Jimmer Fredette

SmashMouthRod · Post #1 » by **SmashMouthRod** » Tue Jun 25, 2013 12:19 pm

Coming from espn.com "The Sacramento Kings are looking to acquire a second first-round pick and are using guard Jimmer Fredette as bait. Sources say the Kings have reached out to a number of teams in the mid-to-late first round in an attempt to secure another pick. Both the Indiana Pacers and Utah Jazz are potential destinations for Jimmer. Kings coach Mike Malone is enamored with both Tim Hardaway Jr. and Tony Snell, but the Kings feel that they can get them much lower in the draft.

In addition to the Pacers' Jimmer discussions, sources say Indiana has made the No. 23 pick available in hopes that an interested party would be willing to take on the contract of Gerald Green for the right to acquire Indy's pick. "

Looks like some of the trade the first round pick with Gerald Green supporters were right. Dont know how I feel about the first and Green for Jimmer Fredette; its obvious he's a great shooter; something the team has been trying to add. My guess is that there would most def be more pieces added to this deal if its legit. What else could the team acquire from Sactown? Thoughts on the possibility of Fredette to Indy......

Post #2 » by **Jake0890** » Tue Jun 25, 2013 12:58 pm

1st + Green for Jimmer doesn't make sense to me. Jimmer really lit up college basketball, but he hasn't been anything special in the NBA.

I wouldn't mind getting him, but not at the expense of a first round pick.

Wizop · Post #3 » by **Wizop** » Tue Jun 25, 2013 1:09 pm

Jimmer isn't the defender we need coming off the bench but if Canaan could be taken with the Kings second round pick I'd keep talking. maybe they've got a more useful piece and maybe they could be talked into including a 1st down the road a few years.

8305 · Post #4 » by **8305** » Tue Jun 25, 2013 1:25 pm

Green and our 1st
for
Jimmer and their 2nd

That's about as good as we could expect. Assuming Larkin, Mitchell, Franklin, Dieng are all off the board before we pick I'm fine with this trade.

Post #5 » by **Scoot McGroot** » Tue Jun 25, 2013 2:19 pm

I'd probably prefer Wolters or Green over Jimmer. Especially since we wouldn't really be saving money in a Green/Jimmer swap (Jimmer makes only $400k less than Green in 2014), unless we turn down the team option on Jimmer and let him go for nothing.

ardthomp · Post #6 » by **ardthomp** » Tue Jun 25, 2013 2:24 pm

Please don't let this trade happen. Jimmer in blue and gold makes me cringe.

8305 · Post #7 » by **8305** » Tue Jun 25, 2013 3:07 pm

Scoot McGroot wrote:I'd probably prefer Wolters or Green over Jimmer. Especially since we wouldn't really be saving money in a Green/Jimmer swap (Jimmer makes only $400k less than Green in 2014), unless we turn down the team option on Jimmer and let him go for nothing.

I absolutely like Wolters better than Jimmer. At least you know he's a point guard.

When would the team option kick in? If next year at this time wouldn't this deal translate to the elimination of Green's salary next summer? That could be pretty critical, in a good way. In the mean time you can take Jimmer on a test drive. Maybe as a JJ Redick type playing the two off the bench. Can he be any worse than Green?

Post #8 » by **Scoot McGroot** » Tue Jun 25, 2013 3:12 pm

8305 wrote:
Scoot McGroot wrote:I'd probably prefer Wolters or Green over Jimmer. Especially since we wouldn't really be saving money in a Green/Jimmer swap (Jimmer makes only $400k less than Green in 2014), unless we turn down the team option on Jimmer and let him go for nothing.

I absolutely like Wolters better than Jimmer. At least you know he's a point guard.

When would the team option kick in? If next year at this time wouldn't this deal translate to the elimination of Green's salary next summer? That could be pretty critical, in a good way. In the mean time you can take Jimmer on a test drive. Maybe as a JJ Redick type playing the two off the bench. Can he be any worse than Green?

I believe it's around October. We'd essentially have to decide before the season really started if we wanted to exercise the option to keep him.

Post #9 » by **Jake0890** » Tue Jun 25, 2013 3:17 pm

8305 wrote:
Scoot McGroot wrote:I'd probably prefer Wolters or Green over Jimmer. Especially since we wouldn't really be saving money in a Green/Jimmer swap (Jimmer makes only $400k less than Green in 2014), unless we turn down the team option on Jimmer and let him go for nothing.

I absolutely like Wolters better than Jimmer. At least you know he's a point guard.

When would the team option kick in? If next year at this time wouldn't this deal translate to the elimination of Green's salary next summer? That could be pretty critical, in a good way. In the mean time you can take Jimmer on a test drive. Maybe as a JJ Redick type playing the two off the bench. Can he be any worse than Green?

Nah, he's not worse than Green by any means. Last year, he shot 41% from deep, 42% overall, 7.2 PPG on 14.1 minutes.

