Balance the Trade: POR - SAC

Moderators: MoneyTalks41890, HartfordWhalers, Texas Chuck, BullyKing, Andre Roberstan, loserX, Trader_Joe, Mamba4Goat, pacers33granger

What do the Kings need to add to balance the trade?

Nothing
2
18%
1 2nd rounder
1
9%
1 1st rounder swap (lottery protected)
1
9%
1 1st rounder swap (top 4 protected)
1
9%
1 1st rounder swap (unprotected)
0
No votes
1 1st rounder (lottery protected)
5
45%
1 1st rounder (top 4 protected)
1
9%
1 1st rounder (unprotected)
0
No votes
More than 1 1st rounder (unprotected)
0
No votes
 
Total votes: 11

bpcox05
Analyst
Posts: 3,034
And1: 703
Joined: Dec 03, 2012
       

Balance the Trade: POR - SAC 

Post#1 » by bpcox05 » Sun Jan 5, 2025 3:43 am

How much value should the Kings add to make the following deal balanced?

Kevin Huerter
Colby Jones
Orlando Robinson

For

Robert Williams III
Matisse Thybulle
Rayan Rupert

For reference, the Kings have the following picks available to include in a trade…

2027 SAC 1st (only if the 2025 1st conveys to ATL)
2028 SAC 1st
2029 SAC 1st
2029 SAC 2nd
2030 SAC 1st
2031 SAC/SAS 1st (the less favorable of the two)


The Blazers would do this to save some money while also getting some long term asset(s) to aid in their rebuild.

The Kings would do this to upgrade their backup C and backup wing spots who can help improve their defense.
JRoy
RealGM
Posts: 16,551
And1: 13,911
Joined: Feb 27, 2019
 

Re: Balance the Trade: POR - SAC 

Post#2 » by JRoy » Sun Jan 5, 2025 3:50 am

Subtract Rupert and Robinson add FRP from SAC
Edrees wrote:
JRoy wrote:Monta Ellis have it all


I was hoping and expecting this to be one of the first replies. You did not disappoint. Jroy have it all.
bpcox05
Analyst
Posts: 3,034
And1: 703
Joined: Dec 03, 2012
       

Re: Balance the Trade: POR - SAC 

Post#3 » by bpcox05 » Sun Jan 5, 2025 3:55 am

JRoy wrote:Subtract Rupert and Robinson add FRP from SAC

That trade would be illegal.
JRoy
RealGM
Posts: 16,551
And1: 13,911
Joined: Feb 27, 2019
 

Re: Balance the Trade: POR - SAC 

Post#4 » by JRoy » Sun Jan 5, 2025 4:15 am

bpcox05 wrote:
JRoy wrote:Subtract Rupert and Robinson add FRP from SAC

That trade would be illegal.


Ah.

Rupert not a throw in.
Edrees wrote:
JRoy wrote:Monta Ellis have it all


I was hoping and expecting this to be one of the first replies. You did not disappoint. Jroy have it all.
Myth
RealGM
Posts: 11,786
And1: 10,442
Joined: Oct 01, 2008
   

Re: Balance the Trade: POR - SAC 

Post#5 » by Myth » Sun Jan 5, 2025 5:08 am

bpcox05 wrote:
JRoy wrote:Subtract Rupert and Robinson add FRP from SAC

That trade would be illegal.

Still legal according to Spotrac if you just remove Rupert but keep Robinson in the trade.

A first feels like too much. Seconds aren’t enticing enough. Something else may need to go to Sacramento to balance it more. Maybe like 2 2nds to Kings with a protected 1st to Portland.
LightTheBeam
RealGM
Posts: 18,916
And1: 12,057
Joined: Sep 17, 2010
     

Re: Balance the Trade: POR - SAC 

Post#6 » by LightTheBeam » Sun Jan 5, 2025 5:12 am

Im not giving a 1st in any circumstance for Thybulle and Rob Williams. I get the idea, a defensive wing and a defensive rim protecting big. But rob can't stay healthy and thybulles offense is so horrible he can't play.
JRoy
RealGM
Posts: 16,551
And1: 13,911
Joined: Feb 27, 2019
 

Re: Balance the Trade: POR - SAC 

Post#7 » by JRoy » Sun Jan 5, 2025 5:13 am

Huerter is a bad contract and the other guys are fodder, not interested without FRP.
Edrees wrote:
JRoy wrote:Monta Ellis have it all


I was hoping and expecting this to be one of the first replies. You did not disappoint. Jroy have it all.
Jkam31
Head Coach
Posts: 6,867
And1: 5,833
Joined: Feb 23, 2014

Re: Balance the Trade: POR - SAC 

Post#8 » by Jkam31 » Sun Jan 5, 2025 5:44 am

JRoy wrote:Huerter is a bad contract and the other guys are fodder, not interested without FRP.


