ImageImageImage

Trade Talk (Part Six)

Moderators: Domejandro, Calinks, Worm Guts

IceManBK1
Starter
Posts: 2,361
And1: 205
Joined: Jul 14, 2017
   

Re: Trade Talk (Part Six) 

Post#1781 » by IceManBK1 » Fri Jun 11, 2021 2:50 am

Clippers were interested in Rubio at the deadline. Maybe Rubio for Patrick beverley? He would be a better fit nxt to both Edwards and dlo as a backup pg. Doesn't command the ball and can spot up for 3. Excellent defender too ofcuz.
User avatar
packforfreedom
Analyst
Posts: 3,088
And1: 3,582
Joined: Nov 06, 2012
 

Re: Trade Talk (Part Six) 

Post#1782 » by packforfreedom » Fri Jun 11, 2021 8:19 am

No Beverley is overrated and I don't want his character on this team.
Guidus88
Sophomore
Posts: 160
And1: 38
Joined: Jul 08, 2010
   

Re: Trade Talk (Part Six) 

Post#1783 » by Guidus88 » Fri Jun 11, 2021 10:19 am

DLO for Porzingis + picks ?
younggunsmn
Assistant Coach
Posts: 3,785
And1: 286
Joined: May 28, 2007
Location: Hiding from the thought police.

Re: Trade Talk (Part Six) 

Post#1784 » by younggunsmn » Fri Jun 11, 2021 6:26 pm

Nick K wrote:
younggunsmn wrote:
shrink wrote:I’ve been trying to keep a closer eye on the Rubio trade market, and I am becoming more and more encouraged. There are many teams out there that could use his passing and organize an offense, and we are seeing in the playoffs even more. CHI, NYK, IND all seem like decent targets off the top, but free agency could open many more. Will Lonzo Ball stay in NOP? Will the Lakers pay Schroeder anything he wants, to maintain salary? Is Gordon Dragic staying in MIA? What about Lowry? Heck, Chris Paul? The advantage Rubio provides is that he is a one-year deal that allows him to be caretaker. FA contracts much be three, and while years can be guaranteed, most decent free agents have the market pull to demand three years guaranteed, or at least a partial guarantee on the end.


Well Rubio was traded last offseason, coming off a better year, for essentially a semi useful expiring and a future 2nd round pick (if you consider 17 for 25+28 a wash). Does having one year remaining rather than two change that valuation much?
I just think that his value to this team will be much bigger than a future 2nd, especially considering how instrumental he was in helping Ant on the court his rookie year. Finding salary filler that is a better fit with those on court intangibles the rest of the team sorely lacks is going to be tough. He's not the first guy I would think about sending out.


Beasley is the most obvious trade candidate at this point considering contract, position, and relative value.


Rosas has publically said recently that our core 5 players are Kat, Ant, Dlo, McD, and Beasley. That tells me he's unlikely to be moved.

I think they are very high on Reid and Vando. That would leave everybody else on the trade block. You never know when one guys trash is another guys treasure.


What a pro sports executive says publicly and thinks privately are completely different worlds.
And it's kind of a dumb statement by a numbskull executive. It's kind of like lining your kids up and telling everyone who your favorites are.

Those 5 guys coincidentally are the only ones who have 3+ years on their contracts too. It's in your best interest not to rile up someone you are stuck with for the next few years. How Beasley handles beta status next to Ant's alpha is going to go a long ways towards how long he stays here. But if you get are looking for a PF upgrade, Beasley may be your best chip both position glut and salary matching wise.
younggunsmn
Assistant Coach
Posts: 3,785
And1: 286
Joined: May 28, 2007
Location: Hiding from the thought police.

Re: Trade Talk (Part Six) 

Post#1785 » by younggunsmn » Fri Jun 11, 2021 6:59 pm

I thought myles turner would be a good fit until I started looking at the pacers interior defense metrics, they aren't good. Turner is kind of overhyped as far as I'm concerned. Sabonis is the real stud on that team. Sending Beasley plus a first for turner would be too much.
Those covington firsts were post-lottery and ended up being 20 and 22. With 2 years left on his deal, I don't know that turner has that kind of value.
younggunsmn
Assistant Coach
Posts: 3,785
And1: 286
Joined: May 28, 2007
Location: Hiding from the thought police.

