ImageImageImage

Trade Talk (Part Four)

Moderators: Domejandro, Worm Guts, Calinks

KGdaBom
RealGM
Posts: 22,804
And1: 6,185
Joined: Jun 22, 2017
         

Re: Trade Talk (Part Four) 

Post#1981 » by KGdaBom » Tue Oct 20, 2020 6:54 pm

Chello1 wrote:
KGdaBom wrote:
Chello1 wrote:

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.

Love sure got traded for a top ten players ransom. #1 overall, plus two additional #1s, plus the prior years #1 :lol:. A lot of people were still holding out hope for Bennett. BS that Love was hated by his teammates.


Guy was a conceited horses ass..... Stat stuffer and nothing more than a third fiddle. Lebron could barely carry his ass over the finish line for a title. The second best player ever!!!!!!

LeBron is the best player ever and he wanted Love big time.
KGdaBom
RealGM
Posts: 22,804
And1: 6,185
Joined: Jun 22, 2017
         

Re: Trade Talk (Part Four) 

Post#1982 » by KGdaBom » Tue Oct 20, 2020 7:02 pm

Chello1 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


NO< NO< NO< NO

YES>YES>YES>YES.
KGdaBom
RealGM
Posts: 22,804
And1: 6,185
Joined: Jun 22, 2017
         

Re: Trade Talk (Part Four) 

Post#1983 » by KGdaBom » Tue Oct 20, 2020 7:06 pm

Chello1 wrote:
KGdaBom wrote:
Chello1 wrote:
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.....

Sorry, but if you think Collins and 6 is what a loser franchise would take then you need to stop thinking like a loser franchise. Losers always have their head in the clouds looking for that pie in the sky. Collins is a very good basketball player and I'm talking about getting Collins and pick 6 who could easily be a star player if we do our homework. Most national analysts think Collins straight up for #1 is a pretty solid deal for the Wolves.


Let me ask you a question- Do you think Collins gets us over the top for a championship? If the answer is no as most on here I assume would agree with...... then you can't make that trade..... You are capped out and will barely be a playoff team let alone a championship caliber team. If you love Collins why not take Wiseman on the rookie deal and get someone to protect the rim. You also now have a bunch of money to sign other players because you are not capped out..... This is not hard to follow.... I am not attacking you but I think if you look at it it is easy to see. The draft falls off like a cliff after pick 3. Collins will need a max or near max contract and are we a championship team? Again, I think clearly the answer is that we are not a championship team so what other moves are you going to make to get us there???? I will sit back and listen......

If you think Wiseman, Ball or Edwards will make us a championship team IMO you're thinking pie in the sky with your head in the clouds thoughts. No one player we could add in the entire league would make us a championship team. Okongwu who we can likely get at 6 could easily be a better player than Wiseman and I like Wiseman more than any other player in the draft. Collins by himself is likely better than who we get at #1. I wouldn't make that deal, but we get 6 thrown in it's a no brainer.
SmokeyPaw
Starter
Posts: 2,207
And1: 1,163
Joined: May 14, 2016
 

Re: Trade Talk (Part Four) 

Post#1984 » by SmokeyPaw » Tue Oct 20, 2020 7:13 pm

The ideal fit at the 4 would include ability to defend the perimeter, provide weak side help and decent 3 pt shooting. There are various guys who I think fit that mold to varying degrees: JJJ, Siakam, OG, Isaacs, PJ, and Brandon Clarke.

Of these I think Clarke is the most attainable. While very efficient Memphis found it hard to play him with JJJ due to rebounding issues. So they can keep him and play him 20 minutes a game or trade him to someone who values him as a starter.

He's got both the perimeter defense and weak side help covered. He wont be a volume or movement shooter, but he showed he could hit corner 3s last season. Also good as a cutter and in transition.

Trying to put a value on him. Dont think culver alone would get him. Wondering about culver plus 17. Thoughts?
KGdaBom
RealGM
Posts: 22,804
And1: 6,185
Joined: Jun 22, 2017
         

Re: Trade Talk (Part Four) 

Post#1985 » by KGdaBom » Tue Oct 20, 2020 7:41 pm

SmokeyPaw wrote:The ideal fit at the 4 would include ability to defend the perimeter, provide weak side help and decent 3 pt shooting. There are various guys who I think fit that mold to varying degrees: JJJ, Siakam, OG, Isaacs, PJ, and Brandon Clarke.

Of these I think Clarke is the most attainable. While very efficient Memphis found it hard to play him with JJJ due to rebounding issues. So they can keep him and play him 20 minutes a game or trade him to someone who values him as a starter.

