Who blinks first?

[longstrangetrip [enjin:6600564]]

Espn Insider has an article saying quite the opposite Lip. Of 12 GMs spoken to 7 said theyd keep Wiggins.

I would love to ask those GM's why they'd be willing to waste years of Lebron's prime and limit the amount of title contending years he has left to keep a rookie who has done nothing in this league over a top 10 player. They must be talking to the teams who want to get Love in free agency trying to talk up Wiggins so Cleveland gets an ego about their pick and don't trade him. Otherwise they must be talking to lottery teams because there is no way any good GM who runs a playoff level team would take the rookie over the top 10 player. To me, they shouldn't have jobs if they would honestly keep Wiggins over getting a top 10 player.

Some of the comments the GM's made are in the article...I think alex included some of them in a post earlier today. But I would suspect the 7 GM's who preferred keeping the young lottery picks over Love don't believe they are wasting LeBron's time...they merely believe. like me, that four young lottery picks combine with James better than Love. I suspect their logic is something like this:

1) Love is a marvelous producer, but frankly there are known question marks about him. His defense is subpar, he hasn't been to the playoffs, and his first NBA coach had nothing but negative comments to say about him. not to mention that the two seasons previous to last year, he only played 55 and 18 games. Too risky to sacrifice the potential of 4 high picks for a guy with those known issues.

2) While rookies generally don't produce much in their first year, we're only talking about one rookie here in Wiggins. The other lottery picks are 2nd to 4th year players, and should be counted on to produce.

3) Plus LeBron makes everyone on the court better. It's true that Love will likely be better playing better with LBJ too, but it's more exciting to think of the positive impact he would have on 5 guys with enormous potential.

4) Love will not help defensively and LeBron needs more defensive help as he gets older. While Wiggins may not be an offensive star his first year, the Kawhi Leonard story shows that long athletic players can contribute to a playoff team defensively at a very young age, and that will be helpful to LeBron.

5) There hasn't been a more highly regarded prospect than Wiggins since LeBron, and his 20 PPG his last month in college confirmed his high ceiling. He doesn't have to be an offensive star right away for the Cavs with LBJ, Irving, TT, Waiters Varejo and Bennett (and maybe Ray Allen or Mike Miller), but he can be expected to help anyway on both sides of the court...especially without as much pressure to perform.

Whether you agree with these 5 statements or not, they are not unreasonable. And you can't argue that 7 out of 12 guys queried who are calling the shots don't deal for Love if Wiggins is included.

[longstrangetrip [enjin:6600564]]

It wasn't NBA GMs necessarily, it was a combo of scouts and front office executives (only one high executive) if I remember correctly. Guys that don't make the final decision on what their respective teams do. If I'm wrong on that I will gladly retract my correction, though. It's been a while since I last looked at that article.

You know, you might be right about that cam. I have heard this discussed as "NBA GM's" so often that I assumed it was true. But I can't recall what the exact sample was. Can anyone post the article?

[Lipoli390]

I'd like to broaden that sample from 12 to 30 and see the results. I'd also like to know what teams those 12 GMs are with. Are they perennial losers that typically make poor player personnel decisions? Are they all Eastern Conference GMs hoping their opinion can help stop Love from ending up in Cleveland where he would make the Cavs an instant title contender? Or is it simply a poor unrepresentative sample? All I know is that those basketball people who have spoken publicly, like PJ Carlesimo, have emphatically declared that trading Wiggins for Love would be the absolute right move for Cleveland.

No doubt It will be LeBron's decision. I'm convinced that LeBron told the organization not to deal Wiggins for Love. I think LeBron wants to make history in his mind by molding and carrying a group of young talent to a championship. He has no pressure to win right away. He already has two rings so no one can say he can't win championships. After creating a super-team in Miami LeBron wants to prove he can win the hard way.

There will be no Love for Wiggins deal.

[Camden [enjin:6601484]]

Lip, if that's the case, why'd Cleveland reportedly offer Bennett, Waiters and a 1st for Love? If LeBron wants to do it the hard way, you'd think their front office would respect that and not even entertain the idea of adding Love.

[TeamRicky [enjin:6648771]]

Original post was accidentally deleted. Will repost.

