Minnesota Sports Forum

It's hard to come up with a realistic deal for Young. All the teams that could use him have nothing to offer.

Camden wrote:Oh, I also brought up this one, but I have no idea if the other team would do it. They are chasing playoffs, though.

MIL: Henson
MIN: Williams

I don't get why, but it's like the Bucks just don't want Henson to truly succeed. When given sizable minutes, though, he's a shot-blocking, glass-cleaning garbage man with decent athleticism and length. They could use a backup PG for this stretch the rest of the season. This trade would be ideal.

Cam you've ripped me in the past for undervaluing Jon Henson.

And now that is exactly what you've done.

As well as Mo William is playing I can't see the Bucks giving Henson up for a one year rental injury prone vet PG. We'd have to either take on a bad contract, give up an asset or send them one of our youngs.

Like these 2 trades of Cams

MIL: Henson
MIN: Williams

HOU- Jones, Terry
MIN- Martin, GRII

--------------------------------------------------------------

PG: Rubio, Terry, Brown
SG: Wiggins, Lavine, Daniel
SF: Shabazz, Budinger, Hummel
PF: Jones, Young, Bennett
C: Pekovic, Dieng, Henson

I could see the Bulls doing Gibson for Thad straight up. The Bulls are probably weakest at the 3 and Thad gives them some versatility to play either the 3 or 4. Pau can backup the 5. Gibson would be great on this team defensively and on the boards. I think if the Bulls want to win they'll need more depth than Dunleavy at the 3. Snell and McDermott aren't ready to be those guys yet. That's an even swap in my opinion.

Let's not forget it is the Bucks who we would be dealing with here. The same front office which traded Tobias Harris for one year of JJ Redick. But even so the Bucks would have to be really desperate to do a trade like that for Mo

For sure. I preluded my proposal with the same concerns. I know that FO wants playoffs, though, and they have a hole at backup PG. Mo is a good value, but for what price?

I'd kick in AB or GRIII, but that doesn't move the needle much, if any.

The problem with Mo is he can decline any trade because he signed a one year deal. So the real question would be: "Is Milwaukee that much of an upgrade for him to want to go there?" It'd be a better situation than MN, but there is no real chance at doing anything significant with that team. I would think he would choose to stay here unless he landed on a team with a shot to at least win a playoff round, otherwise there isn't much point to accept a trade to a team in a crappy market like Milwaukee for a first round exit.

Camden wrote:

phenom's_revenge wrote:I was thinking just Bennett and Budinger for Gibson. Sending Martin or Thad would be overpaying. The issue seems to revolve around Gibson's contract. Bulls can shed some dollars here and decline Bennett's option.

That's an unrealistic offer, though. A win-now, championship contender does not make a trade involving their sixth man unless they get better as a team. That means they need significant wing help. They want nothing to do with Bennett and Budinger just like we don't.

It really depends how much of a problem they have with Gibson's salary. If it is actually an issue, then it is a reasonable offer.

Phenom's_Revenge wrote:It really depends how much of a problem they have with Gibson's salary. If it is actually an issue, then it is a reasonable offer.

Even in case Chicago really wants to drop their total salary, it is not reasonable offer since there are many organizations that are willing to offer more from elite defensive big with improving offensive game.

Camden wrote:For sure. I preluded my proposal with the same concerns. I know that FO wants playoffs, though, and they have a hole at backup PG. Mo is a good value, but for what price?

Cam, Milwaukee isn't going to trade Henson when he is currently their only healthy big. Zaza, Sanders and Ilyasova all are injured and if they would trade Henson for point guard, that would left only Johnny O'Bryant who is rookie 2nd rounder to play center.

Also they don't currently need backup point. Bayless has been doing terrific job in that position. Both their offense and defense have been better when Bayless has been point vs when Knight has been point guard. He is not prototypical point guard but especially his defense has been elite level against other backup points. I will write more about that in new topic if I have time. I would like to analyze why both Atlanta and Milwaukee have been able to play such a good defense without having much elite defenders.