He's got both the perimeter defense and weak side help covered. He wont be a volume or movement shooter, but he showed he could hit corner 3s last season. Also good as a cutter and in transition.

Trying to put a value on him. Dont think culver alone would get him. Wondering about culver plus 17. Thoughts?

I hate giving up Culver, but I would do that. If you were on the board last year during the predraft time you would have been reading me say we should draft him a hundred times or more.
Dewey
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,899
And1: 1,070
Joined: May 22, 2001

Re: Trade Talk (Part Four) 

Post#1986 » by Dewey » Tue Oct 20, 2020 8:25 pm

KGdaBom wrote:
Chello1 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


NO< NO< NO< NO

YES>YES>YES>YES.

I'd have to take this deal (I think) to nail down the SF spot long-term ... there's a bunch of PG's and PF's we could grab at #17/#33.
Flip response to Love wanting out, "He has no reason to be upset, you're either a part of the problem or a part of the solution"
minimus
RealGM
Posts: 13,642
And1: 5,157
Joined: Jan 28, 2011
Location: Germany, Stuttgart area
 

Re: Trade Talk (Part Four) 

Post#1987 » by minimus » Tue Oct 20, 2020 9:32 pm



The reason why I prefer Beasley on 13-15mil per year contract
gandlogo
Senior
Posts: 548
And1: 414
Joined: Jun 14, 2017
Location: Fountain Inn, SC
     

Re: Trade Talk (Part Four) 

Post#1988 » by gandlogo » Tue Oct 20, 2020 10:05 pm

SmokeyPaw wrote:The ideal fit at the 4 would include ability to defend the perimeter, provide weak side help and decent 3 pt shooting. There are various guys who I think fit that mold to varying degrees: JJJ, Siakam, OG, Isaacs, PJ, and Brandon Clarke.

Of these I think Clarke is the most attainable. While very efficient Memphis found it hard to play him with JJJ due to rebounding issues. So they can keep him and play him 20 minutes a game or trade him to someone who values him as a starter.

He's got both the perimeter defense and weak side help covered. He wont be a volume or movement shooter, but he showed he could hit corner 3s last season. Also good as a cutter and in transition.

Trying to put a value on him. Dont think culver alone would get him. Wondering about culver plus 17. Thoughts?


No thanks. I’d take 18-yr-old Pokusevski or 20-year-old McFadden at 17 and still have Culver. If Memphis would take Okogie straight up for Clarke, then yes.
SO_MONEY
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,799
And1: 1,032
Joined: Sep 11, 2009
         

Re: Trade Talk (Part Four) 

Post#1989 » by SO_MONEY » Tue Oct 20, 2020 11:24 pm

KGdaBom wrote:
Chello1 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


NO< NO< NO< NO

YES>YES>YES>YES.


Easy NO for me. Rather have #1 + Beasley.
SmokeyPaw
Starter
Posts: 2,207
And1: 1,163
Joined: May 14, 2016
 

Re: Trade Talk (Part Four) 

Post#1990 » by SmokeyPaw » Tue Oct 20, 2020 11:28 pm

gandlogo wrote:
SmokeyPaw wrote:The ideal fit at the 4 would include ability to defend the perimeter, provide weak side help and decent 3 pt shooting. There are various guys who I think fit that mold to varying degrees: JJJ, Siakam, OG, Isaacs, PJ, and Brandon Clarke.

Of these I think Clarke is the most attainable. While very efficient Memphis found it hard to play him with JJJ due to rebounding issues. So they can keep him and play him 20 minutes a game or trade him to someone who values him as a starter.

He's got both the perimeter defense and weak side help covered. He wont be a volume or movement shooter, but he showed he could hit corner 3s last season. Also good as a cutter and in transition.

Trying to put a value on him. Dont think culver alone would get him. Wondering about culver plus 17. Thoughts?


No thanks. I’d take 18-yr-old Pokusevski or 20-year-old McFadden at 17 and still have Culver. If Memphis would take Okogie straight up for Clarke, then yes.


