Two Trades: DET/SAC and SAC/LAL

chriswebb86 · Post #1 » by **chriswebb86** » Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:03 pm

First, I dont know how much I like these trades, but since I have some free time today this is what I came up with.

DET Incoming: Ron Artest
DET Out Going: Lindsey Hunter, Walter Herrman, Amir Johnson, and 2008 1st round pick.

SAC Incoming: Lindsey Hunter, Walter Herrman, Amir Johnson, and 2008 1st round pick.
Sac Outgoing: Ron Artest

Why for DET: They add another player who gives them a shot at winning a title. Ron can play a lot of PF especially in the East, which could allow a lineup of Billups/Richard/Prince/Artest/Wallace. Which, I think would be very dominate on both ends of the floor. Also most likely the Kings would wavie Herrman and Hunter since they are exp and DET could go back after them.

Why for SAC: The Kings get two things here; Young player in Amir who is developing and could be the future pf for the Kings, and they also get a 1st Round pick in a very deep draft. This would singal the start to rebuilding.

LAL Incoming: Brad Miller
LAL Outgoing: JC, Brown, 2008 First Round Pick.

SAC Incoming: JC, Brown, 2008 First Round Pick.
SAC Outgoing: Brad Miller.

Why for LAL; They add a player in Brad Miller who could replace a lot of the production from Bynum. Along with that he would be a great fit with the triangle offense. When Bynum gets back the Lakers would be able to move Miller to the 4 and Odom to the 3 giving themselves a great offensive team.

Why for SAC: They get the exp contract of Brown, which sheds a few years off of Millers contract. They also get a young player in JC who I would have considered with the 10th pick in this last draft. Finally, they get another 1st round pick to use to build for a team of the future.

Overall, I dont know if the Kings would do the first trade and the second one I doubt laker fans would do.

Post #2 » by **dockingsched** » Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:08 pm

horrible for the lakers. they would never take on multiple years of high paid salary just so brad miller could help out for two months. odom is not moving to the 3, he's a 4. the price of expiring + critt + 08 1st is too high anyway.

chriswebb86 · Post #3 » by **chriswebb86** » Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:11 pm

dcash4 wrote:horrible for the lakers. they would never take on multiple years of high paid salary just so brad miller could help out for two months. odom is not moving to the 3, he's a 4. the price of expiring + critt + 08 1st is too high anyway.

While, I think this is something that would have to be offered to move Brad from the Kings I understand where you are coming from on that. Mostly this was throwing an Idea out there. Honestly I highly doubt Brad is moved.

hermes · Post #4 » by **hermes** » Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:25 pm

bad for the lakers

Post #5 » by **loserX** » Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:47 pm

Do you really think the Pistons would take Artest, whatever the price? He's not exactly a local hero in Detroit.

PistonsFanFromNJ · Post #6 » by **PistonsFanFromNJ** » Mon Jan 21, 2008 5:56 pm

Detroit is not going to give up Amir for a 1/2 season rental of Artest. Artest is going to opt-out at the end of the season and I can't see Dumars giving him more than $8.5 million a year, which Artest thinks in too little based on his recent comments. I can see a 1st + the expirings of Primo, Herrmann and Murray. I can't see the Kings getting more from Detroit.

If you want more value in return you would have to trade him to someone crazy enough to give him a long term contract once the opts out at the end of the year. Plus, that team has to be confident that they can resign him as he can walk away for nothing.

RTM · Post #7 » by **RTM** » Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:24 pm

loserX wrote:Do you really think the Pistons would take Artest, whatever the price? He's not exactly a local hero in Detroit.

+1

Artest will not be a Piston anytime soon. Unless the Pistons hierarchy think Ron vs. the fans would be a fun halftime skit...?

No from Detroit (we send out too much anyways)

Post #8 » by **theBigLip** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 3:05 am

I would love to see Artest on the Pistons - they need something to wake them up...

DanTown8587 · Post #9 » by **DanTown8587** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 3:22 am

I don't see the sense in these deals, basically you are trading Artest for a late first, and the Lakers aren't touching Miller's contract.

SacKingZZZ · Post #10 » by **SacKingZZZ** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 3:57 am

PistonsFanFromNJ wrote:Detroit is not going to give up Amir for a 1/2 season rental of Artest. Artest is going to opt-out at the end of the season and I can't see Dumars giving him more than $8.5 million a year, which Artest thinks in too little based on his recent comments. I can see a 1st + the expirings of Primo, Herrmann and Murray. I can't see the Kings getting more from Detroit.

If you want more value in return you would have to trade him to someone crazy enough to give him a long term contract once the opts out at the end of the year. Plus, that team has to be confident that they can resign him as he can walk away for nothing.

You might want to have a doctor look at that then. Something is clearly wrong with your vision.

UKF · Post #11 » by **UKF** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 6:21 am

Bad for LA

And Kings can get a lot more for Artest..