Re: Trade Talk (Part Six) 

Post#1786 » by younggunsmn » Fri Jun 11, 2021 7:13 pm

SO_MONEY wrote:
TheProdigy wrote:
SO_MONEY wrote:
You are making excuses and denying the obvious. People don't much care for that. There are literally no positive outcomes yielded from their actions in terms of making this team the best it could be. None.. The fact you need to weigh in to do this only proves you don't get it. I want the team to be the best it can be, you are concerned with pointless, probably non-existent moral victories. And I didn't say it is the end of the world, I said that idiom was proverbial, as in it was the worst thing they could do in this regard.

This type of loser mentality has not served us well over the last 15 years.

I think the difference between us is I have a better grasp of probabilities and statistics. I went through this entire season assuming we wouldn't keep the pick (again only a 40% chance at best of keeping the pick). You on the other hand sound like you were expecting to keep the pick, hence the dramatic "proverbial end of the world" comment.

Crying over 12.5% is a waste of time.


Your mentally is the loser mentality!

I can get indifference over our self-defeating behavior, such as "figures"...what I don't get is the mental gymnastics people need to play to not admit what happened was bad. And being it is bad and nothing good comes from it statistically, it is frustrating to fans that want the team to do the right things and put the best team on the court for long-term success. Your loser mentality isn't going to fly with those fans. Moreover, the obliviousness from those in denial is probably more frustrating than what they did in the first place, what I am saying is not debatable and to want to dig in and justify the indefensible actions of the franchise tells me you don't want to win and want to argue. If this were not the case I could say what I said and you would just let it be, because I am right.

Lastly, you don't know my level of education, but being I was early on going for actuarial science, maybe lecturing me about statistics and probability is not the best tact.

I don't like tanking, but I understand the mentality of the importance of having a top pick this year to the future of the franchise.
I'd make 2 points:
1. You should be angry at Rosas for trading the pick away in the first place, not the team for winning.
That trade at this point is already a sunk cost.
Say we finished 3rd worst, you are still looking at a statistical likelihood of picking about 6th.
2. If we keep the pick this year, we owe an uprotected pick next year, which may be an even more important pick to keep.
There is no guarantee the team is any better next year, it will be very hard to climb out of even the top ten picks.
Winning games and giving up the 7th or 8th pick this year may in the long run be the smart thing to do.

I don't know that any of the top 5 guys outside of maybe cade cunningham is going to be a franchise changing difference maker.
It will hurt to give up the pick, to the warriors of all teams especially, but that is on Rosas and not the team winning games when finally fully healthy. We could have pumped the brakes on those 2 Utah wins, but we simply got massively outtanked by detroit and orlando especially. And I would not want to trade places with either of those teams even if you guaranteed me cade cunningham.
post0115
Junior
Posts: 395
And1: 35
Joined: Dec 17, 2006

Re: Trade Talk (Part Six) 

Post#1787 » by post0115 » Fri Jun 11, 2021 7:38 pm

[quote="shrink"]Jerami Grant left playoff DEN to go to lottery DET because he wanted his own team, to show off what he could do. He has done well there personally, too. I love his fit here, but I think he would be unhappy being the third or fourth option.[/quote]

I think he just went to Det to get paid.
User avatar
Domejandro
Forum Mod - Timberwolves
Forum Mod - Timberwolves
Posts: 14,214
And1: 18,714
Joined: Jul 29, 2014
Location: San Diego, California

Re: Trade Talk (Part Six) 

Post#1788 » by Domejandro » Fri Jun 11, 2021 8:16 pm

post0115 wrote:
shrink wrote:Jerami Grant left playoff DEN to go to lottery DET because he wanted his own team, to show off what he could do. He has done well there personally, too. I love his fit here, but I think he would be unhappy being the third or fourth option.


I think he just went to Det to get paid.

Denver offered Jerami Grant the same money.
shrink
RealGM
Posts: 46,496
And1: 6,653
Joined: Sep 26, 2005

Re: Trade Talk (Part Six) 

Post#1789 » by shrink » Fri Jun 11, 2021 8:46 pm

Maybe the way to look at potential team additions is by who will be happy here.

Right now we have four players on the team that expect to be 20+ PPG scorers. Scoring gets you paid. None of them, with maybe the recent exception of KAT, is a defensive player.

