Moderators: Domejandro, Calinks, Worm Guts
jpatrick wrote:
I mean, he has. There was a meeting between his agents and Morey awhile back where it was agreed that Morey would try to trade him.
_AIJ_ wrote:
what do you think hes doing? Lmao
IceManBK1 wrote:jpatrick wrote:
I mean, he has. There was a meeting between his agents and Morey awhile back where it was agreed that Morey would try to trade him.
there wasn't a formal trade request. if i'm philly, i take beasley, mcdaniels and 3 1sts with one of them being top 3 protected; and run with it. Don't feel like waiting til sept to see whether beverly or prince will be added to the package.
winforlose wrote:KGdaBom wrote:winforlose wrote::evil:
Do you think they other teams go for it?
Probably not. They'd probably want somebody useful along with that Lottery protected FRP. Depending on Nance's medicals i might trade Beasley straight up for him.
If anything they may not even want Vando. They are trying to cut down the roster from 17 or 18 players.
Krapinsky wrote:KGdaBom wrote:Krapinsky wrote:
I think the Grizz are pretty high on Dillion Brooks, and rightfully so. I also think we'd be crazy to trade a draft pick for Nance.
I don't think we would be crazy to trade a lottery protected FRP for Nance. 9 times out of 10 Nance will be better than any pick outside of the lottery. If we could do that along with non productive salary it would be a no brainer IMO.
These are the types of trades treadmill teams make. Nance will soon be 29 and is heavily reliant on his athleticism. I suspect he'll be going downhill from here on out. Indeed, he's got worse every year the last three years so we have already seen his decline (though I suspect some of this comes at the expense of playing further away from the basket, which has hurt his rebound numbers at the expense of shooting more three pointers). He's also injury prone.
Less than a year after trading a first for Nance I suspect we'd be asking ourselves how we go about upgrading the PF position for the long term. In that sense he's a place holder that would make us marginally better this year (though I think that much is even debatable as I am higher on Vanderbilt than most). How many more games would we win or lose with Nance getting PF minutes instead of developing the players we already have: Naz/McDaniels/Vanderbilt or plugging in Prince? And are those extra wins contributed to Nance worth the expense of our long term development of other players?
KGdaBom wrote:winforlose wrote:KGdaBom wrote:Probably not. They'd probably want somebody useful along with that Lottery protected FRP. Depending on Nance's medicals i might trade Beasley straight up for him.
If anything they may not even want Vando. They are trying to cut down the roster from 17 or 18 players.
They might be trying to cut down the roster, but we have to send salary out in the deal.
EDIT: the more I think about this we wouldn't have to send much salary out right. Nance is making 11Million per year I believe. We got some cap space to work with.
KGdaBom wrote:jpatrick wrote:MPLSwolves wrote:The more I think about it, the more I don’t like Simmons next to Ant. I know the idea of Simmons as a big next to KAT seems nice, but in reality I think Ben would essential usurp Ant’s role as a primary ball handler.
Ideally, we’d have Ant take over the offense at times with D’Lo off-ball as a shooting threat. With Ben Simmons in the lineup I’m not sure how that would work. Would Ben embrace a role where he’s just in the dunker’s spot the whole time? Is that even a good use of him?
I’m of the opinion we need a big who can be a rim protector. We go all in on Simmons and sure our defense would be better, but Simmons doesn’t exactly provide what we need on the defensive-end.. Hell, Vando and him are kind of similar players on that end of the floor.
Wrote all of this to say maybe Larry Nance Jr makes more sense for us because he (a) fits KAT’s timeline, (b) is a versatile defender who can defend Centers when called upon (c) is a low-usage big on the offensive end who won’t cannibalize the offense.
Im not all that concern about the two timelines narrative some in the media are droning on about. Im more concerned about basketball fit when it comes to Ant, and I can’t really think of a worse player to have on the court with him than Simmons. Either Ben has the ball in his hand or he’s near the rim. Both scenarios aren’t great for Ant because the last thing we need is a big clogging the lane.
