How do we...

[SacKingZZZ]

No interest in Okafor. Get a 3rd team involved with an asset going back to Sac. The tank commander needs to stay away from Sacramento.

Sent from my SM-J700T using RealGM mobile app

What kind of assest is someone gonna give up for Okafor? I doubt anyone would even throw a decent 2nd rder for him. He is due 5mil this year and has a club option next yr. We can handle him for a yr where he is playing for a contract. His post scoring off the bench could be of use in this scenario.

This guy?
.

No thanks. Simple fix, Philly keeps the tank commander and instead sends Sac #39.

Sent from my SM-J700T using RealGM mobile app

I don't think the guy is value-less. On the right team I think he'll produce pretty well, but I just can't see the benefit in having him with the Kings other bigs still in the picture.

[benchmobbin02]

I think it's a pretty good deal all the way around. I'm not sure the Kings would extend Covington right now though. I'd also like to see the Kings maybe flip Okafor to another team either in the deal or afterward.

You can't trade a player you just traded for within that year.

Did they change the rule of the 1 for 1 deal? I remember there was a restriction in package deals, but if it came via a dump as in for space or a pick without any other pieces going out I thought that was still OK.

I was slightly wrong about the time limit. It's two months a team has to wait to trade a player just traded to them. Of course package deals can be worked out where he is sent somewhere else but like i said I don't see anyone giving anything of substance for him. I get it, you don't want Okafor. They don't either and that's why I said there is a reason he is in the deal. It's give and take. We'd have him for one year and could dump him after that or whatever. All based on a hypothetical trade I doubt will happen any way so meh.

[benchmobbin02]

What kind of assest is someone gonna give up for Okafor? I doubt anyone would even throw a decent 2nd rder for him. He is due 5mil this year and has a club option next yr. We can handle him for a yr where he is playing for a contract. His post scoring off the bench could be of use in this scenario.

This guy?


No thanks. Simple fix, Philly keeps the tank commander and instead sends Sac #39.

Sent from my SM-J700T using RealGM mobile app

I don't think the guy is value-less. On the right team I think he'll produce pretty well, but I just can't see the benefit in having him with the Kings other bigs still in the picture.

In this scenario I see him as the 4th big with Toliver now gone(behind WCS, Skal and Papa with Koufos being moved for a real assets) and someone that can give us post offense off the bench. That's his value.

[Sactowndog]

No interest in Okafor. Get a 3rd team involved with an asset going back to Sac. The tank commander needs to stay away from Sacramento.

Sent from my SM-J700T using RealGM mobile app

Would you do the CBS trade?

Okafor and 3

For

BMac and 5

[City of Trees]

No interest in Okafor. Get a 3rd team involved with an asset going back to Sac. The tank commander needs to stay away from Sacramento.

Sent from my SM-J700T using RealGM mobile app

Would you do the CBS trade?

Okafor and 3

For

BMac and 5

Yes. Why on earth would Philly entertain that trade tho??? I'd still route Okafor to a third team for a 2nd, or Free haha

Sent from my SM-J700T using RealGM mobile app

[SacKingZZZ]

You can't trade a player you just traded for within that year.

Did they change the rule of the 1 for 1 deal? I remember there was a restriction in package deals, but if it came via a dump as in for space or a pick without any other pieces going out I thought that was still OK.

I was slightly wrong about the time limit. It's two months a team has to wait to trade a player just traded to them. Of course package deals can be worked out where he is sent somewhere else but like i said I don't see anyone giving anything of substance for him. I get it, you don't want Okafor. They don't either and that's why I said there is a reason he is in the deal. It's give and take. We'd have him for one year and could dump him after that or whatever. All based on a hypothetical trade I doubt will happen any way so meh.

I looked it up in the CBA and in reading the language, if this is the part you are talking about, it specifically refers to the word "aggregated". Doesn't that mean if you combine them with other players in this instance? I'm confused. lol.

(b)
No player contract acquired pursuant to an Exception may be aggregated for a period of two months from the date the player contract
is acquired.

I'm not too familiar with the last CBA because I learned it one time back to front, and realized it doesn't matter enough unless you're getting paid to understand it since they'll probably change it anyway.

If it does mean two months regardless of circumstance it wouldn't be bad at all anyway. I can't see him being a total negative on a rookie deal myself. I might be wrong, but there has to be more than one team that would be interested in getting him for nothing. I look at Bayless's deal as the albatross there. I just think Sac is a bad fit with their front court situated the way it is. If the Kings didn't have one of the three bigs they do have now I think the pickup of Okafor could be a potential payoff in talent.

