Hicks123 wrote:Would anyone entertain the following:
Wolves: Wiggins / Option to swap first rounders for Brooklyn's #1 in 2017 draft
Boston: Crowder
With the PG's available in this draft, essentially securing Fultz, Ball or Smith is worth it IMO. None of those guys fit with Boston if they keep Thomas. Crowder is on a steal of a deal for next 3 seasons and makes us a better defensive team. Boston gets another marquee name, and they seemingly have Jaylen Brown to take over role of Crowder in future seasons.
Just a thought.
For a team trying to win now... it can be argued Crowder (and on a great contract) has more value than Wiggins. And then a top 5 (possibly #1) pick as well?
Boston doesn't need a marquee name. They need guys who can help a 53-win team win 60 games. There's no proof that Wiggins is that guy. At least not for what they have to give up to find out.
Don't necessarily disagree Abe. Last season I said I would trade Wiggins and Crowder straight up. Would still likely do it, but I do believe that Wiggins holds more "perceived" value around the league than does Crowder. Despite the actuallity of it....I do believe the Wolves can get something else besides a straight up deal. And Boston seems a logical partner with all of their assets and youth. While that team is certainly steps ahead of the Wolves today, they still have a long way to go to get to where they can truly compete for more than maybe a round 1 victory.
Hicks123 wrote:Would anyone entertain the following:
Wolves: Wiggins / Option to swap first rounders for Brooklyn's #1 in 2017 draft
Boston: Crowder
With the PG's available in this draft, essentially securing Fultz, Ball or Smith is worth it IMO. None of those guys fit with Boston if they keep Thomas. Crowder is on a steal of a deal for next 3 seasons and makes us a better defensive team. Boston gets another marquee name, and they seemingly have Jaylen Brown to take over role of Crowder in future seasons.
Just a thought.
For a team trying to win now... it can be argued Crowder (and on a great contract) has more value than Wiggins. And then a top 5 (possibly #1) pick as well?
Boston doesn't need a marquee name. They need guys who can help a 53-win team win 60 games. There's no proof that Wiggins is that guy. At least not for what they have to give up to find out.
Don't necessarily disagree Abe. Last season I said I would trade Wiggins and Crowder straight up. Would still likely do it, but I do believe that Wiggins holds more "perceived" value around the league than does Crowder. Despite the actuallity of it....I do believe the Wolves can get something else besides a straight up deal. And Boston seems a logical partner with all of their assets and youth. While that team is certainly steps ahead of the Wolves today, they still have a long way to go to get to where they can truly compete for more than maybe a round 1 victory.
We disagree on how close Boston is. I think they're already the East's 3rd best team and nipping at Toronto's heels. I don't think anybody is close to the three at the top.
And with two Brooklyn picks and several intriguing assets with NBA experience, I think they can find a guy to get them into the ECF pretty easily.
The question is whether they can beat Cleveland at that point... and there you're right. They have a long way to go.
fondey wrote:Some random sportswriter suggested this.
Damian Lillard to Minnesota for Kris Dunn, Zach LaVine and a top-four protected pick
I like it. We would be a defensive minded 2/3 away from a legit top 4 roster in the west.
I'd rather trade for McCollum and I think Portland would give up McCollum before Lillard when you consider marketing and brand.
That trade is crazy. I mean Lilliard isn't getting dealt so that what it would take but no way I give up that much for Lilliard and I respect what he brings quite a bit.
bleedspeed177 wrote:I wouldn't trade Zach Lavine straight up for CJ. You guys are all nuts.
I agree and at the very least I certainly wouldn't be adding anything. IF CJ could play PG AND there was no faith in Dunn as a future PG...it would make sense. I wouldn't do it but I could see the thought process. That's a lot of ifs though right? :)
I agree I'm not interested in moving LaVine (or Towns, obviously) for McCollum, but other than that... it's worth discussing. Think we're underrating him a bit. He's Lillard-lite and actually better in some ways.
Camden0916 wrote:I agree I'm not interested in moving LaVine (or Towns, obviously) for McCollum, but other than that... it's worth discussing. Think we're underrating him a bit. He's Lillard-lite and actually better in some ways.
No doubt he is a very good player and putting up even better numbers than he did last year which is pretty impressive.
Camden wrote:I agree I'm not interested in moving LaVine (or Towns, obviously) for McCollum, but other than that... it's worth discussing. Think we're underrating him a bit. He's Lillard-lite and actually better in some ways.
You would move Wiggins for McCollum but not Lavine?
