|
|
Post by Andrei Kirilenko on Apr 15, 2020 16:12:52 GMT
 Brooklyn Nets Send:80 JJ Redick - $9,258,000 - $9,952,350 - $10,698,776 76 Danuel House Jr - $1,500,000 - $2,000,000 - $2,500,000 Total: $10,758,000  Sacramento Kings Send:77 Seth Curry - $8,000,000 - $8,000,000 - $8,000,000 - $8,000,000 73 TJ McConnell - $3,500,000 - $3,000,000 - $2,500,000 GSW 2021 1st LAC 2021 2nd Total: $11,500,000 The Kings are over the hard cap but lose salary in this trade. |
|
|
|
Post by Jared Montini on Apr 15, 2020 16:15:03 GMT
Interesting
|
|
|
|
Post by Andrei Kirilenko on Apr 15, 2020 16:15:04 GMT
I accept, I've been toying with the idea of moving Redick for a while but I feel like this is finally the right deal. I lose a few rating points in going Redick to Curry, and losing House's great contract hurts, but my bench next year is still pretty strong (Aminu and Curry), and I pick up two picks in a supposedly good draft.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jerry West on Apr 15, 2020 16:29:22 GMT
By the end of those deals Curry will be a better player than Reddick.
|
|
Amare Stoudemire
 Sacramento Kings
Starter
Posts: 2,416 
|
Post by Amare Stoudemire on Apr 15, 2020 17:40:33 GMT
I accept
Reddick gives us the ultimate floor spacer to the starting line up, and his 3 year contract matches up with what I'm looking 4. JJ also helps us this year fight for that top spot in the West.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bryan Colangelo on Apr 15, 2020 17:41:33 GMT
accept
|
|
Amare Stoudemire
Sacramento Kings
Starter
Posts: 2,416
|
Post by Amare Stoudemire on Apr 15, 2020 17:53:35 GMT
By the end of those deals Curry will be a better player than Reddick. I completely agree, but by then the rest of my players will have regressed and it won't matter I need the better player this year, and next! |
|
|
|
Post by Alex English on Apr 15, 2020 18:30:28 GMT
Nice trade for the Nets. I'll accept.
|
|
|
|
Post by Brian Scalabrine on Apr 15, 2020 18:51:13 GMT
Josh the trader raider is back
|
|
|
|
Post by Ian Noble on Apr 15, 2020 21:46:10 GMT
I think this trade is really bad for the Kings. How does Redick fulfil a 3 year plan when he's only going to decrease in rating, and Seth Curry will probably not? Why on earth does a 1st Rounder have to be thrown in as well, regardless if it's likely late 1st Round? AND a super-high 2nd Rounder?
Josh absolutely hosing the Kings in this deal imho.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jared Montini on Apr 15, 2020 21:57:58 GMT
josh gets the better end of the deal but this helps Sacto this season and if he wins the title itll be worth it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Walt Frazier on Apr 16, 2020 2:23:52 GMT
Worried Amar'e is making this trade based on current ratings, and not current value...
The 1st seems like an insane overpay. Maybe I'm not valuing House enough. Not voting yet, want to think on this more.
|
|
|
|
Post by James Kay on Apr 16, 2020 2:59:39 GMT
A team with LMA, DeRozan, and CP3 trading away the only first they're allowed to trade and their only second round pick, hmm
|
|
|
|
Post by Tom Izzo on Apr 16, 2020 3:15:48 GMT
How many deals in the past were rejected based on perceived pick or young player value that you guys ended up being totally wrong on?
|
|
Amare Stoudemire
Sacramento Kings
Starter
Posts: 2,416
|
Post by Amare Stoudemire on Apr 16, 2020 3:38:36 GMT
This is about improving the team to win a title this season! That's what It took to get JJ who I personally like better for my team with his 3 point shooting and floor spacing. All my contracts are up in three years besides Richardson and lma
So with trading curry that's another 8 mil I will save heading into that off season where I will be starting a complete rebuild in 2023
It also gives me house jr who im immediately flipping to get dinwiddie to have a better team down the stretch
In theory, with these trades, my 2nd unit could possibly compete for a 8th seed in the western conference!