We go all in on Ben and I am afraid we become pregnant with a Big 3 that’s great in a vacuum but not with the other pieces we value, pieces we may have to give up in a Simmons trade..
Could we somehow swing a Nance Jr trade around Okogie and Layman instead?
Nance moves the needle zero. If it was him or nothing, sure. Rosas is after big swings though. I don’t know how Finch would use Simmons, but I highly doubt it’d be as a primary ball handler in the half court. That’s just not Simmons’ strength. People sag off him too much. He’d be much better as a cutter, dunker spot, pick man in the pick in roll. The beautiful thing about Simmons is that with his BBIQ, he’ll find the open man (well except when he passed on that dunk in the playoffs).
This is critical as Finch has said he’s getting rid of the highly structure Wolves’ offense that was here under Saunders and wants a more free flowing system (I’m thinking Spurs type offense), which requires less ball pounding and more quick passing. Speaking of the Spurs, one of Simmons’ biggest fans is Pop, which makes sense with that system.
In fact, if I were betting where Simmons ends up,
My guess is Kings or Spurs.
I don't understand you saying Nance moves the needle zero. IMO he's an almost perfect complement to our existing team.
Nick K wrote:KGdaBom wrote:jpatrick wrote:
Nance moves the needle zero. If it was him or nothing, sure. Rosas is after big swings though. I don’t know how Finch would use Simmons, but I highly doubt it’d be as a primary ball handler in the half court. That’s just not Simmons’ strength. People sag off him too much. He’d be much better as a cutter, dunker spot, pick man in the pick in roll. The beautiful thing about Simmons is that with his BBIQ, he’ll find the open man (well except when he passed on that dunk in the playoffs).
This is critical as Finch has said he’s getting rid of the highly structure Wolves’ offense that was here under Saunders and wants a more free flowing system (I’m thinking Spurs type offense), which requires less ball pounding and more quick passing. Speaking of the Spurs, one of Simmons’ biggest fans is Pop, which makes sense with that system.
In fact, if I were betting where Simmons ends up,
My guess is Kings or Spurs.
I don't understand you saying Nance moves the needle zero. IMO he's an almost perfect complement to our existing team.
I agree on Nance. He's not the sexy choice but he's solid as hell and fits what we need to a "T". The guy does all the little things we need plus he can shoot. Nobody can play off of him like they can against Ben. He'd be a very good guy to get. I wonder if a superb shooter like Beasley and a future pick gets him. The money is right. He reminds me of PJ Tucker somewhat but better offensively.
Myles Turner might still be available. What about Derek Favors at OKC?
I'm hoping we sign Vando as well. He's getting better by the day.
VeritasTri wrote:MPLSwolves wrote:The more I think about it, the more I don’t like Simmons next to Ant. I know the idea of Simmons as a big next to KAT seems nice, but in reality I think Ben would essential usurp Ant’s role as a primary ball handler.
Ideally, we’d have Ant take over the offense at times with D’Lo off-ball as a shooting threat. With Ben Simmons in the lineup I’m not sure how that would work. Would Ben embrace a role where he’s just in the dunker’s spot the whole time? Is that even a good use of him?
I’m of the opinion we need a big who can be a rim protector. We go all in on Simmons and sure our defense would be better, but Simmons doesn’t exactly provide what we need on the defensive-end.. Hell, Vando and him are kind of similar players on that end of the floor.
Wrote all of this to say maybe Larry Nance Jr makes more sense for us because he (a) fits KAT’s timeline, (b) is a versatile defender who can defend Centers when called upon (c) is a low-usage big on the offensive end who won’t cannibalize the offense.
Im not all that concern about the two timelines narrative some in the media are droning on about. Im more concerned about basketball fit when it comes to Ant, and I can’t really think of a worse player to have on the court with him than Simmons. Either Ben has the ball in his hand or he’s near the rim. Both scenarios aren’t great for Ant because the last thing we need is a big clogging the lane.
