Pelton on ESPN.com gave the Cavs an A. I think that makes perfect sense. But then, in the all too typical fashion of the national sports media, he gave the Wolves a B- and the Sixers a B+. Even if you agree a B- is appropriate for the Wolves, it is beyond ridiculous to simultaneously give the Sixers a B+.
The Wolves obtained both #1 picks from the past two drafts, a very good young starter in Thad Young and a $6.3 million trade exception in exchange for a player who made it clear he would likely leave after this season. And the Sixers? Two useless players with expiring contracts for a team that does not need the additional cap space expiring contracts offer and a first round pick that can't be better than #11 and will more likely be in the 16-20 range.
If what the Wolves did deserves a B-, then the Sixers should get a D- and that's charitable.
Grading the 3-Team Deal
-
mnhoops [enjin:11017401]
- Posts: 31
- Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2014 12:00 am
Re: Grading the 3-Team Deal
It seems like they are using two different criteria for grading...
Sixers plan for tanking would give them at least a B for helping their losing cause while getting a 1st round pick but not an A since it will be a late first.
Wolves in the context they got a talent like Wiggins (high draft pick), Bennett (young with potentital), and Thad Young (solid vet) I dont know how that wouldn't get an A for a player destined to leave after the season. Going by the winner of the trade gets the best player (Love) the Wolves would have to have a significantly worse grade by those standards.
Throwing in the player we got wont require use to give a max extension (Klay Thompson) should also factor into grading. This is truly one of those trade where all parties involved seem to get what they wanted.
Sixers plan for tanking would give them at least a B for helping their losing cause while getting a 1st round pick but not an A since it will be a late first.
Wolves in the context they got a talent like Wiggins (high draft pick), Bennett (young with potentital), and Thad Young (solid vet) I dont know how that wouldn't get an A for a player destined to leave after the season. Going by the winner of the trade gets the best player (Love) the Wolves would have to have a significantly worse grade by those standards.
Throwing in the player we got wont require use to give a max extension (Klay Thompson) should also factor into grading. This is truly one of those trade where all parties involved seem to get what they wanted.
Re: Grading the 3-Team Deal
Ive learned to tune out the national media with regards to their take on the wolves. They wanted us to trade love to golden state for just lee and barnes or to cavs without getting wiggins in return and other lopsided deals. They wanted us to trade rubio to the knicks before he came over and i wont be surprised if they are going to start speculating where wiggins will go after his rookie contract.
-
slimcalhoun27 [enjin:6640095]
- Posts: 333
- Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2013 12:00 am
Re: Grading the 3-Team Deal
This grading is disturbing. As much of a Goober that I am for the Wolves, I understand how to differentiate between the pros and cons on a equal and unbiased level. That being said, there is ZERO reason why the Wolves do not come out looking great and smell the like roses.
#1. Cavs add a viable Big three member in Love. By already adding James it would be a great off season, but adding Love is a solid solid win now trade. Plus the allure to play with the big three has drawn extra support in Marion, Miller etc. Grade A
#2. Wolves lose a top 10 talent, who pushed his way out after being involved in a organization who has struggled to put together viable talent since the KG era. This factor alone, knowing that this Team has been run by clowns alone should have given them a A+. Losing Love, gaining the most hyped potential in Wiggins, plus a player in Bennett who I believe is more or less used improperly, not trained well, and not given the proper motivation to reach his potential is the major reason he faultered his Rookie season. Guy needs some serious guidance on and off the court and has made major strides by the way it looks already in his physical appearance. As for Young....we got a Steal, a absolute steal for a player who was also in a poorly run organization and not given the chance to shine. He is gifted and for what we gave up for him, it was a stroke of genius on Flips part. Grade A-
#3. 76ers lose the most talented player they have. But since they are in a complete rebuild for season 4 now....its not a surprise. I would believe that since we do not expect much from them, the grading is simplified. Grade B-
This media hatred and bias towards the Wolves is so old. The day has changed, and I personally feel Flip has pulled out a miracle. Strong, cool headed, ice in the veins type poker bluff coolness move on his part. I still would like to see an additional move this offseason and perhaps it surrounds Barea, Bud plus something for a solid talent or ship them out at the trade deadline for future considerations. We are deeper, more equipped and I believe healthier on all ends since this move and I'm excited to see this happen.