[SacKingZZZ]

No interest in Okafor. Get a 3rd team involved with an asset going back to Sac. The tank commander needs to stay away from Sacramento.

Sent from my SM-J700T using RealGM mobile app

Would you do the CBS trade?

Okafor and 3

For

BMac and 5

Can the Kings even trade Ben considering he's got a QO coming up or would it have to be a sign and trade later on?

[Sactowndog]

No interest in Okafor. Get a 3rd team involved with an asset going back to Sac. The tank commander needs to stay away from Sacramento.

Sent from my SM-J700T using RealGM mobile app

Would you do the CBS trade?

Okafor and 3

For

BMac and 5

Yes. Why on earth would Philly entertain that trade tho??? I'd still route Okafor to a third team for a 2nd, or Free haha

Sent from my SM-J700T using RealGM mobile app

Get Okafor off the books and hope Mac turns around.

[Sactowndog]

No interest in Okafor. Get a 3rd team involved with an asset going back to Sac. The tank commander needs to stay away from Sacramento.

Sent from my SM-J700T using RealGM mobile app

Would you do the CBS trade?

Okafor and 3

For

BMac and 5

Can the Kings even trade Ben considering he's got a QO coming up or would it have to be a sign and trade later on?

Not sure. I believe unless we renounce our rights we can trade those rights just like we gained the rights of Bogdan.

[benchmobbin02]

Did they change the rule of the 1 for 1 deal? I remember there was a restriction in package deals, but if it came via a dump as in for space or a pick without any other pieces going out I thought that was still OK.

I was slightly wrong about the time limit. It's two months a team has to wait to trade a player just traded to them. Of course package deals can be worked out where he is sent somewhere else but like i said I don't see anyone giving anything of substance for him. I get it, you don't want Okafor. They don't either and that's why I said there is a reason he is in the deal. It's give and take. We'd have him for one year and could dump him after that or whatever. All based on a hypothetical trade I doubt will happen any way so meh.

I looked it up in the CBA and in reading the language, if this is the part you are talking about, it specifically refers to the word "aggregated". Doesn't that mean if you combine them with other players in this instance? I'm confused. lol.

(b)
No player contract acquired pursuant to an Exception may be aggregated for a period of two months from the date the player contract
is acquired.

I'm not too familiar with the last CBA because I learned it one time back to front, and realized it doesn't matter enough unless you're getting paid to understand it since they'll probably change it anyway.

If it does mean two months regardless of circumstance it wouldn't be bad at all anyway. I can't see him being a total negative on a rookie deal myself. I might be wrong, but there has to be more than one team that would be interested in getting him for nothing. I look at Bayless's deal as the albatross there. I just think Sac is a bad fit with their front court situated the way it is. If the Kings didn't have one of the three bigs they do have now I think the pickup of Okafor could be a potential payoff in talent.

In a sense we don't. Papa will still be on and off the roster next year with trips to the Dleague. In that scenario we move Koufos for future assets during the draft or at the deadline and we've already dumped Toliver. Even if we draft a big or combo forward there are still plenty of minutes in the rotation. He would be a stop gap of sorts that could play his way into something more with no risk. Your acting like teams don't keep 4-5 bigs on the roster.

[SacKingZZZ]

I was slightly wrong about the time limit. It's two months a team has to wait to trade a player just traded to them. Of course package deals can be worked out where he is sent somewhere else but like i said I don't see anyone giving anything of substance for him. I get it, you don't want Okafor. They don't either and that's why I said there is a reason he is in the deal. It's give and take. We'd have him for one year and could dump him after that or whatever. All based on a hypothetical trade I doubt will happen any way so meh.

I looked it up in the CBA and in reading the language, if this is the part you are talking about, it specifically refers to the word "aggregated". Doesn't that mean if you combine them with other players in this instance? I'm confused. lol.

(b)
No player contract acquired pursuant to an Exception may be aggregated for a period of two months from the date the player contract
is acquired.

I'm not too familiar with the last CBA because I learned it one time back to front, and realized it doesn't matter enough unless you're getting paid to understand it since they'll probably change it anyway.

If it does mean two months regardless of circumstance it wouldn't be bad at all anyway. I can't see him being a total negative on a rookie deal myself. I might be wrong, but there has to be more than one team that would be interested in getting him for nothing. I look at Bayless's deal as the albatross there. I just think Sac is a bad fit with their front court situated the way it is. If the Kings didn't have one of the three bigs they do have now I think the pickup of Okafor could be a potential payoff in talent.

