Minnesota Sports Forum

A couple thoughts on these deals.

If you dealt Wiggins and you knew you could get Wade after a buyout from the Bulls and he would be your starting SG that would help even though he is declining and isn't a 3 point shooter he is still a pretty good player. The fit with the other high usage guys would be fun.

The exciting idea of Kyrie is basically pushing aside Teague and I think the guy is a pretty solid player and a legit NBA starter. Obviously if you can upgrade from Teague to Kyrie do it but Teague could be a really nice fit here. His value seems to get lost. One thing that's fun to look at is his stats compared to a Kyrie in the playoff series this past year. Teague put up terrific efficient numbers while Kyrie was not. Teague's numbers start to look pretty good considering his usuage rate was basically half of Kyrie. That's more just fun stats not to really prove anything but the potential is there for Teague to be a really effective complimentary player for this team. I'm not certain it will work out but it certainly could and the Wolves do have Tyus as a young guy who could potentially take over at some point. If I was the Cavs I would be demanding Tyus in a deal too.

Doogie reported that the Wolves have made a formal offer to the Cavs for Kyrie. No details.

lipoli390 wrote:Doogie reported that the Wolves have made a formal offer to the Cavs for Kyrie. No details.

There is no way Wiggins wouldn't be a part of the deal.

lipoli390 wrote:Doogie reported that the Wolves have made a formal offer to the Cavs for Kyrie. No details.

Yep...came from Woj. 5 other teams have made offers too...interesting, because that means at least 2 teams that offered were not on Kyrie's list.

I have heard many experts...Trent Tucker included...say that a deal involving Wig and Kyrie is a deal the Wolves have to make if available. As exctiing an offensive player as Kyrie is, I'm in the camp with those who are wary about this deal. The roster imbalance this creates would be ridiculous, becasue there just aren't suitable wings available in free agency. Butler is a stud but regularly misses 15 games per year. Imagine our starting lineup with Crawford and the new D-League guy, not to mention no bench...yuck!

If the Cavs like Wig in a deal, this is a difficult proposition for Thibs to pass up...I hope he does though.

longstrangetrip wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:Doogie reported that the Wolves have made a formal offer to the Cavs for Kyrie. No details.

Yep...came from Woj. 5 other teams have made offers too...interesting, because that means at least 2 teams that offered were not on Kyrie's list.

I have heard many experts...Trent Tucker included...say that a deal involving Wig and Kyrie is a deal the Wolves have to make if available. As exctiing an offensive player as Kyrie is, I'm in the camp with those who are wary about this deal. The roster imbalance this creates would be ridiculous, becasue there just aren't suitable wings available in free agency. Butler is a stud but regularly misses 15 games per year. Imagine our starting lineup with Crawford and the new D-League guy, not to mention no bench...yuck!

If the Cavs like Wig in a deal, this is a difficult proposition for Thibs to pass up...I hope he does though.

.....unless Thibs is really thinking about 2018-19. It's certainly a messy roster situation at least through mid-December. Then perhaps Thibs can do something with Teague to balance things out a bit. Still, it's hard to see things coming together in a big way with that kind of tumult in the roster this season. They would probably at least get to the playoffs though.

But give Thibs another off season with a core of KAT, Butler, and Irving....now there might be some folks willing to take a discount to come fill in the gaps.

I'm not an advocate for it, just thinking that Thibs is thinking one year ahead and wants to make a serious title run in two seasons.

If we make the deal our prospects for 2018-19 should be better than if we stand pat. But I think you could be making the decision for a one year shot at a title vs being a contender for the next 5-7 years. With Butler and Irving both having the option to leave after that year, our future would be very uncertain. I'm not sure I've waited 14 years to have one chance and then go back to being an also ran. I want to see what Andrew looks like this year before we pass judgment.

CoolBreeze44 wrote:If we make the deal our prospects for 2018-19 should be better than if we stand pat. But I think you could be making the decision for a one year shot at a title vs being a contender for the next 5-7 years. With Butler and Irving both having the option to leave after that year, our future would be very uncertain. I'm not sure I've waited 14 years to have one chance and then go back to being an also ran. I want to see what Andrew looks like this year before we pass judgment.

If you wait to see what he'll be then his value will drop if his play doesn't elevate. The Wolves have a history of waiting to long and missing the window to capitalize on potential in a trade.

