Artest for Odom?

[CITYOFANGELSX3]

According to a league source, the Lakers already have contacted the Kings regarding Artest and are believed to be offering forward Lamar Odom. As of Tuesday evening, the Kings had not returned the call. They are expected to insist on forward Kenny Thomas and his $18 million of remaining salary (over two seasons) being included in that potential trade. Kings basketball president Geoff Petrie declined comment on whether the Lakers had called.

http://www.sacbee.com/kings/story/1072665.html

Is this a good deal for the lakers or the kings?

[cb4_89]

good for both if artest signs with the lakers after the year is done. He would do so much more for the lakers than odom. And the kings would get something for nothing as hes leaving for sure

[CB4MiamiHeat]

Laker fans underrate what Lamar brings defensively at PF and his elite rebounding..but with Gasol/Bynum, Artest is a great fit..Lamar is not .. i would even take on the contract if i was the Lakers.

[Ballings7]

For the Lakers it'd be terrific, and a dream come true for many

For the Kings, ulitmately it would just not be that good. Odom's a good player, generally, but isn't a solid fit for the Kings and with their team situation. Odom would leave the Kings after next season, as well (because Ron will, too). While only there for a year, he'd also put another proven, capable veteran player in front of their young big men (Brad Miller and Moore already there, and maybe even Shareef coming back), and take some regular time at SF as well, I'd guess. The Kings would also be helping out the Lakers huge, by giving them Artest. I kinda doubt they want to do that considering the past, and how that probably won't ever be gotten over from for that franchise.

I'm doubting that the Lakers will take on Kenny Thomas' or SAR's contract, despite them being expirings after next season.

Overall I don't think the Kings should trade Artest to the Lakers, and wait and look at other, more fitting trade oppurtunities relating to Artest and for Sac's situation. I'd actually just let Ron walk if nothing else that good comes up, than trade Ron Artest to the Lakers.

I'd be pretty surprised to see this go down, and lean to it not happening.

As a Spurs/Kings/Artest fan, just would be unfortunate (to a lesser degree as an Artest fan).

[hoop_head]

Artest would be a good fit, wow that would make quite a group: Kobe, Artest, Gasol, Bynum.

Odom would be a contributor for the Kings, but I think the Lakers would get the better end of an Artest-Odom swap.

[lukeridenour]

since the kings arent at the lakers level, i think they should drop their "no trading with rivals" deal. if they do indeed end up discussing a trade, i think the deal breaker will be who else the kings throw in to match salaries. for example, i think the kings can benefit here from odoms expiring, and getting rid of kenny thomas' contract, but will the lakers be willing to take bad contracts like thomas'?

[carrottop12]

Finally, we could see the Lakers go down in flames. It would be great for them to have Artest the psycho.

[TDG26]

Few things to consider for me. The extra contarct the kings want to dump on us is obviously a major point. How bout back up PF for the lakers, with Turiaf signing a offer sheet which IMO is a bit too much for the lakers to match (they need to consider vujacic with that money too). The third would be who holds more trade value at or near the deadline, ron artest or LO's expiring and what the kings can get for them?

[GreenWithEnvy]

since the kings arent at the lakers level, i think they should drop their "no trading with rivals" deal. if they do indeed end up discussing a trade, i think the deal breaker will be who else the kings throw in to match salaries. for example, i think the kings can benefit here from odoms expiring, and getting rid of kenny thomas' contract, but will the lakers be willing to take bad contracts like thomas'?

theyd have to. were talking about a fringe star in Artest for a career underachiever in Odom.

[Jajwanda]

There's also the possibility that Buss may see some value in a guy like a Mikki Moore who means nothing to Sacramento (I'm pretty sure they'd rather play their youth) in addition to Shareef Abdul Rahim.

If I'm L.A. I don't mind paying a hefty sum (believe me it is hefty) for the 2009-2010 season if in fact it brings me a Championship. After 2009 it all becomes irrelevant and the payroll returns to normal anyway.

As far as this season the contracts don't matter that much, they add up more or less if Mihm is added. The Laker's due enjoy the fact that they replaced Turiaf without adding salary and who knows SAR may in fact rebound to be a decent backup PF again for a year.

The primary saving for Sacramento is that they save 11m next year and have already saved 2m this year. Add in the possibility that they choose to trade Odom elsewhere for other valuables (expirings+plus maybe two later first round picks) and 16m in savings+ two firsts really does add up for Petrie and Sacramento.

I mean honestly do the Kings really think that with their roster they can get anywhere above 8th in the West? Artest isn't staying apparently, so they loose another player there next year. Why not save some money and get some extra picks in the mean time.

[Kobay]

Will B-Scott be included in this trade?

[CITYOFANGELSX3]

Will B-Scott be included in this trade?

Of course. He'll move to the kings board.

[Kobay]

Do it Mitch ASAP

[rpa]

Any such swap doesn't make a bit of sense for the Kings.

