"Major deal" with POR?
Moderators: Domejandro, Calinks, Worm Guts
Re: "Major deal" with POR?
- PharmD
- Head Coach
- Posts: 6,964
- And1: 5,559
- Joined: Aug 21, 2015
-
Re: "Major deal" with POR?
I thought those were both baseless rumors.
Re: "Major deal" with POR?
- m2002brian
- Analyst
- Posts: 3,296
- And1: 1,355
- Joined: May 29, 2009
-
Re: "Major deal" with POR?
They're baseless based on the fact that the person/organization seeking a trade is incorrect.
It has been fairly clear that OTHER TEAMS have been calling the Wolves in regards to Rubio. NOT the other way around.
It has been fairly clear that OTHER TEAMS have been calling the Wolves in regards to Rubio. NOT the other way around.
BLUEGREENRED
Re: "Major deal" with POR?
- Skeon
- Ballboy
- Posts: 39
- And1: 13
- Joined: Jun 11, 2015
- Location: Barcelona
-
Re: "Major deal" with POR?
NikolaPekovic wrote:Saltine wrote:Flip isn't trading Rubio.
Flip tried to trade him for Bledsoe last year. Also would've taken D'Angelo 2nd in the draft, which would eventually lead to Ricky being traded.
Lol, you say that without any basis. smh
Re: "Major deal" with POR?
- NikolaPekovic
- Rookie
- Posts: 1,117
- And1: 344
- Joined: Jun 27, 2012
-
Re: "Major deal" with POR?
Skeon wrote:NikolaPekovic wrote:Saltine wrote:Flip isn't trading Rubio.
Flip tried to trade him for Bledsoe last year. Also would've taken D'Angelo 2nd in the draft, which would eventually lead to Ricky being traded.
Lol, you say that without any basis. smh
Flip offered Bledsoe the max that would've only been possible in a sign and trade.
During draft deliberation Flip told Russell he envisioned a core him, LaVine, and Wiggins. Flip even admitted he woud've taken Russell #2 after the draft on Barreiro.
Re: "Major deal" with POR?
- shakendfries
- Assistant Coach
- Posts: 3,886
- And1: 1,063
- Joined: Jun 24, 2015
Re: "Major deal" with POR?
PharmD wrote:shakendfries wrote:Worm Guts wrote:The major deal made me think Rubio-Lillard, but I'm not sure how that would fit with the cap space part.
Rubio and Martin for Lillard + a throwaway like Plumlee?
Why would Portland do this? They're pretty much committed to rebuilding around Lillard. Martin has ~no value to them.
There's no reason for Portland to be committed to anything- they just lost two of their 3 building blocks this summer. In doing so, they lost half of their backcourt. Portland shouldn't have any plans to compete soon in the West (dealing with Jazz, Sac, Pels, Mavs) so they must be thinking long term. Portland knows it must procure talent through the draft because their city is a tough sell for free agents. They drafted most of their main pieces in Aldridge, Roy, Oden, Lillard. Since they don't have any first round picks, they have to ask themselves whether they think they'd have better chances building a system/cohesive team around Lillard, or a backcourt that already has significant chemistry in Rubio + Martin. Backcourt chemistry is something that is difficult to replicate. With Lillard, Portland is dealing with too many unknowns- Who are they going to pair with Lillard, is it going to work, what are they going to do about the frontcourt. However, making a deal for Rubio and Kevin Martin solves their backcourt issues, and puts them in a situation where their in a better position to build. Building around Rubio means getting shooters, because he is a pass first PG supreme. Building around Lillard is so much more trickier because he is a scoring PG. Even though some people will claim Lillard is 10x better than Rubio, it seems like a lateral move for Portland


"Kevin Durant is not coming to the Nets. If I'm wrong, I will change my avatar to anything you request no matter how humiliating it is." - MrDollarBills, 10/22/18
Re: "Major deal" with POR?
- urinesane
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 5,012
- And1: 2,887
- Joined: May 10, 2010
-
Re: "Major deal" with POR?
Tekkenlaw wrote:lol, mods getting butthurt and locking threads in trades and transactions because twolves fans thought Rubio-Lavine-Shabazz-Dieng-Bjelica-two firsts for Lillard would be a bad trade.
It would be a terrible trade. Not sure what your point is.
Re: "Major deal" with POR?
- urinesane
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 5,012
- And1: 2,887
- Joined: May 10, 2010
-
Re: "Major deal" with POR?
NikolaPekovic wrote:Skeon wrote:NikolaPekovic wrote:Flip tried to trade him for Bledsoe last year. Also would've taken D'Angelo 2nd in the draft, which would eventually lead to Ricky being traded.