Who is McFadden?
gandlogo
Senior
Posts: 548
And1: 414
Joined: Jun 14, 2017
Location: Fountain Inn, SC
     

Re: Trade Talk (Part Four) 

Post#1991 » by gandlogo » Tue Oct 20, 2020 11:52 pm

SmokeyPaw wrote:Who is McFadden?


https://www.nbadraft.net/players/jaden-mcdaniels/


NBA Comparison: Jonathan Isaac

Strengths: Former highly touted HS recruit is a modern day, face-up frontcourt player with a budding perimeter skill set … A long-striding athlete with good body control, footwork and the ability to run the floor and cover ground well … Physically fits the bill of the “positionless” NBA standard as he’s around 6’10 with great length (7-foot wingspan) and “skill potential” … Likes to pull up off the dribble from 15-20 ft, and shows glimpses of the ability to make perimeter jump shots from 3 point range too … Has a quick and high shot release that could become a consistent weapon with more repetition in the practice gym … Plays with finesse, and occasionally makes tough plays look very easy and effortless on the court at both ends … Adequate rebounder, did alright on the glass for a guy that often played at the top of a primarily zone defense in college … There’s no doubt teams will like that his physical skills allow him to potentially defend multiple positions on the court effectively, though this is something that would be a work in progress … Pretty decent timing as a weakside shot-blocker, put up 1.4 bpg as a Fr … A classic boom-or-bust type prospect, but it is important to remember he will only be 20 years old as a rookie with plenty of time to grow physically and polish his skill set … Shot a decent 76% from the FT line his Fr season, which only heightens the claims of his potential and natural ability as a shooter … Has one of the highest ceilings of any player in this year’s draft … Has intriguing scoring and shooting ability if he can improve upon his shot selection / strength …

Weaknesses: All things considered, McDaniels is a very raw prospect who struggled a bit more than most expected him to as a freshman … While those intrigued by him will point to his rangy frame and potential skill-set on the perimeter as a face-up forward, his detractors will point to the inconsistency, inefficiency and number of puzzling decisions he made on the court with the ball in his hands as a Fr as cause for concern … Seems to struggle, for whatever reason, to make the most of his abilities and often leaves you wanting more …. Not physically strong at all currently, would benefit from significantly adding weight to his 200 lb frame … A lot of his struggles seem to stem from his lack of physicality … While a solid athlete, McDaniels isn’t exactly twitchy and doesn’t have great explosiveness … Shows great ability and talent in spurts, but appears to lack the ability to sustain that level of focus and intensity … Struggles with things like finishing contested shots near the rim, post offense/defense, and playing through contact at the moment; should not be confused with a tough or physical player … Played nearly exclusively in zone defense in college, will be very green with NBA defensive concepts as a young player … Struggled to defend without fouling last season (3.3 fpg), while also demonstrating his raw defensive fundamentals and instincts by often reaching and not moving his feet or fouling players while opponents were well beyond the 3 point line … His overall feel for the game and shot selection needs improvement … He shot a lot of low percentage long 2s and didn’t hit them with any type of consistency … Must cut down on his turnovers (3.2 topg), often throwing lazy entry passes and has a habit of telegraphing what he intends to do … Doesn’t play without the ball particularly well, often is a complete non-factor in half court offense when plays aren’t run for him … Rarely put together complete games in college, usually only playing well in spurts and often disappearing during the deciding stretches … Lack of maturity. Will have questions about his attitude on the court, displayed poor body language and often seen sulking when things didn’t go his way … Possibly even more troubling, McDaniels picked up 5 technical fouls in his Fr season, which is only compounded by the fact that a “tech” in college is also both a personal and team foul … A headlining recruit for a young Washington team, but their season was a big disappointment relative to preseason expectations this past season …

Overall: Next in line of long, skilled wing forwards that evoke “shades of KD”, and at points in his high school career had some convinced that he could compete to be a top overall pick … A polarizing prospect, McDaniels is young and has the size and upside some NBA coaches will likely decide he’s worth taking a chance on developing … He had the size that jumped off the screen as a collegiate player, and he makes a few splashy plays that shows what he could become as a combo forward in the perimeter-oriented NBA … Still, he is a young player and he did not play with much consistency as a touted Fr for a Washington team that finished last place in the Pac 12…His attitude was most concerning though, as he often let his emotions get the best of him during their tough season…Still he is only 19 years old, and with his 6’10 frame and a budding face-up game he is someone who it would be easy for a coach to feel is worth stashing and developing as he improves his skills and adds strength …
UnFadeable21
Veteran
Posts: 2,712
And1: 845
Joined: Mar 30, 2019

Re: Trade Talk (Part Four) 

Post#1992 » by UnFadeable21 » Wed Oct 21, 2020 1:03 am

Would you do

Wolves send #1, Culver, expiring James Johnson

For Bulls #4, Lavine?

Chicago Bulls get No. 1 NBA Overall Pick & $60 million capspace for 2021 big free agency class. Sign two max contract free agents.

