Minnesota Sports Forum

Q12543 wrote:If I'm Philly and in win-now mode, I insist on PBev if the deal is Beasley and picks. If it's DLO, he probably doesn't have to be included. You can't lose a major ball handler in Simmons and not get something back to help fill that void.

You can probably live with a second-year Tyrese Maxey and Shake Milton holding it down until the trade deadline, assuming Joel Embiid stays healthy and they play through him and Tobias Harris. At that point, Philadelphia can make significant changes/additions to the roster and prepare for the post-season.

If Rosas isn't willing to give up a year of Patrick Beverly (and the 50-60 games he is likely to be healthy and available to play) for Simmons that's nuts and I'm a big Beverly fan.

monsterpile wrote:If Rosas isn't willing to give up a year of Patrick Beverly (and the 50-60 games he is likely to be healthy and available to play) for Simmons that's nuts and I'm a big Beverly fan.

It's not really about what Minnesota is willing to give up. It's about what Minnesota can get Philadelphia to agree to. If Gersson Rosas can retain Patrick Beverley by lessening the protection on a first-round pick or adding a first-round swap to the package, or some other various means of compensation, then why wouldn't he if it means keeping a player that contributes to winning? Rosas wouldn't let a deal die because of an unwillingness to include Beverley, but Daryl Morey also wouldn't lose out on potentially the most valuable trade package on the market because of a desire to receive Beverley.

Camden0916 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:If Rosas isn't willing to give up a year of Patrick Beverly (and the 50-60 games he is likely to be healthy and available to play) for Simmons that's nuts and I'm a big Beverly fan.

It's not really about what Minnesota is willing to give up. It's about what Minnesota can get Philadelphia to agree to. If Gersson Rosas can retain Patrick Beverley by lessening the protection on a first-round pick or adding a first-round swap to the package, or some other various means of compensation, then why wouldn't he if it means keeping a player that contributes to winning? Rosas wouldn't let a deal die because of an unwillingness to include Beverley, but Daryl Morey also wouldn't lose out on potentially the most valuable trade package on the market because of a desire to receive Beverley.

Question: Theoretically if the Wolves could get a protected 1st round pick for Beverly right now should they do it?

monsterpile wrote:

Camden0916 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:If Rosas isn't willing to give up a year of Patrick Beverly (and the 50-60 games he is likely to be healthy and available to play) for Simmons that's nuts and I'm a big Beverly fan.

It's not really about what Minnesota is willing to give up. It's about what Minnesota can get Philadelphia to agree to. If Gersson Rosas can retain Patrick Beverley by lessening the protection on a first-round pick or adding a first-round swap to the package, or some other various means of compensation, then why wouldn't he if it means keeping a player that contributes to winning? Rosas wouldn't let a deal die because of an unwillingness to include Beverley, but Daryl Morey also wouldn't lose out on potentially the most valuable trade package on the market because of a desire to receive Beverley.

Question: Theoretically if the Wolves could get a protected 1st round pick for Beverly right now should they do it?

No. And I assign a lot of value to 1st-round draft picks. The Wolves need to make a significant jump next season and Beverley can help them do that. He brings defense, nastiness and 3-point shooting -- all major needs of this team.

monsterpile wrote:

Camden0916 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:If Rosas isn't willing to give up a year of Patrick Beverly (and the 50-60 games he is likely to be healthy and available to play) for Simmons that's nuts and I'm a big Beverly fan.

It's not really about what Minnesota is willing to give up. It's about what Minnesota can get Philadelphia to agree to. If Gersson Rosas can retain Patrick Beverley by lessening the protection on a first-round pick or adding a first-round swap to the package, or some other various means of compensation, then why wouldn't he if it means keeping a player that contributes to winning? Rosas wouldn't let a deal die because of an unwillingness to include Beverley, but Daryl Morey also wouldn't lose out on potentially the most valuable trade package on the market because of a desire to receive Beverley.

Question: Theoretically if the Wolves could get a protected 1st round pick for Beverly right now should they do it?

It's possible Minnesota could get a protected first-round pick or a couple of second-round picks for Patrick Beverley at the trade deadline. Why not hold on to him now if you can and try to win before selling pieces?

Camden0916 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

Camden0916 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:If Rosas isn't willing to give up a year of Patrick Beverly (and the 50-60 games he is likely to be healthy and available to play) for Simmons that's nuts and I'm a big Beverly fan.

It's not really about what Minnesota is willing to give up. It's about what Minnesota can get Philadelphia to agree to. If Gersson Rosas can retain Patrick Beverley by lessening the protection on a first-round pick or adding a first-round swap to the package, or some other various means of compensation, then why wouldn't he if it means keeping a player that contributes to winning? Rosas wouldn't let a deal die because of an unwillingness to include Beverley, but Daryl Morey also wouldn't lose out on potentially the most valuable trade package on the market because of a desire to receive Beverley.

Question: Theoretically if the Wolves could get a protected 1st round pick for Beverly right now should they do it?

It's possible Minnesota could get a protected first-round pick or a couple of second-round picks for Patrick Beverley at the trade deadline. Why not hold on to him now if you can and try to win before selling pieces?