In a sense we don't. Papa will still be on and off the roster next year with trips to the Dleague. In that scenario we move Koufos for future assets during the draft or at the deadline and we've already dumped Toliver. Even if we draft a big or combo forward there are still plenty of minutes in the rotation. He would be a stop gap of sorts that could play his way into something more with no risk. Your acting like teams don't keep 4-5 bigs on the roster.

Not bigs drafted that high, or with that kind of potential. Unless you are the Sixers of course, and we see how well that's worked out for them. In the end you will lose value across the board if you platoon your big man rotation or they can't play well together in a rotation and I don't think these bigs can just like they can't/couldn't in Philly. Yeah, PapaG being more of a future asset will help but in the end someone gets crunched maybe even beyond just him.

[SacKingZZZ]

Would you do the CBS trade?

Okafor and 3

For

BMac and 5

Can the Kings even trade Ben considering he's got a QO coming up or would it have to be a sign and trade later on?

Not sure. I believe unless we renounce our rights we can trade those rights just like we gained the rights of Bogdan.

Eh, I'm not sure that's right because Ben is/was already under contract and is going to essentially be a FA, but if it is that would open up a plethora of opportunities with Ben heading into the summer.

[benchmobbin02]

I looked it up in the CBA and in reading the language, if this is the part you are talking about, it specifically refers to the word "aggregated". Doesn't that mean if you combine them with other players in this instance? I'm confused. lol.

(b)
No player contract acquired pursuant to an Exception may be aggregated for a period of two months from the date the player contract
is acquired.

I'm not too familiar with the last CBA because I learned it one time back to front, and realized it doesn't matter enough unless you're getting paid to understand it since they'll probably change it anyway.

If it does mean two months regardless of circumstance it wouldn't be bad at all anyway. I can't see him being a total negative on a rookie deal myself. I might be wrong, but there has to be more than one team that would be interested in getting him for nothing. I look at Bayless's deal as the albatross there. I just think Sac is a bad fit with their front court situated the way it is. If the Kings didn't have one of the three bigs they do have now I think the pickup of Okafor could be a potential payoff in talent.

In a sense we don't. Papa will still be on and off the roster next year with trips to the Dleague. In that scenario we move Koufos for future assets during the draft or at the deadline and we've already dumped Toliver. Even if we draft a big or combo forward there are still plenty of minutes in the rotation. He would be a stop gap of sorts that could play his way into something more with no risk. Your acting like teams don't keep 4-5 bigs on the roster.

Not bigs drafted that high, or with that kind of potential. Unless you are the Sixers of course, and we see how well that's worked out for them. In the end you will lose value across the board if you platoon your big man rotation or they can't play well together in a rotation and I don't think these bigs can just like they can't/couldn't in Philly. Yeah, PapaG being more of a future asset will help but in the end someone gets crunched maybe even beyond just him.

Yeah and the guy that well get crunched would be Papa in the beginning of the year as he wouldn't even be on the roster most of the time with Okafor getting the 20-28 mins of back up big mins. Then as the year wears on we evaluate the guys. Has Papa progressed enough to get major mins? Is Okafor surprising with his production and locker room fit? They play accordingly with Okafor knowing he is playing for his next big deal and the team knowing that we can move on from him if the fit isn't ideal and Papa has proved he is ready to take over the minutes. Its a win win. Not to mention the depth and versatility it provides.

[SacKingZZZ]

In a sense we don't. Papa will still be on and off the roster next year with trips to the Dleague. In that scenario we move Koufos for future assets during the draft or at the deadline and we've already dumped Toliver. Even if we draft a big or combo forward there are still plenty of minutes in the rotation. He would be a stop gap of sorts that could play his way into something more with no risk. Your acting like teams don't keep 4-5 bigs on the roster.

Not bigs drafted that high, or with that kind of potential. Unless you are the Sixers of course, and we see how well that's worked out for them. In the end you will lose value across the board if you platoon your big man rotation or they can't play well together in a rotation and I don't think these bigs can just like they can't/couldn't in Philly. Yeah, PapaG being more of a future asset will help but in the end someone gets crunched maybe even beyond just him.

Yeah and the guy that well get crunched would be Papa in the beginning of the year as he wouldn't even be on the roster most of the time with Okafor getting the 20-28 mins of back up big mins. Then as the year wears on we evaluate the guys. Has Papa progressed enough to get major mins? Is Okafor surprising with his production and locker room fit? They play accordingly with Okafor knowing he is playing for his next big deal and the team knowing that we can move on from him if the fit isn't ideal and Papa has proved he is ready to take over the minutes. Its a win win. Not to mention the depth and versatility it provides.

