Thunder roll

[kms789 [enjin:6694798]]

In return for KG we got:

Ryan Gomes, Gerald Green, Al Jefferson, Theo Ratliff, Sebastian Telfair, a late 2009 first round draft pick and a return of Minnesota's conditional first round draft pick. This was considered to be a big haul in exchange for one of the best players in the game.

A lot of that was salary filler because KG had a huge contract. But the real assets were Jefferson (a quality starter with potential), Ratliff (a large expiring), Green (a promising young player) and two late draft picks.

Westbrook is no KG. Pekovic is a better player than Jefferson had proven to be at that stage, though his potential is more limited. Martin is another quality player who clearly has value to a playoff team, even if as a 6th man. A pick swap would net them the 13th pick in a loaded draft. And if they wanted Barea instead of one of the wings they'd get an expiring contract that has the potential to actually contribute off the bench for them. I don't see them getting much more than that given Westbrook's injury history and the questions surrounding his bball IQ.

There's no way I add many more assets, particularly Rubio or Dieng because Houston is showing how having two superstars, even ones that are complementary on paper will not necessarily get you far in the playoffs. If we traded away either of those two assets we'd have little room for improvement in the future beyond the MLE and I'm not sure even with two superstars MN would be as attractive as a lot of other established contenders.

Three reasons this is the wrong approach to looking at the situation:

1) We needed to trade KG. The Thunder don't need to trade Westbrook.
2) This trade has been laughed at around the league for years as McHale giving Ainge a championship team.
3) The Thunder aren't interested in being really bad and striking lottery gold, as was the Wolves' motivation at the time.

I give a Westbrook trade a pretty slim chance of happening, and no chance if teams are trying to be stingy with them.

[alexftbl8181 [enjin:6648741]]

why did we need to trade KG?

[kms789 [enjin:6694798]]

why did we need to trade KG?

Taylor told Garnett at the start of the offseason in 2007 that the Wolves wanted to go in another direction, and asked him to make a list of teams he would accept being traded to. It was public knowledge that they were going to trade him and Garnett already vetoed the 1st attempt to trade him to the Celtics.

[Q12543 [enjin:6621299]]

Would Love and Westbrook clash over who gets the last shot? Westbrook is a legit superstar but, I'm not sure if we can give OKC enough in return without gutting our roster to Love, Westbrook, & spare parts. Its interesting to dream about though..

The idea that a unit can't work because two people might fight over the last shot seems somewhat trivial given the fact we only won 40 games last season. I think Love would be perfectly happy playing pick and roll with Westbrook in end-of-game situations and whoever gets the best look takes the shot.

As for Rubio and Westbrook, they could potentially be a nightmare (in a good way) defensively against opposing backcourts. Offensively, they wouldn't overlap a ton because you would never have them both sit at the same time; one or the other would always be on the floor quarterbacking the offense.

Isn't the Rubio/Westbrook situation largely moot?

Would OKC consider any trade without Rubio attached?

Don't know. We're dealing with the hypothetical. I actually think OKC could just go sign a guy like Chalmers and have him and Reggie Jackson split the PG duties. Chalmers knows how to work with an alpha dog scorer and can space the floor in a way that Westbrook never could.

[AbeVigodaLive]

In return for KG we got:

Ryan Gomes, Gerald Green, Al Jefferson, Theo Ratliff, Sebastian Telfair, a late 2009 first round draft pick and a return of Minnesota's conditional first round draft pick. This was considered to be a big haul in exchange for one of the best players in the game.

A lot of that was salary filler because KG had a huge contract. But the real assets were Jefferson (a quality starter with potential), Ratliff (a large expiring), Green (a promising young player) and two late draft picks.

Westbrook is no KG. Pekovic is a better player than Jefferson had proven to be at that stage, though his potential is more limited. Martin is another quality player who clearly has value to a playoff team, even if as a 6th man. A pick swap would net them the 13th pick in a loaded draft. And if they wanted Barea instead of one of the wings they'd get an expiring contract that has the potential to actually contribute off the bench for them. I don't see them getting much more than that given Westbrook's injury history and the questions surrounding his bball IQ.

There's no way I add many more assets, particularly Rubio or Dieng because Houston is showing how having two superstars, even ones that are complementary on paper will not necessarily get you far in the playoffs. If we traded away either of those two assets we'd have little room for improvement in the future beyond the MLE and I'm not sure even with two superstars MN would be as attractive as a lot of other established contenders.

1. Kevin Martin doesn't play defense and has a very bad contract within the next year or so. I doubt a lot of organizations consider him an asset.

2. Pekovic is being paid $48M over the next few years. But hasn't stayed healthy as a starter yet. Jefferson was on a rookie deal with a higher ceiling. Those two things are coveted in a trade more than you're allowing here.

3. Speaking of injuries... you rip Westbrook's "injury history". He never missed a game before this season. He had TWO knee surgeries and still played more games than Pekovic who sat out with "sore feet" or something like that.

[AbeVigodaLive]

Would Love and Westbrook clash over who gets the last shot? Westbrook is a legit superstar but, I'm not sure if we can give OKC enough in return without gutting our roster to Love, Westbrook, & spare parts. Its interesting to dream about though..

The idea that a unit can't work because two people might fight over the last shot seems somewhat trivial given the fact we only won 40 games last season. I think Love would be perfectly happy playing pick and roll with Westbrook in end-of-game situations and whoever gets the best look takes the shot.

As for Rubio and Westbrook, they could potentially be a nightmare (in a good way) defensively against opposing backcourts. Offensively, they wouldn't overlap a ton because you would never have them both sit at the same time; one or the other would always be on the floor quarterbacking the offense.

Isn't the Rubio/Westbrook situation largely moot?

Would OKC consider any trade without Rubio attached?

