What do the Kings Management Expect to get for Artest...

[SacKingZZZ]

Well any team that trades for Ron has to be in the hunt. If they are, Ron will stay, no doubt about it. For a person that typically speaks in question marks he has said it enough to where you know he means it.

[OGSactownballer]

Just remember that a man with a wife and children always has to answer at home as well. I wouldn't want to be on the other end of the iron skillet after I told my wife I took half the money to get a ring.

Besides that, I do think that because of the changed situation in the West and desperation in some GM's who suddenly see their opportunities going down the toilet that we are now in a MUCH better position than two weeks ago regarding both Artest AND Bibby trades.

Also, I think that Joe D is well acquainted with the fact that his young guys aren't getting him any championships NOW when he has an all-star but aging core/starting five, and he would be willing to part with one of them for Ron - who is fairly young still himself.

[Piranha]

I think Joe D would be willing to part with Amir IF Ron Ron agreed to extend his current deal for a year or two at a reasonable salary. The Pistons owner will not pay the luxury tax, so matching Ron Ron this summer could be impossible given the existing salaries already committed to the team.

I doubt Artest would agree to do that... which likely makes him a rent a player for us.

I'm sure most contending teams are in the same boat.

[Piranha]

-= original quote snipped =-

2) If nobody takes on Kenny then Kings will hold out for a young player WITH potential, some expirings and a 1st (probably will take a late 1st).

3) If neither of these happen then I am sure Petrie will just hold onto Ron and either he walks and we get nothing (which isn't bad since he is not in our long term plans and it does shed some salary), or Petrie uses him in a sign and trade, which is more likely to happen. This is because none of the teams that Ron wants or want him can flat out sign him unless Ron takes the MLE. And even if he says he will take the MLE I wont believe it until it happens. Players always say it isn't about the money but for 99% of them it always does end up being about the money. This is Ron's last big payday, he ain't taking the MLE.

Do you think the Kings would need the "young player with potential" in return... or would they be willing to go with all expirings and a 1st?

#3 could end up being your best option of all. Teams that make the playoffs but lose in the 1st or 2nd rounds may want to shake up their existing roster, and you might be able to get more of an equal exchange of talent for Ron Ron by waiting. That's a gamble though since you could lose him and get nothing.

Basically.... what King management probably needs to decide is whether that gamble is worth losing a mid-late 1st round pick for.

I would think that quality teams like the Pistons with expiring contracts will (or already have) approached the Kings with deals similar to the one I proposed and management is hoping that a better deal will come along. If it doesn't... then they'll have to weigh whether the gamble is worthwhile.

Do you think buy into the "discount" if he is sent East vs. "paying closer to full price" if he stays in the West?

[Sacramento_King]

-= original quote snipped =-
And shaq probably had less value than that and he netted Shawn Marion

Shaq could be the piece to their championship goals. Artest could be the piece to some teams. KT is not part of that puzzle. I highly doubt KT gets moved in any Bibby or Artest deal and I feel KT could help certain teams. The guy gets no time whatsoever to show what he can do and has a huge contract. Theus has been a fantastic coach but he absolutely has killed what little value KT had by not giving him any time. KT gets moved only if we take back a bad contract such as Snow, Radman, Marshall, Battie etc.

[Bac2Basics]

-= original quote snipped =-
Shaq could be the piece to their championship goals. Artest could be the piece to some teams. KT is not part of that puzzle. I highly doubt KT gets moved in any Bibby or Artest deal and I feel KT could help certain teams. The guy gets no time whatsoever to show what he can do and has a huge contract. Theus has been a fantastic coach but he absolutely has killed what little value KT had by not giving him any time. KT gets moved only if we take back a bad contract such as Snow, Radman, Marshall, Battie etc.

I don't buy that at all.
With the lack of talent that the Kings would likely get back in an Artest trade, taking back a bad contract isn't necessary.

[Sacramento_King]

-= original quote snipped =-

I don't buy that at all.
With the lack of talent that the Kings would likely get back in an Artest trade, taking back a bad contract isn't necessary.

But half the trades being proposed have talent coming back. Most of it young, cheap talent. By your own criteria, Artest and KT are attached and then two of at least one 1st rd pick, a potential long term young PG or PF, and predominately expiring if not all expiring contracts. So you are talking about getting the relief of moving KT as well as a young talented player.

[shrink]

Just remember that a man with a wife and children always has to answer at home as well. I wouldn't want to be on the other end of the iron skillet after I told my wife I took half the money to get a ring. :lol:.

GREAT line! ROFL!

I know this is probably not what most SAC fans want to hear, but I doubt that Ron Artest has enough trade value to move Kenny Thomas, and bring back expirings for almost any team.

Kenny's making about $8.3 mil a year, for three years. He's putting up 2.7 RPG and 1.4 PPG in 12 minutes a game. I think that if you were able to trade him for expirings, he'd have to be carrying a contract around $2.0-$2.5 mil/year

Ron Artest is worth more than $7.4 mil/year, but how much more? To make up the production difference of Kenny Thomas to equal expirings, he'd effectively cost $7.4 + ($7.9-$2.2) = $13.1 mil this year, and $13.8 mil next year. In today's NBA, max deals start at $13 mil. I think its highly questionable that he should be paid like a max deal player.