1) Odom's talent is useless to the Kings. They aren't trying to compete now so having a talented, nearing 30 player on their roster means dick to them. If they wanted a guy that age as part of their nucleus they'd just keep Artest, who's a better player

2) Odom's expiring contract is useless to the Kings. The Maloofs have never objected to spending money as long as they don't dip into the luxury tax. This move has no effect on that. Further, the filler would likely be either Thomas or Shareef--both of whom expire after the 2010 season. The Kings are shooting for cap space in 2010 (NOT 2009--doing so would be nearly impossible). Therefore, the extra year of Thomas/Shareef (compared to Odom) isn't detrimental to the Kings' future plans at all.

3) Assuming the Kings use Odom as trade bait is just a flat out stupid idea. The Kings are giving the Lakers what they want; why on Earth should the Kings be the ones that then have to go find another deal to get what they want. Further, doing so takes a number of chances that the Kings wouldn't have to incur if they were to trade Artest in another deal (such as the question of Odom's value dropping due to bad play).


Unless you want to try to make the argument that the Maloofs would be thrilled to save some $8mil and that is the biggest reason for trading Artest then there really isn't a single positive for the Kings to do such a swap.

[Jajwanda]

1) Who says that Odom cannot be further moved for assets afterwards. That's just a blind and simple-minded way of looking at Odom.

2) 8m is never useless and there may be a chance that the Lakers look to save Sacramento even more than that. 8m can buy two first round picks in today's NBA. 2010 cap space is not impossible, it requires creativity. The Knicks would love to have Odom and would probably take Kenny Thomas' deal in a trade for Marbury+filler. The Lakers may be willing to take Moore+SAR's deals. That clears out an astounding 19m in cap room for 2009.

3) The deal will be done immediately at that moment. The Kings will do it only in a three way-deal and that's it.

[bigbreakfast]

If I'm the Lakers I don't even want Artest. He's a time bomb, he may be great this season, but can he be stable enough to give you a shot at the ring the next 3 or 4 years after that? Besides, Artest's D is not where it used to be. He's a ball stopper on offense. I'm not even sure he can accept a very reduced role (he'd be a 4th option most likely, behind kobe, gasol, bynum). I know Odom is soft, but his D isnt that much worse than ARtest, I'd wanna give the current Lakers team a chance w/ bynum healthy before pulling this risky move.

[rpa]

1) Who says that Odom cannot be further moved for assets afterwards. That's just a blind and simple-minded way of looking at Odom.

See #3. The Kings are not going to put the onus on themselves to pull of a 2nd atomic deal to get what they want.

2) 8m is never useless and there may be a chance that the Lakers look to save Sacramento even more than that. 8m can buy two first round picks in today's NBA.

They could buy either of those picks anyways. As I said before: the Maloofs have never been against spending money so long as they don't hit the luxury tax. Since cash included in a deal isn't added to a team's salary, cash they would use to buy a pick wouldn't effect the luxury tax at all. Thus, if they had wanted to spend $3mil on a pick before they would have done it and they'd do it again.

2010 cap space is not impossible, it requires creativity.

I said the Kings were going for 2010 and made sure to say "not 2009" because there'd be people that attempt to counter with "well you'll have cap space earlier". Getting under the cap in 2009 would require the Kings to move both Brad Miller & Shareef (along with Thomas). Trying to argue that it's reasonable for a team to move some $30mil in salary in one offseason is pretty naive given recent history. Further, the 2009 free agent class sucks. There's a reason the Kings are targeting 2010: because having money in 2009 wouldn't do anything for them.

The Knicks would love to have Odom and would probably take Kenny Thomas' deal in a trade for Marbury+filler. The Lakers may be willing to take Moore+SAR's deals. That clears out an astounding 19m in cap room for 2009.

As I've already said: 2009 makes no sense for the Kings.

3) The deal will be done immediately at that moment. The Kings will do it only in a three way-deal and that's it.

The discussed deal is a straight swap, not a 3-team deal.

[Jajwanda]

It can easily be a three team deal and 2009 is not nearly as bad as you make it out to be.

The Maloofs are first and foremost businessmen. Sure they don't mind spending up to the luxury tax but that is no reason to keep crappy players on your team and not save 15-23m dollars. I would be that the Kings don't even make 20m in a single year in profit.

[rpa]

It can easily be a three team deal and 2009 is not nearly as bad as you make it out to be.

Are you completely ignoring the words "the 2009 free agent class sucks"? There is exactly ONE possible free agent the Kings might be interested in and that's Boozer.

The Maloofs are first and foremost businessmen. Sure they don't mind spending up to the luxury tax but that is no reason to keep crappy players on your team and not save 15-23m dollars. I would be that the Kings don't even make 20m in a single year in profit.

They didn't buy the Kings to make money off them; they aren't Donald Sterling.

Further, you're trying to lump me into saying that I wouldn't trade Artest, but you're completely wrong. I've been arguing this ENTIRE time that the Kings taking on Odom themselves doesn't make ANY SENSE AT ALL. Just about every one of your arguments has him going elsewhere. So what exactly are you trying to argue here?

[Jajwanda]

That the Lakers are the team that will one way or the other make it most desirable for the Kings to make a deal. At some point however, Marion will become a better alternative and that's where I see the Lakers going.