Minnesota Sports Forum

all_day_88 wrote:I would be too worried about Westbrooks recent multiple surgeries to pull the trigger without getting Reggie Jackson as well.

I think I would need Westbrook and Jackson or Westbrook, lamb and Steven Addams and even then I wouldn't be too thrilled about giving up on Rubio before letting him reach his potential

Westbrook, to me, seems like a freak of nature in how fast he recovers. His injuries have been pretty minor to this point too compared to an ACL tear (Rubio). Highly doubt OKC gives up Lamb/Jackson in that deal and why should they have to? They're giving up the best player in the trade. Rubio may still have a ceiling to grow to, but he will never be the game-changer that Westbrook already is when healthy.

Well they would have to or I wouldn't do it. Rubio would be CRAZY good in OKC's system next to Durant, Pek, Ibaka and whoever else they ended up keeping. Rubio and Pek would take that team to another level and for that I would need Reggie Jackson or Lamb and Steven Adams as well.

Also rubio's contract would be a lot better for OKC's future cap outlook since they aren't willing to spend with their small market (hello James Harden).

all_day_88 wrote:Well they would have to or I wouldn't do it. Rubio would be CRAZY good in OKC's system next to Durant, Pek, Ibaka and whoever else they ended up keeping. Rubio and Pek would take that team to another level and for that I would need Reggie Jackson or Lamb and Steven Adams as well.

Also rubio's contract would be a lot better for OKC's future cap outlook since they aren't willing to spend with their small market (hello James Harden).

The Wolves should make trades if they think it makes them better... who cares what it does for somebody else.

Right now, there's no reason comparing the wolves to a consistent 55+ win team. They're on completely different levels.

Camden wrote:

all_day_88 wrote:I would be too worried about Westbrooks recent multiple surgeries to pull the trigger without getting Reggie Jackson as well.

I think I would need Westbrook and Jackson or Westbrook, lamb and Steven Addams and even then I wouldn't be too thrilled about giving up on Rubio before letting him reach his potential

Westbrook, to me, seems like a freak of nature in how fast he recovers. His injuries have been pretty minor to this point too compared to an ACL tear (Rubio). Highly doubt OKC gives up Lamb/Jackson in that deal and why should they have to? They're giving up the best player in the trade. Rubio may still have a ceiling to grow to, but he will never be the game-changer that Westbrook already is when healthy.

I think the recovery from the ACL is much better longterm. Westbrook's injuries are likely to have a significant impact going forward. I think I would stick with Rubio and look to move Pek for an upgrade on the wing.

I guess I just don't think it would make us better to trade Rubio and Pek for Westbrook and Perkins.

all_day_88 wrote:Well they would have to or I wouldn't do it. Rubio would be CRAZY good in OKC's system next to Durant, Pek, Ibaka and whoever else they ended up keeping. Rubio and Pek would take that team to another level and for that I would need Reggie Jackson or Lamb and Steven Adams as well.

Also rubio's contract would be a lot better for OKC's future cap outlook since they aren't willing to spend with their small market (hello James Harden).

It doesn't hurt to ask for Jackson but let's not be greedy, OKC is the team that would be trading away an all star. It doesn't matter how well you think Rubio and Pek would do there, their trade value is primarily based on how they do here. Also you can't have it both ways, you can't say Rubio would be CRAZY good and then say his contract would be better for the team, if Rubio plays that well he would end up getting paid and OKC would be over $50 for just 4 players.

The Rage Monster wrote:

all_day_88 wrote:Well they would have to or I wouldn't do it. Rubio would be CRAZY good in OKC's system next to Durant, Pek, Ibaka and whoever else they ended up keeping. Rubio and Pek would take that team to another level and for that I would need Reggie Jackson or Lamb and Steven Adams as well.

Also rubio's contract would be a lot better for OKC's future cap outlook since they aren't willing to spend with their small market (hello James Harden).

It doesn't hurt to ask for Jackson but let's not be greedy, OKC is the team that would be trading away an all star. It doesn't matter how well you think Rubio and Pek would do there, their trade value is primarily based on how they do here. Also you can't have it both ways, you can't say Rubio would be CRAZY good and then say his contract would be better for the team, if Rubio plays that well he would end up getting paid and OKC would be over $50 for just 4 players.

But, I thought you never get full value in return when trading away a star player. How come that only applies when we are trading away the better player?