Minnesota Timberwolves 
New Squad

DLo
Zach Lavine
Layman
Onyeka Okongwu
KAT

Jmac
Beasley
Okogie
Juancho
Naz

Pick 17 & 33
KGdaBom
RealGM
Posts: 22,804
And1: 6,185
Joined: Jun 22, 2017
         

Re: Trade Talk (Part Four) 

Post#1993 » by KGdaBom » Wed Oct 21, 2020 1:21 am

SO_MONEY wrote:
KGdaBom wrote:
Chello1 wrote:
NO< NO< NO< NO

YES>YES>YES>YES.


Easy NO for me. Rather have #1 + Beasley.

Ingram is VERY good. Easy third star. Better than D'Lo.
Norseman79
Starter
Posts: 2,367
And1: 861
Joined: Jul 26, 2017
     

Re: Trade Talk (Part Four) 

Post#1994 » by Norseman79 » Wed Oct 21, 2020 1:53 am

KGdaBom wrote:
SO_MONEY wrote:
KGdaBom wrote:YES>YES>YES>YES.


Easy NO for me. Rather have #1 + Beasley.

Ingram is VERY good. Easy third star. Better than D'Lo.


Here is what I see people forgetting. Culver is a good defensive 2 that can handle a little and improved in shooting consistently as the year went on. A Culver and DLo backcourt should work well in theory. That could leave a JMac and Okoge pairing as the backups, which also plays well as a pairing. Ingram is a wing, 2-4 doesn't matter and allows positional flexibility. Ideally he is a three, and our starting three for the foreseeable future. While Ingram isn't Kawhi on defense, he isn't a chump either. That is why I would move up and be sure to draft a player like Achiuwa to come in and play a Jerami Grant/Bam A type of role. If you haven't seen Achiuwa play before Memphis was forced to play him at the 5 it is worth a watch. That being said, Achiuwa is a high motors, rebounding, defensive guy as a floor with legit PF size and reported elite athleticism.

Russell
Culver
Ingram
Achiuwa
Towns

Would be long, athletic, able to get out and run. It would also have three stars with Russell, Ingram and Towns next to two ideal roleplayers (if not better). If all it costs to do all this is the 1, Beasley and Johnson that is a no brainer.
Baseline81
Analyst
Posts: 3,265
And1: 1,901
Joined: Jan 18, 2009

Re: Trade Talk (Part Four) 

Post#1995 » by Baseline81 » Wed Oct 21, 2020 2:04 am

UnFadeable21 wrote:Would you do

Wolves send #1, Culver, expiring James Johnson

For Bulls #4, Lavine?

Chicago Bulls get No. 1 NBA Overall Pick & $60 million capspace for 2021 big free agency class. Sign two max contract free agents.

Minnesota Timberwolves 
New Squad

DLo
Zach Lavine
Layman
Onyeka Okongwu
KAT

Jmac
Beasley
Okogie
Juancho
Naz

Pick 17 & 33

You really are desperate for LaVine to return...

Honestly, I am content with Beasley as the starting SG next to Russell.
UnFadeable21
Veteran
Posts: 2,712
And1: 845
Joined: Mar 30, 2019

Re: Trade Talk (Part Four) 

Post#1996 » by UnFadeable21 » Wed Oct 21, 2020 3:25 am

Baseline81 wrote:
UnFadeable21 wrote:Would you do

Wolves send #1, Culver, expiring James Johnson

For Bulls #4, Lavine?

Chicago Bulls get No. 1 NBA Overall Pick & $60 million capspace for 2021 big free agency class. Sign two max contract free agents.

Minnesota Timberwolves 
New Squad

DLo
Zach Lavine
Layman
Onyeka Okongwu
KAT

Jmac
Beasley
Okogie
Juancho
Naz

Pick 17 & 33

You really are desperate for LaVine to return...

Honestly, I am content with Beasley as the starting SG next to Russell.


If Booker, Simmons, or Beal isn’t available. I would be open to Lavine.
Jedzz
RealGM
Posts: 12,322
And1: 2,506
Joined: Oct 05, 2018

Re: Trade Talk (Part Four) 

Post#1997 » by Jedzz » Wed Oct 21, 2020 4:14 am

Norseman79 wrote:
KGdaBom wrote:
SO_MONEY wrote:
Easy NO for me. Rather have #1 + Beasley.

Ingram is VERY good. Easy third star. Better than D'Lo.