Yeah, it could be a win win, but I can't see him impressing with the same minutes he's getting in Philly now and there is a big difference between playing near 20 mpg or near 30 when evaluating a players whose value is largely tied to their productivity. You may essentially be banging your head against the same wall and hoping for a different result. Then if the answer is to play everyone role player minutes you'll find yourself in the boat I said, where you've lost value across the board. You've now just turned first round talents, some lottery picks, into role players. Which they might be in the end of their development anyway but if you are trying to build value as a rebuilding team it's not the way to go initially. Then there is the question of adding a SF who will play some minutes in the front court, or even drafting another PF in the front court. On paper it provides versatility as a whole, but the players in question aren't extremely versatile so finding a rotation with these players in conjunction with one another that works on the floor could be difficult.

[Sactowndog]

Can the Kings even trade Ben considering he's got a QO coming up or would it have to be a sign and trade later on?

Not sure. I believe unless we renounce our rights we can trade those rights just like we gained the rights of Bogdan.

Eh, I'm not sure that's right because Ben is/was already under contract and is going to essentially be a FA, but if it is that would open up a plethora of opportunities with Ben heading into the summer.

I think a true free agent is different then a restricted free agent but not positive.

[VeganKingsFan]

Not sure. I believe unless we renounce our rights we can trade those rights just like we gained the rights of Bogdan.

Eh, I'm not sure that's right because Ben is/was already under contract and is going to essentially be a FA, but if it is that would open up a plethora of opportunities with Ben heading into the summer.

I think a true free agent is different then a restricted free agent but not positive.

We can't trade a free agent, restricted or no (except for a sign and trade, which cannot be done on draft night because free agents cannot be signed yet).

[benchmobbin02]

Not bigs drafted that high, or with that kind of potential. Unless you are the Sixers of course, and we see how well that's worked out for them. In the end you will lose value across the board if you platoon your big man rotation or they can't play well together in a rotation and I don't think these bigs can just like they can't/couldn't in Philly. Yeah, PapaG being more of a future asset will help but in the end someone gets crunched maybe even beyond just him.

Yeah and the guy that well get crunched would be Papa in the beginning of the year as he wouldn't even be on the roster most of the time with Okafor getting the 20-28 mins of back up big mins. Then as the year wears on we evaluate the guys. Has Papa progressed enough to get major mins? Is Okafor surprising with his production and locker room fit? They play accordingly with Okafor knowing he is playing for his next big deal and the team knowing that we can move on from him if the fit isn't ideal and Papa has proved he is ready to take over the minutes. Its a win win. Not to mention the depth and versatility it provides.

Yeah, it could be a win win, but I can't see him impressing with the same minutes he's getting in Philly now and there is a big difference between playing near 20 mpg or near 30 when evaluating a players whose value is largely tied to their productivity. You may essentially be banging your head against the same wall and hoping for a different result. Then if the answer is to play everyone role player minutes you'll find yourself in the boat I said, where you've lost value across the board. You've now just turned first round talents, some lottery picks, into role players. Which they might be in the end of their development anyway but if you are trying to build value as a rebuilding team it's not the way to go initially. Then there is the question of adding a SF who will play some minutes in the front court, or even drafting another PF in the front court. On paper it provides versatility as a whole, but the players in question aren't extremely versatile so finding a rotation with these players in conjunction with one another that works on the floor could be difficult.

Alot of ifs in there. Point is he is a guy that could use a op to start over. Getting those "role player" mins with us for one year with little to no risk sounds about right. Whatever...it's a hypothetical that won't happen.

[Sactowndog]

Eh, I'm not sure that's right because Ben is/was already under contract and is going to essentially be a FA, but if it is that would open up a plethora of opportunities with Ben heading into the summer.

I think a true free agent is different then a restricted free agent but not positive.

We can't trade a free agent, restricted or no (except for a sign and trade, which cannot be done on draft night because free agents cannot be signed yet).

okay thanks for the clarification.

[SacKingZZZ]

I think a true free agent is different then a restricted free agent but not positive.

We can't trade a free agent, restricted or no (except for a sign and trade, which cannot be done on draft night because free agents cannot be signed yet).

okay thanks for the clarification.

Dang, I was hoping they might have slipped that into the last CBA. Now I wonder if part of the reason they let Tolliver go was to keep Ben's cap hold on the books heading in to see if they can sign and trade him??? I really just hope they let Ben find a team where he can fit in because even if Bogdan doesn't come there just isn't time him here.