If you are lucky enough to be given the chance to add a top ten player to your team, you do it regardless of what you have to give up outside your other star. Veterans go where the stars are, so filling a roster with decent role players is not hard once you have the foundation. Westbrook is a two way star which is something we don't have. I would give up Pek and Ricky in a heartbeat for him and I'd be willing to pay Perk 9 million to stay at home just because that is how difficult it is to get stars in this league. It is even harder when you aren't bad enough to get a high draft pick and even then it is usually luck that lands you a star. PG is the deepest position in the league right now, so having the chance to get the second best PG in the NBA would be a huge opportunity if presented this summer. You don't need a great C to win anything as proven by most of the top teams in the league right now. You just need one that can protect the paint, rebound and make the easy looks they get. Ricky's ceiling is no where near the level Westbrook is on, so it makes no sense to say no to this deal because of Ricky's potential. You take the surefire All-Star over the maybe one day All-Star when you are trying to keep your other All-Star. If you can squeak out a Lamb, Adams, Jones, or late 1st round pick in addition to the deal then you take it, but I wouldn't push the envelope if they shut down that idea right away because the prize of the deal is Westbrook and he is worth more than turning down the deal because you aren't getting one of those other options. Not to mention, this kind of deal almost guarantees Love returning because of the potential having a second star adds to this team over the crop of good but not great players we have now. Love wants to win and get paid and the best way to do that is add another star to this team so he can get both.

khans2k5 wrote:If you are lucky enough to be given the chance to add a top ten player to your team, you do it regardless of what you have to give up outside your other star. Veterans go where the stars are, so filling a roster with decent role players is not hard once you have the foundation. Westbrook is a two way star which is something we don't have. I would give up Pek and Ricky in a heartbeat for him and I'd be willing to pay Perk 9 million to stay at home just because that is how difficult it is to get stars in this league. It is even harder when you aren't bad enough to get a high draft pick and even then it is usually luck that lands you a star. PG is the deepest position in the league right now, so having the chance to get the second best PG in the NBA would be a huge opportunity if presented this summer. You don't need a great C to win anything as proven by most of the top teams in the league right now. You just need one that can protect the paint, rebound and make the easy looks they get. Ricky's ceiling is no where near the level Westbrook is on, so it makes no sense to say no to this deal because of Ricky's potential. You take the surefire All-Star over the maybe one day All-Star when you are trying to keep your other All-Star. If you can squeak out a Lamb, Adams, Jones, or late 1st round pick in addition to the deal then you take it, but I wouldn't push the envelope if they shut down that idea right away because the prize of the deal is Westbrook and he is worth more than turning down the deal because you aren't getting one of those other options. Not to mention, this kind of deal almost guarantees Love returning because of the potential having a second star adds to this team over the crop of good but not great players we have now. Love wants to win and get paid and the best way to do that is add another star to this team so he can get both.

So hope for Westbrook to struggle enough in the playoffs that the Thunder fall apart and lose? And since Westbrook is the resident whipping boy for his polarizing, somewhat unconventional game, they break up the team amid dissension and chants of selfishness by fans and media?

I'd love OKC to fall apart by the way. Too many look at that team as doing it the "right" way. Meh. They lied to get the franchise. They took the cheap route and dumped Harden because they knew they had goodwill built up with a rabid fanbase brand new to the NBA game. Going for a title wasn't necessary yet... they're making money and everybody is still in the honeymoon phase. I thought they played the fans for suckers a bit on that one.

The owners don't deserve a perennial winner.

sjm34 wrote:

Camden wrote:

all_day_88 wrote:I would be too worried about Westbrooks recent multiple surgeries to pull the trigger without getting Reggie Jackson as well.

I think I would need Westbrook and Jackson or Westbrook, lamb and Steven Addams and even then I wouldn't be too thrilled about giving up on Rubio before letting him reach his potential

Westbrook, to me, seems like a freak of nature in how fast he recovers. His injuries have been pretty minor to this point too compared to an ACL tear (Rubio). Highly doubt OKC gives up Lamb/Jackson in that deal and why should they have to? They're giving up the best player in the trade. Rubio may still have a ceiling to grow to, but he will never be the game-changer that Westbrook already is when healthy.

I think the recovery from the ACL is much better longterm. Westbrook's injuries are likely to have a significant impact going forward. I think I would stick with Rubio and look to move Pek for an upgrade on the wing.

I agree with SJM. Westbrook's repeated knee problems last season and again this season trouble me. His knee orzo elms are particularly troubling given how much he relies on his speed and athleticism. I love him as a player, but I'd stay away.