The ‘18-‘19 Kings/Grizzlies/Clippers: Tracking the Picks

Bleedred

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 21, 2001
6,984
Boston, MA
Forgive me, but can someone reset the original post or explain what it is I am rooting for as to the LAC, SAC and Memphis picks? SAC seems pretty obvious, we would like them to lose the rest of their games and get the #2 pick. LAC and Memphis?
 

InstaFace

MDLzera
Sep 27, 2016
7,430
LAC conveys if they make the playoffs; it's lottery-protected. If it doesn't convey, we get a 2021 2nd-rounder, I think.

Memphis conveys if it's 9+, rolls over if it's 1-8. If it's 1-8, then in 2020 it's protected 1-6, and unprotected in 2021. So we want Memphis to suck this year and suck hard the following two years.
 

Royal Reader

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 21, 2005
1,727
UK
Forgive me, but can someone reset the original post or explain what it is I am rooting for as to the LAC, SAC and Memphis picks? SAC seems pretty obvious, we would like them to lose the rest of their games and get the #2 pick. LAC and Memphis?
LAC only conveys if the Clips make the playoffs this year or next, or it converts to two seconds. Therefore the best possible pick is the one where they *just* make the playoffs, though even them making the four seed is preferable to them missing both the next two years.

Memphis has gradually-reducing protections on it so it conveys this year if not top-8, next year if not top six, and is then unprotected. Since Boston holds the SAC pick plus their own, and may get the Clips pick, most fans want the Grizz pick to roll over. This would mean less pressure on roster space for 2019/20 and more spreading out of (hopefully) usual players on rookie deals to keep their window open longer.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
31,033
Denver pulls it out against Kings. Warriors next but then schedule eases up a bit. These guys probably won’t make playoffs but continue to look up for the chase.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
31,033
538 projections put us with #9 (SAC), # 11 (MEM), # 18 (LAC), and #24 (BOS)
Wouldn’t be a terrible outcome if this holds true although we’d all prefer to have MEM roll over. Lots Ainge could do with these picks.
 

ElcaballitoMVP

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 19, 2008
3,058
What does the Clippers pick roll into? I thought it was nothing.
2019 first round draft pick from L.A. Clippers
L.A. Clippers' 1st round pick to Boston (via Memphis) protected for selections 1-14 in 2019 and 1-14 in 2020; if the L.A. Clippers have not conveyed a 1st round pick to Boston by 2020, then the L.A. Clippers will instead convey their 2022 2nd round pick to Boston [L.A. Clippers-Memphis, 2/18/2016; Boston-Memphis, 6/23/2016]

https://basketball.realgm.com/nba/draft/future_drafts/detailed
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
31,033
Yup. Feeling much better about the Clippers pick conveying. Now, I wouldn't be opposed to Kyrie getting some much-needed rest on Feb 9 and Mar 11...
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
15,733
68
where I was last at
I never understood the rationale behind the Clipper's pick converting to a less valuable pick two years later. Is there a back story?

As to the Sac/Mem picks, I hope the the point differential plays true to form and we're looking at 8-10, instead of 13-14
 

the moops

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 19, 2016
2,113
44
Saint Paul, MN
I never understood the rationale behind the Clipper's pick converting to a less valuable pick two years later. Is there a back story?
LAC owes their 2021 2nd round pick to CHA.
And it is pretty common to have a 1st rounder convert to a 2nd rounder after a few bites. Teams can't be hamstrung with Stepien rule for multiple years
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
15,733
68
where I was last at
LAC owes their 2021 2nd round pick to CHA.
And it is pretty common to have a 1st rounder convert to a 2nd rounder after a few bites. Teams can't be hamstrung with Stepien rule for multiple years
Then why not a '23 1 st unprotected?

I get the Stepian rule, but trading a 1 today for a potential #2 in 3-4 years seems to violate common sense and PV/FV convention.
 

the moops

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 19, 2016
2,113
44
Saint Paul, MN
Then why not a '23 1 st unprotected?

I get the Stepian rule, but trading a 1 today for a potential #2 in 3-4 years seems to violate common sense and PV/FV convention.
It is quite common for non-conveyed protected 1sts to turn into 2nds. We are spolied because Ainge somehow convinced MEM to offer no protections on their 1st round pick if it doesn't convey this year or next.

