yardbarker

NCAA Wiretap Headlines

Varejao - what are we willing to give up?

Moderators: Basti, C.lupus, Klomp

Post#31 Re: Varejao - what are we willing to give up?
Fri Dec 14, 2012 10:19 pm by shrink

Eight hours after their posts, and Pek's 31 point game, do people still want to deal Pek for Varejao?

People are going to differ on Varejao's value based on whether they evaluate players for their per game averages, or for their season totals. I'm the latter, because we pay for the whole season, and that's why I'm not as high on Varejao as most. He played 31 and 25 games his previous two seasons. I worry about whether all these injuries are bad luck, or the result of the way he plays the game.

I'd give Williams and Roy/Ridnour/Barea. I may throw in the pick if it's a deal-breaker. But I wouldn't go higher than that.
shrink
RealGM
Posts: 34,096
And1: 262
Joined: Sep 25, 2005
Top

Post#32 Re: Varejao - what are we willing to give up?
Fri Dec 14, 2012 10:31 pm by karch34

I'd love Varejo as it would give us a killer front court. As far as minutes I think Saltine had a good breakdown. Cunningham has played great, but I think he loses some effectiveness when he gets heavy minutes. Also with the health and style of play with Love and Pek a quality big would be a great add. I wouldn't take him over Pek and would probably be where Shrink is on what I'd give.
karch34



Assistant Coach
User avatar
Posts: 3,971
And1: 136
Joined: Jul 4, 2001
Location: Valley of the Sun
Top

Post#33 Re: Varejao - what are we willing to give up?
Fri Dec 14, 2012 11:32 pm by jfg

shrink wrote:Eight hours after their posts, and Pek's 31 point game, do people still want to deal Pek for Varejao?


Most people who have had decent ideas don't want to ship Pek but would if they get somebody who equals Pek's value but in different ways plus SG help in return. I have to say that I have backed off on considering Pek as a trade candidate because we're going to need him if Love bolts. Who knows if that will happen, but the only reason I'm down on Pek is because he doesn't compliment Love's weaknesses.
jfg
Junior
Posts: 342
And1: 29
Joined: Jul 11, 2012
Top

Post#34 Re: Varejao - what are we willing to give up?
Sat Dec 15, 2012 1:06 am by [RCG]

jfg wrote:
shrink wrote:Eight hours after their posts, and Pek's 31 point game, do people still want to deal Pek for Varejao?


Most people who have had decent ideas don't want to ship Pek but would if they get somebody who equals Pek's value but in different ways plus SG help in return. I have to say that I have backed off on considering Pek as a trade candidate because we're going to need him if Love bolts. Who knows if that will happen, but the only reason I'm down on Pek is because he doesn't compliment Love's weaknesses.


The only problem with that logic is we'll need to re-sign Pek because Love won't have to opportunity to "bolt" for another season or two.
Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt
[RCG]
Head Coach
User avatar
Posts: 7,047
And1: 135
Joined: May 24, 2010
Location: Saint Paul
Top

Post#35 Re: Varejao - what are we willing to give up?
Sat Dec 15, 2012 1:28 am by the_bruce

AQuintus wrote:
the_bruce wrote:http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=c3y24lo

Mem pick mn pick to cle

Hou eats ridnour year and swaps out dwill for royce

Mn gambles the white will play for them and doesn't impact cap space next season. White is cheap and high risk reward. Hou gets high draft pick forward with loads of potential that will actually goto practice?


Decent for Minnesota, though White is a net negative at this point.

Terrible for Cleveland and WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY too good for Houston. Turning a headcase that's not even playing for them into DWill and a quality backup PG is ridiculous.


Disagree for cle two future 1st is big imo
the_bruce
Analyst
Posts: 3,343
And1: 15
Joined: Jun 1, 2007
Top

Post#36 Re: Varejao - what are we willing to give up?
Sat Dec 15, 2012 1:31 am by the_bruce

Krapinsky wrote:Rather not have White than have him. Negative asset IMO.


While I agree that white is negative value I think the long term result is good. I am biased as I like white skillset and would gladly pay 1.5-2m for its potential than 1m a year for guys like Amundsen
the_bruce
Analyst
Posts: 3,343
And1: 15
Joined: Jun 1, 2007
Top

Post#37 Re: Varejao - what are we willing to give up?
Sat Dec 15, 2012 1:43 am by [RCG]

I wouldn't mind having White for home games as a 14th/15th, end-of-the-bench guy.
Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt
[RCG]
Head Coach
User avatar
Posts: 7,047
And1: 135
Joined: May 24, 2010
Location: Saint Paul
Top

Post#38 Re: Varejao - what are we willing to give up?
Sat Dec 15, 2012 11:30 am by Gideon

The idea of trading for Varejao and using him as a backup is misguided IMO. The guy is a legit all-star this season who is going to be a big producer wherever he goes. He's also worked hard to get to this point and would likely not be thrilled to suddenly take a step back during his prime. I totally disagree that having a crowded frontcourt rotation fighting for minutes "would be a good problem to have" -- these are human beings not chess pieces, and chemistry is one of the absolute most important things in basketball.