[longstrangetrip [enjin:6600564]]

I'd like to broaden that sample from 12 to 30 and see the results. I'd also like to know what teams those 12 GMs are with. Are they perennial losers that typically make poor player personnel decisions? Are they all Eastern Conference GMs hoping their opinion can help stop Love from ending up in Cleveland where he would make the Cavs an instant title contender? Or is it simply a poor unrepresentative sample? All I know is that those basketball people who have spoken publicly, like PJ Carlesimo, have emphatically declared that trading Wiggins for Love would be the absolute right move for Cleveland.

No doubt It will be LeBron's decision. I'm convinced that LeBron told the organization not to deal Wiggins for Love. I think LeBron wants to make history in his mind by molding and carrying a group of young talent to a championship. He has no pressure to win right away. He already has two rings so no one can say he can't win championships. After creating a super-team in Miami LeBron wants to prove he can win the hard way.

There will be no Love for Wiggins deal.

Lip, that is exactly how I think LeBron is thinking. I mentioned a few days ago that most basketball observers view a champion who is able to build a championship organically more favorably than one who skips to another team just to get a ring. Many on this board countered that legacy is all about number of rings, not how you get them. I don't agree, and I don't think LeBron agrees. I don't think that LeBron necessarily doesn't want to play with Love (although he may not) because he had to have noticed what an important role Kevin played in the Olympics. But I think he knows tht his legacy will be that much more admired if he proves he can win a championship without forming a Big 3. And I think his ego is big enough that he knows he can make these young prospects better players, and that it will be rewarding to help them develop. I think he is right, and that the Cavs are going to be really fun to watch the next 5 years. They probably won't win it all this year, but they will be good, And they could be a dynasty beginning in 2015-6.

But as I have been saying all along, I want to be wrong about this more than I have ever wanted to be wrong. I covet Wiggins, Bennett, TT and Waiters more than I do Love, just like all the Cavs' fans do.

[Camden [enjin:6601484]]

I've seen several forum posts just like that, most saying the same thing. Saw one that talked about his buddy's dad working in the Cavs front office and he told his son he wouldn't buy him a Wiggins jersey because he very well could be on his way to Minnesota before the season. Said that the Wolves were relentless in not discussing offers for Love without Wiggins included, and Cleveland knew this, but would eventually cave in if that's what it meant to bring Love to play with LeBron.

Obviously just forum talk, but there are posts like that out there. Depending on those people's sources, it's likely true, and would confirm most of what I've been saying on here.

Wiggins, Bennett and Waiters is ultimately what I'd expect, especially with Waiters saying he doesn't want to come off the bench.

[Lipoli390]

Lip, if that's the case, why'd Cleveland reportedly offer Bennett, Waiters and a 1st for Love? If LeBron wants to do it the hard way, you'd think their front office would respect that and not even entertain the idea of adding Love.

Good question, Cam. First, I'm not convinced they made that offer. Second, I think they knew Flip would turn it down in which case they could placate the fan base by showing they tried while refusing to hang onto fan-favorite Wiggins. Obviously I could be way off on this. Just my gut sense.

Question: would you trade Love for a package of Waiters, Bennett, and Thompson? I'd be tempted.

[TeamRicky [enjin:6648771]]

When we traded KG he was 31 and we got a nice haul of players and draft picks with a young Al Jefferson as the centerpiece. Love is not yet 26 and the offers are even remotely close yet. I believe we should hold out for Wiggins, Klay or signed Bledsoe or a nice haul of future picks. No reason to cave in or take less.

[longstrangetrip [enjin:6600564]]

I've seen several forum posts just like that, most saying the same thing. Saw one that talked about his buddy's dad working in the Cavs front office and he told his son he wouldn't buy him a Wiggins jersey because he very well could be on his way to Minnesota before the season. Said that the Wolves were relentless in not discussing offers for Love without Wiggins included, and Cleveland knew this, but would eventually cave in if that's what it meant to bring Love to play with LeBron.

Obviously just forum talk, but there are posts like that out there. Depending on those people's sources, it's likely true, and would confirm most of what I've been saying on here.

Wiggins, Bennett and Waiters is ultimately what I'd expect, especially with Waiters saying he doesn't want to come off the bench.

Keeps the dream alive...Flip, hold tight and get this done! I want Wiggins!