longstrangetrip wrote:Interesting arguments on both sides, but I tend to gravitate toward Cool's position of trying to maximize our return at the optimal time.
I have one question though. The last time we were in this position, our tradable asset was arguably a more valuable 2-way player, and we were not able to garner much of a return. What are the factors that are significantly different now? Put another way, why do we think we can get more for Love than we got for KG?
For starters, KG was 31 when we traded him. Kevin Love is 25. Six year difference equals a more significant return. The younger the star, the more valuable he is.
Not to mention this NBA is becoming all about versatility and who's more versatile than Kevin Love other than LeBron James? Nobody. The three-point shot is more relied upon today than it was a decade ago as well.
These factors combined are why we should be able to receive a much larger trade package than the one we got for KG.
I missed the obvious difference in your first paragraph...age. I agree that Love should bring more than KG. Thx Cam.
I'm confident an amazing offer is going to come down the pike for Love and when it does even the Wolves brain trust will not be able to mess it up. Teams know the Wolves have to trade him, but they also are competing against each other, and there can be only one winner.-----------------------
I am not. Klay Thompson won't happen. The bottom line is teams wait one year and he is a free agent, either with us or somewhere he doesn't want to stay.
I think the original post mentioned being a farm team for better teams. Wow, sad but true. But the argument for trading him is flawed, I don't believe we will see anything close to a value for value proposition (love to be wrong). I hate to say it, but this is not going to end well for us. I'd be delighted if we could get for Love an equivalent of what Denver got for Melo. I just doubt it.
As a parting shot, Love reminds me of Melo. Very different players, same result. Great production, they do not make any team better.
papalrep wrote:I'm confident an amazing offer is going to come down the pike for Love and when it does even the Wolves brain trust will not be able to mess it up. Teams know the Wolves have to trade him, but they also are competing against each other, and there can be only one winner.-----------------------
I am not. Klay Thompson won't happen. The bottom line is teams wait one year and he is a free agent, either with us or somewhere he doesn't want to stay.
I think the original post mentioned being a farm team for better teams. Wow, sad but true. But the argument for trading him is flawed, I don't believe we will see anything close to a value for value proposition (love to be wrong). I hate to say it, but this is not going to end well for us. I'd be delighted if we could get for Love an equivalent of what Denver got for Melo. I just doubt it.
As a parting shot, Love reminds me of Melo. Very different players, same result. Great production, they do not make any team better.
Yes but not all teams can just outright sign Love, the Warriors and Rockets can only get him by trade, and in my opinion even though teh Celtics have the cap space the only way they are getting him is by trading for him and convincing him they are good enough to compete. Some teams like the Lakers will wait it out but there are a lot of teams that have no choice but to put together a legit offer.
"Don't let him walk for nothing! Can't let him walk for nothing! If he leaves for nothing, we're screwed!"
What NBA have you been watching the last decade?
How has trading superstar players to big markets or loaded teams worked out for the dregs of the league thus far? How has putting our short-term interests ahead of the long-term health of the league worked out for us and the Cavs and the Bucks and the Magic and all the other non-destination teams so far?
These trade packages are almost always the exact same useless bullshit. A mediocre lottery pick that will almost assuredly not turn into an all-star (let alone a franchise player). A semi-legit young player who will flee the scene the moment his contract is up. A big expiring contract, resulting in loads of cap space we can use to overpay third tier free agents.
If we can't get a top 2-3 pick for Love, or two young players who are already on the cusp, we absolutely shouldn't trade him. At the very least, we won't be complicit in constructing another team we literally cannot beat 3-4 times a year. Better still, we won't be capitulating to the overriding, media-driven narrative that sees so many teams continually funneling their lottery rentals to the "real teams" every 3-5 years.
Time to get off the carousel. If Love wants out, let him walk. Do the same for all the entitled superstars who want to be traded to the best teams for easy shots at rings. Make them choose between taking real paycuts (70%+) to play for the MLE on a loaded team OR signing for max deals with another non-contender.
Besides, we are INFINITELY better positioned moving forward if we gain precisely nothing in exchange for Love. If you're going to bottom out in this league, you have to do it all the way. No half-measures. Set yourselves up for a top 3 pick in 3 straight drafts, nail two minimum, and hope things fall your way to the tune of a 2-3 year window to compete.
That is the reality of the NBA in non-destination markets today.
papalrep wrote:I'm confident an amazing offer is going to come down the pike for Love and when it does even the Wolves brain trust will not be able to mess it up. Teams know the Wolves have to trade him, but they also are competing against each other, and there can be only one winner.-----------------------
I am not. Klay Thompson won't happen. The bottom line is teams wait one year and he is a free agent, either with us or somewhere he doesn't want to stay.
I think the original post mentioned being a farm team for better teams. Wow, sad but true. But the argument for trading him is flawed, I don't believe we will see anything close to a value for value proposition (love to be wrong). I hate to say it, but this is not going to end well for us. I'd be delighted if we could get for Love an equivalent of what Denver got for Melo. I just doubt it.
As a parting shot, Love reminds me of Melo. Very different players, same result. Great production, they do not make any team better.
Bizarre, papes...I had the identical thought during a long drive back from San Fran yesterday, the Melo/Love comparison. To me, they are both remarkably productive players who will never win a championship as "the man". It will be interesting to see if either is willing to admit this and win a championship as a second fiddle.
horatio81 wrote:"Don't let him walk for nothing! Can't let him walk for nothing! If he leaves for nothing, we're screwed!"
