Markannen, Dunn and Lavine or Butler and Patton?

[Hicks123 [enjin:6700838]]

Agree with Doper. Sorry to say, but this whole discussion is stupid.

Look, I understand Butler could leave.....but Lavine, Dunn and Markkenan aren't winning anybody anything important if they are main cogs. All those guys are 4-7 guys on a good team. And with what Lavine just got, I would rather lose Butler for nothing than be stuck paying that guy.

I tell you what, this board has the best second-guessers and hindsight guys I have ever seen. Not sure why many of you aren't on the inside track to a Wolves front office job....it seems so easy.

[kekgeek]

Those questions aren't very nuanced. We would have been even further from a championship with Lavine, Dunn and Markannen. Who knows what else would have went wrong in that scenario.

Close only counts with hand grenades and horseshoe. A first round playoff exit isn't success if it doesn't lead t a Championship down the road.

At the time I hated the trade and it still looks like a bad one when we lose Butler for nothing after this season.

Lavine, Markkenan and Dunn weren't getting us a championship down the road. We would have been maxed out with no options to retool and a worse team.

Now if Butler leaves we will still have cap space to work with rather than having been forced to give Lavine a contract he didn't deserve.

Exactly. It's not like if we didn't do the trade the wolves are championship contenders.

Big argument can be made that if we didn't do that trade we would be in huge trouble going forward. Lavine, Wiggins and gorgui would all be massively overpaid for their current output in their careers. We would have be in the lux tax with lavine making more then butler, then markannan and Dunn on a high rookie scale. Add another lottery rookie this year. We would be in more cap hell then we already are with less proven talent.

I still make the trade 100 out of 100 times. It is not Jimmy fault for not being a contender it is Kat and Wiggins not taking the necessary steps forward. Kat needs to be a top 5 player and Wiggins needs to be an all star. Until then it don't matter who is around them.

The only way the trade becomes "bad" is if markannan becomes a legit multi time all star

[Wolvesfan21]

Those questions aren't very nuanced. We would have been even further from a championship with Lavine, Dunn and Markannen. Who knows what else would have went wrong in that scenario.

Close only counts with hand grenades and horseshoe. A first round playoff exit isn't success if it doesn't lead t a Championship down the road.

At the time I hated the trade and it still looks like a bad one when we lose Butler for nothing after this season.

Lavine, Markkenan and Dunn weren't getting us a championship down the road. We would have been maxed out with no options to retool and a worse team.

Now if Butler leaves we will still have cap space to work with rather than having been forced to give Lavine a contract he didn't deserve.

All 3 look to be on the way up though, who is the FA you think would come here?

[longstrangetrip [enjin:6600564]]

The team that gets the best player in a deal almost always wins the deal, and there's no question that the best player in this deal is Butler...none of the three we gave up are even close, and never will be. If Butler leaves after next year, we still will have had by far the best player in the deal for two years...and will still have the cap space to spend on someone else. We avoided having to pay huge money for a guy (LaVine) who can't defend and has a career PER under the league average. We got better by subtraction by giving Dunn's minutes to a far superior +/- player in Tyus Jones. And even though Markannen put up good stats on a poor team, there's no certainty that he ends up a better pro than Patton.

This question is really easy for me...I still see this trade as Thibs' finest moment with this franchise. If Butler stays after next year, this deal is a complete home run. And we still win the deal if he leaves by unloading 2 players who I don't think will ever be even average players in the NBA, especially if we spend the cap space he gives us on something that can help us more than Zach and Dunn (a very low bar!).

[kekgeek]

Those questions aren't very nuanced. We would have been even further from a championship with Lavine, Dunn and Markannen. Who knows what else would have went wrong in that scenario.

Close only counts with hand grenades and horseshoe. A first round playoff exit isn't success if it doesn't lead t a Championship down the road.

At the time I hated the trade and it still looks like a bad one when we lose Butler for nothing after this season.

Lavine, Markkenan and Dunn weren't getting us a championship down the road. We would have been maxed out with no options to retool and a worse team.

Now if Butler leaves we will still have cap space to work with rather than having been forced to give Lavine a contract he didn't deserve.

All 3 look to be on the way up though, who is the FA you think would come here?

Are they though. Lavine just had his most inefficient season of his career (numbers worse then Wiggins). Also lavine just got paid a lot of money for his best role is a 6th man at this point.

Dunn is probably a bottom 5 starting pg in the league, he also was a old rookie and he is fighting with his second head coach in his 2nd year. Both coaches have different coaching styles also.

Lauri might be really good but who knows, there is no promises that a player continues to get better. Look at MCW, Foye, Wiggins. Just because they are young doesn't mean improvement

[Wolvesfan21]

8th seed means nothing. Having Butler for 2 years means nothing unless you win a Championship. If Butler leaves the trade will have been an utter failure and that is looking likely.

[longstrangetrip [enjin:6600564]]

8th seed means nothing. Having Butler for 2 years means nothing unless you win a Championship. If Butler leaves the trade will have been an utter failure and that is looking likely.

