lipoli390 wrote:I'm thinking that Zach is our 5-year guy next Fall. If so, that makes Wiggins a 4-year guy because the other 5-year deal has to be reserved for KAT the following Fall. So I would hope our front office can get a sense of whether Andrew would be cool with the 4-year deal. If not, then we'll need to seriously consider trading him either by this season's trade deadline or next summer.
What? You slap the RFA tag on him and match any offer he gets. Why in the world would we trade him like we have to when we don't?
Why should we "consider" trading him under those circumstances? Because we might have a player, Wiggins, who doesn't want to be here. We could certainly match any offer, but that's less than optimal if the player doesn't want to be here. So no, we don't simply decide to trade him if he balks at the 4-year deal next Fall. But if we know he'd wouldn't want to stay here under those circumstances then of course we should "consider" trading him. I might consider trading Wiggins regardless of his contract situation given what appears to be a lack of progression in his game and his persisting motor issues. But of course, in considering any deal, whether we trade him has to turn on what we'd get in return. I'm not suggesting a fire sale.
lipoli390 wrote:I'm thinking that Zach is our 5-year guy next Fall. If so, that makes Wiggins a 4-year guy because the other 5-year deal has to be reserved for KAT the following Fall. So I would hope our front office can get a sense of whether Andrew would be cool with the 4-year deal. If not, then we'll need to seriously consider trading him either by this season's trade deadline or next summer.
What? You slap the RFA tag on him and match any offer he gets. Why in the world would we trade him like we have to when we don't?
Agreed 100%. He has absolutely no leverage. Everyone is getting ahead of themselves with our big 3.
lipoli390 wrote:I'm thinking that Zach is our 5-year guy next Fall. If so, that makes Wiggins a 4-year guy because the other 5-year deal has to be reserved for KAT the following Fall. So I would hope our front office can get a sense of whether Andrew would be cool with the 4-year deal. If not, then we'll need to seriously consider trading him either by this season's trade deadline or next summer.
What? You slap the RFA tag on him and match any offer he gets. Why in the world would we trade him like we have to when we don't?
Why should we "consider" trading him under those circumstances? Because we might have a player, Wiggins, who doesn't want to be here. We could certainly match any offer, but that's less than optimal if the player doesn't want to be here. So no, we don't simply decide to trade him if he balks at the 4-year deal next Fall. But if we know he'd wouldn't want to stay here under those circumstances then of course we should "consider" trading him. I might consider trading Wiggins regardless of his contract situation given what appears to be a lack of progression in his game and his persisting motor issues. But of course, in considering any deal, whether we trade him has to turn on what we'd get in return. I'm not suggesting a fire sale.
You should "consider" trading anybody, at any time. You evaluate their value and the offer, then decide. This isn't new news.
lipoli390 wrote:I'm thinking that Zach is our 5-year guy next Fall. If so, that makes Wiggins a 4-year guy because the other 5-year deal has to be reserved for KAT the following Fall. So I would hope our front office can get a sense of whether Andrew would be cool with the 4-year deal. If not, then we'll need to seriously consider trading him either by this season's trade deadline or next summer.
What? You slap the RFA tag on him and match any offer he gets. Why in the world would we trade him like we have to when we don't?
Oh, I got the answer to this one...call on me...call on me!
https://www.google.com/search?q=kevin+love&biw=1097&bih=489&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=0ahUKEwiz14WCsqzRAhVr5oMKHUraA4sQ_AUIBygC#imgrc=18LT8lGvja_ZMM%3A
lipoli390 wrote:I'm thinking that Zach is our 5-year guy next Fall. If so, that makes Wiggins a 4-year guy because the other 5-year deal has to be reserved for KAT the following Fall. So I would hope our front office can get a sense of whether Andrew would be cool with the 4-year deal. If not, then we'll need to seriously consider trading him either by this season's trade deadline or next summer.
What? You slap the RFA tag on him and match any offer he gets. Why in the world would we trade him like we have to when we don't?
Oh, I got the answer to this one...call on me...call on me!
https://www.google.com/search?q=kevin+love&biw=1097&bih=489&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=0ahUKEwiz14WCsqzRAhVr5oMKHUraA4sQ_AUIBygC#imgrc=18LT8lGvja_ZMM%3A
Well we signed him to a 4 year deal rather than 5. Savingvthe longer contract for the worse player in rubio. He also was here until the last year of that contract.
lipoli390 wrote:I'm thinking that Zach is our 5-year guy next Fall. If so, that makes Wiggins a 4-year guy because the other 5-year deal has to be reserved for KAT the following Fall. So I would hope our front office can get a sense of whether Andrew would be cool with the 4-year deal. If not, then we'll need to seriously consider trading him either by this season's trade deadline or next summer.
What? You slap the RFA tag on him and match any offer he gets. Why in the world would we trade him like we have to when we don't?
Oh, I got the answer to this one...call on me...call on me!
https://www.google.com/search?q=kevin+love&biw=1097&bih=489&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=0ahUKEwiz14WCsqzRAhVr5oMKHUraA4sQ_AUIBygC#imgrc=18LT8lGvja_ZMM%3A
Well we signed him to a 4 year deal rather than 5. Savingvthe longer contract for the worse player in rubio. He also was here until the last year of that contract.
And we got Andrew Wiggins for him. That scenario is 4 YEARS away if we make the same dumb deal and give him a player option on the 4th year. He has no leverage. Him not being happy here while making max money because he didn't get a 5th year won't be a thing and if it is tell him to suck it up and play out his contract and we can talk about dealing him in 4 years instead of next year. Oh and it's also assuming Lavine gets the 5 year deal which I would also say is highly unlikely given how much Thibs is putting on Wiggins over Zach. It's clear to me Andrew and Karl are the two guys on track to get the designations at this time and it's a pipe dream that Zach will get it.
lipoli390 wrote:I'm thinking that Zach is our 5-year guy next Fall. If so, that makes Wiggins a 4-year guy because the other 5-year deal has to be reserved for KAT the following Fall. So I would hope our front office can get a sense of whether Andrew would be cool with the 4-year deal. If not, then we'll need to seriously consider trading him either by this season's trade deadline or next summer.
What? You slap the RFA tag on him and match any offer he gets. Why in the world would we trade him like we have to when we don't?
Oh, I got the answer to this one...call on me...call on me!
https://www.google.com/search?q=kevin+love&biw=1097&bih=489&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=0ahUKEwiz14WCsqzRAhVr5oMKHUraA4sQ_AUIBygC#imgrc=18LT8lGvja_ZMM%3A
Well we signed him to a 4 year deal rather than 5. Savingvthe longer contract for the worse player in rubio. He also was here until the last year of that contract.
And we got Andrew Wiggins for him. That scenario is 4 YEARS away if we make the same dumb deal and give him a player option on the 4th year. He has no leverage. Him not being happy here while making max money because he didn't get a 5th year won't be a thing and if it is tell him to suck it up and play out his contract and we can talk about dealing him in 4 years instead of next year. Oh and it's also assuming Lavine gets the 5 year deal which I would also say is highly unlikely given how much Thibs is putting on Wiggins over Zach. It's clear to me Andrew and Karl are the two guys on track to get the designations at this time and it's a pipe dream that Zach will get it.
Love had plenty of reason to want out. Imagine if he had stayed the only saving grace would have been Lavine Dieng being solid and maybe even a decent fit next to him and the fact that Pek's deal is about to come off the books. There is no way Love would have resigned here and I wouldnt have blamed him basically at all. He made a smart basketball and career decision and the Wolves got a plenty nice return.
