Shitz and giggles--Trade Rubio?

Post #1 » by **revprodeji** » Mon Sep 7, 2009 6:49 pm

This is for Mn posters only. I am declaring that NY spamming will be dealt with severely in this thread.

Mn fans.

Lets say Sessions progresses and is a stud, and Flynn looks like a keeper. What kind of deal would you look at moving Rubio for? I just want to gauge what people think the value should be that we are going for.

Post #2 » by **Baphomet** » Mon Sep 7, 2009 7:04 pm

Well, the obvious choice to me is that in the event we do move him, we move for a young, starting caliber SG/SF.

I'm thinking someone along the lines of Eric Gordon, Jeff Green (with some more incentive from OKC), and maybe a Thad Young type guy (same incentives as Green). Gordon appears to be the real deal, so in all likelihood we'd have to throw in something else to make a deal more amicable.

Post #3 » by **revprodeji** » Mon Sep 7, 2009 7:04 pm

In my case, the only trade I readily advocated would be Eric Gordon+our Pick for Rubio. The logic being that points have more value than wings, Rubio is a better prospect and would be a great pair with Griffin. It also would take care of any concern for Market that Rubio's agent has. We would get a SG that would fit nice with our existing players and we get our pick back. Of course LAC fans could decline it, but that is not the point. the point is to float deals. The LAC deal is unique because of our pick.

I would want a wing prospect in the same avenue as Gordon.

Busch Legion · Post #4 » by **Busch Legion** » Mon Sep 7, 2009 8:05 pm

Its funny, because out of everyone in that draft, I thought Gordon would be the guy that wouldn't live up to expectations (bust kinda)

Anyway I would love a trade to LAC for Gordon and DeAndre Jordan... i'm still kinda pissy we didn't select him instead of pekovic.

mnWI · Post #5 » by **mnWI** » Mon Sep 7, 2009 9:12 pm

Trade him to the Knicks for Jared Jeffries.

Post #6 » by **The J Rocka** » Mon Sep 7, 2009 11:05 pm

To SAC for Kevin Martin

or

To LAC Eric Gordon + our pick and/or DeAndre Jordan

Post #7 » by **revprodeji** » Mon Sep 7, 2009 11:11 pm

The value between those two trades is pretty different.

Mcfale313 · Post #8 » by **Mcfale313** » Mon Sep 7, 2009 11:27 pm

I dont think Martin is a good choice, he simply doesnt play D at all, I'd do the Gordon+pick for Rubio, but I just don't see Clippers adding Rubio when they already have Davis to man that position

Rubio+Songaila for Gay please

Post #9 » by **C.lupus** » Mon Sep 7, 2009 11:36 pm

I think we might be able to get Gay (if we want him) without giving up Rubio. I don't see the Clipps giving up Gordon and a pick for unproven Rubio, either. It's really tough to guage value right now. I think RR is at a low value point now but should be back up this time next year.

Post #10 » by **C.lupus** » Mon Sep 7, 2009 11:51 pm

MN trades:
Al Jefferson ($12M)
R.Rubio ($2.8M)

MN recieves:
Danny Granger ($9.9M)
Roy Hibbert ($1.6M)

Indiana trades:
Danny Granger ($9.9M)
Roy Hibbert ($1.6M)

Indians receives:
Al Jefferson ($12M)
Danilo Gallinari ($3.1M)

NY trades:
Danilo Gallinari ($3.1M)

NY receives:
R.Rubio ($2.8M)

MN roster:
Hibbert/(Pekovic)
Love/Songalia
Granger/Gomes
Brewer/Ellington
Sessions/Flynn

Post #11 » by **revprodeji** » Mon Sep 7, 2009 11:54 pm

Are you serious or mocking the NY trades? Al jeff is not needed to make that trade happen.

Post #12 » by **C.lupus** » Tue Sep 8, 2009 12:00 am

I was thinking Jefferson and Granger had similar value (Al is a bit higher). Granger gives us the scoring wing we need and Pekovic replaces Al in the low post. We then draft Turner (or Warren) and have a young core of:

Flynn/Sessions
Turner/Ellington
Granger
Love
Pekovic

Is the value that far off? Maybe we get a pick or two coming back our way?