It seems like you are saying that the only way to judge a trade positively is if it results in a championship. If that's true, 99.5% of all trades must be deemed failures! And it presumes that we were easily on track to win a championship with LaVine and Dunn, and our 31 wins the previous year makes that a preposterous presumption. I would agree that if we had given up some very good players, and it didn't result in a significant improvement in wins, that would constitute failure. But we gave up LaVine and Dunn, two names that will never be enshrined in the Naismith Hall of Fame in Springfield...and we improved by 16 wins! It's baffling to me how that cannot be judged as successful. As I said before, even if Butler walks this franchise is much improved but this trade because 1) we swap Dunn's ineffective minutes for Tyus' productive minutes and 2) we get to spend $20 million plus on a player who is almost certain to be more effective than Zach Lavine. And if Butler stays, this deal looks even better.

I can find many, many areas to criticize the actions and style of both PBO and coach Thibodeau. This trade is not one of them though in that it almost single-handedly resulted in a 50% increase in wins, and I'm going to continue to give the much-maligned Thibs his due when deserved (it won't be often, I can assure you :)).

[thedoper]

8th seed means nothing. Having Butler for 2 years means nothing unless you win a Championship. If Butler leaves the trade will have been an utter failure and that is looking likely.

It seems like you are saying that the only way to judge a trade positively is if it results in a championship. If that's true, 99.5% of all trades must be deemed failures! And it presumes that we were easily on track to win a championship with LaVine and Dunn, and our 31 wins the previous year makes that a preposterous presumption. I would agree that if we had given up some very good players, and it didn't result in a significant improvement in wins, that would constitute failure. But we gave up LaVine and Dunn, two names that will never be enshrined in the Naismith Hall of Fame in Springfield...and we improved by 16 wins! It's baffling to me how that cannot be judged as successful. As I said before, even if Butler walks this franchise is much improved but this trade because 1) we swap Dunn's ineffective minutes for Tyus' productive minutes and 2) we get to spend $20 million plus on a player who is almost certain to be more effective than Zach Lavine. And if Butler stays, this deal looks even better.

I can find many, many areas to criticize the actions and style of both PBO and coach Thibodeau. This trade is not one of them though in that it almost single-handedly resulted in a 50% increase in wins, and I'm going to continue to give the much-maligned Thibs his due when deserved (it won't be often, I can assure you :)).

Got to give you lots of credit on this take LST. You've been probably the most vocal critic of Thibs on the board but as you said, the Butler deal is not the anti-Thibs hill to die on. I'm still pro-Wiggins as much as anyone here and swapping Wiggins for Lavine in the deal still would have been a win for Thibs. Butler is that good, and the salary space around Towns is that important.

[worldK]

8th seed means nothing. Having Butler for 2 years means nothing unless you win a Championship. If Butler leaves the trade will have been an utter failure and that is looking likely.

It seems like you are saying that the only way to judge a trade positively is if it results in a championship. If that's true, 99.5% of all trades must be deemed failures! And it presumes that we were easily on track to win a championship with LaVine and Dunn, and our 31 wins the previous year makes that a preposterous presumption. I would agree that if we had given up some very good players, and it didn't result in a significant improvement in wins, that would constitute failure. But we gave up LaVine and Dunn, two names that will never be enshrined in the Naismith Hall of Fame in Springfield...and we improved by 16 wins! It's baffling to me how that cannot be judged as successful. As I said before, even if Butler walks this franchise is much improved but this trade because 1) we swap Dunn's ineffective minutes for Tyus' productive minutes and 2) we get to spend $20 million plus on a player who is almost certain to be more effective than Zach Lavine. And if Butler stays, this deal looks even better.

I can find many, many areas to criticize the actions and style of both PBO and coach Thibodeau. This trade is not one of them though in that it almost single-handedly resulted in a 50% increase in wins, and I'm going to continue to give the much-maligned Thibs his due when deserved (it won't be often, I can assure you :)).

Very good posts lst. I agree with your take here.

[Wolvesfan21]

8th seed means nothing. Having Butler for 2 years means nothing unless you win a Championship. If Butler leaves the trade will have been an utter failure and that is looking likely.

It seems like you are saying that the only way to judge a trade positively is if it results in a championship. If that's true, 99.5% of all trades must be deemed failures! And it presumes that we were easily on track to win a championship with LaVine and Dunn, and our 31 wins the previous year makes that a preposterous presumption. I would agree that if we had given up some very good players, and it didn't result in a significant improvement in wins, that would constitute failure. But we gave up LaVine and Dunn, two names that will never be enshrined in the Naismith Hall of Fame in Springfield...and we improved by 16 wins! It's baffling to me how that cannot be judged as successful. As I said before, even if Butler walks this franchise is much improved but this trade because 1) we swap Dunn's ineffective minutes for Tyus' productive minutes and 2) we get to spend $20 million plus on a player who is almost certain to be more effective than Zach Lavine. And if Butler stays, this deal looks even better.

I can find many, many areas to criticize the actions and style of both PBO and coach Thibodeau. This trade is not one of them though in that it almost single-handedly resulted in a 50% increase in wins, and I'm going to continue to give the much-maligned Thibs his due when deserved (it won't be often, I can assure you :)).

Thibs said this was one of the most talented roster in the NBA. 8th seed after two years would be a failure if that were true.

The Celtics turned around fast are are contenders, the Wolves are not. So blame the GM or the Coach, it's the same guy who made the trade.