Living in Portland, I am surrounded by Blazer fans, but I spoke with a few last night over some Micro brews and they all thought Minnesota was primed for success, even more dangerous without Love. The League has noticed! But as usual, the douche bag writers can't get over there homerness towards the Wolves.
#1. Cavs add a viable Big three member in Love. By already adding James it would be a great off season, but adding Love is a solid solid win now trade. Plus the allure to play with the big three has drawn extra support in Marion, Miller etc. Grade A
#2. Wolves lose a top 10 talent, who pushed his way out after being involved in a organization who has struggled to put together viable talent since the KG era. This factor alone, knowing that this Team has been run by clowns alone should have given them a A+. Losing Love, gaining the most hyped potential in Wiggins, plus a player in Bennett who I believe is more or less used improperly, not trained well, and not given the proper motivation to reach his potential is the major reason he faultered his Rookie season. Guy needs some serious guidance on and off the court and has made major strides by the way it looks already in his physical appearance. As for Young....we got a Steal, a absolute steal for a player who was also in a poorly run organization and not given the chance to shine. He is gifted and for what we gave up for him, it was a stroke of genius on Flips part. Grade A-
#3. 76ers lose the most talented player they have. But since they are in a complete rebuild for season 4 now....its not a surprise. I would believe that since we do not expect much from them, the grading is simplified. Grade B-
This media hatred and bias towards the Wolves is so old. The day has changed, and I personally feel Flip has pulled out a miracle. Strong, cool headed, ice in the veins type poker bluff coolness move on his part. I still would like to see an additional move this offseason and perhaps it surrounds Barea, Bud plus something for a solid talent or ship them out at the trade deadline for future considerations. We are deeper, more equipped and I believe healthier on all ends since this move and I'm excited to see this happen.
Living in Portland, I am surrounded by Blazer fans, but I spoke with a few last night over some Micro brews and they all thought Minnesota was primed for success, even more dangerous without Love. The League has noticed! But as usual, the douche bag writers can't get over there homerness towards the Wolves.
Re: Grading the 3-Team Deal
ESPN only care about the bandwagon teams and LeBron James. Everything else is irrelevant to them. Giving the Wolves a B- just shows how clueless they are. Everyone with half a brain for basketball knows the Wolves got a dam good return. And how can you give Philly B+. Wow what a joke. That's why I don't follow ESPN.
Re: Grading the 3-Team Deal
Well said, Slim. Here are my grades for the three teams:
Cavs: A (Could not have done better. Adding Love makes them the instant favorite in the East. A+ if they had been able to keep Wiggins. :))
Wolves: A- (Hard to imagine a better deal for the Wolves under the circumstances. The minus is simply intended to recognize that the Cavs get the best player and biggest immediate impact in this deal)
Sixers : C (I have a hard time seeing much value in this deal for the Sixers. The only value they get is a first round pick in the teens. I thought about giving them a D, but I'm in a charitable mood.
Cavs: A (Could not have done better. Adding Love makes them the instant favorite in the East. A+ if they had been able to keep Wiggins. :))
Wolves: A- (Hard to imagine a better deal for the Wolves under the circumstances. The minus is simply intended to recognize that the Cavs get the best player and biggest immediate impact in this deal)
Sixers : C (I have a hard time seeing much value in this deal for the Sixers. The only value they get is a first round pick in the teens. I thought about giving them a D, but I'm in a charitable mood.
Re: Grading the 3-Team Deal
Lip you wouldn't get a job at ESPN.
:thumb:
:thumb:
-
bleedspeed
- Posts: 8161
- Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 12:00 am
Re: Grading the 3-Team Deal
ESPN giving a B- really means we got a A+
Interesting talk here.
http://www.nbadraft.net/forum/love-trade-wolves-fan-persepective
Interesting talk here.
http://www.nbadraft.net/forum/love-trade-wolves-fan-persepective
-
Camden [enjin:6601484]
- Posts: 18065
- Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 12:00 am
Re: Grading the 3-Team Deal
I think the B grade for Minny is because we're still the team that's losing our star player. I can understand that. We got two unproven prospects and a good player, but a player that can walk after next year if he chooses to do. Now, while I think Flip did a tremendous job, nothing in our return is a sure thing. That might be where the slightly low grade comes in.
