ImageImageImage

Trade Talk (Part Four)

Moderators: Domejandro, Worm Guts, Calinks

KGdaBom
RealGM
Posts: 22,837
And1: 6,191
Joined: Jun 22, 2017
         

Re: Trade Talk (Part Four) 

Post#1941 » by KGdaBom » Mon Oct 19, 2020 12:01 am

Chello1 wrote:
KGdaBom wrote:
vtime wrote:Would you guys do John Collins for #1 and possibly absorbing Johnson’s expiring deal?

Collins and 6 yes.


Why? You already know what Collins is going to be-- Kevin Love junior.... You have to keep the pick and swing for a superstar. Ball or Wiseman..... We don't need a good player we need a stud on a rookie contract to move forward.

Kevin Love in his prime was a top 10 player in the league. Plus we get pick 6 as well. Easy to take that deal. Kevin Love was traded for the #1 pick in the draft plus I think two other FRPs and a former #1 overall who was a liability LOL.
Jedzz
RealGM
Posts: 12,322
And1: 2,506
Joined: Oct 05, 2018

Re: Trade Talk (Part Four) 

Post#1942 » by Jedzz » Mon Oct 19, 2020 2:04 am

If not Booker or Simmons, go all the way after James H. That team is now twisting in the wind. He fits the Rosas/Ryan roster/offense. He fits with Dlo much better than with Westbrook. He'll suck in so much attention that even the teams poor shooters will at least have open looks. Plus he can play defense now. Would they average 50 3s a game?

What would it take to have Harden/Dlo/Towns on the same team?
Mamba4Goat
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 11,767
And1: 8,071
Joined: Dec 13, 2013
     

Re: Trade Talk (Part Four) 

Post#1943 » by Mamba4Goat » Mon Oct 19, 2020 7:59 am

Chello1 wrote:
KGdaBom wrote:
vtime wrote:Would you guys do John Collins for #1 and possibly absorbing Johnson’s expiring deal?

Collins and 6 yes.


Why? You already know what Collins is going to be-- Kevin Love junior.... You have to keep the pick and swing for a superstar. Ball or Wiseman..... We don't need a good player we need a stud on a rookie contract to move forward.

Collins+6 for 1 is a homerun in terms of value. You absolutely take it and run. The guys that’ll be there at 6 are also safer, better fitting players which isn’t awful.

If it was a deal that was balanced I probably wouldn’t touch it though. Collins is due for a raise soon and between that/cap concerns and his awful defensive fit it’s an easy pass.
Rest in peace Mamba. There'll never be another Kobe.
Chello1
Junior
Posts: 476
And1: 114
Joined: Jun 05, 2014
       

Re: Trade Talk (Part Four) 

Post#1944 » by Chello1 » Mon Oct 19, 2020 9:22 pm

Mamba4Goat wrote:
Chello1 wrote:
KGdaBom wrote:Collins and 6 yes.


Why? You already know what Collins is going to be-- Kevin Love junior.... You have to keep the pick and swing for a superstar. Ball or Wiseman..... We don't need a good player we need a stud on a rookie contract to move forward.

Collins+6 for 1 is a homerun in terms of value. You absolutely take it and run. The guys that’ll be there at 6 are also safer, better fitting players which isn’t awful.

If it was a deal that was balanced I probably wouldn’t touch it though. Collins is due for a raise soon and between that/cap concerns and his awful defensive fit it’s an easy pass.


We should not settle for safe and nice.... Home run superstar. John Collins is not the type of return you should want with the number 1 pick. He is a good player that will go into negative or neutral value within one year because of his contract. You do this trade and you are locked in with this roster for years.... No movement, capped out..... John Collins will not help us become champions... If you want Collins take the chance on Wiseman on a rookie deal for years. If he hits you have him and all the money to make other moves. We need to stop thinking like a loser franchise..... Wiseman has a real chance to be a stud.... Far superior than Collins and on a rookie contract. The defense alone is already better than Collins provides.... Think like a championship team not a team that is ok just making the playoffs.....
Chello1
Junior
Posts: 476
And1: 114
Joined: Jun 05, 2014
       

Re: Trade Talk (Part Four) 

Post#1945 » by Chello1 » Mon Oct 19, 2020 9:33 pm

KGdaBom wrote:
Chello1 wrote:
KGdaBom wrote:Collins and 6 yes.


