Chauncey Billups trade

koogiking · Post #1 » by **koogiking** » Sat Apr 23, 2011 1:48 pm

Lets say the Knicks were going to trade Chancey Billups and Landry Fields to the Kings for Marcus Thornton and Samuel Dalembert. Would you accept this trade if you were GM?

Billups fills in the PG hole on the team, and it gives the team a good savvy winning veteran that the young squad could look up to as a role model. It allows the team to move Tyreke Evans to the SG position which is more of his natural position. Tyreke is kind of a ball dominant distributing 2, he's doesn't seem like a PG. Billups is the perfect type of point guard to play with that type of SG.

The Kings also get Landry Fields, a smart young savvy rookie who gets paid only 600K next year so he's on a really cheap contract. He plays as a shooting guard but he is a better fit as the small forward position since he is a 6 foot 7 and his speed matches up with Small Forwards better than smaller quicker shooting guards. He is also the best rebounding guard in the NBA.

The Knicks get Samuel Dalembert who addresses the size and interior defense issue of the team, and the knicks get Marcus Thornton, a guy who looks like a good scorer, who can defend even though he is somewhat unproven.

If this is too much, how does Billups for Samuel Dalembert straight up sound?

longfellow44 · Post #2 » by **longfellow44** » Sat Apr 23, 2011 2:32 pm

I wouldnt do either of those trades. Honestly i think tgorton is worth a lot more to us than landry fields, and dalembert is certainly worth more to us than billups. This trade makes no sense to me, it takes us from a balanced roster with a hole at small forward to, an unbalanced roster with a hole at center or power forward depending where you put cousins.

I personally like putting cousins at pf next to dalembert. It has been a very physically dominant combo especially eith thompson coming off the bench. Fixing our current roster is simpler than what your trade suggests, all we need is a good sf and we should be very dangerous, i suggest trying to obtain kirilenko who would be a monster for our team as a guy who focuses on defense but can contribute everywhere on the cort.

king125 · Post #3 » by **king125** » Sat Apr 23, 2011 5:17 pm

no way! not even close!

and yes, Kirlenko would be great but I dont think it would happen. He will be in NJ next year.

5th pick sucks · Post #4 » by **5th pick sucks** » Sat Apr 23, 2011 6:12 pm

Bro, it's not 4/20 anymore. Thorton >>>>>>>>>>>> Billups Dalembert >> Fields

boogie-reke · Post #5 » by **boogie-reke** » Sat Apr 23, 2011 6:24 pm

He would retire if thats gonna happen imo.

Post #6 » by **pillwenney** » Sat Apr 23, 2011 8:01 pm

As much as I've said many times that I'd LOVE to get Chauncey here (and I agree with your reasoning as to why he'd be good here), this just too steep of a price.

The trade you proposed is also currently impossible, since Sam and Marcus are both FA's, and I'm pretty sure you can't do a double S&T like that.

And of course, like others said, there's the issue of Chauncey possibly not wanting to play here. That would obviously throw a big wrench into everything.

Post #7 » by **KF10** » Sat Apr 23, 2011 9:36 pm

I like Billups but I don't think the Kings are willing to give up much if they view him as a rental. He is entering in his last year of his contract and most likely will consider retire very soon.

ADoaN17 · Post #8 » by **ADoaN17** » Sat Apr 23, 2011 10:54 pm

haha, how about swap thornton with pooh.....

Bac2Basics · Post #9 » by **Bac2Basics** » Sun Apr 24, 2011 1:31 am

As much as I like Billups, I don't think he's the answer for Sacramento.

I'm not opposed to trading anyone that the OP has listed in the deal, but my guess is that it would have to be a 3 or 4 team deal in order for Sacramento to get the kind of pieces that make more sense for them.

OGSactownballer · Post #10 » by **OGSactownballer** » Sun Apr 24, 2011 2:10 am

If we were to sign Tayshaun for a 2/3 option deal, I'd be happy to give up either or both of Beno/Garcia and Greene and Whiteside plus a second for Chauncey. That's about his value right now as an expiring after next year and a vet PG who is showing marked signs of slowing down/being injury prone.

Post #11 » by **ICMTM** » Sun Apr 24, 2011 2:52 pm

This isn't the right situation to pick up Billups. If we were going go compete for a title it would make more sense, but we aren't a good fit for him.

5th pick sucks · Post #12 » by **5th pick sucks** » Sun Apr 24, 2011 3:55 pm

Would anyone consider Beno for Chauncey Billups if he was willing to stay with us?

DickVitale · Post #13 » by **DickVitale** » Sun Apr 24, 2011 4:42 pm

Absolutely Not. I think dally and thorton are perfect fits here in sacto... what we really need is a way to get a solid SF.. I know everyone is thinking "young.. talented" but I think we have enough young talent... a vet would be good.. he doesnt have to be to old.. but atleast 4-5 solid seasons under his belt would be nice.

Post #14 » by **pillwenney** » Sun Apr 24, 2011 9:13 pm

ICMTM wrote:This isn't the right situation to pick up Billups. If we were going go compete for a title it would make more sense, but we aren't a good fit for him.

But that's why he's a good fit. This team needs a veteran leader in the worst way. I think that's arguably what this team needs more than anything. That's why he'd be great here.

SacKingsPejaFan · Post #15 » by **SacKingsPejaFan** » Sun Apr 24, 2011 9:22 pm

Hell no.

Thornton and Dalembert are amazing fits with the Kings. They're perfect players to put around Evans and Cousins. You're not prying them from us for a hobbling old man and a decent rookie--neither of whom play the positions you're taking away from us. This is ridiculous.

Unless we're getting a young all-star in return, we're pretty set on seeing how a core of Evans, Thornton, Cousins, and Dalembert develops. You're not breaking that up very easily.

If you're interested in any of our other players, we can talk. Otherwise, no deal is happening.

Post #16 » by **ICMTM** » Mon Apr 25, 2011 2:49 pm

pillwenney wrote:
ICMTM wrote:This isn't the right situation to pick up Billups. If we were going go compete for a title it would make more sense, but we aren't a good fit for him.

But that's why he's a good fit. This team needs a veteran leader in the worst way. I think that's arguably what this team needs more than anything. That's why he'd be great here.

I was thinking from his perspective.

yayotube · Post #17 » by **yayotube** » Mon Apr 25, 2011 6:55 pm

Wouldn't you guys just look to draft a PG in the draft? Kemba/Knight?

5th pick sucks · Post #18 » by **5th pick sucks** » Mon Apr 25, 2011 7:54 pm

yayotube wrote:Wouldn't you guys just look to draft a PG in the draft? Kemba/Knight?

Most likely yes

Post #19 » by **pillwenney** » Mon Apr 25, 2011 9:33 pm

ICMTM wrote:
I was thinking from his perspective.

Oh, well then fair enough.

yayotube wrote:Wouldn't you guys just look to draft a PG in the draft? Kemba/Knight?

Ehh, we'll see. I'm not sure either really brings what we need. Kemba might be too ball-dominant and I'd rather have more of a floor general than Knight.

Silver Man · Post #20 » by **Silver Man** » Mon Apr 25, 2011 11:10 pm

yayotube wrote:Wouldn't you guys just look to draft a PG in the draft? Kemba/Knight?

Depends.

Knight yes.
Walker no.