You’re not getting a first for them zero chance
JRoy
RealGM
Posts: 16,551
And1: 13,911
Joined: Feb 27, 2019
 

Re: Balance the Trade: POR - SAC 

Post#9 » by JRoy » Sun Jan 5, 2025 6:02 am

Jkam31 wrote:
JRoy wrote:Huerter is a bad contract and the other guys are fodder, not interested without FRP.


You’re not getting a first for them zero chance


Fair enough, we will look elsewhere.
Edrees wrote:
JRoy wrote:Monta Ellis have it all


I was hoping and expecting this to be one of the first replies. You did not disappoint. Jroy have it all.
Sactown33
Ballboy
Posts: 48
And1: 30
Joined: Jan 21, 2023

Re: Balance the Trade: POR - SAC 

Post#10 » by Sactown33 » Sun Jan 5, 2025 6:41 am

Lmao somehow an injury prone Robert Williams and injured Matisse Thybulle is worth Huerter, Jones, and a FRP to some people.
JRoy
RealGM
Posts: 16,551
And1: 13,911
Joined: Feb 27, 2019
 

Re: Balance the Trade: POR - SAC 

Post#11 » by JRoy » Sun Jan 5, 2025 6:54 am

Sactown33 wrote:Lmao somehow an injury prone Robert Williams and injured Matisse Thybulle is worth Huerter, Jones, and a FRP to some people.


You’re welcome to shop your guys for the best deal,

Expiring and SRPs for Thybulle and Williams, or bad contract (Huerter) and FRP.
Edrees wrote:
JRoy wrote:Monta Ellis have it all


I was hoping and expecting this to be one of the first replies. You did not disappoint. Jroy have it all.
Walton1one
Starter
Posts: 2,139
And1: 1,199
Joined: Jul 05, 2023
 

Re: Balance the Trade: POR - SAC 

Post#12 » by Walton1one » Sun Jan 5, 2025 7:05 am

I guess we will see if\when RW3 is traded but there has been some chatter that they have already been offered a protected 1st for him

Trying to sell that POR should be happy with marginal (Huerter) or useless (Jones\Robinson) players for (2) vet players who can be major (RW3) or minor (Thybulle) difference makers to a playoff team & asking POR to throw in a young (Rupert\20) improving prospect in addition strains credibility
shrink
RealGM
Posts: 59,291
And1: 19,304
Joined: Sep 26, 2005

Re: Balance the Trade: POR - SAC 

Post#13 » by shrink » Sun Jan 5, 2025 7:11 am

JRoy wrote:
Jkam31 wrote:
JRoy wrote:Huerter is a bad contract and the other guys are fodder, not interested without FRP.

You’re not getting a first for them zero chance

Fair enough, we will look elsewhere.

I don’t have a dog in this fight, but I will point out in the current NBA economic climate, teams have stopped giving up 1sts for players of this caliber, and even for fifth starters. Teams seem to be getting multiple seconds for them though.
JRoy
RealGM
Posts: 16,551
And1: 13,911
Joined: Feb 27, 2019
 

Re: Balance the Trade: POR - SAC 

Post#14 » by JRoy » Sun Jan 5, 2025 7:12 am

shrink wrote:
JRoy wrote:
Jkam31 wrote:You’re not getting a first for them zero chance

Fair enough, we will look elsewhere.

I don’t have a dog in this fight, but I will point out in the current NBA economic climate, teams have stopped giving up 1sts for players of this caliber, and even for fifth starters. Teams seem to be getting multiple seconds for them though.


POR should be willing to take SRP without attached bad contracts.
Edrees wrote:
JRoy wrote:Monta Ellis have it all


I was hoping and expecting this to be one of the first replies. You did not disappoint. Jroy have it all.
Walton1one
Starter
Posts: 2,139
And1: 1,199
Joined: Jul 05, 2023
 

Re: Balance the Trade: POR - SAC 

Post#15 » by Walton1one » Sun Jan 5, 2025 7:21 am

shrink wrote:
JRoy wrote:
Jkam31 wrote:You’re not getting a first for them zero chance

Fair enough, we will look elsewhere.