However, even if you say that he should, you still have to hope Artest can recoup the cost of Kenny's third year. That tosses another $3 mil a year on Artest, meaning he needs to justify a salary of $16 mil and $17 mil!

I don't think he is worth that to most teams, particularly when you factor in all the risk factors Artest brings.

[SactownHrtBrks8]

-= original quote snipped =-



GREAT line! ROFL!

I know this is probably not what most SAC fans want to hear, but I doubt that Ron Artest has enough trade value to move Kenny Thomas, and bring back expirings for almost any team.

Kenny's making about $8.3 mil a year, for three years. He's putting up 2.7 RPG and 1.4 PPG in 12 minutes a game. I think that if you were able to trade him for expirings, he'd have to be carrying a contract around $2.0-$2.5 mil/year

Ron Artest is worth more than $7.4 mil/year, but how much more? To make up the production difference of Kenny Thomas to equal expirings, he'd effectively cost $7.4 + ($7.9-$2.2) = $13.1 mil this year, and $13.8 mil next year. In today's NBA, max deals start at $13 mil. I think its highly questionable that he should be paid like a max deal player.

However, even if you say that he should, you still have to hope Artest can recoup the cost of Kenny's third year. That tosses another $3 mil a year on Artest, meaning he needs to justify a salary of $16 mil and $17 mil!

I don't think he is worth that to most teams, particularly when you factor in all the risk factors Artest brings.

about the 20th time Kings fans have heard this from you we'd love to hear it again

[shrink]

about the 20th time Kings fans have heard this from you :reporter: we'd love to hear it again

Now that's not true. I'd don't think I've ever done this math before at all.

And regardless, does that really address the point?

[BMiller52]

GREAT line! ROFL!

I know this is probably not what most SAC fans want to hear, but I doubt that Ron Artest has enough trade value to move Kenny Thomas, and bring back expirings for almost any team.

Kenny's making about $8.3 mil a year, for three years. He's putting up 2.7 RPG and 1.4 PPG in 12 minutes a game. I think that if you were able to trade him for expirings, he'd have to be carrying a contract around $2.0-$2.5 mil/year

Ron Artest is worth more than $7.4 mil/year, but how much more? To make up the production difference of Kenny Thomas to equal expirings, he'd effectively cost $7.4 + ($7.9-$2.2) = $13.1 mil this year, and $13.8 mil next year. In today's NBA, max deals start at $13 mil. I think its highly questionable that he should be paid like a max deal player.

However, even if you say that he should, you still have to hope Artest can recoup the cost of Kenny's third year. That tosses another $3 mil a year on Artest, meaning he needs to justify a salary of $16 mil and $17 mil!

I don't think he is worth that to most teams, particularly when you factor in all the risk factors Artest brings.

You're probably right. We might've been able to move Kenny+Ron together last year, when Kenny was even slightly productive. But now we have pretty much no shot at it IMO.

[SactownHrtBrks8]

-= original quote snipped =-



Now that's not true. I'd don't think I've ever done this math before at all.

And regardless, does that really address the point?

YOU HAVEN'T USED NUMBERS!?!? The point is all you have is numbers. Every kings trade thread you come spewing your numbers. This can't work because of this, BLAH BLAH BLAH

Then I completely butcher your argument, you're a ghost to the thread? Coincidence? I think not

YOU GO ON AND ON about how people won't pay the luxury tax ignoring the fact that 17 teams are over the luxury tax threshold and 12 of those teams are currently trying to win a championship and aren't likely to get under it any time soon if they want to stay competitive or resign their young guys. CHAMPIONSHIPS WILL BRING IN MORE MONEY THAN YOU WILL LOSE HAVING TO PAY THE LUXURY TAX

Now if you thought Artest can't be that piece, then thats different. That's debatable, but you don't say that. You just bring numbers every **** time. We get it man, you don't think some one will do financially, we **** get it

[shrink]

1. 17 teams are not over the lux. Prove your point," butcher"

[shrink]

2. I've posted this 20 times before. Prove your point "butcher"

[shrink]

3. I said "I haven't used this math before"

You change it to (in caps no less) YOU HAVEN'T USED NUMBERS!?!?

Is changing quotes how you "butcher" people's arguments?

[shrink]

4. Do you see ANY reference to the luxury tax in my post, butcher?

[SactownHrtBrks8]

2. I've posted this 20 times before. Prove your point "butcher"

Exaggeration

[shrink]

Now, I thought this was a serious discussion from the title of the thread. If you want to discuss whether teams will pay $17 mil for Artest in today's NBA, I'm open to an honest discussion.

If you want to make things up, like "17 teams are over the lux" or "I've posted this 20 times" or change my quotes, then I suspect you've found the reason people don't continue discussing things with you, Artest93.

[SactownHrtBrks8]

1. 17 teams are not over the lux. Prove your point," butcher"

17 are over the 65.43 threshold, so some our have amnesty to it? Simple mistake, doesn't change the fact to win a championship they would go over it

[SactownHrtBrks8]

3. I said "I haven't used this math before"

You change it to (in caps no less) YOU HAVEN'T USED NUMBERS!?!?

Is changing quotes how you "butcher" people's arguments?

Math , Numbers. There's a difference when its always the same numbers and its always the same argument?