Who is out there that would be happy being a key component on defense, but not getting hardly any shot attempts?
SO_MONEY
Analyst
Posts: 3,261
And1: 534
Joined: Sep 11, 2009
         

Re: Trade Talk (Part Six) 

Post#1790 » by SO_MONEY » Fri Jun 11, 2021 11:22 pm

younggunsmn wrote:
SO_MONEY wrote:
TheProdigy wrote:This type of loser mentality has not served us well over the last 15 years.

I think the difference between us is I have a better grasp of probabilities and statistics. I went through this entire season assuming we wouldn't keep the pick (again only a 40% chance at best of keeping the pick). You on the other hand sound like you were expecting to keep the pick, hence the dramatic "proverbial end of the world" comment.

Crying over 12.5% is a waste of time.


Your mentally is the loser mentality!

I can get indifference over our self-defeating behavior, such as "figures"...what I don't get is the mental gymnastics people need to play to not admit what happened was bad. And being it is bad and nothing good comes from it statistically, it is frustrating to fans that want the team to do the right things and put the best team on the court for long-term success. Your loser mentality isn't going to fly with those fans. Moreover, the obliviousness from those in denial is probably more frustrating than what they did in the first place, what I am saying is not debatable and to want to dig in and justify the indefensible actions of the franchise tells me you don't want to win and want to argue. If this were not the case I could say what I said and you would just let it be, because I am right.

Lastly, you don't know my level of education, but being I was early on going for actuarial science, maybe lecturing me about statistics and probability is not the best tact.

I don't like tanking, but I understand the mentality of the importance of having a top pick this year to the future of the franchise.
I'd make 2 points:
1. You should be angry at Rosas for trading the pick away in the first place, not the team for winning.
That trade at this point is already a sunk cost.
Say we finished 3rd worst, you are still looking at a statistical likelihood of picking about 6th.
2. If we keep the pick this year, we owe an uprotected pick next year, which may be an even more important pick to keep.
There is no guarantee the team is any better next year, it will be very hard to climb out of even the top ten picks.
Winning games and giving up the 7th or 8th pick this year may in the long run be the smart thing to do.

I don't know that any of the top 5 guys outside of maybe cade cunningham is going to be a franchise changing difference maker.
It will hurt to give up the pick, to the warriors of all teams especially, but that is on Rosas and not the team winning games when finally fully healthy. We could have pumped the brakes on those 2 Utah wins, but we simply got massively outtanked by detroit and orlando especially. And I would not want to trade places with either of those teams even if you guaranteed me cade cunningham.



No and No.

1. The pick was traded that is the world we live in, I don't like the trade, but I am not dwelling on a debatable trade at the time.

2. I can't even understand your point. It is better to add top talent to this team now, not a late lottery talent next year. Not more important. If this team isn't any better next year then the team is going to be blown up. I don't buy they won't be better, they are better, they just didn't need to show out as much.

3. Your not trading places with any team, this team is what it is, have extra Ws on paper doesn't change that.
shangrila
General Manager
Posts: 9,604
And1: 2,953
Joined: Dec 21, 2009
Location: Land of Aus
 

Re: Trade Talk (Part Six) 

Post#1791 » by shangrila » Sat Jun 12, 2021 1:30 am

Win as many as you can and let the chips fall where they may.

We've tried losing as much as we can for the last 15 years and where has that gotten us? May as well put out an entertaining product if nothing else.
SO_MONEY
Analyst
Posts: 3,261
And1: 534
Joined: Sep 11, 2009
         

Re: Trade Talk (Part Six) 

Post#1792 » by SO_MONEY » Sat Jun 12, 2021 1:52 am

shangrila wrote:Win as many as you can and let the chips fall where they may.

We've tried losing as much as we can for the last 15 years and where has that gotten us? May as well put out an entertaining product if nothing else.


If you really truly wanted an entertaining product, you would have wanted them to tank to have a chance to accumulate the most possible top end talent. This disjointed logic is almost comical. And watching self-harm is not really entertaining either.
shangrila
General Manager
Posts: 9,604
And1: 2,953
Joined: Dec 21, 2009
Location: Land of Aus
 

Re: Trade Talk (Part Six) 

Post#1793 » by shangrila » Sat Jun 12, 2021 2:41 am

SO_MONEY wrote:
shangrila wrote:Win as many as you can and let the chips fall where they may.

We've tried losing as much as we can for the last 15 years and where has that gotten us? May as well put out an entertaining product if nothing else.