Lol, you say that without any basis. smh
Flip offered Bledsoe the max that would've only been possible in a sign and trade.
During draft deliberation Flip told Russell he envisioned a core him, LaVine, and Wiggins. Flip even admitted he woud've taken Russell #2 after the draft on Barreiro.
You have proof of any of this?
Re: "Major deal" with POR?
-
- Forum Mod - Timberwolves
- Posts: 27,244
- And1: 12,081
- Joined: Dec 27, 2003
-
Re: "Major deal" with POR?
Saltine wrote:Flip isn't trading Rubio.
I think he would if he could get a PG he likes better. I think he would for Lillard.
Re: "Major deal" with POR?
-
- Head Coach
- Posts: 6,943
- And1: 1,262
- Joined: Dec 20, 2008
Re: "Major deal" with POR?
urinesane wrote:Tekkenlaw wrote:lol, mods getting butthurt and locking threads in trades and transactions because twolves fans thought Rubio-Lavine-Shabazz-Dieng-Bjelica-two firsts for Lillard would be a bad trade.
It would be a terrible trade. Not sure what your point is.
looks somebody didn't read the thread but is quick to make snarky remarks...
Re: "Major deal" with POR?
- Vindicater
- General Manager
- Posts: 7,948
- And1: 423
- Joined: Apr 11, 2004
Re: "Major deal" with POR?
So can we bin this now?
"That's why the last two years weren't guaranteed," Walsh said. "Either way, he knew it could have happened either way."
Re: "Major deal" with POR?
- Saltine
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 5,392
- And1: 997
- Joined: Jul 20, 2003
- Location: Land o' Lakes
-
Re: "Major deal" with POR?
Worm Guts wrote:Saltine wrote:Flip isn't trading Rubio.
I think he would if he could get a PG he likes better. I think he would for Lillard.
Yep, of course, but I doubt Lillard is that guy. He is a very poor defender, he's much better at scoring than Ricky, but that's about it... Our teams biggest issue is defense, not scoring.
Re: "Major deal" with POR?
- urinesane
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 5,012
- And1: 2,887
- Joined: May 10, 2010
-
Re: "Major deal" with POR?
NewWolvesOrder wrote:urinesane wrote:Tekkenlaw wrote:lol, mods getting butthurt and locking threads in trades and transactions because twolves fans thought Rubio-Lavine-Shabazz-Dieng-Bjelica-two firsts for Lillard would be a bad trade.
It would be a terrible trade. Not sure what your point is.
looks somebody didn't read the thread but is quick to make snarky remarks...
Are you saying that's not a bad trade?
I commented on what you wrote, do I need to read an entire thread to know that trade offer is not only crap?
Also Rubio+Martin for Lillard wouldn't make sense for either side. Lillard fits better in Portland and Rubio is the much better fit with the Wolves current roster.
Rubio trade ideas/threads/posts/rumors are dumb.
Re: "Major deal" with POR?
-
- Head Coach
- Posts: 6,943
- And1: 1,262
- Joined: Dec 20, 2008
Re: "Major deal" with POR?
urinesane wrote:NewWolvesOrder wrote:urinesane wrote:
It would be a terrible trade. Not sure what your point is.
looks somebody didn't read the thread but is quick to make snarky remarks...
Are you saying that's not a bad trade?
I commented on what you wrote, do I need to read an entire thread to know that trade offer is not only crap?
Also Rubio+Martin for Lillard wouldn't make sense for either side. Lillard fits better in Portland and Rubio is the much better fit with the Wolves current roster.
Rubio trade ideas/threads/posts/rumors are dumb.
The point is you completely missed Tekkenlaw's point because you didn't read the thread he was referring to, geez.
Re: "Major deal" with POR?
- NikolaPekovic
- Rookie
- Posts: 1,117
- And1: 344
- Joined: Jun 27, 2012
-
Re: "Major deal" with POR?
urinesane wrote:NikolaPekovic wrote:Skeon wrote:
Lol, you say that without any basis. smh
Flip offered Bledsoe the max that would've only been possible in a sign and trade.
During draft deliberation Flip told Russell he envisioned a core him, LaVine, and Wiggins. Flip even admitted he woud've taken Russell #2 after the draft on Barreiro.
You have proof of any of this?
You can find the Bledsoe stuff on google.
As for the radio show I don't have proof of that. Barreiro asked Flip if the top 5 surprised him, he said no. They talked about the Lakers pick a bit, he said he wasn't surprised at all and thought they made a good pick. Barreiro then asked him if that's the order he would've picked. He said pretty much (outside of Hezonja of course). When they brought up Justise Winslow Flip sounded pretty surprised he dropped, said he should've went top 5.
Return to Minnesota Timberwolves