Here is what I see people forgetting. Culver is a good defensive 2 that can handle a little and improved in shooting consistently as the year went on. A Culver and DLo backcourt should work well in theory. That could leave a JMac and Okoge pairing as the backups, which also plays well as a pairing. Ingram is a wing, 2-4 doesn't matter and allows positional flexibility. Ideally he is a three, and our starting three for the foreseeable future. While Ingram isn't Kawhi on defense, he isn't a chump either. That is why I would move up and be sure to draft a player like Achiuwa to come in and play a Jerami Grant/Bam A type of role. If you haven't seen Achiuwa play before Memphis was forced to play him at the 5 it is worth a watch. That being said, Achiuwa is a high motors, rebounding, defensive guy as a floor with legit PF size and reported elite athleticism.

Russell
Culver
Ingram
Achiuwa
Towns

Would be long, athletic, able to get out and run. It would also have three stars with Russell, Ingram and Towns next to two ideal roleplayers (if not better). If all it costs to do all this is the 1, Beasley and Johnson that is a no brainer.


This team is straight up garbage this coming season if they let Beasley walk or push him to bench role, unless they draft an even better shooter who works as hard every game from the draft. I can't state how badly the Wolves needed another true shooter before he came. Every season before it has been jokes because of the lack of shooting. I can't stand that fans of this team don't see this by now and understand what's been needed and don't understand what a gift it is to have gotten such a player by trading who they did. Those so quick to even suggest an off bench 6th man role don't understand we need at least three players in the starting crew who can respectably shoot every game. You have to have that first before you can start sliding other talented players onto your bench for shooting help there.

I don't think he'll want to resign here for a full time bench role period.
Slim Tubby
Veteran
Posts: 2,911
And1: 2,529
Joined: Jun 03, 2017
         

Re: Trade Talk (Part Four) 

Post#1998 » by Slim Tubby » Wed Oct 21, 2020 4:42 am

I would trade #1 and Culver for Ingram without so much as blinking but we really need to retain Beasley in a decent deal. Then hopefully grab a PF prospect at #17 or somehow figure out a way to sign/trade for Jerami Grant:

C Towns
PF Grant/#17
SF Ingram
SG Beasley
PG Russell

That lineup can shoot, rebound and we can always call in the National Guard to play defense. It would be fun on offense, though!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Glen Taylor: "Is this moron #1 (Layden)? Put moron #2 (Thibs) on the phone."
SO_MONEY
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,799
And1: 1,032
Joined: Sep 11, 2009
         

Re: Trade Talk (Part Four) 

Post#1999 » by SO_MONEY » Wed Oct 21, 2020 4:55 am

Slim Tubby wrote:I would trade #1 and Culver for Ingram without so much as blinking but we really need to retain Beasley in a decent deal. Then hopefully grab a PF prospect at #17 or somehow figure out a way to sign/trade for Jerami Grant:

C Towns
PF Grant/#17
SF Ingram
SG Beasley
PG Russell

That lineup can shoot, rebound and we can always call in the National Guard to play defense. It would be fun on offense, though!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


No way am I giving up Beasley's shooting. We finally have a team that can shoot. Fill it out with a wing defender (with better shooting) and a defensive PF.
KGdaBom
RealGM
Posts: 22,804
And1: 6,185
Joined: Jun 22, 2017
         

Re: Trade Talk (Part Four) 

Post#2000 » by KGdaBom » Wed Oct 21, 2020 6:22 am

Norseman79 wrote:
KGdaBom wrote:
SO_MONEY wrote:
Easy NO for me. Rather have #1 + Beasley.

Ingram is VERY good. Easy third star. Better than D'Lo.


Here is what I see people forgetting. Culver is a good defensive 2 that can handle a little and improved in shooting consistently as the year went on. A Culver and DLo backcourt should work well in theory. That could leave a JMac and Okoge pairing as the backups, which also plays well as a pairing. Ingram is a wing, 2-4 doesn't matter and allows positional flexibility. Ideally he is a three, and our starting three for the foreseeable future. While Ingram isn't Kawhi on defense, he isn't a chump either. That is why I would move up and be sure to draft a player like Achiuwa to come in and play a Jerami Grant/Bam A type of role. If you haven't seen Achiuwa play before Memphis was forced to play him at the 5 it is worth a watch. That being said, Achiuwa is a high motors, rebounding, defensive guy as a floor with legit PF size and reported elite athleticism.

Russell
Culver
Ingram
Achiuwa
Towns

Would be long, athletic, able to get out and run. It would also have three stars with Russell, Ingram and Towns next to two ideal roleplayers (if not better). If all it costs to do all this is the 1, Beasley and Johnson that is a no brainer.

yep if Ingram is available for that you take it and run.

Return to Minnesota Timberwolves