We go all in on Ben and I am afraid we become pregnant with a Big 3 that’s great in a vacuum but not with the other pieces we value, pieces we may have to give up in a Simmons trade..
Could we somehow swing a Nance Jr trade around Okogie and Layman instead?
Why would we want Ant to "take over the offense" as the primary ball handler/decision maker when hes not very good at it? Hell, even Dlo isnt always very good at it and instead hunts his own shots or ball pounds. Thats why we mixed Rubio in with those guys and allowed them to focus on being more scoring oriented. I dont see Simmons being the PG here, I just see him taking some of the ball handling duties out of the hands of Dlo and creating looks for guys. Ant still gets his touches off the creation of Dlo/Simmons, in ISO/PnR, or as the late shot clock guy who can generate a shot when the offense failed to. Due to Simmons playstyle of getting others involved and having a lower usage I dont think there will be any issue getting Ant touches, and he and the team would likely get much better looks allowing Simmons to handle.
It would be nice to add more rim protection, but adding perimeter defense so guys arent just going downhill at the rim all day would be equally as effective. I would love to replace Reid with a legit athletic backup defensive center/lob threat to help with rim protection. But overall improvements to our defense is more important than one particular aspect. I mean you talk about Simmons not being a rim protector and then suggest Larry Nance, a guy who is no better at blocking shots than Simmons.
Nick K wrote:KGdaBom wrote:jpatrick wrote:
Nance moves the needle zero. If it was him or nothing, sure. Rosas is after big swings though. I don’t know how Finch would use Simmons, but I highly doubt it’d be as a primary ball handler in the half court. That’s just not Simmons’ strength. People sag off him too much. He’d be much better as a cutter, dunker spot, pick man in the pick in roll. The beautiful thing about Simmons is that with his BBIQ, he’ll find the open man (well except when he passed on that dunk in the playoffs).
This is critical as Finch has said he’s getting rid of the highly structure Wolves’ offense that was here under Saunders and wants a more free flowing system (I’m thinking Spurs type offense), which requires less ball pounding and more quick passing. Speaking of the Spurs, one of Simmons’ biggest fans is Pop, which makes sense with that system.
In fact, if I were betting where Simmons ends up,
My guess is Kings or Spurs.
I don't understand you saying Nance moves the needle zero. IMO he's an almost perfect complement to our existing team.
I agree on Nance. He's not the sexy choice but he's solid as hell and fits what we need to a "T". The guy does all the little things we need plus he can shoot. Nobody can play off of him like they can against Ben. He'd be a very good guy to get. I wonder if a superb shooter like Beasley and a future pick gets him. The money is right. He reminds me of PJ Tucker somewhat but better offensively.
Myles Turner might still be available. What about Derek Favors at OKC?
I'm hoping we sign Vando as well. He's getting better by the day.
SO_MONEY wrote:Nick K wrote:KGdaBom wrote:I don't understand you saying Nance moves the needle zero. IMO he's an almost perfect complement to our existing team.
I agree on Nance. He's not the sexy choice but he's solid as hell and fits what we need to a "T". The guy does all the little things we need plus he can shoot. Nobody can play off of him like they can against Ben. He'd be a very good guy to get. I wonder if a superb shooter like Beasley and a future pick gets him. The money is right. He reminds me of PJ Tucker somewhat but better offensively.
Myles Turner might still be available. What about Derek Favors at OKC?
I'm hoping we sign Vando as well. He's getting better by the day.
I would have a hard time trading Beasley for him let alone add a pick.
shangrila wrote:Wait, Beasley for Nance?
Come on guys. I just got through the Simmons crap, let’s not start a new rabbit hole that digs straight into the sewer line.
KGdaBom wrote:shangrila wrote:Wait, Beasley for Nance?
Come on guys. I just got through the Simmons crap, let’s not start a new rabbit hole that digs straight into the sewer line.
I get that Beasley is a good shooter and Valuable to us. I think what Nance would bring would be more valuable. What's your issue with this idea?
