Could we somehow fleece Vlade again?

[Thukydides]

https://www.hoopsrumors.com/2019/10/king...novic.html

If we can make this happen, I'd go nothing but nuts. See no path, though and don't know much about the credibility of this Deveney dude.

[j0Shi]

I don't hink we have a shot either, but let me just say that things in Sactown can get really ugly really fast if this continues. However, imho they'll fire the coach first before trading away anyone.

[SleepingHero]

Bogi has been on my radar since last year and I've been enthralled with how he plays. He's gotten off to such an awful start this year which makes him gettable but I can't see the Kings trying to trade him at all this season.

If by the offseason he hasn't accepted his extension I can see him getting traded, but that does the Mavs no good anyways.

Also, with the Knicks being rumored, I doubt the Mavs have the firepower to pull-off a deal. The Knicks will almost certainly overpay, even though Bogi doesn't fit well over there with Barrett occupying the 2. 

If the Kings overvalue cap space, then Courtney Lee and some spare parts could be attractive I suppose. If thats the case then yeah, we could theoretically fleece the Kings.

Bogdan here would be the perfect 3rd guy. He is good enough to create his own shot, and shot 40% on catch and shoot 3's last year.

[donzingis38]

Very interesting player. He looked really good in FIBA.

[ItsGoTime]

When did we fleece him the first time?

[Mak]

It’s waaaay too early and virtually  useless to be looking at 5-man lineups right now but for a fun fact: there have been 2,000 unique lineups played across the NBA this season thus far and the Kings happen to have the #1 lineup in terms of net rating. 

Joseph | Hield | Bogdan | Barnes | Dedmon is technically the best lineup in the NBA right now and have played a blistering total of 1 minute together   .

[Thukydides]

When did we fleece him the first time?

I´d consider the Barnes/JJ swap a huge fleece. At the time you couldn´t expect HB to waive his player option and he surely wouldn´t have done that with the Mavs, as they wouldn´t have offered him a crazy contract like Vlade did. Getting JJ and the opportunity of capspace - which granted we didn´t use - for HB and not having to give up anything else was a fleece IMO.

[vfromlmf]

Getting JJ and the opportunity of capspace - which granted we didn´t use

I believe Mavs still have a Barnes trade exception worth $11.8 million or so

[ItsGoTime]

When did we fleece him the first time?

I´d consider the Barnes/JJ swap a huge fleece. At the time you couldn´t expect HB to waive his player option and he surely wouldn´t have done that with the Mavs, as they wouldn´t have offered him a crazy contract like Vlade did. Getting JJ and the opportunity of capspace - which granted we didn´t use - for HB and not having to give up anything else was a fleece IMO.

Man, I hope I don't have to compare the two players to make the point. There really is little comparison at the time of the trade (and even now, but the trade isn't happening now, it happened when HB showed he was a decent starting quality player, which there is no proof that JJ will be at the very least that). 

We have no clue what HB would have done with the crazy money that was available in the offseason, and that might be the reason Sac reupped him for the amount they did cause HB and his agent showed what other teams were willing to offer.

I said at the time of the trade that the even trade would have been with the addition of Harry Giles. We see with the commitment they made to HB how desperate they were to get him from us. The trade IMO was lopsided, but in the direction of Sac.

[Thukydides]

When did we fleece him the first time?

I´d consider the Barnes/JJ swap a huge fleece. At the time you couldn´t expect HB to waive his player option and he surely wouldn´t have done that with the Mavs, as they wouldn´t have offered him a crazy contract like Vlade did. Getting JJ and the opportunity of capspace - which granted we didn´t use - for HB and not having to give up anything else was a fleece IMO.

Man, I hope I don't have to compare the two players to make the point. There really is little comparison at the time of the trade (and even now, but the trade isn't happening now, it happened when HB showed he was a decent starting quality player, which there is no proof that JJ will be at the very least that). 