Post #13 » by **Klomp** » Tue Sep 8, 2009 12:16 am

What about Rubio/Jefferson to Oakland for Randolph/Biedrins

Post #14 » by **revprodeji** » Tue Sep 8, 2009 12:17 am

If Al and Granger have similar value, then you are trading Rubio for Hibbert? I am not sure why you would need both guys.

Hibbert+Granger for Al jefferson would be a debated deal. One that could be argued depending on personal preference. You basically throw rubio in there for nothing.

NY and Indy make out waaaaay ahead and Minnesota gets bent over bad.

Post #15 » by **revprodeji** » Tue Sep 8, 2009 12:20 am

Why would we attach Jefferson with RUbio? Seems like a lot of value to give up. I would feel more comfortable moving Rubio with expirings.

The GSW trade is interesting Klomp. I guess we would be banking on Randolph being a real stud and not a one hit wonder, as well as AB being a legit defender that he was rumored for earlier in his career but did not statistically back-up last year. It is close in value.

shrink · Post #16 » by **shrink** » Tue Sep 8, 2009 12:29 am

I think it would be difficult to find a Rubio trade that works for both teams.

1. We are psychologically invested in him after this drama, while other teams can take-or-leave him.

2. We can stand to wait on him better than virtually any team. We aren't win now.

3. Any player we'd trade for would carry more "win-now" value, and we'd have to compensate a team for that.

Best we just let him develop in Europe, while we develop Sessions and Flynn.

GopherIt! · Post #17 » by **GopherIt!** » Tue Sep 8, 2009 12:33 am

at first, I thought the title of this thread was "**** Cats and giggles"

Post #18 » by **Klomp** » Tue Sep 8, 2009 12:34 am

revprodeji wrote:Why would we attach Jefferson with RUbio? Seems like a lot of value to give up. I would feel more comfortable moving Rubio with expirings.

The GSW trade is interesting Klomp. I guess we would be banking on Randolph being a real stud and not a one hit wonder, as well as AB being a legit defender that he was rumored for earlier in his career but did not statistically back-up last year. It is close in value.

If it did work, I do think it would be great for balancing the roster. Love would have to prove he can handle being the nmber one down low, which I'm not worried about. The only spot that would currently be a question is SG. You probably wouldn't want Brewer and Randolph playing together. I think Ellington would be your starter.

Flynn / Sessions / Atkins
Ellington / Brewer / Wilkins
Randolph / Gomes / Cardinal
Love / Songaila / Pecherov
Biedrins / Hollins / Blount

wolf it down · Post #19 » by **wolf it down** » Tue Sep 8, 2009 2:22 am

Rubio, Blount, Wilkins, Atkins
for
Josh Smith, Mo Evans

Gives Atlanta a ton of cap room next year, and gets Ricky to a slightly bigger market. Maybe Atlanta has warm fuzzy feelings for Nique’s nephew. Also returns a more veteran Evans to us for a couple years. Throw in Brewer or a pick if the Hawks don’t jump at it.

Flynn/Sessions
Evans/ Brewer/ Ellington
Smith/Gomes/Cardinal
Love/Songaila
Jefferson/Hollins/Pecherov

Post #20 » by **C.lupus** » Tue Sep 8, 2009 2:27 am

revprodeji wrote:If Al and Granger have similar value, then you are trading Rubio for Hibbert? I am not sure why you would need both guys.

Hibbert+Granger for Al jefferson would be a debated deal. One that could be argued depending on personal preference. You basically throw rubio in there for nothing.

NY and Indy make out waaaaay ahead and Minnesota gets bent over bad.

This is why I don't make a lot of trade proposals. :-?

The best I could come up with is a 2012 first from NY and a 2010 or 2011 first from Indy (don't know what their pick status is). Like I said, Rubio's value is kinda hard to judge right now so Hibbert + 2 firsts probably isn't enough but on the other hand, those picks might be valuable in the year we give ours to LAC. shrug