The late 1st, and early 2nd are all fine and dandy but I'm all in this season especially with the warriors going to be back at full strength next year, my window is right now! And not to mention how far over the cap I am and could still possibly be, I might lose the draft picks anyways bc of penality, so why not push in right now and go for a championship, rather than worry about value in 2-3 years when the old guys on my team will be about ready to hang it up!
|
|
|
|
Post by James Kay on Apr 16, 2020 5:09:43 GMT
How many deals in the past were rejected based on perceived pick or young player value that you guys ended up being totally wrong on? I don't see that pick as having any particular specific value in itself, as in the player who will be picked there. But for teams operating above and around the hard cap, having a pick that you can attach to bad contracts or aging vets is crucial. It's more about putting all your eggs in one basket - it's a bit more hazardous when that basket's construction is put together from aging players that may not be valuable for much longer. The Kings starting 5 has an average age of 30 years and an average salary of 31 million. Moving your only movable first for a very short-term 3 D5 rating points difference is highly questionable, and I think the arguably precarious future of a team like the Kings deserves giving this a second look. |
|
|
|
Post by Tom Izzo on Apr 16, 2020 5:22:59 GMT
Yeah good point.
Having Chris Paul and Aldridge is about to bite that franchise hard.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hanamichi Sakuragi on Apr 16, 2020 11:52:49 GMT
In my unbias opinion, this is a very fair trade. Thank you.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hanamichi Sakuragi on Apr 16, 2020 12:01:05 GMT
How many deals in the past were rejected based on perceived pick or young player value that you guys ended up being totally wrong on? I don't see that pick as having any particular specific value in itself, as in the player who will be picked there. But for teams operating above and around the hard cap, having a pick that you can attach to bad contracts or aging vets is crucial. It's more about putting all your eggs in one basket - it's a bit more hazardous when that basket's construction is put together from aging players that may not be valuable for much longer. The Kings starting 5 has an average age of 30 years and an average salary of 31 million. Moving your only movable first for a very short-term 3 D5 rating points difference is highly questionable, and I think the arguably precarious future of a team like the Kings deserves giving this a second look. Unless you are currently at #2 of the Western Conference with less than 20 games left and all the ratings of the players seem safe from any stockwatch decrease. Here is the point that we need to understand. Sacramento has a chance here. He is constructing a roster that could battle against any team in a series. Why is he doing that? Because he realize that there will only be a single team that will be crowned as a champion this year. You can be as flexible and malleable for a decade and end up in five Finals. Or, you can also put it all-in and win one championship and be bad for four seasons, with an opportunity to rebuild for the other five years. Which team really succeeded? Remember, even if all the thirty GMs here in D5 are all elite. Yeah, imagine all of us are at the level of Ian / James / Glenn and etc. Only 10, at the maximum, can be called a champion in a decade. |
|
|
|
Post by George Gervin on Apr 16, 2020 12:51:30 GMT
The Kings would be in a precarious long term spot given no picks beyond their 2021 and 2023 1st rounders, but ultimately, the longest term contracts on their books— DeRozan, CP3, and LMA— are unlikely movable even with a 1st attached to any. Most GMs— if you asked them anonymously— aren’t taking a 35 yr old PG who is sub 6 ft (historically those players fall off a cliff in their mid 30s) with $40.5 MM a year left, or a soon to be 36 yr old PF with $35 MM per coming to him through his late 30s, even if both those picks he’s dealing here are attached to them. Outside of the notorious Kanter contract, they might be D5s worst deals given the age of the players. Might as well go for broke to win in this likely two season window (this and next) before age really saps this roster of its potency.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ian Noble on Apr 16, 2020 13:06:43 GMT