In comparison to Philly's grade, however, our grade makes zero sense. Maybe their grade is what it is because they got closer to their goal of absolute tanking. Otherwise, expirings and a late 1st is a poor return for a player ESPN just projected to be the 7th best PF in basketball next year.
Personally, I'd distribute the grades as so:
Cleveland - A+
Minnesota - B+
Philadelphia - C
In comparison to Philly's grade, however, our grade makes zero sense. Maybe their grade is what it is because they got closer to their goal of absolute tanking. Otherwise, expirings and a late 1st is a poor return for a player ESPN just projected to be the 7th best PF in basketball next year.
Personally, I'd distribute the grades as so:
Cleveland - A+
Minnesota - B+
Philadelphia - C
-
longstrangetrip [enjin:6600564]
- Posts: 9432
- Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 12:00 am
Re: Grading the 3-Team Deal
Like most of you, I'm most interested in evaluating the deal from a Wolves' perspective, and the fact that almost everyone here gives them an A (or close to an A) means much more to me than ESPN's evaluation. Given that Love was going to leave anyway, and likely be a sour influence in the clubhouse if he wasn't traded before the season started, this is an A+ deal to me from a Wolves' perspective.
I'm sure most of you won't be surprised that I'm not as high as all of you from a Cavs' perspective. The A grades are given mainly because adding Love makes them the instant favorite in the East, and that's a decent point. But I would argue that LeBron is such a superior player that the moment he decided to return to Cleveland (along with his Mike Miller and maybe Ray Allen), they were already neck and neck with the Bulls as the favorite in the East. Adding Love makes them immediately a better team, but I'm not convinced that it moves the needle sufficiently to sacrifice the #1's from each of the past two years plus another first rounder. A starting five of LBJ, Irving, Waiters, TT and Varejao would have allowed the Cavs to bring Wiggins and Bennett along slowly, and I suspect that the #1's would have been making great contributions to the Cavs off the bench late in the season (along with Mike Miller and maybe Allen). The fact that 40% of Cavs fans preferred to not make the trade and almost 100% of Wolves' fans love the deal, only proves how ridiculous it is for ESPN to give the Cavs the higher grade. I give the Cavs a B-.
The deal is difficult to evaluate from the 76ers perspective. Like the Wolves, they were going to lose their starting PF in a year anyway, but unlike the Wolves, they weren't able to get back much of significance. I recognize that Young is not in Love's class, but still it seems like he is worth more than two unusable players and a pick in the 20s. I give them a C.
I'm sure most of you won't be surprised that I'm not as high as all of you from a Cavs' perspective. The A grades are given mainly because adding Love makes them the instant favorite in the East, and that's a decent point. But I would argue that LeBron is such a superior player that the moment he decided to return to Cleveland (along with his Mike Miller and maybe Ray Allen), they were already neck and neck with the Bulls as the favorite in the East. Adding Love makes them immediately a better team, but I'm not convinced that it moves the needle sufficiently to sacrifice the #1's from each of the past two years plus another first rounder. A starting five of LBJ, Irving, Waiters, TT and Varejao would have allowed the Cavs to bring Wiggins and Bennett along slowly, and I suspect that the #1's would have been making great contributions to the Cavs off the bench late in the season (along with Mike Miller and maybe Allen). The fact that 40% of Cavs fans preferred to not make the trade and almost 100% of Wolves' fans love the deal, only proves how ridiculous it is for ESPN to give the Cavs the higher grade. I give the Cavs a B-.
The deal is difficult to evaluate from the 76ers perspective. Like the Wolves, they were going to lose their starting PF in a year anyway, but unlike the Wolves, they weren't able to get back much of significance. I recognize that Young is not in Love's class, but still it seems like he is worth more than two unusable players and a pick in the 20s. I give them a C.