Deal with Minnesota?

TheOGJabroni · Post #1 » by **TheOGJabroni** » Mon Jul 20, 2009 5:11 pm

Personally I'd love to see Gomes back in Green. They have a ridiculous amount of PF's on their team, and a lack of 2's and 3's. Gomes is a combo F, and as it stands it looks like he would be the playing the 3 on that team, just because he is capable pretty much, and Brewer is being forced to play the 2, simply because they have no one else.

Could we offer some kind of package revolving around JR Giddens and Eddie House and picks to get Ryan Gomes?

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=ne7uno

That way the TWolves start Brewer at his natural position, they have a nice prospect at SG which they currently don't have with JR Giddens, and Eddie House can provide some scoring/shooting to help their young point guards and to provide a lift which Minnesota desperately needs at the SG position right now.

Our team would then look like:

Perk / Sheed
KG / Sheed / Gomes
Pierce / Gomes
Ray / Daniels
Rondo / Pruitt (or LLE)

We could go small much like we did with Posey at the 4, with Gomes at the 4. Or we could go big playing Gomes at the 3. Mismatches galore.

What are your thoughts?

DorfonCeltics · Post #2 » by **DorfonCeltics** » Mon Jul 20, 2009 5:23 pm

A couple of things. Can Eddies contract be traded at this point? I thought there were some restrictions on that. Also, where does Baby play into this?

lojowo · Post #3 » by **lojowo** » Mon Jul 20, 2009 5:26 pm

http://hoopshype.com/depth_charts_northwest.htm

T-Wolves dont look loaded at SF from this depth chart.

Plus Hollinger says we will lose on more game each if we make this deal.

TheOGJabroni · Post #4 » by **TheOGJabroni** » Mon Jul 20, 2009 5:28 pm

I don't believe there is any reason Eddie can't be traded. Maybe I'm mistaken. ESPN's trade machine allowed me to do it and they usually are pretty good with those types of restrictions and things.

And this is assuming Baby is no re-signed, or is involved in a seperate sign and trade, maybe for a back-up PG.

Another thing that is assumed is that we either signed Daniels outright with the LLE, or received him via S&T with Indiana for Scal or TA.

TheOGJabroni · Post #5 » by **TheOGJabroni** » Mon Jul 20, 2009 5:30 pm

lojowo wrote:http://hoopshype.com/depth_charts_northwest.htm

T-Wolves dont look loaded at SF from this depth chart.

Plus Hollinger says we will lose on more game each if we make this deal.

They aren't loaded at SF, they are loaded at PF. Gomes really is a good bench player being a COMBO F, not really a starting SF, IMO. Brewer is a natural SF, so this deal would make sense. They may be thin at SG, but they were regardless. And JR could help them there, same with Eddie.

And, now that Hollinger says that, I'm 100% certain I'd make this deal :lol:

Papa Irish31 · Post #6 » by **Papa Irish31** » Mon Jul 20, 2009 6:00 pm

Id do it, id try not to include eddie though, i think we have to wait and see who we are giving up in a s&t with indiana if that gets completed before we can work out a new deal

TheOGJabroni · Post #7 » by **TheOGJabroni** » Mon Jul 20, 2009 6:09 pm

Papa Irish31 wrote:Id do it, id try not to include eddie though, i think we have to wait and see who we are giving up in a s&t with indiana if that gets completed before we can work out a new deal

If this trade was done, Eddie would not see much PT. I don't think they would do JR for Gomes straight up either. Nor does the money work. In the event of a S&T with the Pacers it sounds like it is TA or Scal for Daniels from the news that has been made available though.

Banks2Pierce · Post #8 » by **Banks2Pierce** » Mon Jul 20, 2009 6:20 pm

For some reason, I believe I remember hearing that Eddie had the final say on a trade out, so there'd be no way for the trade to go through. I could be wrong.

Post #9 » by **canman1971** » Mon Jul 20, 2009 6:23 pm

Is this our weekly Gomes thread? Been there, done that. No thanks.

Banks2Pierce · Post #10 » by **Banks2Pierce** » Mon Jul 20, 2009 6:27 pm

canman1971 wrote:Is this our weekly Gomes thread? Been there, done that. No thanks.

