A trade idea you will all hate but that makes some sense

andyhop · Post #1 » by **andyhop** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 3:32 am

After the draft if the Wolves have picked Beasley as the BPA but he has shown that he is going to be a 4 not a 3 (as I and others think likely) in the league, is anyone else prepared to think the unthinkable and trade Al.

Here's what i had in mind.

Wolves incoming Dalembert and Iggy (S&T 5 years $55m)

Wolves outgoing Al and Toine

The Wolves replace Al with Beasley whilst adding a defensive centre in Dally and an all around guy in Iggy

The Sixers get the best guy in the deal to rebuild around and Toine to provide cap relief after next year or to use as an expiring in a deal.

Wolves line up:

Dally / Richard
Beasley / Smith
Iggy / Brewer
McCants / Brewer
Foye

dunkonu21 · Post #2 » by **dunkonu21** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 3:34 am

it doesn't make sense at all...go away.

dunkonu21 · Post #3 » by **dunkonu21** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 3:34 am

oh ya ibtl

theGreatRC · Post #4 » by **theGreatRC** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 3:39 am

You know Al isn't going anywhere.

Post #5 » by **revprodeji** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 4:16 am

No reason to lock it.

But no andy, there is no way we do this. After grooming the public that Al is the future, signing him to the big deal as well. There is no way he is traded. We are much more likely to move Beasley on draft day then move Al.

Also, no way of knowing if he can play 3 until he gets a chance to play the 3. Which will not be this year.

Post #6 » by **Worm Guts** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 6:36 pm

I don't hate it but I do think it's incredibly unlikely.

B Calrissian · Post #7 » by **B Calrissian** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 7:13 pm

I like Iggy but Al is not going anywhere. Plus we know that Al wants to be here (signed ext.).

Rev, what does the PF stand for that is under your name?

mandurugo · Post #8 » by **mandurugo** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 7:20 pm

with their current record the wolves can't rule out trading anyone. That said, I haven't watched Dalembert or Igudoula play enough to figure out if this is a good deal. The general idea doesn't seem too crazy to me.

deeney0 · Post #9 » by **deeney0** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 7:31 pm

mandurugo wrote:with their current record the wolves can't rule out trading anyone. That said, I haven't watched Dalembert or Igudoula play enough to figure out if this is a good deal. The general idea doesn't seem too crazy to me.

Yes they can. Trading Jefferson makes 0 sense.

Post #10 » by **revprodeji** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 8:54 pm

Jefferson is the only literal untouchable we have.

B.Cal it is for the passed away Pacer

chrbal · Post #11 » by **chrbal** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 9:04 pm

I was expecting to see something along the lines of "Buckner to Denver for Steven Hunter". I'm pretty sure the Wolves would have to allow for the physical to be skipped, since I think Steven is injured.

Hes a center whose contract is one year shorter then Gregs.

Or even something along the lines of a 3 team trade that sends Jaric, Buckner, and some of the younger talent (think Gerald Green, not Corey Brewer <2nd level younger talent>) that gets Wally World back in Minnesota. Wallys contract is shorter then Marko/Greg, but its obviouslly a larger contract.

4ho5ive · Post #12 » by **4ho5ive** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 9:06 pm

I hate it and it doesnt make sense. Iggy and Dally arent working well in Philly. They probably wont do to well here either. I dont see Iggy ever playing the 3 efficiently.

I hate this deal.

Post #13 » by **Worm Guts** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 10:14 pm

4ho5ive wrote:I hate it and it doesnt make sense. Iggy and Dally arent working well in Philly. They probably wont do to well here either. I dont see Iggy ever playing the 3 efficiently.

I hate this deal.

You could argue that Al Jefferson is working well in Minnesota. He's putting up 20 and 12 but the Wolves only have 5 wins.

deeney0 · Post #14 » by **deeney0** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 10:23 pm

Worm Guts wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

You could argue that Al Jefferson is working well in Minnesota. He's putting up 20 and 12 but the Wolves only have 5 wins.

You could argue Durant isn't working in Seattle, they only have 9 wins. You could argue Wade isn't working in Miami, they only have 8 wins. You can argue a lot of things.

Post #15 » by **Worm Guts** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 10:32 pm

deeney0 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

You could argue Durant isn't working in Seattle, they only have 9 wins. You could argue Wade isn't working in Miami, they only have 8 wins. You can argue a lot of things.

Yes you can.

shrink · Post #16 » by **shrink** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 11:03 pm

Worm Guts wrote: Yes you can.

No you can't!!!

Post #17 » by **revprodeji** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 11:39 pm

The team has tried to convince us that Al is the guy, we got him for KG and we are getting attached. Teams do not move guys like that so soon

Taking on Iggy and Dally is a ton of cash, and neither of those guys are cornerstones to build around. Even with Beasley.

Also, I am convinced beasley will be an ok 4, but if he is to be the dynamic player that some of you crush on he will need to make the transistion to the 3. That being said the OP is invalid.

shrink · Post #18 » by **shrink** » Sun Jan 20, 2008 12:59 am

"A trade idea you will all hate but that makes some sense"

Well, you're half right.

Seriously though, for me, this is better than a lot of offers that completely neglect the financial ramifications of offers, and is swapping young players on significant contracts. I'm personally a little too risk averse to jump on the Dalembert badwagon after he's looked lost for so many years, but its hard to argue with the stats this year. Iguodala is immensely talented, but he plays a position where the nba is filled with immensely talented players. We just don't have one yet.

However, I don't think this would ever happen. The ghost of KG is still around, and to trade away the heir apparent, our best parting gift from Garnett seems almost sacreligious. Al Jefferson seems to me to be better than we even hoped, and he's young and keeps getting better. I hate to say anyone is untradable, but I think he probably is. He's our franchise, and he's our future, and even if Iggy and Dal matched his trade value, I doubt we would still trade him.

dunkonu21 · Post #19 » by **dunkonu21** » Sun Jan 20, 2008 1:10 am

Iggy is overrated

andyhop · Post #20 » by **andyhop** » Sun Jan 20, 2008 4:05 am

As I said in the original post this only makes the slightest bit of sense if Beasley is projected to be a PF ,if you believe he can play the 3 then obviously you would play him alongside Al.

I know that it is a very unlikely trade to happen even if the above condition is met because trading the face of the franchise for the second time in a year is a public relations nightmare however good or bad it is from a basketball standpoint.

As for the trade itself the reason it makes some sense is that if you believe Beasley is going to be a star at the 4 then his likely production should be around that of Al's even if the method of his scoring is going to differ a bit with less post and more mid range scoring.

Iggy isn't a franchise player or anything but if you believe that Foye is going to be the number 1 or 2 option for the team offensively then Iggy is a very good 3rd option offensively who will also grab his share of assists and boards whilst being good on the defensive side of the ball.

Dally is going to average close to a double-double with a couple of blocks whilst playing good defense and not needing the ball offensively.

The Wolves are 28th in the league in offensive rating and 30th in defensive rating.If Foye is the answer to the offensive side of the problem then that still leads to a massive need to address the defensive problems which this trade would help with.

It would basically be a gamble on Beasley being able to replace Al's production at the 4, as such I am not sold enough on Beasley yet to really believe he is capable of doing that but if you believe he can then the trade makes some sense.