Why? You already know what Collins is going to be-- Kevin Love junior.... You have to keep the pick and swing for a superstar. Ball or Wiseman..... We don't need a good player we need a stud on a rookie contract to move forward.

Kevin Love in his prime was a top 10 player in the league. Plus we get pick 6 as well. Easy to take that deal. Kevin Love was traded for the #1 pick in the draft plus I think two other FRPs and a former #1 overall who was a liability LOL.



He was never more than a third level player on a championship team.... Never a top ten player. He was a selfish stat stuffer who was hated by his teammates because he cared more about stats than winning. Collins is very similar, great offensive stats but you will have a hard time winning with a guy like him. He doesn't play any defense. Ask yourself why Atlanta would be willing to trade him if he is that good? They do not want to pay him either.... because they know what he is. They want to have the shot at a superstar on a rookie deal.
shrink
RealGM
Posts: 59,344
And1: 19,373
Joined: Sep 26, 2005

Re: Trade Talk (Part Four) 

Post#1946 » by shrink » Mon Oct 19, 2020 9:39 pm

#1 for #4 + 2022 CHI 1st, unprotected

Would ya?
Sign5 wrote:Yea not happening, I expected a better retort but what do I expect from realgm(ers) in 2025. Just quote and state things that lack context, then repeat the same thing over and over as if something new and profound was said. Just lol.
minimus
RealGM
Posts: 13,644
And1: 5,157
Joined: Jan 28, 2011
Location: Germany, Stuttgart area
 

Re: Trade Talk (Part Four) 

Post#1947 » by minimus » Mon Oct 19, 2020 9:51 pm

shrink wrote:#1 for #4 + 2022 CHI 1st, unprotected

Would ya?


Too good for MIN. I'd even offer #1, #17 for #4 + 2022 CHI 1st, unprotected
DarkXaero
RealGM
Posts: 14,220
And1: 5,763
Joined: Mar 25, 2011
   

Re: Trade Talk (Part Four) 

Post#1948 » by DarkXaero » Mon Oct 19, 2020 11:40 pm

How would you guys feel about this trade?

https://tradenba.com/trades/lSgCXNFVT

It's assuming that Chicago wants to move into top 2, and that the Wolves want to move down a bit.
Neeva
Head Coach
Posts: 7,442
And1: 2,858
Joined: Jun 03, 2016

Re: Trade Talk (Part Four) 

Post#1949 » by Neeva » Mon Oct 19, 2020 11:54 pm

assuming 4/19/2021 second is for the first pick— I would not do that and then Culver/17/Johnson for Lavert? A little steep IMO.
Maybe if the 17 is left out because this seems way too good for Chicago 1,17 and culver for 4 and zach??
jpatrick
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,733
And1: 1,955
Joined: May 30, 2007
 

Re: Trade Talk (Part Four) 

Post#1950 » by jpatrick » Mon Oct 19, 2020 11:58 pm

shrink wrote:#1 for #4 + 2022 CHI 1st, unprotected

Would ya?


If unprotected yes, but Chicago never does this. 2022 = probable double draft year.
Jedzz
RealGM
Posts: 12,322
And1: 2,506
Joined: Oct 05, 2018

Re: Trade Talk (Part Four) 

Post#1951 » by Jedzz » Tue Oct 20, 2020 12:10 am

minimus wrote:
shrink wrote:#1 for #4 + 2022 CHI 1st, unprotected


Would ya?


Too good for MIN. I'd even offer #1, #17 for #4 + 2022 CHI 1st, unprotected


Then Chicago takes this #1 overall, adds him to LaVine/Mark and friends and by 2022 the Wolves would get their #20 pick. No deal if having to add two picks. I would likely take Shrinks deal. Could use that asset to also jump back into 2021 if needed to.

I would also offer the #1 and anyone outside Dlo/Towns/Beasley for LaVine #4. Just because I would love to hear who the great GM minds would call the 6th man between LaVine and Beasley.
shrink
RealGM
Posts: 59,344
And1: 19,373
Joined: Sep 26, 2005

Re: Trade Talk (Part Four) 

Post#1952 » by shrink » Tue Oct 20, 2020 12:56 am

I like LaVine as a person, but adding DeAngelo Russell excludes LaVine from this team, in my opinion.