So you would be opposed to getting Gomes? I don't know about that. I think he could be a good fit on our team. More reliable than Scal. Ryan Gomes is a lot different than Marbury or Antoine, for whom there should be a ban on their "bring them back" threads. Can't say the same for Ryan.

TheOGJabroni · Post #11 » by **TheOGJabroni** » Mon Jul 20, 2009 6:30 pm

Maybe I am wrong about Eddie House. Does anyone know for sure? If so, I blame ESPN. But I will say, I do see him offered in trades quite often.

And I don't understand why anyone would be opposed to getting Gomes. He was a perfect fit accepting whatever role on a bad Celtic team. He would love accepting a decent role on a great Celtic team. He's a hometown guy. We should definitely want him.

Hemingway · Post #12 » by **Hemingway** » Mon Jul 20, 2009 6:32 pm

Having Gomes back would be great. That said, regardless of IF we can trade Eddie, we SHOULD NOT trade Eddie. He just re-uped. What kind of message would that send? No one wants to go to Minny and that would not make us look good to future free agents and even our own guys that don the line we will want to resign for friendly deals. Also at this point Eddie is a difference maker for us a few games a year. Next year there will probably be 5 or so games where we can probably say we wouldn't have won without House.

Post #13 » by **ParticleMan** » Mon Jul 20, 2009 6:38 pm

This doesn't pass the stupid test. Minny LOVES Gomes. I don't care if there's a glut, there's not way they're going to dump him for crap. It doesn't matter if Eddie has some trade kicker or whatever, they're not going to take him for Gomes.

TheOGJabroni · Post #14 » by **TheOGJabroni** » Mon Jul 20, 2009 6:38 pm

Hemingway wrote:Having Gomes back would be great. That said, regardless of IF we can trade Eddie, we SHOULD NOT trade Eddie. He just re-uped. What kind of message would that send? No one wants to go to Minny and that would not make us look good to future free agents and even our own guys that don the line we will want to resign for friendly deals. Also at this point Eddie is a difference maker for us a few games a year. Next year there will probably be 5 or so games where we can probably say we wouldn't have won without House.

You may be right but where does he see PT IF we got Gomes back?

Papa Irish31 · Post #15 » by **Papa Irish31** » Mon Jul 20, 2009 6:51 pm

as of now at backup up point with marquis helping him bring the ball up

TheOGJabroni · Post #16 » by **TheOGJabroni** » Mon Jul 20, 2009 6:53 pm

Papa Irish31 wrote:as of now at backup up point with marquis helping him bring the ball up

Eddie bringing up the ball is not a good situation. A situation that needs to be addressed, regardless of this trade.

Banks2Pierce · Post #17 » by **Banks2Pierce** » Mon Jul 20, 2009 6:54 pm

ParticleMan wrote:This doesn't pass the stupid test. Minny LOVES Gomes. I don't care if there's a glut, there's not way they're going to dump him for crap. It doesn't matter if Eddie has some trade kicker or whatever, they're not going to take him for Gomes.

Who knows now? They have a new gm, new coach, etc. He might be too expensive as a role player on a bad team for management's taste.

Cross · Post #18 » by **Cross** » Mon Jul 20, 2009 7:04 pm

Your proposed second squad lacks a proven, quality jump shooter. Granted they probably wouldn't play the whole team at once, but there isn't going to be much in the way of floor spacing, making it difficult for all the mid-range/slasher type players to get shots.

stiles21 · Post #19 » by **stiles21** » Mon Jul 20, 2009 7:04 pm

I think it would be a good trade, for the Celtics. I don't see Minny doing it though. They lose their starting SF for Eddie house and a throw in to make the money work. Hell if they would go for that, we should throw in T.A and see if we could get Telfair or Brown to go with it and get our back up PG.

TheOGJabroni · Post #20 » by **TheOGJabroni** » Mon Jul 20, 2009 7:06 pm

Cross wrote:Your proposed second squad lacks a proven, quality jump shooter. Granted they probably wouldn't play the whole team at once, but there isn't going to be much in the way of floor spacing, making it difficult for all the mid-range/slasher type players to get shots.

Well like you said yourself, they will not play together at the same time so it's not much of an issue.