I don’t have a dog in this fight, but I will point out in the current NBA economic climate, teams have stopped giving up 1sts for players of this caliber, and even for fifth starters. Teams seem to be getting multiple seconds for them though.


If you are referring to the DFS\LAL deal, BRK was offered a 1st and b/c of their situation, (4) 1st’s already in 25’& a preference for not taking any non expiring deals back in return, chose the LAL deal instead

This narrative that teams are not offering 1st’s for players is not true, and in no world was the well traveled Schroeder worth a 1st to begin with
shrink
RealGM
Posts: 59,291
And1: 19,304
Joined: Sep 26, 2005

Re: Balance the Trade: POR - SAC 

Post#16 » by shrink » Sun Jan 5, 2025 7:32 am

Walton1one wrote:
shrink wrote:
JRoy wrote:Fair enough, we will look elsewhere.

I don’t have a dog in this fight, but I will point out in the current NBA economic climate, teams have stopped giving up 1sts for players of this caliber, and even for fifth starters. Teams seem to be getting multiple seconds for them though.


If you are referring to the DFS\LAL deal, BRK was offered a 1st and b/c of their situation, (4) 1st’s already in 25’& a preference for not taking any non expiring deals back in return, chose the LAL deal instead

This narrative that teams are not offering 1st’s for players is not true, and in no world was the well traveled Schroeder worth a 1st to begin with

Can you tell me when the last completed trade was done when players of this caliber actually brought back 1st?

I’m not saying you guys have to take this deal. Just that you might be over-estimating the market if you think other teams are going to offer 1sts these days. These guys aren’t even DFS.
bpcox05
Analyst
Posts: 3,034
And1: 703
Joined: Dec 03, 2012
       

Re: Balance the Trade: POR - SAC 

Post#17 » by bpcox05 » Sun Jan 5, 2025 3:36 pm

JRoy wrote:
bpcox05 wrote:
JRoy wrote:Subtract Rupert and Robinson add FRP from SAC

That trade would be illegal.


Ah.

Rupert not a throw in.

JRoy wrote:Huerter is a bad contract and the other guys are fodder, not interested without FRP.


How is Colby Jones “fodder” but then Rupert is “not a throw in?”

You may remember that both were drafted in the same draft yet Jones went 9 picks ahead of Rupert. And I haven’t seen anything over the last 1.5 seasons to have altered that evaluation of value, but to each their own I guess.
bpcox05
Analyst
Posts: 3,034
And1: 703
Joined: Dec 03, 2012
       

Re: Balance the Trade: POR - SAC 

Post#18 » by bpcox05 » Sun Jan 5, 2025 3:38 pm

Myth wrote:
bpcox05 wrote:
JRoy wrote:Subtract Rupert and Robinson add FRP from SAC

That trade would be illegal.

Still legal according to Spotrac if you just remove Rupert but keep Robinson in the trade.

A first feels like too much. Seconds aren’t enticing enough. Something else may need to go to Sacramento to balance it more. Maybe like 2 2nds to Kings with a protected 1st to Portland.

Yeah, that trade is legal. Would POR cut Walker then to make room for the extra player coming in?

Agree that a 1st feels like too much. I was thinking if the Kings add a 2nd and a pick swap that it would balance it out.
JRoy
RealGM
Posts: 16,551
And1: 13,911
Joined: Feb 27, 2019
 

Re: Balance the Trade: POR - SAC 

Post#19 » by JRoy » Sun Jan 5, 2025 3:47 pm

bpcox05 wrote:
JRoy wrote:
bpcox05 wrote:That trade would be illegal.


Ah.

Rupert not a throw in.

I mean Colby Jones isn’t either so to each their own.


Fair enough, haven’t seen him play.
Edrees wrote:
JRoy wrote:Monta Ellis have it all


I was hoping and expecting this to be one of the first replies. You did not disappoint. Jroy have it all.
User avatar
MoneyTalks41890
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 32,741
And1: 24,968
Joined: Oct 13, 2009
 

Re: Balance the Trade: POR - SAC 

Post#20 » by MoneyTalks41890 » Sun Jan 5, 2025 3:57 pm

Protected swap is the balancer imo

Return to Trades and Transactions