

How far is Sacremento from Sacramento?

HornetJail · Post #134 » by **HornetJail** » Tue Dec 4, 2012 12:20 am

One Earth's circumference away.

chrbal · Post #135 » by **chrbal** » Tue Dec 4, 2012 12:41 am

Is it wrong that I am starting to come around to trading for Okafor? Mind you Charlotte would have to get a 1st, but still. You could consolidate Diop and Warrick into Okafor.

James Gatz · Post #136 » by **James Gatz** » Tue Dec 4, 2012 1:11 am

chrbal wrote:Is it wrong that I am starting to come around to trading for Okafor? Mind you Charlotte would have to get a 1st, but still. You could consolidate Diop and Warrick into Okafor.

I'd be fine with that but the Wiz would not.

JT2006 · Post #137 » by **JT2006** » Tue Dec 4, 2012 1:18 am

catch20two wrote:
JT2006 wrote:maybe the kings should just give up, move to sacremento, and get new management/ownership/players

How far is Sacremento from Sacramento?

I meant to say seattle

chrbal · Post #138 » by **chrbal** » Tue Dec 4, 2012 2:37 am

1- it would be a heavily protected 1st.

2- we are talking about a team that took on the contracts of Trevor Ariza and Emeka Okafor so that they could get the FORTY-SIXTH pick in a draft and trade Rashard Lewis. All that so they wouldn't have to pay Lewis $13.7 mil via a buyout. Lets not rule anything out. Okafor and Ariza make just shy of $21 mil this year and almost $23 mil the next (Trevors picking up his player option, i'm calling it now). Emeka has an early termination option, I'm sure hes going to avoid. I can't see him making anything close to $15 mil a year on the open market.

They saw that as better then just buying out Lewis. Paying almost $46 mil and getting a 46th pick in the draft. Thats a lot of faith in Darius Miller. Or maybe they just like the number 46.

Sorry I got sidetracked.

HornetJail · Post #139 » by **HornetJail** » Tue Dec 4, 2012 2:46 am

chrbal wrote:Is it wrong that I am starting to come around to trading for Okafor? Mind you Charlotte would have to get a 1st, but still. You could consolidate Diop and Warrick into Okafor.

I'm all for taking back a bad contract for a 1st. I'm thinking Biedrins, but they don't have a 1st to give right now.

JT2006 · Post #140 » by **JT2006** » Tue Dec 4, 2012 2:49 am

CHA_77_Bobcats wrote:
chrbal wrote:Is it wrong that I am starting to come around to trading for Okafor? Mind you Charlotte would have to get a 1st, but still. You could consolidate Diop and Warrick into Okafor.

I'm all for taking back a bad contract for a 1st. I'm thinking Biedrins, but they don't have a 1st to give right now.

We should just put out a sign that says "Over paid vets welcome here" and wait for offers