Trade Proposal: Minn - Chi

Post #21 » by **revprodeji** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 12:53 am

Maybe a little more incentive. Like do not take Ellingson, and maybe include a 1st or a pick exchange with our utah pick for a top-3 protected. Insurance for Deng.

Mcfale313 · Post #22 » by **Mcfale313** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 2:17 am

Noah's function is similar to Love's so I wouldn't say he is a better compliment to Love than Al

As for Deng, clearly that fits our need as a 3-point shooting slasher, but a log jam will be created at the swingman position

plus, I think Al Jefferson has way more value than this package, he is young and still not 100% yet, consider his 23/11 stat last season, the bulls need to at least include Rose in any deals for Jefferson

I'd do Rose/Johnson/Noah for Jefferson/Sasha/Sessions/Utah pick

B Calrissian · Post #23 » by **B Calrissian** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 2:37 am

^ The Bulls would never do that. And since when is Deng a 3pt shooter?

I would love the original deal though.

Esohny · Post #24 » by **Esohny** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 3:08 am

B Calrissian wrote:^ The Bulls would never do that. And since when is Deng a 3pt shooter?

I would love the original deal though.

Yeah, Deng is less than a 30% career 3-pt shooter, so that's not what you're getting.

Krapinsky · Post #25 » by **Krapinsky** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 4:12 am

Fale!

John Doe [MIN] · Post #26 » by **John Doe [MIN]** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 8:26 am

I saw a similar proposal several weeks ago and said I wouldn't do it. Now I'm sorta coming around, to the point that I think I would.

Pekovic is a big part of it. I wouldn't want my team to become the new Bulls, with no threat of post offense, but if he's looking signable and if Love can push his scoring rate up toward 18 points/36 min, then we're probably set enough.

deeney0 · Post #27 » by **deeney0** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 8:53 am

Dr.Krapinsky wrote:
deeney0 wrote:
shrink wrote:Would you consider Brad Miller + James Johnson instead of Deng?

No. For me, it'd have to be Deng.

What if it meant getting Gay or trading for Butler with the extra cap space?

If it meant for sure acquiring one of them with the cap space, sure. If it meant a chance of acquiring one of them with the cap space (as I'm sure it does), I'll stick with my No.

shrink · Post #28 » by **shrink** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 2:24 pm

$20 mil in raw cap space, and its ability to shed salary from lux-strapped teams, means MIN is hardly limited to just the free agents. Look at any of the teams in the bottom half in size, and in the bottom half in record (often correlated), and there is a chance they would give up their #1 or #2 guy for cap space and young assets. Heck, many of us here would consider it for the young Al Jefferson, and we're not that small, nor that concerned about losing money.

Steve_Holiday · Post #29 » by **Steve_Holiday** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 4:03 pm

Ajosu wrote:revprodeji wrote:
I do not think this deal is too far off. The issue of value is Deng. His inconsistency worries me, his contract concerns me, and his rumored age is a giant red flag.

I've never heard of any age discrepencies with him. As far as I know, he is 24.

Even if his real age was incorrect and Deng was 26-27, I wouldn't expect any decline over the course of his contract that would be a concern.

shrink wrote:Look at any of the teams in the bottom half in size, and in the bottom half in record (often correlated), and there is a chance they would give up their #1 or #2 guy for cap space and young assets.

Isn't that what we're doing in your proposed trade? Giving up our #1 for cap space and young "assets"? It's a completely backwards proposal considering the Wolves have already completed that stage of the rebuilding process (for the most part).

999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999

From what I've seen of Love, he's an incredibly skilled garbage man with great passing and a long-range shot. I don't think he can create for himself well enough down low for him to be the centerpiece of a successful frontcourt. I think the original proposal is fair, however, paying a high price for Deng may be short-sighted when the Wolves will have cap space and a high lottery pick to address the wing positions. I wouldn't pull the trigger on this.

Devilzsidewalk · Post #30 » by **Devilzsidewalk** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 4:40 pm

our offense is worse than our defense, I don't think this trade makes us any better. Makes Gomes and Flynn our go-to guys on offense.

shrink · Post #31 » by **shrink** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 5:12 pm

Steve_Holiday wrote:
shrink wrote:Look at any of the teams in the bottom half in size, and in the bottom half in record (often correlated), and there is a chance they would give up their #1 or #2 guy for cap space and young assets.

