If we could get Carter with Rozier, our 1st, and the Kings pick, I would do it.
I think the most likely outcome for the Sacto pick is 7-12 next year.
Why not get a comparable pick this year at a position of need? His floor seems pretty high - already has an NBA-ready body and some perimeter game, high BBIQ, willing defender. He might plug in for 10-15 minutes right away and be ready to replace Al in 2 years when (if we are lucky) Jaylen will have earned a fat contract.
Whoa, I’m a huge Wendell Carter fan, but the Kings pick is a bridge too far. I think the Memphis pick is also too much. The highest I’d go is Rozier, #27, and next year’s 1st with top-4 protection.
Not a chance the Sacramento pick isn't in play. It's the first of a few assets heading out if DA trades that far up.
Shouldn’t be with Rozier and this year’s pick already included, at least not for anything outside the top 5, which is where Carter projects to.
Are we allowed to add some more protections to the Kings Pick, like we give them that pick and make it protected 2-5 for US? Otherwise, I don't see a team like Orlando doing it unless the Kings Pick is included to be honest, or at least one of the Kings/Grizzlies Picks.
Nope, as already answered earlier today in the Luka Doncic thread.
Ah okay, thanks. And I never checked that thread today so didn't know
I think people are overvaluing the Sacramento pick. If they hadn’t won the lottery this year, they would’ve picked what, 7th? While they might win the lottery again or decline, I don’t know we would expect that. They’re adding the second pick, and they have no incentive to tank. If they win even a few more games they could be 10th or 12th.
To me, Getting the seventh pick this year as a sure thing, and getting a guy we need, is pretty good value compared to the uncertainty of the Sacramento pic. The other thing that will make this pic hard to use, which I don’t think people are fully taking into account is the downside risk of Sacramento actually wins the lottery. A general manager who turns this year’s seven pick into next years 25th or 26th is going to have some explaining to do. I am not sure what kind of protection we can offer – probably it would need to be an additional pick.
I really think you’re overrating Sacramento, and/or not fully considering the lottery changes going into next year. They were 7th (well, tied for 6tb with Chicago), but they were 8 games out of 10th, which would have been 30% more wins. They’re very unlikely to get to the mid-30s in win totals even with no incentive to lose. They simply don’t have the talent. Furthermore, they had the 2nd-worst expected winning percentage based on point differential, and won 4 games more than expected by this measurement. Sure, they could do that again, but more likely than not they’ll finish closer to their actual expected record. This means that actual on-court improvement might not show up in the win column.
Secondly, with flattened lottery odds, teams will have a little less incentive to tank (they will still do so, but maybe not quite as blatantly, except perhaps with an 8th/9th place conference finish tradeoff in the East).
Given that, I think it’s borderline impossible the Kings will have any worse than the 9th lottery odds, and there’s considerable upside from that point. At the 9th odds, the pick has a 16% chance to be 2-4, a 51% chance to be 9, a 26% chance to be 10, and a small chance to be worse (with most of those odds coming from Philly winning #1 overall). That 2-4 odds is better than the odds we had if the Lakers had finished 6th this year.
So conservatively we have a 1/6 chance of getting a top 4 pick, with the most likely outcome in the second-third of the lottery. But it’s not that aggressive an assumption to say the Kings improve a little on the court, but their luck reverts to the mean, and they finish with the 6th-worst record. This brings a 28% chance at a 2-4 pick and a 59% chance at a 6-8 pick.
And then there’s always the chance the bottom drops out. The Kings, again, had the 2nd-worst expected record last year, luckily won four extra games, AND were pretty healthy. A number of their top players (Bogdan, WCS, Hield, Fox, Koufos) played at least 70 games. Randolph played only 59, but at 36 that seems like a reasonable amount anyway. Garrett Temple only played 65, but he’s also on the other side of 30. So they could get more unlucky with injuries and see reduced performance, or unlucky with wins and see a reduced total. Or both. Honestly, I think the Kings are far more likely to be a bottom 5 team than they are 9th. That’s not my green glasses, or my hatred of the Kings talking. They just profile more like the 2015-2016 Nets more than they do the 2017-2018 Lakers.
That pick has too much upside, and it’s most likely floor is 10. Adding that to Rozier and this year’s pick to move up to the 6-9 range is just too much.