Boneman2 · Post #10 » by **Boneman2** » Tue Jun 25, 2013 3:25 pm

So the Pacers have to include a 1st to get rid of GGreen, but Sac doesn't need to do the same with Jimmer?

As it stands Green's contract does not prohibit us this offseason so I don't feel the sense of urgency to lose additional assets just to dump him now. Maybe at this time next year, when Gerald is an expiring, he won't be so expensive to move. Plus whose to say that Gerald won't improve in our system with another year under his belt.

You don't fix a small problem by compounding it with the loss of more assets. I'd offer Green for Fredette, that's it.

8305 · Post #11 » by **8305** » Tue Jun 25, 2013 3:35 pm

Scoot McGroot wrote:
8305 wrote:
Scoot McGroot wrote:I'd probably prefer Wolters or Green over Jimmer. Especially since we wouldn't really be saving money in a Green/Jimmer swap (Jimmer makes only $400k less than Green in 2014), unless we turn down the team option on Jimmer and let him go for nothing.

I absolutely like Wolters better than Jimmer. At least you know he's a point guard.

When would the team option kick in? If next year at this time wouldn't this deal translate to the elimination of Green's salary next summer? That could be pretty critical, in a good way. In the mean time you can take Jimmer on a test drive. Maybe as a JJ Redick type playing the two off the bench. Can he be any worse than Green?

I believe it's around October. We'd essentially have to decide before the season really started if we wanted to exercise the option to keep him.

So you're back to Gerald Green costing us a 1st.

Post #12 » by **Jake0890** » Tue Jun 25, 2013 3:45 pm

In addition to the Pacers' Jimmer discussions, sources say Indiana has made the No. 23 pick available in hopes that an interested party would be willing to take on the contract of Gerald Green for the right to acquire Indy's pick.

It sounds like the 1st would be a different deal than the Jimmer one.

Post #13 » by **Jake0890** » Tue Jun 25, 2013 3:48 pm

It certainly appears the Gerald Green experiment has failed. Should've gone after Mayo last offseason. Oh well.

Wizop · Post #14 » by **Wizop** » Tue Jun 25, 2013 3:49 pm

remember the time line. we're no longer trying to build a team that can win in five years. now we're trying to build a team that can knock out Miami next year. we'll need a veteran backup to Hill to do that and not a rookie. If the coaches like Jimmer, I wouldn't worry about giving up a first, but I wouldn't like to trade a first without getting a pick back but it could be a high second this year or a first enough years down the road to lower its value to something the Kings won't worry about.

Wizop · Post #15 » by **Wizop** » Tue Jun 25, 2013 3:51 pm

Jake0890 wrote:It certainly appears the Gerald Green experiment has failed. Should've gone after Mayo last offseason. Oh well.

but the problem is at point behind Hill and Mayo wouldn't have fixed that. between Danny and OJ, we're okay on the wings without Green and his salary.

Indy4Life · Post #16 » by **Indy4Life** » Tue Jun 25, 2013 4:51 pm

hopefully we wait until the pick before making this trade. Should a player such as Larkin be available at #23 I would much rather take the pick and keep GG.

I wouldn't hate the trade as #23 is going to be a game changer in most drafts...

Post #17 » by **Jake0890** » Tue Jun 25, 2013 5:47 pm

Wizop wrote:
Jake0890 wrote:It certainly appears the Gerald Green experiment has failed. Should've gone after Mayo last offseason. Oh well.

but the problem is at point behind Hill and Mayo wouldn't have fixed that. between Danny and OJ, we're okay on the wings without Green and his salary.

Obviously, but going back in time, do you sign Mayo or do you sign Gerald Green? Quite obviously, the answer is OJ Mayo.

Post #18 » by **Scoot McGroot** » Tue Jun 25, 2013 6:29 pm

Jake0890 wrote:It certainly appears the Gerald Green experiment has failed. Should've gone after Mayo last offseason. Oh well.

Yup, so far. Unless he comes back from the summer and has an amazing training camp to play his way back into the rotation, it's a major bust.

SmashMouthRod · Post #19 » by **SmashMouthRod** » Tue Jun 25, 2013 8:26 pm

The team shouldnt have to use the first round pick to unload Green; especially to just get Fredette. Ultimately one of those guys (meaning Larkin; Canaan; Green; Mitchell etc,,) will be available at the 23rd pick. If the team is going to trade out of that spot it should be for an obvious upgrade to a position on the bench otherwise they would be better off taking there chances on the draft pick. However I do believe if the Green and 23rd bait can get you a one year rental on a major talented or star type of player; I would pull that trigger just for one shot at winning it all.

Boneman2 · Post #20 » by **Boneman2** » Tue Jun 25, 2013 8:27 pm

If we lose a pick because of GGreen's puny contract then Walsh and Pritchard deserve 10 lashings apiece, down on monument circle. We should also add 10 for the drafting of Plumlee, and 5 more for overpaying Hill.

My revised offer for Fredette would be Green and Plumlee. Maybe Pritchard can sell him as a 1st.