If you really truly wanted an entertaining product, you would have wanted them to tank to have a chance to accumulate the most possible top end talent. This disjointed logic is almost comical. And watching self-harm is not really entertaining either.

My idea of entertainment is not watching my team get blown off the court then popping the champagne because our lottery odds went up by 0.1%. It's winning games.

So the only comical thing here is your dogged belief that this time all the losing will turn things around. That despite trying that for almost 2 freaking decades with nothing to show for it, if we just try it a little longer we'll be on our way to the promised land. Screw that. We've been there, done that, it doesn't work. Let's try something different for once. Try to be even just a little bit respectable rather than the annual laughing stock. And if it doesn't work, hey, we can go right back to being losers like you so desperately want us to be.
Nick K
Veteran
Posts: 2,515
And1: 683
Joined: Nov 23, 2016
       

Re: Trade Talk (Part Six) 

Post#1794 » by Nick K » Sat Jun 12, 2021 12:36 pm

younggunsmn wrote:
Nick K wrote:
younggunsmn wrote:
Well Rubio was traded last offseason, coming off a better year, for essentially a semi useful expiring and a future 2nd round pick (if you consider 17 for 25+28 a wash). Does having one year remaining rather than two change that valuation much?
I just think that his value to this team will be much bigger than a future 2nd, especially considering how instrumental he was in helping Ant on the court his rookie year. Finding salary filler that is a better fit with those on court intangibles the rest of the team sorely lacks is going to be tough. He's not the first guy I would think about sending out.


Beasley is the most obvious trade candidate at this point considering contract, position, and relative value.


Rosas has publically said recently that our core 5 players are Kat, Ant, Dlo, McD, and Beasley. That tells me he's unlikely to be moved.

I think they are very high on Reid and Vando. That would leave everybody else on the trade block. You never know when one guys trash is another guys treasure.


What a pro sports executive says publicly and thinks privately are completely different worlds.
And it's kind of a dumb statement by a numbskull executive. It's kind of like lining your kids up and telling everyone who your favorites are.

Those 5 guys coincidentally are the only ones who have 3+ years on their contracts too. It's in your best interest not to rile up someone you are stuck with for the next few years. How Beasley handles beta status next to Ant's alpha is going to go a long ways towards how long he stays here. But if you get are looking for a PF upgrade, Beasley may be your best chip both position glut and salary matching wise.


There is no doubt about Beasley being our best chip. One thing is for sure and that is Rosas has to make some deals this summer. There seems to be so little available at PF that interests me. Do they look at Myles Turner and have Kat play more PF? I can't wait to see how it all turns out.
SO_MONEY
Analyst
Posts: 3,261
And1: 534
Joined: Sep 11, 2009
         

Re: Trade Talk (Part Six) 

Post#1795 » by SO_MONEY » Sat Jun 12, 2021 3:48 pm

shangrila wrote:
SO_MONEY wrote:
shangrila wrote:Win as many as you can and let the chips fall where they may.

We've tried losing as much as we can for the last 15 years and where has that gotten us? May as well put out an entertaining product if nothing else.


If you really truly wanted an entertaining product, you would have wanted them to tank to have a chance to accumulate the most possible top end talent. This disjointed logic is almost comical. And watching self-harm is not really entertaining either.

My idea of entertainment is not watching my team get blown off the court then popping the champagne because our lottery odds went up by 0.1%. It's winning games.

So the only comical thing here is your dogged belief that this time all the losing will turn things around. That despite trying that for almost 2 freaking decades with nothing to show for it, if we just try it a little longer we'll be on our way to the promised land. Screw that. We've been there, done that, it doesn't work. Let's try something different for once. Try to be even just a little bit respectable rather than the annual laughing stock. And if it doesn't work, hey, we can go right back to being losers like you so desperately want us to be.


My idea: entertainment is winning and you win more with more talent, period. I want more talent, more entertainment, you don't. You wanted to win meaningless games for no reason reducing our chances at a better more entertaining product. Yes, your logic is comical.

Your idea that those meaningless yield something or that what we have done in the past has anything to do with the here and now, or the very real situation we find ourselves in where we need to put talent out there THIS YEAR to prevent situations where players want to leverage their way out. By not tanking you have increased the chances of that very thing. By advocating meaningless wins you are in effect advocating going through another potential rebuild and a perpetual inferior product by limiting gains this coming season. Your logic is counterintuitive and why it is humorous in a sad way because you are wishing for the increased opportunity for exactly the opposite of what you want.