To me the reality is as much as I love Beverly especially after watching that Press conference from today I still do think we should not be dying to keep him for one year. I remember how upset you were when the Wolves traded Thad Young for KG. I'm not suggesting that we shop Beverly around right now because like you said if he is healthy at the trade deadline and the Wolves aren't winning enough then yeah he might have value then. I think it doesn't make sense to me to be willing to hold onto him as much as you are suggesting for a guy that has a hard time staying healthy is over 30 and may not be back after this season. The way Rosas talked about guys in the press conference nobody is getting traded ever...ok maybe Prince. Lol

Do I think Rosas values Beverly a lot and will try and keep him? Absolutely. Honestly after watching the press conference I do think the Wolves want Simmons but I wonder if they are really going to go great lengths to acquire him. They clearly like some of the guys they introduced today I don't think they are blowing smoke only saying nice stuff. If a trade makes sense I think Rosas has no problem pulling the trigger though either. I'm not sure if that scenario will actually come to fruition. I think for the Wolves at this point they have a nice young group and Beverly they can see what happens with their own guys possibly before the Simmons situation plays out. Maybe they decide to move on as it seems like some other teams have done to some extent (if the reports are true which I have some skepticism about) and not really be all in on Simmons.

Monster - If the Wolves have to give up Beverley to get an all-star player who would have a huge positive impact on the team, then I'm OK with it. But given the importance of making the playoffs this season, I see a lot of value in keeping him even if it's just for this season and I'd be highly reluctant to give him up in any trade. He'll help the team statistically with his 3&D metrics, but. I also see him as a culture changer who will have a significant, positive impact on the team's psyche both on and off the court.

Boy, I've gone all the way round and back again on trading for Simmons, and now I'll be disappointed if the Wolves don't get him. It's important not to empty the roster for him or mortgage the future. But I'm as big a DLO bobo as there is, but now I'd include both him, Bev, Jaden in a deal... I'm kind of in the "anybody but Ant and Kat" camp. If Rosas can get a 25 year old 3rd team all NBA, all NBA defensive team, 6' 10", 240 lb, with the combination of skills that he has, to pair with Kat and Ant and whoever's left, he's got to go for it, warts and weaknesses notwithstanding. Someone said they were disappointed that Rosas hasn't added size to the roster, that'd do it.

That said, 1) it's still a long shot; 2) I don't want Rosas to get desperate and completely fleeced; and 3) I think this team as currently constituted should be a .500 team that makes the bottom rung of the play-offs this year.

I'm with Sundog in saying I'll be disappointed if we don't get Simmons. That said, I've been a Wolves fan for a long time, so being disappointed is baked into my DNA, and I'm emotionally prepared to be disappointed by this franchise once again. Of course I don't agree with Sundog that the team as currently constituted will be a .500 team this year, as that would mean an increase of 18 wins. I really want to join the optimists here that provide reasons why we will improve so dramatically this year (some might be surprised to know I'm generally a homer and an optimist when it comes to my local teams...look at my Twins posts), and I agree that some of the reasons are valid (although doesn't it seem that we do this every year with our hapless Wolves?). But while the rose-colored glasses crowd presents all the reasons why we may add 18 wins, nobody is talking about reasons we could actually go the other direction. For instance:

1) Ant played every game last year. In a league where injuries are so common, is it reasonable to think Ant is immune from the injury bug? We're all excited about the progress he made last year. But how good will we be if he twists an ankle and misses 25 games? Same with Naz...one of our few big men in an undersized team. Can we expect him to only miss 2 games this year like he did last year?

2) I think we largely ignore the impact losing Rubio might have on the team. He played the most minutes of anyone last season except for Ant, and had the 3rd best on/off stats on the team (behind KAT and Vando). Ricky's minutes at PG will largely be replaced by Dlo, a guy who we all know has been a negative on/off player during his career. Logic tells me that replacing a positive on/off player with a negative on/off player is not a formula for nearly doubling your win total.

3) Many of us are counting big time on Jaden making a big contribution this year, and were pleasantly surprised by his maturity and demeanor in his rookie season. But let's not forget that just a little more than a year ago, his temper and propensity to pick up technical fouls had him not starting in 1/3 of the games for a bad Washington team that finished in last place in the Pac 12. Who is the real Jaden McDaniels...the rookie who showed poise and looked promising albeit while putting up unimpressive stats, or the guy who didn't even start 1/3 of the games for a last place college team? I guess we will find out.

My conclusion remains the same. This team is destined for mediocrity unless Rosas does something truly dramatic, and Simmons seems to be the only possible dramatic move he can make. KAT needs to be off the table, because he has a track record that proves he is a uniquely talented big man...we know who he is, and even if we question his defense at times, he is clearly untouchable. But only Cool and I have been ballsy enough to put Ant on the table (and admittedly begrudgingly for both of us). I still am clinging to some hope that those who say the Simmons price tag will come way down will prove to be correct, but my gut tells me they're wrong. If Ant is the price to get Simmons and Rosas refuses to give him up, and we end up with yet another year out of the playoffs (while Simmons has led Philly to the playoffs 4 consecutive years with 50+ wins in three of those years), I will not be very forgiving of Rosas at the end of this year...or frankly of those who think our core is good enough to compete without Simmons. He simply has to do what it takes to transform this losing roster.