I don't see that pick as having any particular specific value in itself, as in the player who will be picked there. But for teams operating above and around the hard cap, having a pick that you can attach to bad contracts or aging vets is crucial. It's more about putting all your eggs in one basket - it's a bit more hazardous when that basket's construction is put together from aging players that may not be valuable for much longer. The Kings starting 5 has an average age of 30 years and an average salary of 31 million. Moving your only movable first for a very short-term 3 D5 rating points difference is highly questionable, and I think the arguably precarious future of a team like the Kings deserves giving this a second look. Unless you are currently at #2 of the Western Conference with less than 20 games left and all the ratings of the players seem safe from any stockwatch decrease. Here is the point that we need to understand. Sacramento has a chance here. He is constructing a roster that could battle against any team in a series. Why is he doing that? Because he realize that there will only be a single team that will be crowned as a champion this year. You can be as flexible and malleable for a decade and end up in five Finals. Or, you can also put it all-in and win one championship and be bad for four seasons, with an opportunity to rebuild for the other five years. Which team really succeeded? Remember, even if all the thirty GMs here in D5 are all elite. Yeah, imagine all of us are at the level of Ian / James / Glenn and etc. Only 10, at the maximum, can be called a champion in a decade. I empathise with the sentiment here. This going "all in" culture even brings a bit of diversity and I'm glad for it. What concerns me is when the strategy is "all in" but suffixed by "fuck the future". |
|
Amare Stoudemire
Sacramento Kings
Starter
Posts: 2,416
|
Post by Amare Stoudemire on Apr 16, 2020 13:09:09 GMT
The Kings would be in a precarious long term spot given no picks beyond their 2021 and 2023 1st rounders, but ultimately, the longest term contracts on their books— DeRozan, CP3, and LMA— are unlikely movable even with a 1st attached to any. Most GMs— if you asked them anonymously— aren’t taking a 35 yr old PG who is sub 6 ft (historically those players fall off a cliff in their mid 30s) with $40.5 MM a year left, or a soon to be 36 yr old PF with $35 MM per coming to him through his late 30s, even if both those picks he’s dealing here are attached to them. Outside of the notorious Kanter contract, they might be D5s worst deals given the age of the players. Might as well go for broke to win in this likely two season window (this and next) before age really saps this roster of its potency. Exactly!! Going for it this season and next! And then were going to fall off a cliff during the 2022 season! Suck during the 2023 season, but i will have my own picks by then, and i will be tanking for bates! And rebuilding my team, so a late 1st, or early 2nd in next years draft really means nothing to me, nor do i want to move any of my big unmoveable contracts! I like my old guys, and their retiring sacramento kings! Also, in all seriousness, since d5 started how many teams by the end of the season have a real shot to win a title here in d5? Since ive been apart of the league whether observing, or being a assistant, its been about the same group of 5 teams usually Well the sacramento kings have a real shot this year and who would have thought that at the beginning of the season? Regardless if it is the warriors or t-wolves injury problems, or the struggles of denver, or kat and simmons going down with injuries towards the end of a corona virus enduced season cancellation, or just plain the sun shines on a dogs ass every now and than plain old dumb luck. The point is we have a CHANCE, and i would rather go for that championship, than be to scared to make a deal and think to my self well me were close sacto, but thank god we kept that late 1st and early 2nd next year when the warriors are healthy |
|
Amare Stoudemire
Sacramento Kings
Starter
Posts: 2,416
|
Post by Amare Stoudemire on Apr 17, 2020 1:11:41 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Walt Frazier on Apr 17, 2020 2:22:25 GMT
A: 14.9p / 2.6r / 2.0a / 0.4s / 0.2b - 45.0 / 45.2 / 90.2 in 26.5mpg
vs
B: 12.6p / 2.4r / 2.0a / 0.6s / 0.1b 50.0 / 45.3 / 84.1 in 24.5mpg
B is 6 years younger, as well.
I know there's more to the trade, and I know this doesn't factor additional elements of their respective skillsets (defense, athletic attributes, etc) but I just wanted to put that out there. This is the main reason I'm hesitant on the trade. House looks interesting but it's not like he's necessarily that much better than McConnell. There's a very strong argument that Curry/McConnell/LAC 2021 2nd (likely a very high 2nd!) for Redick / House is totally fair. Josh will tell us he wouldn't do the trade without the 1st, but that's not necessarily the point either. It's just about value to me.
That's why I'm leaning towards rejecting.
But, this one is just close enough that I still want to think on it a little more.
|
|
|
|
Post by Danny Longley on Apr 17, 2020 3:24:35 GMT
I'm voting to reject.
The picks are practically the Kings' last trade-able assets, and the follow up is to trade House for another 1-year rental. I understand the desire to go all-in, but I feel like the line between Curry/McConnell and Redick/House is so thin that adding two fairly decent picks just doesn't sit well with me - especially so, considering how this practically locks the Kings.