KGdaBom wrote:Krapinsky wrote:KGdaBom wrote:I don't think we would be crazy to trade a lottery protected FRP for Nance. 9 times out of 10 Nance will be better than any pick outside of the lottery. If we could do that along with non productive salary it would be a no brainer IMO.
These are the types of trades treadmill teams make. Nance will soon be 29 and is heavily reliant on his athleticism. I suspect he'll be going downhill from here on out. Indeed, he's got worse every year the last three years so we have already seen his decline (though I suspect some of this comes at the expense of playing further away from the basket, which has hurt his rebound numbers at the expense of shooting more three pointers). He's also injury prone.
Less than a year after trading a first for Nance I suspect we'd be asking ourselves how we go about upgrading the PF position for the long term. In that sense he's a place holder that would make us marginally better this year (though I think that much is even debatable as I am higher on Vanderbilt than most). How many more games would we win or lose with Nance getting PF minutes instead of developing the players we already have: Naz/McDaniels/Vanderbilt or plugging in Prince? And are those extra wins contributed to Nance worth the expense of our long term development of other players?
First off I'm a bigger fan of Nance than most. Nance is very talented. He would more than marginally improve our team IMO. Getting him does not mean we can't develop who we got. His play has declined a bit the last couple years due to injuries. 29 is far from being old. I expect him to be good for 4-6 years. So if his medicals check out and we can expect him to be healthy then I say bring him on. It's OK if you expect a non lottery pick to be more valuable to us. We just disagree.
FinnTheHuman wrote: Your post is just garbage.
NewWolvesOrder wrote:Garbage post, indeed.
King Malta wrote:KGdaBom wrote:shangrila wrote:Wait, Beasley for Nance?
Come on guys. I just got through the Simmons crap, let’s not start a new rabbit hole that digs straight into the sewer line.
I get that Beasley is a good shooter and Valuable to us. I think what Nance would bring would be more valuable. What's your issue with this idea?
To me it's a mixture of durability, age, Cavs willingness to deal, and value as a trade asset that would prevent me from pulling the trigger on that.
I also like Nance, a lot, and think he'd be a great fit next to KAT. But he does have injury problems (Beasley is admittedly not the most durable guy either) and he's also got 6 years on Beasley who is currently experiencing a pretty steep improvement in production. Not only that but I feel like Beasley has more value as a trade piece when it comes to exploring other additions to the team (Simmons, for example). The Cavs seem to be in selling mode at the moment too, I don't think it would take giving up an asset of Beasley's quality to make a trade happen.
winforlose wrote:As I said, when played with a PF and a center there is usually a size mismatch because of Simmons. When played as PF you negate the size mismatch. Bigs can probably guard him in the low post. My understanding of Simmons game is that it is often downhill. Also, having him in the low post clogs the lane. Better to have him facilitate then simply try and find new value with him.
tsherkin wrote:The important thing to take away here is that Klomp is wrong.
Esohny wrote:Why are you asking Klomp? "He's" actually a bot that posts random blurbs from a database.
Klomp wrote:I'm putting the tired in retired mod at the moment
Klomp wrote:winforlose wrote:As I said, when played with a PF and a center there is usually a size mismatch because of Simmons. When played as PF you negate the size mismatch. Bigs can probably guard him in the low post. My understanding of Simmons game is that it is often downhill. Also, having him in the low post clogs the lane. Better to have him facilitate then simply try and find new value with him.
You play him with the best players. Matchups are rarely determined solely by position, this isn't 2k. Just because he's the PG in the lineup doesn't mean he'd be guarded by the opponent's PG.
PG: Simmons / Russell / Edwards / Prince / Towns
The opposing PG would likely defend Russell. Edwards gets the top defensive wing assignment, followed by Simmons and Prince. The big defends Towns.
PF: Russell / Edwards / Prince / Simmons / Towns
Same story. The opposing PG would likely defend Russell. Edwards gets the top defensive wing assignment, followed by Simmons and Prince. The big defends Towns.
Return to Minnesota Timberwolves
