RealGM

I brought this up on the Lakers board

LAL GETS: Luke Ridnour + $2 mil cap space

MIN GETS: Luke Walton + LAL 1st (now 20) + DAL 1st (now 18 - Top 20 prot. 2012-17)

Walton 5,680,000 5,800,000
Ridnour 3,680,000 4,000,000 4,320,000

WHY FOR MIN? Ridnour is not really needed for us to get the most out of JJ Barea. Two late 1st for Ridnour and cap space seems like a better asset going forward. MIN could use the picks to sweeten a trade for talent.

WHY FOR LAL? Since LAL is over the lux, this not only gets them a better starting PG, but it saves them $7.6 mil. It'd be like selling the picks, and getting two year upgrade of ridnour for free.

semi-sentient wrote:

shrink wrote:A more cost-effective deal would be for the Lakers to use both picks, and get MIN to take on Luke Walton for two years. It would be like selling the two picks for $7.6 mil in savings, and getting the production of the more useful Ridnour for two years instead of Walton.

Would the Wolves actually consider that? I think we do that in a heartbeat.

I'd do it. I don't know why anyone ever thought Walton was worth over $5.5 million, maybe a favor to the family? But I'd like those picks.

Maybe after the season, but with Barea's injuries, the shortened season and Luke's recent play, I doubt the team would give him up for what amounts to nothing in the short term.

I would jump at that deal. We shorten the length of our financial resposibilities and gain two more tradable assets in picks. Anything we can do to position ourselves to move up in next year's draft I'm largely game for. The only other trades I'm interested in bring us back a functional SG so if we can't use him in that transaction, I'm all for using him to gain picks next season.

Timing is everything. A week ago I possibly would have said, “DEAL” but now it looks like the two-point guard system that Adelman just inserted has been successful. His ability to knock down an open look and not worry about being the lead distributor will benefit this team as well as Luke's production. So this week, “NO DEAL”.

Big no from me. 2 reasons:
1) don't want to make lakers better for 2 crappy 1sts
2) not worth taking on walton's 2012-13 salary (if we decide to cut ties w/beasley/webster/miller/randolph we will have some decent cap room, and ridnour is tradeable for cap space, walton is not).

Lakers already have a lesser version of Luke in Steve Blake. But I admit their PG play is atrocious and Ridnour would be a serious upgrade.

I just think that now that we are building momentum is not the time to be trading rotation players for draft picks in the 20 range. I might change my mind once guys get healthy and the playing time problems start.

Nope, I agree with youngguns. And, a big F you to the lakers for all the Pau to MN trades, the BS Love to LA rumors, and just as a matter of principle. Let them sink down to the bottom as their guys age, they are in the west. We have no reason at all to help them, they made a crappy deal with Walton, let them spend their cap on it

Agree with last two posts. Deal doesn't interest me.

Saltine wrote:Nope, I agree with youngguns. And, a big F you to the lakers for all the Pau to MN trades, the BS Love to LA rumors, and just as a matter of principle. Let them sink down to the bottom as their guys age, they are in the west. We have no reason at all to help them, they made a crappy deal with Walton, let them spend their cap on it

That seems a little dramatic for a trade that nets the Lakers Luke Ridnour. I don't know if I like the trade or not, but my only concern would be how it helps the Wolves, not whether it helps the Lakers.

No way. We don't need the financial liability of two late firsts. We don't need more young talent, and I would argue that trading Luke in a package could get us more of an impact player that fits our roster than two late firsts.

Walton. No.

Remember - these aren't necessarily picks we turn into prospects, but could be picks we use to insure a trade, for example, to win a bid for Mayo.

shrink wrote:Remember - these aren't necessarily picks we turn into prospects, but could be picks we use to insure a trade, for example, to win a bid for Mayo.

Or Gordon. Owning 4 first-round picks and young players would have to put us in prime position to acquire him without giving up anything essential to the team. Ridnour is much more valuable to the Lakers than he would be to a team like New Orleans so this deal works for me if we can spin the picks into another commodity that we value.

I would jump all over that, but I would wait until Barea and Lee are healthy. 2 1st rounders could help get Gordon. Lakers arrogance is not a good reason not to do a deal that benefits the Wolves.