AbeVigodaLive wrote:Camden wrote:AbeVigodaLive wrote:alexftbl8181 wrote:Love/Brew for Wiggins/Thompson/Waiters/Haywood and a 1st
Fair for everybody
No. Cleveland loses that deal by a significant margin.
For the love of all things good, please get it in your head that we're trading a top-10 (top-five in my opinion) player in the NBA. Minnesota loses every Love trade because of that reason alone. If the Cavs are lucky enough to stumble on to Love, they are the clear winners. Trading unknowns for a for sure star works out almost every time, especially for Cleveland as they likely win multiple rings with that core.
Yes. I understand how good Love is. In fact, for years, I've been one of the few on here wondering why Love was getting ripped so much and Rubio was being praised so much.
But I also understand how the NBA works. And how trades work when a star player requests a trade with an end date. It's difficult to find "even value" trades in those situations. While I think it makes perfect sense for Cleveland to trade for a top 5- 12 NBA player that complements its new star player... others might want to get as much value as possible for the #1 pick in an allegedly loaded draft class.
Furthermore, Dion Waiters was the #4 pick just two seasons ago and he showed signs of promise, averaging 16 ppg last season at only 22. Should he be the centerpiece in a Love trade? Hell no. But he has value around the league.
A lot of people are on the fence about Love - Wiggins as it is. While both of us may see the sure thing in Love being better... it's not unanimous. In fact, Wiggins holds a ton of value despite never playing in the NBA.
If we look back at other trades like this, Wiggins alone would make this a good trade for the Wolves. Adding in another promising player (or two) is probably not necessary... if we go by NBA history.
[Note: Just to be sure... Yes. I think Love is the better player. I think he's perfect with James in Cleveland. I think the Wolves are worse after trading Love... for possibly a long time. By "winning" or "losing" the trade, I'm talking about the specifics of the trade itself using the context of other trades and the situation. Personally, I think they can get Love without giving up Waiters and Wiggins. So if they give up both... they "lose" the trade. Make sense?]
They would be getting great value for that No. 1 pick, considering he's far from a sure thing and while he has a high ceiling, he could just as easily bottom out and become a better version of Corey Brewer. You trade guys like that plus other unknowns for a star to lock up an NBA trophy 10 times out of 10 in my book.
Waiters' draft class is over. I couldn't care less if he was picked No. 4 or No. 40. I do realize the talent he has, though, which is why I'd like to get him and see if Flip could get the best out of him. His value around the league though isn't that desirable. He's known as a locker room cancer and a chucker, while already being slightly undersized for his position.
The reason the rest of the world is on the fence about Love/Wiggins is because the majority is absolutely clueless as to how good Love is. They think he's just a stat stuffer on a bad team who's never made the playoffs because he's just not that good, which is so far from the truth as you should know. Intelligent basketball minds know his ability, though, and that's what I'm working off of.
This isn't a situation that should be compared to trades in the past. This is different for a couple reasons:
1) LeBron has reached out to Love about playing with him. LeBron gets what LeBron wants.
2) According to NBA rules, salary in a trade has to match or be somewhat close (don't kill me if the wording/length of the rule is off). Cleveland doesn't have other contracts to make this trade work other than a Bennett, Waiters, Varejao or Thompson. Varejao is practically off the table since that's LeBron's buddy. That leaves three former high first round picks with salaries around $5M each. If you're Cleveland, there's not much you can really do except give up several, if not all, of those young players to get this trade to match salary-wise. Even if they sign Wiggins today and wait this out a month, two of those young players + Wiggins will still need to return to Minnesota.
"Personally, I think they can get Love without giving up Waiters and Wiggins. So if they give up both... they "lose" the trade. Make sense?"
And how do they get Love without trading for him? Even if they wiped their roster clean except for Irving and LeBron next summer, they'd still be cutting it close on the cap (in which they should have just made the trade in July). Not to mention Flip would probably trade Love elsewhere (Golden State) before that time so that would difficult some things as well. There is absolutely no way Love lands on the Cavs without them trading for him, and to do that it will take Wiggins ++.
PS: I can't remember the last time a team traded for a star player, won a championship because of that trade, then looked back at the trade as them losing it. The whole goal of building a team is to win a ring. If that trade was the necessary factor in putting them over the top, then it was a grand success and nobody in Cleveland would give a shit about Wiggins/Waiters/Bennett/Thompson being in Minnesota.
