kekgeek1 wrote:Also in that pod they talk about #1 and Johnson for Rozier and #3 i do not like that trade
I don't like that either. But it fits the recent comment from Rosas that he wants to add a defensive guard who can guard multiple positions. I sure hope we don't end up with that deal.
CoolBreeze44 wrote:To be honest, I would do the trade. I floated this idea as soon as we won the #1 pick. Wiseman is my favorite in the draft, but the Wolves are going to take Ball.
I don't think the Wolves will draft Ball. I think they'll trade down and draft Toppin.
Have you heard anything Lip about drafting Toppin. I just know that is the hot rumor with the wolves is they love Toppin.
Just don't know how true it is.
*I actually won't mind it the Wolves end up with Toppin in this draft. I do think he will be a very solid NBA player with some star ability. Big concern is defense though
I'd trade #1 for Gobert and I'd go twin towers. He would immediately infuse a defensive stopper up the middle which we desperately need. He isn't wasteful on offense, and we already have a stretch big in Towns so it would allow Towns to roam the perimeter where he's a knockdown 3 point shooter. Defensively we can make it work and it would instantly make the Wolves a playoff team in my opinion.
The Wolves aren't going to become a contender against the LeBrons and the Warriors of this league by following their styles ...because let's face it, the starpower isn't as strong as a team like the Lakers and we aren't going to out Warriors the Warriors. This would give us the opportunity to zig when other teams are zagging, and that can work (at least it might be worth a try). Plus, I've made it no secret that my pick if we stay at #1 would be Wiseman.
Then make a solid pick at 17, re-sign Beasley and hope for progression and chemistry improvement and see what we have. Worst case we blow it up in a few years and try again. (that's life as a Wolves fan)
I think I'm a bigger fan of Gobert than most on this board, however, and I have always felt elite defenders were extremely underrated and are often the difference between a flashy team and a winning team.
kekgeek1 wrote:Also in that pod they talk about #1 and Johnson for Rozier and #3 i do not like that trade
I don't like that either. But it fits the recent comment from Rosas that he wants to add a defensive guard who can guard multiple positions. I sure hope we don't end up with that deal.
That's an interesting deal. The only bad part about acquiring Rozier is he is overpaid. The thing is he is only signed for 2 more years and we are trading johnson so it's only overpaying for 1 year. I value Johnson but I also think Rozier could be a pretty valuable player. I think because he got paid like a very good starter people are down on him. I could see him being a Dennis Shoeder type that the right team gets him and he becomes pretty valuable. I value James Johnson but if we draft a guy that would play a lot at PF or C then it would make sense to me. Imagine having Rozier as the backup PG on this team. That would be a valuable addition. It's possible he could turn into a trade asset. He is 26 it's possible there is some upside still. If there was 3 draft picks that were basically in the same bucket...I might be interested in doing this deal. Honestly I think the Wolves might be able to get something else like a future 2nd to add a bit of value to the package.
CoolBreeze44 wrote:To be honest, I would do the trade. I floated this idea as soon as we won the #1 pick. Wiseman is my favorite in the draft, but the Wolves are going to take Ball.
I don't think the Wolves will draft Ball. I think they'll trade down and draft Toppin.
Have you heard anything Lip about drafting Toppin. I just know that is the hot rumor with the wolves is they love Toppin.
Just don't know how true it is.
*I actually won't mind it the Wolves end up with Toppin in this draft. I do think he will be a very solid NBA player with some star ability. Big concern is defense though
If they trade down and add value coming back I wouldn't be upset if the drafted Toppin. If his ability on offense is legit like it sounds like it is he will have legit value to the team in one way or another. The defense is concerning but most prospects have a legit flaw.
TheFuture wrote:Draft Wiseman if you stay at #1, and figure the rest out later. He is the best talent. By far.
The problem is that if the goal is to still pursue a third star eventually like a Booker or Simmons, Wiseman becomes a negative asset since teams like Phoenix and Philly won't want Wiseman. They're still treating this top pick as an asset they hope doesn't depreciate enough to take them out of a potential trade for someone like Booker, Beal or Simmons
TheFuture wrote:Draft Wiseman if you stay at #1, and figure the rest out later. He is the best talent. By far.
The problem is that if the goal is to still pursue a third star eventually like a Booker or Simmons, Wiseman becomes a negative asset since teams like Phoenix and Philly won't want Wiseman. They're still treating this top pick as an asset they hope doesn't depreciate enough to take them out of a potential trade for someone like Booker, Beal or Simmons
I think we disagree on what a negative asset is, to begin with. Andrew Wiggins was a negative asset in that the Wolves were looking to offload him even if it meant attaching draft compensation with him. That is not happening with James Wiseman. In the case of making a move for Ben Simmons or Devin Booker, Wiseman would simply be dangled to a third team for assets that would head in another direction. That's why three-team trades are a thing.
For example, it might make sense for the Wizards to be an option in any Simmons trade with Bradley Beal heading back to Philadelphia.
TheFuture wrote:Draft Wiseman if you stay at #1, and figure the rest out later. He is the best talent. By far.
The problem is that if the goal is to still pursue a third star eventually like a Booker or Simmons, Wiseman becomes a negative asset since teams like Phoenix and Philly won't want Wiseman. They're still treating this top pick as an asset they hope doesn't depreciate enough to take them out of a potential trade for someone like Booker, Beal or Simmons
I think we disagree on what a negative asset is, to begin with. Andrew Wiggins was a negative asset in that the Wolves were looking to offload him even if it meant attaching draft compensation with him. That is not happening with James Wiseman. In the case of making a move for Ben Simmons or Devin Booker, Wiseman would simply be dangled to a third team for assets that would head in another direction. That's why three-team trades are a thing.
For example, it might make sense for the Wizards to be an option in any Simmons trade with Bradley Beal heading back to Philadelphia.
Yep.
I'm not saying Wiseman is that guy... only that the if the Wolves draft for a potential trade... draft the guy with the most draft stock.