TheSP wrote:

CoolBreeze44 wrote:If we make the deal our prospects for 2018-19 should be better than if we stand pat. But I think you could be making the decision for a one year shot at a title vs being a contender for the next 5-7 years. With Butler and Irving both having the option to leave after that year, our future would be very uncertain. I'm not sure I've waited 14 years to have one chance and then go back to being an also ran. I want to see what Andrew looks like this year before we pass judgment.

If you wait to see what he'll be then his value will drop if his play doesn't elevate. The Wolves have a history of waiting to long and missing the window to capitalize on potential in a trade.

I agree. The assumption has to be that the Cavs wouldn't give us Irving unless they got Wiggins, so that's really the question here.

Cool, a lot of it depends on how you see Wiggins. I know you're high on him, and I have serious doubts about him. If you think he'll develop, then yes, it would be a good long-term investment to keep him. But from my view, holding on to him for another year, especially if we lock ourselves into a max extension, could really hinder our development both long term and short term if he doesn't take a big step up.

The other equation is Irving, of course. Personally, I don't like how one-sided his game is, which is one of the same problems I have with Wiggins. This is why I wish we had traded Wiggins for Paul George. But I see the arguments that Irving would help us more than Wiggins because he plays the point, is more efficient offensively, and has proven his range and absolutely elite handles and scoring. In terms of his weak defense, I think we'd absolutely have to get some great wing defenders in here or it could fizzle (I'd be looking at Teague deals for defensive wings for sure if we got Irving). And I don't like his personality, but if Butler and Towns like him, that's really the important thing. The other question is the one you bring up, what are the chances that Irving and Butler bolt after 2 years? My guess is that it all depends on how much we're winning and how much they get along. If we're winning and the big three get along, I can easily see the two of them re-upping with Thibs. I've got my doubts about Kyrie, and his trade demand has made him look bad to me, but Butler is loyal as hell and has a long relationship with Thibs. And if you look at the history of stars reaching free agency, my guess is the majority of the time, they stay with their teams. It's the guys who bolt who you remember because they're somewhat of an anomaly. If they both stay as KAT enters his second contract, our window is just as long as if we kept Wiggins, and arguably, our ceiling would be higher because, let's face it, Irving is a bigger star and a better player, and we'd basically have 3 team USA guys on our roster. That's what you need to remain a center of gravity for great free agents.

So in the end, I'd be willing to risk a Wiggins for Irving swap, as long as Butler and Towns are legitimately on board and we are confident we could move Teague for a starting wing defender like Danny Green. I'm less worried about Kyrie and Butler re-signing than I would be about Kyrie's weak defense hurting us in the same way Wiggins' has hurt us.

Like a couple other guys, imagining Kyrie on this roster has made me a little more appreciative of what Teague could bring to the table this year.

I think at this point I would do the deal. We'd be good enough to make the playoffs this year which is all that matters for this season. We'd have Teague as a trade chip in December or even next summer if needed. We'd be in great position to make a run in 2018-19 with Teague and our exceptions as assets to add around Irving, Butler and Towns. I seriously doubt Irving and Butler will leave after that season. Something would have to go very wrong for that to happen in my mind because we'd be the second best team in the West Imo at that point. You also have to factor in a lot of guys are signing shorter second maxes to get to another cap jump at 10 years of service so I could see them easily willing to sign a 2-3 year deal (whatever it takes to get to 10 years) to run it back and see if they can win and then at 10 years of service pick if they want to stay or go. We'd have a serious foothold in Team USA which is how a lot of these super teams are built and continue to build around their great players. This year wouldn't be perfect, but it's really about building something sustainable moving forward and I think Kyrie, Butler, Towns is a clear and stable big 3 whereas Teague, Butler, Wiggins, Towns gets murky in 2 years and you lose one of them anyway.

Doing the deal gives you a two year window to win it all. Is it enough though? Is Towns, Butler, and Irving better than Love, James, and Irving? The first year of the run there will be a hole at SG. Maybe you can flip Teague for a good SG, or maybe he and Irving can coexist in the same backcourt. To me if you do the trade you aren't going to beat Golden State and you may not improve the team overall. Yes Irving is better than Wiggins, but a Towns, Gibson, Butler, Wiggins, Teague lineup is better than a Towns, Gibson, Butler, ?, Irving lineup. I wouldn't pull the trigger.