If you look here you will see that most 1sts turn to 2nds eventually
 

bosox79

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
9,799
Then why not a '23 1 st unprotected?

I get the Stepian rule, but trading a 1 today for a potential #2 in 3-4 years seems to violate common sense and PV/FV convention.
Teams don't trade unprotected picks in the future anymore.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
5,124
Then why not a '23 1 st unprotected?

I get the Stepian rule, but trading a 1 today for a potential #2 in 3-4 years seems to violate common sense and PV/FV convention.
Because the Celtics traded the 31st pick in the draft for it. A couple of chances at a low 1st rounder before it turns into a 2nd is a fair return.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
5,124
Teams don't trade unprotected picks in the future anymore.
Sure they do. They are more careful, but Phoenix just did it (not their own pick, but it was still unprotected). Teams will be falling over themselves to give up their own unprotected picks for Anthony Davis.
 

the moops

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 19, 2016
2,113
44
Saint Paul, MN
Sure they do. They are more careful, but Phoenix just did it (not their own pick, but it was still unprotected). Teams will be falling over themselves to give up their own unprotected picks for Anthony Davis.
I think it was more of a general response, not an absolute. Smart teams, or rather non dumb teams, rarely trade unprotected 1sts for anything but a superstar.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,467
Then why not a '23 1 st unprotected?
Because what was being traded was Jeff Green and first round picks have to be conveyed within six years. '23 was too far out.

EDIT: To give the full convoluted tale, Boston traded Jeff Green to Memphis for the Grizzlies pick we're tracking now. Memphis later traded Green to the Clippers for the Clippers pick we're tracking. Memphis then traded that pick to Boston for two seconds a couple of years ago.
 
Last edited:

bosox79

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
9,799
Sure they do. They are more careful, but Phoenix just did it (not their own pick, but it was still unprotected). Teams will be falling over themselves to give up their own unprotected picks for Anthony Davis.
The Celtics did for Kyrie too. I meant more like the Memphis pick. Teams aren't going to trade away unprotected 1st rounders for Jeff Green.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,467
Of course from the Grizzlies perspective they traded a protected first round pick for Deyonta Davis, some guy that they waived in his first training camp, and a rental player (Stephenson maybe? I'd have to look that up).
 

HowBoutDemSox

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2009
3,748
Kings currently 13 in the lottery, but 14 through 7 is separated by two games. A top 5 pick seems unlikely barring lottery luck catapulting them into a top spot while avoiding the 1, given the Cavs/Knicks/Hawks/Suns/Bulls are in a tier onto themselves (and who knows whats going on in Washington, currently 6), but there's still a decent chance the Kings pick can fall into the top 10. Will depend on how close the race for the playoffs stays in both conferences and which teams would rather make a push for grabbing the 8th seed rather than fall into the lottery.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
17,585
The Kings have a 6-game in 6-city in 11-day beginning Jan 17th so if they are going to slip up and drop 5 of 6 (or worse) this could be their time to do so.

17 @ Charlotte
19 @ Detroit
21 @ Brooklyn
22 @ Toronto
25 @ Memphis
27 @ Clippers
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
3,842
Lisbon, PT
I feel bad rooting against the Kings: they have good fans, they've been shitty for awhile, and the team is damn fun to watch. Imagine if Vlade had gone with Luka over Bagley...
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
31,033
I feel bad rooting against the Kings: they have good fans, they've been shitty for awhile, and the team is damn fun to watch. Imagine if Vlade had gone with Luka over Bagley...
Never feel bad about Tankathon rooting interests. We’ll all be Kings fans next year. This year, I hope they lose every game 145-143.
 

TripleOT

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2007
1,826
The Kings are 12-17 in the tough West and 6-3 against Eastern Conference teams. Hopefully they will have trouble on their mid-January road trip, but they are 9-10 in away games, impressive for a young team. If the Kings are going to lose a lot, they need to lose a key piece to long term injury.
 

Red Averages

owes you $50
SoSH Member
Apr 20, 2003
5,118
They are also still shooting 39% from 3. If that can normalize a bit they will regress fairly quickly given how poor their defense is. 8 out of their 19 wins have been by 6 points or less, so even two missed 3's is a huge difference. For a comparison, 5 out of the 23 Celtics wins are by 6 or less if you're curious.