What NBA have you been watching the last decade?
How has trading superstar players to big markets or loaded teams worked out for the dregs of the league thus far? How has putting our short-term interests ahead of the long-term health of the league worked out for us and the Cavs and the Bucks and the Magic and all the other non-destination teams so far?
These trade packages are almost always the exact same useless bullshit. A mediocre lottery pick that will almost assuredly not turn into an all-star (let alone a franchise player). A semi-legit young player who will flee the scene the moment his contract is up. A big expiring contract, resulting in loads of cap space we can use to overpay third tier free agents.
If we can't get a top 2-3 pick for Love, or two young players who are already on the cusp, we absolutely shouldn't trade him. At the very least, we won't be complicit in constructing another team we literally cannot beat 3-4 times a year. Better still, we won't be capitulating to the overriding, media-driven narrative that sees so many teams continually funneling their lottery rentals to the "real teams" every 3-5 years.
Time to get off the carousel. If Love wants out, let him walk. Do the same for all the entitled superstars who want to be traded to the best teams for easy shots at rings. Make them choose between taking real paycuts (70%+) to play for the MLE on a loaded team OR signing for max deals with another non-contender.
Besides, we are INFINITELY better positioned moving forward if we gain precisely nothing in exchange for Love. If you're going to bottom out in this league, you have to do it all the way. No half-measures. Set yourselves up for a top 3 pick in 3 straight drafts, nail two minimum, and hope things fall your way to the tune of a 2-3 year window to compete.
That is the reality of the NBA in non-destination markets today.
You're delusional if you think those teams won't trade assets plus bad contracts to make cap space for said superstar player. Letting Love walk for the purpose of changing the NBA is stupid and irresponsible.
horatio81 wrote:"Don't let him walk for nothing! Can't let him walk for nothing! If he leaves for nothing, we're screwed!"
What NBA have you been watching the last decade?
How has trading superstar players to big markets or loaded teams worked out for the dregs of the league thus far? How has putting our short-term interests ahead of the long-term health of the league worked out for us and the Cavs and the Bucks and the Magic and all the other non-destination teams so far?
These trade packages are almost always the exact same useless bullshit. A mediocre lottery pick that will almost assuredly not turn into an all-star (let alone a franchise player). A semi-legit young player who will flee the scene the moment his contract is up. A big expiring contract, resulting in loads of cap space we can use to overpay third tier free agents.
If we can't get a top 2-3 pick for Love, or two young players who are already on the cusp, we absolutely shouldn't trade him. At the very least, we won't be complicit in constructing another team we literally cannot beat 3-4 times a year. Better still, we won't be capitulating to the overriding, media-driven narrative that sees so many teams continually funneling their lottery rentals to the "real teams" every 3-5 years.
Time to get off the carousel. If Love wants out, let him walk. Do the same for all the entitled superstars who want to be traded to the best teams for easy shots at rings. Make them choose between taking real paycuts (70%+) to play for the MLE on a loaded team OR signing for max deals with another non-contender.
Besides, we are INFINITELY better positioned moving forward if we gain precisely nothing in exchange for Love. If you're going to bottom out in this league, you have to do it all the way. No half-measures. Set yourselves up for a top 3 pick in 3 straight drafts, nail two minimum, and hope things fall your way to the tune of a 2-3 year window to compete.
That is the reality of the NBA in non-destination markets today.
You're delusional if you think those teams won't trade assets plus bad contracts to make cap space for said superstar player. Letting Love walk for the purpose of changing the NBA is stupid and irresponsible.
He still won't get his 5 yr max deal with 7.5% raises. I agree with Horatio unless someone absolutely blows us away with an offer.
It all comes down to what teams are willing to offer for Love. Cool and a few others seem bullish on a bidding war taking place. I'm skeptical. Of course all sorts of teams are expressing interest. Hell, almost every GM should be calling Flip right now. But the question is what are they really willing to offer and where does that line get drawn?
Q12543 wrote:It all comes down to what teams are willing to offer for Love. Cool and a few others seem bullish on a bidding war taking place. I'm skeptical. Of course all sorts of teams are expressing interest. Hell, almost every GM should be calling Flip right now. But the question is what are they really willing to offer and where does that line get drawn?
... and how many of them are going to give up quality assets without Love guaranteeing he'll resign? The biggest problem the Wolves face is the teams he's likely to okay and resign with are short on quality assets and top picks and the teams with assets and top picks are unlikely to be places Love would resign. The Wolves are going to take it in the shorts on this trade, the biggest question is can they unload some crap contracts with him?
I'm with Cool in concluding that the time to trade Love is upon us. I also agree we will see a nice bidding war develop that will give us the opportunity to get a good return for Love.
It stands to reason that the teams willing to give the most will be those who can get a commitment from Love to re-sign with them. Those teams would include Chicago, Golden State, Houston and possibly Phoenix. However, never underestimate the ego of some owners and GMs. There will likely be a few teams willing to give up a lot for Love even without a commitment from Love believing that they will have enough success with Love next season to keep him. And honestly it's not a huge stretch for a lot of Eastern Conference teams to conclude that Love would make them a top tier team in their Conference. Cleveland and Atlanta are a couple teams that come to mind. Even some Western Conference teams will likely offer a lot for Love without a commitment -- especially West Coast teams who might see a regional advantage in the fact that Love is from the West Coast. The Kings appear willing to enter the fray and I'll bet they'll offer a nice package for Love.