There is nothing you can say to make a competent argument for what you think is correct. You are just wrong and that is that. Not tanking was wrong and statistically bad for furnishing the best team possible.
IceManBK1
Starter
Posts: 2,361
And1: 205
Joined: Jul 14, 2017
   

Re: Trade Talk (Part Six) 

Post#1796 » by IceManBK1 » Yesterday 12:17 am

can this team make the playoffs in west? let's say we get myles turner+doug mcdermott(sign and trade) for beasley+huancho. somehow we get another good defending guard. Patrick Beverley for Rubio maybe? or sign Avery Bradley or KCP with the MLE.

Dlo/Beverley
Edwards/Mcdermott
McDaniels/Layman
Turner/Vanderbilt
Towns/Reid

That's a solid 10 man rotation
TheZachAttack
Rookie
Posts: 1,084
And1: 785
Joined: Jul 23, 2014
       

Re: Trade Talk (Part Six) 

Post#1797 » by TheZachAttack » Yesterday 5:20 pm

I would love for Edwards to get under Mitchell's wing as a mentor. There are some differences and this is not a new line of thinking, but Edwards has many of the same weaknesses as Mitchell did coming into the league. Mitchell has made gradual improvements to his game since coming into the NBA that mirror the improvements that I would want or hope that Edwards would make over his next few years. In addition, Mitchell seems to have a self-awareness about his weaknesses and a mindset that I think would be valuable to rub off on Edwards.

Here's a ringer article about Mitchell that got me thinking about this topic again: https://www.theringer.com/nba/2021/6/16/22536524/donovan-mitchell-utah-jazz
IceManBK1
Starter
Posts: 2,361
And1: 205
Joined: Jul 14, 2017
   

Re: Trade Talk (Part Six) 

Post#1798 » by IceManBK1 » Today 2:42 am

Lol Philly might be getting eliminated by Hawks. Just 1 more loss. If they make Simmons available, do we still trade for him. Those few extra wins at the end of the season might cost us the top 3 pick. If we land the top 3 pick I would make an offer of top 3 pick+Beasley and filler for Simmons. No 3 pt shot, but elite defender who can defend all 5 positions. We can use the MLE to sign a sharpshooter.
ChiefKeith91
Sophomore
Posts: 150
And1: 47
Joined: Nov 13, 2020
     

Re: Trade Talk (Part Six) 

Post#1799 » by ChiefKeith91 » Today 3:41 am

IceManBK1 wrote:Lol Philly might be getting eliminated by Hawks. Just 1 more loss. If they make Simmons available, do we still trade for him. Those few extra wins at the end of the season might cost us the top 3 pick. If we land the top 3 pick I would make an offer of top 3 pick+Beasley and filler for Simmons. No 3 pt shot, but elite defender who can defend all 5 positions. We can use the MLE to sign a sharpshooter.

Ben Simmons Red flags
•Can’t play offball
•Lack of Shooting
•Horrible FT shooter
•His contract

Those are problems I think we don’t need going forward. Ant and DLo are our ball handlers and need shooters for better spacing. I’d hate to have teams hack a Ben during late game situations smh.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app
IceManBK1
Starter
Posts: 2,361
And1: 205
Joined: Jul 14, 2017
   

Re: Trade Talk (Part Six) 

Post#1800 » by IceManBK1 » Today 4:59 am

ChiefKeith91 wrote:
IceManBK1 wrote:Lol Philly might be getting eliminated by Hawks. Just 1 more loss. If they make Simmons available, do we still trade for him. Those few extra wins at the end of the season might cost us the top 3 pick. If we land the top 3 pick I would make an offer of top 3 pick+Beasley and filler for Simmons. No 3 pt shot, but elite defender who can defend all 5 positions. We can use the MLE to sign a sharpshooter.

Ben Simmons Red flags
•Can’t play offball
•Lack of Shooting
•Horrible FT shooter
•His contract

Those are problems I think we don’t need going forward. Ant and DLo are our ball handlers and need shooters for better spacing. I’d hate to have teams hack a Ben during late game situations smh.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

Yea I would prefer turner cuz he can stretch the floor and score in various ways while being a good defender and the asking price is lower.

Return to Minnesota Timberwolves