Also FWIW, I think McConnell probably deserves a boost. He's not going to wow you in any way, but 73 seems low considering how he's able to contribute in so many ways.
|
|
|
|
Post by Andrei Kirilenko on Apr 17, 2020 3:36:03 GMT
It’s crazy to me how everyone values things sometimes. I was honestly hesitant to do this deal and now it’s on the verge of not even passing. Maybe I’m overrating my own players but this is nowhere in the ballpark of a reject IMO.
And yes, for the record, I wouldn’t do the deal if you removed the 2nd rounder. The GSW pick is already pick ~27 so there just wouldn’t really be any incentive in me downgrading from Redick and House (who Amare flipped for another 80 rated player btw) to two guys who probably are paid more than they are worth.
|
|
|
|
Post by Andrei Kirilenko on Apr 17, 2020 3:38:16 GMT
If Curry and McConnell have that much value, someone feel free to post a trade where you take them from me for expirings
|
|
|
|
Post by Tom Izzo on Apr 17, 2020 3:51:16 GMT
Yeah I agree with Josh here. I've been vocal before about the league's over-valuing of youth. That's just my opinion and I'm still relatively new, so maybe I'll be wrong in the future. But young players and draft picks in this league have some crazy value. It's like gambling and the chances of you hitting on that pick are statistically very small. Never mind the fact we are talking about a very likely bottom 5 1st round pick.
And for those who are saying Seth is going to be better than JJ. How do you know that? Lemme see that crystal ball cuz I could sure use it. JJ's game has aged pretty well. Seth is younger but this dude could fall off, and he's not some All-Star either. Man, for all we know those last 2 years of Seth's contract could be a huge burden. None of us truly know...we can speculate for sure, and the odds favor Seth being worth more than JJ in 2 years, but we don't know that.
This aint the trade that's going to break Sacramento. If you guys want to protect the Kings' future, you shouldn't have let him trade for 34 year old LMA. Sacramento will be paying 35-37 year old Aldridge a total of $107M over the next 3 years.
Protecting the Kings future has come and gone
|
|
|
|
Post by Danny Longley on Apr 17, 2020 4:23:59 GMT
I just think that the players on both sides have pretty equal value as is. I'm not trying to look ahead or anything with the Seth/JJ comparison, just that I think they're pretty much functionally the same as is.
As for the picks, I'm not valuing them super high or anything, not even starter value or anything crazy - just that they do have value, and shouldn't be treated as throw-ins for what to me is an overall sidegrade for the Kings.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hanamichi Sakuragi on Apr 17, 2020 5:16:34 GMT
Unless you are currently at #2 of the Western Conference with less than 20 games left and all the ratings of the players seem safe from any stockwatch decrease. Here is the point that we need to understand. Sacramento has a chance here. He is constructing a roster that could battle against any team in a series. Why is he doing that? Because he realize that there will only be a single team that will be crowned as a champion this year. You can be as flexible and malleable for a decade and end up in five Finals. Or, you can also put it all-in and win one championship and be bad for four seasons, with an opportunity to rebuild for the other five years. Which team really succeeded? Remember, even if all the thirty GMs here in D5 are all elite. Yeah, imagine all of us are at the level of Ian / James / Glenn and etc. Only 10, at the maximum, can be called a champion in a decade. I empathise with the sentiment here. This going "all in" culture even brings a bit of diversity and I'm glad for it. What concerns me is when the strategy is "all in" but suffixed by "fuck the future". what is wrong with "fuck the future, I am going all in?" Yep. You will not look elite doing it. Nobody does. But that doesn't mean that, that is a wrong strategy. With the stepien rule, the future will never be as fuck up as you think it will be. The same way that " fuck the present, I am going all out!" will not assure you that you will be having a bright and successful future. You can ask ATL, NOP, and even you, Ian, about how efficient is that type of strategy. Or, how about the PHILADELPHIA of real life? What happened to them? |
|
Utah Jazz
Portland Trailblazers
Toronto Raptors
Denver Nuggets
New Orleans Pelicans
Boston Celtics
Minnesota Timberwolves
Charlotte Hornets
Houston Rockets
Cleveland Cavaliers
San Antonio Spurs
Dallas Mavericks