Isn't that what we're doing in your proposed trade? Giving up our #1 for cap space and young "assets"? It's a completely backwards proposal considering the Wolves have already completed that stage of the rebuilding process (for the most part).

I agree with you (except perhaps how far along we are in rebuilding). And that's exactly what I'm saying. If WE are considering Al Jefferson trades, without being constrained by the lux or a cheap owner, I think many teams would consider trading their #1. I was addressing the previous poster, who thought it might be too risky without knowing we were going to lock up a free agent; my point is that it might not be that risky, since the pool will be greater than just the free agents.

shrink · Post #32 » by **shrink** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 5:16 pm

The basis of an Al Jefferson - Noah trade is possible, in my opinion.

The young center Noah is probably worth more here than there, and the more experienced low-post scorer al Jefferson is probably more valuable there than here. That creates trade value for both teams that might make a mutually beneficial deal possible.

Note that I did not compare Al and Noah. I compare MIN-Al and CHI-Al, and MIN-Noah and CHI-Noah. Balancing the overall value of the trade is step two.

Devilzsidewalk · Post #33 » by **Devilzsidewalk** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 5:36 pm

we can swap Noah/Jefferson if we can add a Flynn/Rose swap to it

Ajosu · Post #34 » by **Ajosu** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 8:54 pm

Devilzsidewalk wrote:we can swap Noah/Jefferson if we can add a Flynn/Rose swap to it

Im sure you wouldn't mind throwing in Rubio and your 2010 1st rd pick

SO_MONEY · Post #35 » by **SO_MONEY** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 11:01 pm

revprodeji wrote:I do not think this deal is too far off. The issue of value is Deng. His inconsistency worries me, his contract concerns me, and his rumored age is a giant red flag.

That being said, I love the idea of Noah with Love.

So the X factor is Deng. I am not sure if I would be willing to pull the trigger for him. I would highly debate it, and I think it is closer then some on this board would say. The defensive difference of Noah and Al would be great, Noah would be great in the uptempo system and Deng would be nice in the triangle. I am just not sure still.

What is his rumored age?????

big3_8_19_21 · Post #36 » by **big3_8_19_21** » Wed Dec 23, 2009 7:32 pm

shrink wrote:Would you consider Brad Miller + James Johnson instead of Deng?

This is interesting...I'm pretty convinced at this point that Love and Jefferson will not work together, especially on defense.

I'm swirling thoughts of Noah, Pekovic and Aldrich in my head trying to figure out what would work the best.

Noah/Pek/Love would be great, plus we get to use our pick on someone else, probably wing help. If we did this, we would almost have to let Gomes go at the end of the year with all the prospects we would have at the wing. Brewer/Ellington/Johnson, plus likely someone in the draft, and we would have a ton of cap space freed up by Miller expiring and Gomes being released. Hmmm...I really want Aldrich's shot blocking, though...Noah's an OK shot blocker, but we still wouldn't have an intimidator in the paint.

Devilzsidewalk · Post #37 » by **Devilzsidewalk** » Wed Dec 23, 2009 9:18 pm

Ajosu wrote:
Devilzsidewalk wrote:we can swap Noah/Jefferson if we can add a Flynn/Rose swap to it

Im sure you wouldn't mind throwing in Rubio and your 2010 1st rd pick

c'mon, your guys gave up a 35 point lead. At least our guys have the common decency to play bad the whole game.

Ajosu · Post #38 » by **Ajosu** » Fri Dec 25, 2009 6:16 am

Devilzsidewalk wrote:c'mon, your guys gave up a 35 point lead. At least our guys have the common decency to play bad the whole game.

We like to keep ya on ur toes! Keep you guessing... :falloff:

invno1 · Post #39 » by **invno1** » Fri Dec 25, 2009 7:51 pm

What are Dengs injuries? Does he have enough value to be traded later?
I think the Jefferson for Noah, Johnson & Expiring is a good fit.

the_bruce · Post #40 » by **the_bruce** » Fri Dec 25, 2009 9:18 pm

I'd certainly consider a deal without Deng. It allows MN to bring in pek who can replicate much of what big all does.

I'd take deng back in certain circumstances, but I'd make it all to complex. Mostly it would revolve around ditching 2010 salary of Brewer, Sessions, Gomes and Hollins so that Dengs contract isn't as big a burden.

Al that said this is one of the only trade big al type deals I would consider. Not because I think its a better fit, or more talent, but because MN has Pek to take over much of what Al can do.