NY - MN

Dewey · Post #1 » by **Dewey** » Sat Aug 22, 2009 1:34 pm

Rubio/Blount to NY
Gallinari/Milicic/Future 1st to MN

Rumor has it Kahn is helping facilitate a trade sending Rubio to NY. I'd say it is like just that - a rumor representing one last effort on behalf of the media to get the Rube to NY. Anyway, let's think hypothetically ... this summer, Gallinari has reported as successfully recovering from a back injury ... could this be the player the Wolves have been waiting on? NY has called off all pursuit of any FA PG's ...

digitaldropoff · Post #2 » by **digitaldropoff** » Sat Aug 22, 2009 1:45 pm

You might as well go away now....Gallo has done nothing but be hurt in this league....Darko has done even less...and I don't know how that's possible. And NYK don't have a first rounder to give till what...2012? Pathetic trade idea.....absolutely pathetic. Honestly...as of right now....in terms of proven assets...Blount is this best player in that trade if you consider Rubio hasn't played in the NBA yet. Man....I hope your not a NYK fan...because you're only reaffirming the stupidity.

Vega06 · Post #3 » by **Vega06** » Sat Aug 22, 2009 2:34 pm

According to some Knicks fans, Gallinari could be better than Durant. I don't think they'd give up such a promising prospect.

Esohny · Post #4 » by **Esohny** » Sat Aug 22, 2009 3:30 pm

Dewey is a Wolves fan.

I would only consider this if it was the 2010 knicks pick, when I know that they won't be very good. Who knows where they'll be in 2012? I'm intruiged by Gallo, but worried about his back and defense, and I have only a bit more interest in Darko than Blount.

shrink · Post #5 » by **shrink** » Sat Aug 22, 2009 4:49 pm

Vega06 wrote:According to some Knicks fans, Gallinari could be better than Durant. I don't think they'd give up such a promising prospect.

LOL! So you've been reading the trade board too?

Dewey, I think its a fair deal that neither side agrees to. MIN will hold onto rubio because of his ridiculous upside and marketability, and Knicks fans will try to believe that Galinari is close. they must also worry about that pick, since they may really be smarting when they have to give their unprotected 1st to UTA next season.

skorff26 · Post #6 » by **skorff26** » Sat Aug 22, 2009 6:06 pm

Add in a Songalia + Cardinal for expiring swap as well and I might do it.

I really like Rubio, but I'm also really high on Gallinari. I think they both will be studs. I think that with the way Flynn has impressed if we could do a Rubio, Blount, Songalia, Cardinal for Gallinari, Milicic, 2012 unprotected 1st, (Mobley or Hughes or Harrington).

A Flynn/2010 FA (JJ hopefully)/Gallinari/Love/Jefferson with Brewer, Ellington, a couple of 2010 1sts, Hollins, Gomes would be a stellar team.

We would have a ton of cap space to work with as well; also when NY doesn't land their dominant free agent and overpay for a mediocre one, we will end up with another lottery pick in 2012 which would infuse some good, cheap, young talent to our team.

Post #7 » by **revprodeji** » Sat Aug 22, 2009 9:58 pm

Wolves would need to include Song's contract. I like Gallinari but back injuries scare me. So I would not be excited about this trade.

Isnt there a rule about not trading away 2 1st rd pick in a row? So the soonest a NY pick could come to us would be 2012. No thank you.

GopherIt! · Post #8 » by **GopherIt!** » Sat Aug 22, 2009 11:53 pm

There's no way we trade _______ for _______ and scrubs like ________ & ________.

________ is worth way more than _______.

If you want _______ we would need _______ , _______ and 3 unprotected picks.

Take it or leave it.

shrink · Post #9 » by **shrink** » Sun Aug 23, 2009 12:09 am

revprodeji wrote:Wolves would need to include Song's contract. I like Gallinari but back injuries scare me. So I would not be excited about this trade.

Isnt there a rule about not trading away 2 1st rd pick in a row? So the soonest a NY pick could come to us would be 2012. No thank you.

I agree, but it would be a deal-killer for NYK. Right or wrong, they believe that if they can maximize their 2010 cap, the bright lights of New York will bring them superstar free agents. They may be one of the few teams more anxious to clear 2010 cap space than we are.

And yes, you're right about the Ted Stepien rule, where you can't owe two future 1sts in a row without leaving some 1st on deck. NYK could trade it if we could send them a lousy 1st. However, if you drink the NYC Kool-ade, their 2011 1st will have little value, if they can add two superstars next summer.

Post #10 » by **The J Rocka** » Sun Aug 23, 2009 6:42 am

We went from acquiring Wilson Chandler to this?? :noway:

I think Rubio is worth more than this

slinky · Post #11 » by **slinky** » Sun Aug 23, 2009 2:00 pm

shrink wrote:
They may be one of the few teams more anxious to clear 2010 cap space than we are.