We have no clue what HB would have done with the crazy money that was available in the offseason, and that might be the reason Sac reupped him for the amount they did cause HB and his agent showed what other teams were willing to offer.

I said at the time of the trade that the even trade would have been with the addition of Harry Giles. We see with the commitment they made to HB how desperate they were to get him from us. The trade IMO was lopsided, but in the direction of Sac.

Very interesting, how much we disagree on this point.

So there are three cases:

No1: HB stays on his PO: HE´d still be on the books, we´d have no Trade exception and no JJ (who in my eyes plays way to little right now). To me HB would be very detrimental to this No1 offense we´re running right now, as he showed throughout his time here that he is not capable of making quick decisions after receiving the ball. Even if he just stood in the corner being a shooting threat (even though his numbers this year don´t suggest, he´d be one, but granted he would be), him being fully incapable of making the second pass would be a huge, huge negative. This aside, even if he seems like a good dude, I wouldn´t have expected him to commit to this role being paid almost 17 millions per year: And that would mean more ISO-Barnes and I don´t have to explain to anyone around here, what that would mean for the offense we´re currently running.

No2: HB stays and commits to a longterm deal. This would mean he either left shitloads of money on the table to go elsewhere or we overpaid him for his service. As the former seems highly unlikely. Super meh to that option.

No3: HB walks in FA last summer after not opting into his PO. That´s the only case, in which the Mavs are anywhere close to the position they are in now. But this seems to me highly unlikely. Regardless we wouldn´t have JJ in this case. And as I write this, I realize that our disagreement is more about JJ than HB. I see him as a great, cheap, young piece, who understands his role and has tremendous room for improvement.

To me none of these cases is in any form better than our outcome. How the trade should be lopsided in direction of the Kings, as you said, is beyond me.

[ItsGoTime]

Very interesting, how much we disagree on this point.

So there are three cases:

No1: HB stays on his PO: HE´d still be on the books, we´d have no Trade exception and no JJ (who in my eyes plays way to little right now). To me HB would be very detrimental to this No1 offense we´re running right now, as he showed throughout his time here that he is not capable of making quick decisions after receiving the ball. Even if he just stood in the corner being a shooting threat (even though his numbers this year don´t suggest, he´d be one, but granted he would be), him being fully incapable of making the second pass would be a huge, huge negative. This aside, even if he seems like a good dude, I wouldn´t have expected him to commit to this role being paid almost 17 millions per year: And that would mean more ISO-Barnes and I don´t have to explain to anyone around here, what that would mean for the offense we´re currently running.

No2: HB stays and commits to a longterm deal. This would mean he either left shitloads of money on the table to go elsewhere or we overpaid him for his service. As the former seems highly unlikely. Super meh to that option.

No3: HB walks in FA last summer after not opting into his PO. That´s the only case, in which the Mavs are anywhere close to the position they are in now. But this seems to me highly unlikely. Regardless we wouldn´t have JJ in this case. And as I write this, I realize that our disagreement is more about JJ than HB. I see him as a great, cheap, young piece, who understands his role and has tremendous room for improvement.

To me none of these cases is in any form better than our outcome. How the trade should be lopsided in direction of the Kings, as you said, is beyond me.

Not a single part of this explains a "fleecing" of the Kings. The trade itself needed more incoming to be even, IMO. 

An established veteran who is proven to be able to score 18-19 ppg albeit on a contract that is a bit of an overpay, versus a player who has fallen out of favor from a team that is not all that good and the largest trade exception in the history of the NBA. 

That was the trade you think is a fleecing. I don't think it was at all, and believe it was lopsided in favor of the Kings. 

IMO it would be an even trade (not a fleecing, but even) if Harry Giles was included, which I don't think would have been that big of an ask seeing as though they didn't pick up his option this year.

We now know, they thought HB was the final piece that would put them over the top and into the playoffs as we see the commitment to him in the offseason and the comments made after the trade. For that piece, we got a trade exception and a player they didn't think was all that good.