Minnesota Sports Forum

Camden wrote:

WildWolf2813 wrote:I wouldn't go near Randle with a ten foot pole. He straight up quit on that Knicks franchise this year.

As for Simmons, this team can't bank on him getting right mentally. Simmons as a player is just an idea now. Even if he works through a back injury and his mental state, he still has debilitating warts as a player.



Regardless of Russell's status, this team needs to draft his replacement. Whether that's Chandler or Montero, one of them has to be on this team and groomed to take over eventually.

This is a pretty weak draft class for point guard prospects, including those two, in my opinion. I'd be more open to looking for a long-term solution in the draft in 2023, assuming that pick isn't traded.

monsterpile wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:

Camden wrote:It's highly unlikely that any D'Angelo Russell trade directly leads to an upgrade at the point guard position. You're not getting Dejounte Murray, Fred VanVleet, Zach LaVine, or any of these other lead guards that might be perceived as available. If you trade Russell, then you're realistically looking at an upgrade at another position, presumably one of the forward positions, and settling for a downgrade at the point guard spot. The alternative is a linear trade that doesn't lead to a discernible upgrade anywhere, but it involves different players and styles -- such as Malcolm Brogdon or Spencer Dinwiddie. We can debate whether or not that's the direction Minnesota should go, but that's essentially the format that I'd expect.

I agree with your take here, Cam. I have two questions:

1. How would you state the case for trading DLO for either Brogdon or Dinwiddie? I don't see a deal for either one as an upgrade and I'm sure you'd agree. But is there at least an argument for swapping DLO for one or the other?

2. What about a straight-up deal of DLO for Simmons? As you know, I would have done that deal 6 months ago. But given what we've seen from Simmons since he was dealt the Knick, I think it's a nonstarter. However, I'd do the deal if I was convinced that we'd get the Simmons we saw in Philly. He would substantially upgrade our defense and rebounding.

I'll weigh in on these questions.

First of all if people want someone better and being a PG neither of those guys are better and quite possibly they are worse. Neither are upgrades as shooters. There has been some chatter than Brogdon's D isn't as good as it was years ago and all these guys have injury history. If I had any of these guys healthy I might take Brogdon but I don't really get why these teams would do a deal for Russell as he costs more this season.

2. Simmons is one expensive PF that might be an option for the Wolves this offseason or at least interesting to consider. Personally at this point I think I would prefer to take a chance elsewhere than having to pay Simmons almost 80 million over 2 years beyond Russell's contract when he might not be healthy enough to play. I mean it's tempting if the Nets really were basically willing to do a straight up trade for Russell (my guess is they would want something else too) but I would probably still pass which does feel like a wild take but contracts in sports matter a ton. I think I would say the same thing for Julius Randle too (maybe a package for Beasley instead of Russell for Randle could be worked out) The problem with both Simmons and Randle is they are more than a little whacky mentally in some way and I'm not sure this is a good landing spot for that type of player right now. Either guy would have some fantastic aspects of their game that would help the Wolves (Randle is a physical beast) but both guys like to handle the ball a lot and I'm not sure if that's a good fit or not. Maybe it could be and you could play another guard a lot of minutes instead of a pseudo PG but anyway I would have a lot of concerns dealing for both of those guys even though I believe that when on the floor they could really help the Wolves or another team.

lipoli390 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:

Camden wrote:It's highly unlikely that any D'Angelo Russell trade directly leads to an upgrade at the point guard position. You're not getting Dejounte Murray, Fred VanVleet, Zach LaVine, or any of these other lead guards that might be perceived as available. If you trade Russell, then you're realistically looking at an upgrade at another position, presumably one of the forward positions, and settling for a downgrade at the point guard spot. The alternative is a linear trade that doesn't lead to a discernible upgrade anywhere, but it involves different players and styles -- such as Malcolm Brogdon or Spencer Dinwiddie. We can debate whether or not that's the direction Minnesota should go, but that's essentially the format that I'd expect.

I agree with your take here, Cam. I have two questions:

1. How would you state the case for trading DLO for either Brogdon or Dinwiddie? I don't see a deal for either one as an upgrade and I'm sure you'd agree. But is there at least an argument for swapping DLO for one or the other?

2. What about a straight-up deal of DLO for Simmons? As you know, I would have done that deal 6 months ago. But given what we've seen from Simmons since he was dealt the Knick, I think it's a nonstarter. However, I'd do the deal if I was convinced that we'd get the Simmons we saw in Philly. He would substantially upgrade our defense and rebounding.

I'll weigh in on these questions.

First of all if people want someone better and being a PG neither of those guys are better and quite possibly they are worse. Neither are upgrades as shooters. There has been some chatter than Brogdon's D isn't as good as it was years ago and all these guys have injury history. If I had any of these guys healthy I might take Brogdon but I don't really get why these teams would do a deal for Russell as he costs more this season.

