I say we buy Sac's #5 pick. If we can pull this one move off, we can steal this year's draft day. Step 1: Give Sac our #11, $3million cash and a 2013 2nd round pick - to obtain their #5. Scenario A: If Cleveland can pick who we want at #4 (MKG/Beal?) then offer Cleveland our #6 and our two 2012 second round picks...and still have Sac's #5 to use on Lillard or Drummond. Scenario B: A). We could offer #6, Matthews & change, to CHA for the #2 and go get TRob B). Or we could keep #5 and #6 and select MKG/Beal and look at Lillard or Drummond. THE KEY: Do what we must to buy Sac's #5 pick and we can steal this year's draft. Let's say the above "B" happens and we wind up with MKG and Drummond. Do you suppose with LMA and Batum we might look more attractive to DWill?
Reports state Sac may wish to sell their pick. If this is true, I suppose we'd want to know their reasoning. Nevertheless, moving down from #5 to #11 and picking up some cash and Blazer 2nd round pick of next year - may be enough for Sac to listen. I just don't want to have to take back Salmons' contract.
I think Nash is more realistic, and a lineup of Nash, Matthews, Batum, Robinson, Aldridge with MKG and Hickson off the bench has a realistic chance of making it out of the first round I think. Nash instantly makes Matthews and Batum much better, and MKG would likely flourish with him too. Robinson and Aldridge are also great at running the floor.. I think you've sold me on your idea, sir.
I'm just sold on the concept of doing "almost" whatever it takes to buy Sac's #5. Things really can get interesting if we start off with #5 and #6. So many possibilities would be at our disposal. But I then really like taking it up a notch and trading #6 and players/picks to CHA for the #2. With #2 and #5, we can get TRob and BPA and be the winners of draft day.
I think Robinson will be there at 5 and we will flip flop our 6th pick with Sac. I would be ecstatic at getting T-Rob at 5/6 which I think will happen. Getting a SG at 11 would be ideal. Get your point guard through free agency. I wouldn't be mad at getting Lillard at 6 if T-Rob is gone early though.
Why the hell would Petrie not want TRob? This is their frontcourt: Cousins Hayes Thompson Hayes is a role player and JT is an RFA who is pretty meh...
I can't imagine Sac considering this, but even if they do, I have another question. Why would Portland need to move up to 4 to get the guy they wanted at 6? I mean if Cleveland wants the same guy, they aren't trading the pick anyway, so why give up assets to move ahead of yourself?
Because they think Cousins is more a PF then C and were very very high on pairing him and Drummond. Sac really needs a 3 but our random assortment of not very attractive chips probably wont' get it done. A deal of 11/Babbit/3 mill/both our 2nd picks is more likely the worst they would accept.
Here's a nice "local link" from the Sacramento Bee. It paints a local view of what the Kings need and should do with the draft and team overall. Interesting. http://www.prosportsdaily.com/nba/kings/
This is just it. Portland may not have to move up if they acquire #5 from SAC to go along with our own #6. If this (trade with SAC to acquire the #5) can go down before the draft night begins - then Portland can "wait and see" which players are taken and which fall. If I remember correctly, we traded with Chicago for LMA about 30-45 minutes after the top selections had been made. So literally trading up to land #4 would most likely not be the way it would go down, rather, we'd ask Cleveland to pick our guy and then swap selections and addtional schwag later on draft night.
I think he's gone #2 or #3. I'd be suprised that if CHA didn't take him, WA would pass on him. No chance he slips below WA #3 pick.