Given how close the tankathon race is going to be, that's what I'm most focused on. If 3 of those tight 8 point wins were losses they'd be right around the 5th or 6th worst record.

Edit:
Sac is shooting 41.2% from 3 in wins and 36.8% (first in the league!) in losses.
Bos is shooting 39.3% from 3 in wins and 32.3% in losses. Woof.
 
Last edited:

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
17,585
They are also still shooting 39% from 3. If that can normalize a bit they will regress fairly quickly given how poor their defense is. 8 out of their 19 wins have been by 6 points or less, so even two missed 3's is a huge difference. For a comparison, 5 out of the 23 Celtics wins are by 6 or less if you're curious.

Given how close the tankathon race is going to be, that's what I'm most focused on. If 3 of those tight 8 point wins were losses they'd be right around the 5th or 6th worst record.

Edit:
Sac is shooting 41.2% from 3 in wins and 36.8% (first in the league!) in losses.
Bos is shooting 39.3% from 3 in wins and 32.3% in losses. Woof.
What if 39% is their normal? Hield is leading them at 44% but he shot 43% over a full season last year (and 43% in the final 25 games of prior year after the trade to Sac), Bjelica is also at 44% and he shot 41.5% last year. Bogdanovich is at 37%, down from 39% last year.

Fox and Jackson have made second-year leaps in shooting which is common so I'm not convinced these aren't real. As a whole however the reason the Kings are shooting so well from 3 is a combination of playing at a faster pace creating open looks and the team having a bunch of great shooters and others who are also capable. This will be interesting to see how it holds up.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
2,691
50
around the way
What if 39% is their normal? Hield is leading them at 44% but he shot 43% over a full season last year (and 43% in the final 25 games of prior year after the trade to Sac), Bjelica is also at 44% and he shot 41.5% last year. Bogdanovich is at 37%, down from 39% last year.

Fox and Jackson have made second-year leaps in shooting which is common so I'm not convinced these aren't real. As a whole however the reason the Kings are shooting so well from 3 is a combination of playing at a faster pace creating open looks and the team having a bunch of great shooters and others who are also capable. This will be interesting to see how it holds up.
I'm with you. If the end of year line were set at 38% for this team, I would seriously consider taking the over. Hield is leading the team in attempts and will continue to shoot well. The other two will as well. That's like half their attempts right there.
 

the moops

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 19, 2016
2,113
44
Saint Paul, MN
What if 39% is their normal? Hield is leading them at 44% but he shot 43% over a full season last year (and 43% in the final 25 games of prior year after the trade to Sac), Bjelica is also at 44% and he shot 41.5% last year. Bogdanovich is at 37%, down from 39% last year.
It could be, but I find it doubtful that they are Warriors level 3 point shooters. Sure, Hield and Bjelica are good, but I am doubtful that they are both 44% three point shooters over the whole season (one of them sure, but that would be historic for I can't find a pair of teammates both shooting that good with > 3 attempts per game). Fox is likely not a 38% shooter, nor is Shumpert.
 

bosox79

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
9,799
I feel bad rooting against the Kings: they have good fans, they've been shitty for awhile, and the team is damn fun to watch. Imagine if Vlade had gone with Luka over Bagley...
Bagley is pretty good himself and probably a better fit alongside Hield and Fox. Quite a few people are already talking about how bad a pairing Luka and DSJ are.
 

bosox79

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
9,799
It could be, but I find it doubtful that they are Warriors level 3 point shooters. Sure, Hield and Bjelica are good, but I am doubtful that they are both 44% three point shooters over the whole season (one of them sure, but that would be historic for I can't find a pair of teammates both shooting that good with > 3 attempts per game). Fox is likely not a 38% shooter, nor is Shumpert.
That could be historic, but Steph Curry and Cook are shooting .450 and .455 so they'd have company. SA is shooting close to 40% as a team with Bertrans at .475 and Forbes at .430.
 

InstaFace

MDLzera
Sep 27, 2016
7,430
If we could go back, would we rather keep the LAL pick last year (#10 Mikal Bridges, or anyone taken after him I suppose) or the present rolling-the-dice with Sacramento? I imagine it was Danny who insisted on the recycling into the SAC pick, but looking at the trajectory of that roster, I'm not sure we're better off for it.