Anyone know what other teams are really in salary cap cutting mode for 2010?

B Calrissian · Post #12 » by **B Calrissian** » Sun Aug 23, 2009 3:49 pm

J_Era_3 wrote:We went from acquiring Wilson Chandler to this??

I think Rubio is worth more than this

Huh? This is a much better deal than Chandler for Rubio.

alphad0gz · Post #13 » by **alphad0gz** » Sun Aug 23, 2009 4:06 pm

You couldn't get Gallo for anyone on your team and I don't mean that as a slam on your team. NY management is THAT high on him. I can't blame you for not knowing but as someone who watched every game including SL last year, this kid really does have special potential. The back was not a serious, chronic type of injury. It was just painful and temporarily debilitating. The bone in his spine was impinging on a nerve. It was abraided down and the pain is gone. As far as his skills, he is already one of the top 5 shooters in the league, a great, not good passer, and has a superior handle for a big man. He is close to 6'11 now and may get to 7', according to his doctor. He is not a dominating rebounder but will get after it when he needs to. He plays smart and hard all the time. He actually guarded some of the PGs last year effectively because of his length and IQ. Comparing him to Durant is silly because their games are so dissimilar. Gallo's game is closer to Bird's in style, rather than Durants. He is easily the most talented player on the Knicks. He is two years away from being a household name.

You guys know I love Rubio but I wouldn't trade Gallo for him and I don't think NY management would either. We are expecting something along the lines of 15/5/5 from him this year.

alphad0gz · Post #14 » by **alphad0gz** » Sun Aug 23, 2009 4:08 pm

Everyone knows about Walsh's plan for 2010 but what are the Wolves hoping to do with their cap space?

skorff26 · Post #15 » by **skorff26** » Sun Aug 23, 2009 4:18 pm

alphad0gz wrote:Everyone knows about Walsh's plan for 2010 but what are the Wolves hoping to do with their cap space?

We would make an offer to guys like Lebron, Wade, etc. but we are pretty positive and realistic that none would come here.

Our main target and the guy that we think we could land for the max is Joe Johnson. He would look awesome on our team and we feel that a max deal could land him.

After that, we have many opinions, some want Gay, others want some other guys (I don't remember all the options that people want), and then there are others who would use our cap space like Memphis has to facilitate trades in 2010 and go for 2011 cap space since 2010 cap space will probably be worth more than any cap space in previous years and a lot of teams will want it (because of a low luxury tax, to try and get extra cap space to make some offers, or for whatever reason).

Post #16 » by **The J Rocka** » Sun Aug 23, 2009 9:36 pm

B Calrissian wrote:
J_Era_3 wrote:We went from acquiring Wilson Chandler to this??

I think Rubio is worth more than this

Huh? This is a much better deal than Chandler for Rubio.

IMO i think Chandler will be a better player than Gallinari (even if he is is healthy) not saying he's gonna be bad or anything tho.... but i still think think we can get more for Rubio from another team

shrink · Post #17 » by **shrink** » Mon Aug 24, 2009 2:23 am

alphad0gz wrote:Everyone knows about Walsh's plan for 2010 but what are the Wolves hoping to do with their cap space?

I think we'll end up trading it for talent from a team that is:

1. A good FA destination, and they want to clear cap space to get someone better
2. A team that wants to go in a different direction -- perhaps to start rebuilding
3. A team that needs financial help, either to get under the lux (which may drop up to $10 mil) or to remove longterm salary to attract a new owner.

NYchris · Post #18 » by **NYchris** » Mon Aug 24, 2009 7:39 am

I am a knick fan and I wouldnt even make this trade. I would only want rubio if we keep gallinari, but chandler can go he has great potential but his contract will be up and he will want money which we can't provide if we do sign 2 big free agents.

Dewey · Post #19 » by **Dewey** » Mon Aug 24, 2009 1:15 pm

If anyone wants the Rube, especially NY, Kahn will require nothing less than Gallinari. If not, it's apparent thay Plan A will move forward and Rubio will join the Wolves in September.

Personally, I think trading Rubio at this stage would be a huge mistake. We rolled the dice at the draft and I see no reason to change course now.

Post #20 » by **Klomp** » Mon Aug 24, 2009 1:37 pm

NYchris wrote:I am a knick fan and I wouldnt even make this trade. I would only want rubio if we keep gallinari, but chandler can go he has great potential but his contract will be up and he will want money which we can't provide if we do sign 2 big free agents.

If your reasoning for Gallinari over Chandler is that Chandler's contract is up and he'll want money, look again. Both guys are in a similar situation for 2010, each having team options. Actually Chandler would be the better one for you to keep as he's over $1M cheaper.