LaVine is truly one of the worst defensive guards in the league, constantly lost in even the most basic defensive schemes. You can’t play him next to Russell, who is also extremely bad. LaVine has the athleticism to get better, but unfortunately, he is only interested in improving his offense, as he mentioned in last year’s interview with Zach Lowe.
Sign5 wrote:Yea not happening, I expected a better retort but what do I expect from realgm(ers) in 2025. Just quote and state things that lack context, then repeat the same thing over and over as if something new and profound was said. Just lol.
DarkXaero
RealGM
Posts: 14,220
And1: 5,763
Joined: Mar 25, 2011
   

Re: Trade Talk (Part Four) 

Post#1953 » by DarkXaero » Tue Oct 20, 2020 1:24 am

Neeva wrote:assuming 4/19/2021 second is for the first pick— I would not do that and then Culver/17/Johnson for Lavert? A little steep IMO.
Maybe if the 17 is left out because this seems way too good for Chicago 1,17 and culver for 4 and zach??
I don't know how Wolves fans feel about Culver. I know he was the 6th pick last year, but by all accounts, his rookie year wasn't particularly promising, and there's word in media that Wolves have some buyer's remorse with Culver. This can be seen as selling low on Culver, but if Culver is a bust long-term, then its a good chance for Wolves to get a good NBA player in exchange instead. Wolves are essentially getting #4, Caris Levert, and moving down from #17 to #19 here for #1 and Culver (a 2nd round pick next year is thrown in as a sweetener).

I think Levert would be a really solid 3rd piece for Wolves next to D Lo and KAT. He's a versatile, playmaking guard with scoring ability, who can grow into a really good defender (hence the preference over Lavine for Wolves), and he has good familiarity with D Lo. He's also locked up on a team friendly deal for the next 3 years, which should be a big plus for Minnesota. Additionally with the #4 pick, Wolves drop a bit and get someone they like more (e.g. Obi Toppin) instead of reaching at #1. I personally think it's a better deal for Minnesota than it is for Chicago, but I appreciate feedback from y'all.
Norseman79
Starter
Posts: 2,368
And1: 861
Joined: Jul 26, 2017
     

Re: Trade Talk (Part Four) 

Post#1954 » by Norseman79 » Tue Oct 20, 2020 1:31 am

What about a three way with a sign and trade...

Mn out: Johnson, Beasley, #1
In: Brandon Ingram

New Orleans out: Ingram
In: Lavine and the 4, fill

Chicago out: Lavine and the 4
In: #1 and Beasley, fill

We keep the 17, and potentially add to it to move up and grab best PF available (Achiuwa). If we do not need to add 2nd rounder to move up, I would address either depth at PG or C

Russell, JMac
Culver, Okoge
Ingram, Layman, Valentine
Achiuwa, Hernangomez, Valentine
Towns, Reid
Neeva
Head Coach
Posts: 7,442
And1: 2,858
Joined: Jun 03, 2016

Re: Trade Talk (Part Four) 

Post#1955 » by Neeva » Tue Oct 20, 2020 1:42 am

DarkXaero wrote:
Neeva wrote:assuming 4/19/2021 second is for the first pick— I would not do that and then Culver/17/Johnson for Lavert? A little steep IMO.
Maybe if the 17 is left out because this seems way too good for Chicago 1,17 and culver for 4 and zach??
I don't know how Wolves fans feel about Culver. I know he was the 6th pick last year, but by all accounts, his rookie year wasn't particularly promising, and there's word in media that Wolves have some buyer's remorse with Culver. This can be seen as selling low on Culver, but if Culver is a bust long-term, then its a good chance for Wolves to get a good NBA player in exchange instead. Wolves are essentially getting #4, Caris Levert, and moving down from #17 to #19 here for #1 and Culver (a 2nd round pick next year is thrown in as a sweetener).