Don't know. We're dealing with the hypothetical. I actually think OKC could just go sign a guy like Chalmers and have him and Reggie Jackson split the PG duties. Chalmers knows how to work with an alpha dog scorer and can space the floor in a way that Westbrook never could.

That's fine. And maybe the wiser move since Rubio will want to be paid soon.

But then the Wolves don't have enough to offer then... It's why I was going to add the rather large caveat that such a trade (Rubio AND Pekovic for Westbrook) only works if the Thunder brass really dig Rubio.

They might even balk at that trade, even though it seems like most here are on the complete other side of the fence about it.

[repplile [enjin:8691898]]

KMS:

1. I don't think it's fair to say we needed to trade KG anymore than the Thunder need to trade Westbrook. Both would be a function of a decision by the management of the respective teams that there is a better way to go. Further if you do a news search for Westbrook on google or bing the stories you get are asking whether he is to blame and wondering what he would be traded for. It's not like there's not pressure there to trade him, especially if the Thunder flame out in the playoffs for the umpteenth time.

2. The trade seems unbalanced in retrospect but at the time it was considered pretty good value. Admittedly Jefferson was thought to have a lot higher ceiling that he did as were Telfair and Green. The point is you're not getting superstar players back in exchange for a superstar.

3. I agree that the Thunder don't want the same type of assets which is why our proposal is not based around cap space and picks. They get a borderline allstar starter and a guy who was a proven quality 6th man on their own team a year ago. It's not the draft pick/prospect platter we got by any stretch.

[repplile [enjin:8691898]]

Abe:

1. I can see the argument on Kevin Martin but his contract is not as awful as its made out to be and for a contending team getting a proven efficient scorer to lead the bench is not the worst thing in the world. It's a three year deal at this point which means if things don't work with the new Thunder lineup it's going to be an expiring contract by the time they determined that.

2. Jefferson was still on a rookie deal when traded but he signed a hefty extension before he even played a regular season game for us. Admittedly Pek plays about 60 games every year and is on a large contract but what he gives you is better than what Jefferson did at the time, especially on team that is already contending and needs off ball low-post scoring. Pek also has a history of minor nagging injuries but has not had a catastrophic one. He's good for about 60 games per year pretty much every year and could likely play more than that if he was ever playing for anything meaningful like the post-season.

3. Westbrook has had three knee surgeries in the past year. That's a big red flag. I understand he's been resilient and has come back relatively quickly each time but in a PG whose game is predicated on quickness and athleticism knees are a big deal. If I'm a team trading for him I can't bank on him being healthy given all his recent problems imo.

[kms789 [enjin:6694798]]

KMS:

1. I don't think it's fair to say we needed to trade KG anymore than the Thunder need to trade Westbrook. Both would be a function of a decision by the management of the respective teams that there is a better way to go. Further if you do a news search for Westbrook on google or bing the stories you get are asking whether he is to blame and wondering what he would be traded for. It's not like there's not pressure there to trade him, especially if the Thunder flame out in the playoffs for the umpteenth time.

2. The trade seems unbalanced in retrospect but at the time it was considered pretty good value. Admittedly Jefferson was thought to have a lot higher ceiling that he did as were Telfair and Green. The point is you're not getting superstar players back in exchange for a superstar.

3. I agree that the Thunder don't want the same type of assets which is why our proposal is not based around cap space and picks. They get a borderline allstar starter and a guy who was a proven quality 6th man on their own team a year ago. It's not the draft pick/prospect platter we got by any stretch.

That's ridiculous. KG was what...31 when the Wolves traded him? They had nobody else to build around and had just missed the playoffs. The Thunder are built around two 25-year olds and a 24-year old. Last time all three were healthy (at 23, 23, and 22), they were in the Finals. They won 60 and 59 games the last two years. That comparison is from a Wolves fan bias, not a reality.

[AbeVigodaLive]

Abe:

1. I can see the argument on Kevin Martin but his contract is not as awful as its made out to be and for a contending team getting a proven efficient scorer to lead the bench is not the worst thing in the world. It's a three year deal at this point which means if things don't work with the new Thunder lineup it's going to be an expiring contract by the time they determined that.

2. Jefferson was still on a rookie deal when traded but he signed a hefty extension before he even played a regular season game for us. Admittedly Pek plays about 60 games every year and is on a large contract but what he gives you is better than what Jefferson did at the time, especially on team that is already contending and needs off ball low-post scoring. Pek also has a history of minor nagging injuries but has not had a catastrophic one. He's good for about 60 games per year pretty much every year and could likely play more than that if he was ever playing for anything meaningful like the post-season.

3. Westbrook has had three knee surgeries in the past year. That's a big red flag. I understand he's been resilient and has come back relatively quickly each time but in a PG whose game is predicated on quickness and athleticism knees are a big deal. If I'm a team trading for him I can't bank on him being healthy given all his recent problems imo.

1. We can disagree about the contract. Those mid-level guys are a detriment for many clubs. They'd rather "pay 20% of his salary for 80% of his production" with a younger guy with more upside. Maybe even a guy who isn't a huge minus defensively, especially when the playoffs roll around.

2. Likely could have played... that's not good enough. He only played in 54 games despite the Wolves trying to cling to hope in the playoff race this season. Because he was too sore. You're right about the salaries. They are pretty close... although it was largely believed that Jefferson left money on the table at the time he signed his.

3. Westbrook never missed a game in his career before this season. So he's had 3 knee surgeries... do you notice any difference? He missed only 36 games and looks just as explosive. Speaking of knee injuries, Rubio had a pretty significant knee injury too. A lot of players have. I don't know of m(any) who've come back from one with the athleticism that Westbrook still displays. It's a shame that a guy who overcomes the only injury* he's ever had in a ridiculous short amount of time still gets it held against him.