OGSactownballer · Post #12 » by **OGSactownballer** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 6:30 am

You're all assuming that the Kings would do more than laugh at all this junk.
I don't think so - pass. Next stupid offer.

Hunter · Post #13 » by **Hunter** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 10:29 am

Ultimate Kings Fan wrote:Bad for LA

And Kings can get a lot more for Artest..

What Kings fans need to understand is that Artest value around the league is going to be considerably less than what it should be based on performance.

Artest value was low to begin with. Ya know, due to him being crazy and all. But the fact he's going to opt out is a bit of a double edged sword here as well. There could very well be more potential suitors if GM's work under the assumption that Artest should be on his best behavior while playing for a contract, and should he do anything stupid it's easy to cut him loose after the season. On the other hand nobody will want to give up any long term building blocks just to rent a guy for a few months. Some team looking to get over the top may give up a pick or a prospect, but getting both would be quite the coup.

And consider this; teams know that the Kings needs to move Artest now to get anything of value in return. If they don't trade him now they risk losing him for nothing in the off-season. That puts them in a position of weakness and means people will be throwing low ball offers at the Maloofs/Petrie trying to get a bargain basement rate on the guy. And if nothing else better comes along....they very well may have to take it!

_SRV_ · Post #14 » by **_SRV_** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 10:48 am

Hunter wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
And consider this; teams know that the Kings needs to move Artest now to get anything of value in return. If they don't trade him now they risk losing him for nothing in the off-season. That puts them in a position of weakness and means people will be throwing low ball offers at the Maloofs/Petrie trying to get a bargain basement rate on the guy. And if nothing else better comes along....they very well may have to take it!

The FO isn't that eager to move, if the offer isn't good enough for the Kings, they'll keep him, and extend him/let him go in the summer.
Petrie had no troubles doing that to Mobley and Bonzi, and he won't hesitate to do it with Artest.
What non-kings fans don't understand is that the Kings will be paying tax if they extend or replace Artest's contract, it doesn't make any sense to trade him for mediocre prospect just for the sake of trading him, because, again, there is realy no urgency to do that.

Hunter · Post #15 » by **Hunter** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 11:32 am

^And that's turned out just great for the Kings so far, hasn't it? :roll:

At some point you need to get something in return for your assets, particularly one of Artests stature. He's no Mobley or Bonzi. And frankly it's a bit disingenuous to talk about them and then not mention guys like Peja.

Jemini80 · Post #16 » by **Jemini80** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 11:42 am

that honestly is the best deal you will ever get for Artest. Johnson would be a player and freaking Moore starts at PF for Sacramento ( horrible signing, what every writer says is true, Jason Kidd is responsible for about 8 players in the league making double what they deserve) plus they get a first rounder.

Sac fans have to realize they aren't gettind David Lee for Artest, and Artest does not have much value. The one team you could have held for ransom because their GM is just as bad as Thomas is the Miami Heat, but they are way too far out of contention to make a move for a rental player.

unless Phx comes out of no where wanting Artest, which would be an interesting combination, I don't see what Sacramento is doing.

all you got for Artest is an expiring contract, you can't expect much more for him.

_SRV_ · Post #17 » by **_SRV_** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 11:48 am

^And that's turned out just great for the Kings so far, hasn't it?

At some point you need to get something in return for your assets, particularly one of Artests stature. He's no Mobley or Bonzi. And frankly it's a bit disingenuous to talk about them and then not mention guys like Peja.

It's not disingenious at all because we traded Peja and got a great value for him, when he was in similar contract situation to Artest now, except he was playing worse than Artest is now.
And regarding your eye rolling comment, I don't realy get it, but I'd say yes it has turned great for the Kings, Bonzi turned into Salmons, who I think is better player at this stage of their careers, and Petrie did try to trade for Nene when Denver had interest in Mobley, Denver didn't want to give Nene, Petrie just let Mobley go, he wasn't not going to pay tax for something he doesn't realy want just not to lose Mobley's value.

Hunter · Post #18 » by **Hunter** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 12:22 pm

This actually does remind me of the Bonzi situation. We had people trying to trade him for 1st rounders and prospects too lol

I'm just gonna say some Kings fans are going to be mighty disappointed in a few weeks/months time. :lol:

_SRV_ · Post #19 » by **_SRV_** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 1:50 pm

I'm gonna say you're flat out wrong, with nothing on your side to back up what you say, but that's just me.

OGSactownballer · Post #20 » by **OGSactownballer** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 7:09 pm

Amir Johnson's a player, huh? That's why he's beat out Raheed and McDyess (and his no-jump knees) for the strting spots at the 4/5 for the Pistons?

Oh yeah, that's right, he's just buried on the bench like Maxiell and the rest of the Pistons so called "up and coming stars".

:lol:

You gotta come a little better than that around here man - we actually know basketball here.