Pek and Varejao are both starters. Forcing guys who are really good to play limited roles is never a recipe for success. It's one thing one a really good player voluntarily takes a smaller role knowing what he's getting into (which rarely happens, unless he's towards the end of his career and signing with a top team, actually), but it's totally different with young guys or guys in their primes who rightfully want the playing time they've worked so hard to get. You can say they make millions and should just suck it up all you want, but that's not reality.

Varejao (right now, anyway) is a better player, but Pek is younger and we don't know how much he can improve. I like both players a lot. I also think Pek might not be the best long-run fit for the Wolves' roster, but I got into that argument on another thread and there's no point in doing it again here.

Basically, if we trade for Varejao, it wouldn't make sense to keep Pek, as one or both of them would likely end up disgruntled/not maximizing potential. I do think Varejao would be a great fit... health concerns are a biggie, though, so it's a tough call.
Gideon
Pro Prospect
Posts: 810
And1: 162
Joined: Feb 29, 2012
Top

Post#39 Re: Varejao - what are we willing to give up?
Sat Dec 15, 2012 12:17 pm by shrink

Gideon wrote:The idea of trading for Varejao and using him as a backup is misguided IMO. The guy is a legit all-star this season who is going to be a big producer wherever he goes. He's also worked hard to get to this point and would likely not be thrilled to suddenly take a step back during his prime.


Do you think Harden and Ginobili felt the same way, when they were actual All Stars?

The reason that the three-big overwhelming rotation hasn't been used like the three-guard overwhelming rotation is simply because it costs too much money. That may happen here as well, if Taylor isn't willing to go over the lux. But if you want to win games -- wouldn't 48 minutes of this be about the scariest thing in the world to defend?
shrink
RealGM
Posts: 34,096
And1: 262
Joined: Sep 25, 2005
Top

Post#40 Re: Varejao - what are we willing to give up?
Sat Dec 15, 2012 1:02 pm by Gideon

Harden and Ginobili were 6th men (like McHale on the 80s Celtics) who came off the bench for strategy reasons, but still got plenty of minutes and touches, and were virtually always in at the end of games. They basically played just as big a role as if they were starters, and did so on teams contending for a title. Everybody knew that Harden, not Selofosha, was the guy at SG, same with Ginobili and S-Jax or whoever... with Pek and Andy, that's not the case. If we have Andy, Pek, and Love, there's really no way to play all three at once, so I think it's not really a comparable situation. I do agree it would one a hell of a frontcourt to defend, but I don't think you can turn Andy or Pek into a backup (a real backup who doesn't finish close games... not a McHale/Ginobili/Harden 6th man role) right now.
Gideon
Pro Prospect
Posts: 810
And1: 162
Joined: Feb 29, 2012
Top

Post#41 Re: Varejao - what are we willing to give up?
Sat Dec 15, 2012 1:08 pm by C.lupus

Given the injury histories of the three, it might not be a problem anyway. Also, Adelman would just roll with the hot hand. One night it might be Love/Pek, the next night Love/Andy.
Image
C.lupus


Forum Mod - Timberwolves
Forum Mod - Timberwolves
User avatar
Posts: 24,765
And1: 3,966
Joined: Nov 2, 2007
Location: Nobody knows where you are, how near or how far.
Top

Post#42 Re: Varejao - what are we willing to give up?
Mon Dec 17, 2012 5:07 pm by tranjSAIC

Krapinsky wrote:
Fischella wrote:I'd do something like...

to Charlotte, Derrick Williams, Ridnour
to Cleveland, Harrington, Pekovic
to Orlando, Sessions, Henderson, Casspi
to Minnesota, Afflalo, Varejao


Don't see Orlando doing that. Probably not Cleveland either.
Hell no Orlando won't do that. Swing us Williams then we talk, we want potential not scrubs.
tranjSAIC
Banned User
Posts: 4,714
And1: 527
Joined: Nov 18, 2004
Location: orlando
Top

PreviousNext

Return to Minnesota Timberwolves


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot], lobishome, ohmuri, Varejao17