I think Levert would be a really solid 3rd piece for Wolves next to D Lo and KAT. He's a versatile, playmaking guard with scoring ability, who can grow into a really good defender (hence the preference over Lavine for Wolves), and he has good familiarity with D Lo. He's also locked up on a team friendly deal for the next 3 years, which should be a big plus for Minnesota. Additionally with the #4 pick, Wolves drop a bit and get someone they like more (e.g. Obi Toppin) instead of reaching at #1. I personally think it's a better deal for Minnesota than it is for Chicago, but I appreciate feedback from y'all.


Yes Culver had a very rough rookie year but still was not among the top five worst players in the league like Garland, Hunter and RJ Barrett. Rosas is not going to sell low on Culver IMO.
Lavert injury history scares me. Only one season out of his four has he played more than 60 games. More than likely he will miss a big chunk of next season also.
Norseman79
Starter
Posts: 2,368
And1: 861
Joined: Jul 26, 2017
     

Re: Trade Talk (Part Four) 

Post#1956 » by Norseman79 » Tue Oct 20, 2020 1:51 am

Culver was much better to end the season, I am not selling low on him
Neeva
Head Coach
Posts: 7,442
And1: 2,858
Joined: Jun 03, 2016

Re: Trade Talk (Part Four) 

Post#1957 » by Neeva » Tue Oct 20, 2020 2:13 am

Norseman79 wrote:Culver was much better to end the season, I am not selling low on him

He showed me more than enough in every head to head match up with Morant. He will be good once his shot (and free throws) are figured out.
Neeva
Head Coach
Posts: 7,442
And1: 2,858
Joined: Jun 03, 2016

Re: Trade Talk (Part Four) 

Post#1958 » by Neeva » Tue Oct 20, 2020 2:17 am

Norseman79 wrote:What about a three way with a sign and trade...

Mn out: Johnson, Beasley, #1
In: Brandon Ingram

New Orleans out: Ingram
In: Lavine and the 4, fill

Chicago out: Lavine and the 4
In: #1 and Beasley, fill

We keep the 17, and potentially add to it to move up and grab best PF available (Achiuwa). If we do not need to add 2nd rounder to move up, I would address either depth at PG or C

Russell, JMac
Culver, Okoge
Ingram, Layman, Valentine
Achiuwa, Hernangomez, Valentine
Towns, Reid


Imo NO would just cut out Chicago.
Norseman79
Starter
Posts: 2,368
And1: 861
Joined: Jul 26, 2017
     

Re: Trade Talk (Part Four) 

Post#1959 » by Norseman79 » Tue Oct 20, 2020 2:24 am

Neeva wrote:
Norseman79 wrote:What about a three way with a sign and trade...

Mn out: Johnson, Beasley, #1
In: Brandon Ingram

New Orleans out: Ingram
In: Lavine and the 4, fill

Chicago out: Lavine and the 4
In: #1 and Beasley, fill

We keep the 17, and potentially add to it to move up and grab best PF available (Achiuwa). If we do not need to add 2nd rounder to move up, I would address either depth at PG or C

Russell, JMac
Culver, Okoge
Ingram, Layman, Valentine
Achiuwa, Hernangomez, Valentine
Towns, Reid


Imo NO would just cut out Chicago.


That could be, and if so, I am fine with that. Just tried putting together something different.
shrink
RealGM
Posts: 59,344
And1: 19,373
Joined: Sep 26, 2005

Re: Trade Talk (Part Four) 

Post#1960 » by shrink » Tue Oct 20, 2020 3:11 am

Neeva wrote:
Norseman79 wrote:What about a three way with a sign and trade...

Mn out: Johnson, Beasley, #1
In: Brandon Ingram

New Orleans out: Ingram
In: Lavine and the 4, fill

Chicago out: Lavine and the 4
In: #1 and Beasley, fill

We keep the 17, and potentially add to it to move up and grab best PF available (Achiuwa). If we do not need to add 2nd rounder to move up, I would address either depth at PG or C

Russell, JMac
Culver, Okoge
Ingram, Layman, Valentine
Achiuwa, Hernangomez, Valentine
Towns, Reid


Imo NO would just cut out Chicago.

How many ball boys does one team need?
Sign5 wrote:Yea not happening, I expected a better retort but what do I expect from realgm(ers) in 2025. Just quote and state things that lack context, then repeat the same thing over and over as if something new and profound was said. Just lol.

Return to Minnesota Timberwolves