2. Simmons is one expensive PF that might be an option for the Wolves this offseason or at least interesting to consider. Personally at this point I think I would prefer to take a chance elsewhere than having to pay Simmons almost 80 million over 2 years beyond Russell's contract when he might not be healthy enough to play. I mean it's tempting if the Nets really were basically willing to do a straight up trade for Russell (my guess is they would want something else too) but I would probably still pass which does feel like a wild take but contracts in sports matter a ton. I think I would say the same thing for Julius Randle too (maybe a package for Beasley instead of Russell for Randle could be worked out) The problem with both Simmons and Randle is they are more than a little whacky mentally in some way and I'm not sure this is a good landing spot for that type of player right now. Either guy would have some fantastic aspects of their game that would help the Wolves (Randle is a physical beast) but both guys like to handle the ball a lot and I'm not sure if that's a good fit or not. Maybe it could be and you could play another guard a lot of minutes instead of a pseudo PG but anyway I would have a lot of concerns dealing for both of those guys even though I believe that when on the floor they could really help the Wolves or another team.

I view Simmons differently than you do in relation to how he would fit. I don't view him as a PF who would be an alternative to Vando. I see him as a PG. He's a natural PG - a terrific ball-handler and playmaker with a really good feel for the game. He happens to have the size of a modern PF and that's a huge plus for him at the PG position, but it doesn't make him a PF in my view. I know he's also a poor perimeter shooter. I see him as a more talented and bigger Rubio. I think he would fit well on this team as a replacement for DLO. He would bring more dynamic playmaking and better dribble penetration to our offense while also substantially upgrading our defense and our poor rebounding. However, I share your doubts about Simmons physical and mental health. It seems particularly risky to add Simmons to a team that isn't exactly mentally tough. And back surgery is a serious thing.

I don't think the Nets could reasonably expect more than DLO in return given all the issues with Simmons, which include shooting phobia, mental health question marks and now back surgery, not to mention the fact that he hasn't played in a year. But I think the Wolves should make some inquiries with the Nets this summer.

lipoli390 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:

Camden wrote:It's highly unlikely that any D'Angelo Russell trade directly leads to an upgrade at the point guard position. You're not getting Dejounte Murray, Fred VanVleet, Zach LaVine, or any of these other lead guards that might be perceived as available. If you trade Russell, then you're realistically looking at an upgrade at another position, presumably one of the forward positions, and settling for a downgrade at the point guard spot. The alternative is a linear trade that doesn't lead to a discernible upgrade anywhere, but it involves different players and styles -- such as Malcolm Brogdon or Spencer Dinwiddie. We can debate whether or not that's the direction Minnesota should go, but that's essentially the format that I'd expect.

I agree with your take here, Cam. I have two questions:

1. How would you state the case for trading DLO for either Brogdon or Dinwiddie? I don't see a deal for either one as an upgrade and I'm sure you'd agree. But is there at least an argument for swapping DLO for one or the other?

2. What about a straight-up deal of DLO for Simmons? As you know, I would have done that deal 6 months ago. But given what we've seen from Simmons since he was dealt the Knick, I think it's a nonstarter. However, I'd do the deal if I was convinced that we'd get the Simmons we saw in Philly. He would substantially upgrade our defense and rebounding.

I'll weigh in on these questions.

First of all if people want someone better and being a PG neither of those guys are better and quite possibly they are worse. Neither are upgrades as shooters. There has been some chatter than Brogdon's D isn't as good as it was years ago and all these guys have injury history. If I had any of these guys healthy I might take Brogdon but I don't really get why these teams would do a deal for Russell as he costs more this season.

2. Simmons is one expensive PF that might be an option for the Wolves this offseason or at least interesting to consider. Personally at this point I think I would prefer to take a chance elsewhere than having to pay Simmons almost 80 million over 2 years beyond Russell's contract when he might not be healthy enough to play. I mean it's tempting if the Nets really were basically willing to do a straight up trade for Russell (my guess is they would want something else too) but I would probably still pass which does feel like a wild take but contracts in sports matter a ton. I think I would say the same thing for Julius Randle too (maybe a package for Beasley instead of Russell for Randle could be worked out) The problem with both Simmons and Randle is they are more than a little whacky mentally in some way and I'm not sure this is a good landing spot for that type of player right now. Either guy would have some fantastic aspects of their game that would help the Wolves (Randle is a physical beast) but both guys like to handle the ball a lot and I'm not sure if that's a good fit or not. Maybe it could be and you could play another guard a lot of minutes instead of a pseudo PG but anyway I would have a lot of concerns dealing for both of those guys even though I believe that when on the floor they could really help the Wolves or another team.

I view Simmons differently than you do in relation to how he would fit. I don't view him as a PF who would be an alternative to Vando. I see him as a PG. He's a natural PG - a terrific ball-handler and playmaker with a really good feel for the game. He happens to have the size of a modern PF and that's a huge plus for him at the PG position, but it doesn't make him a PF in my view. I know he's also a poor perimeter shooter. I see him as a more talented and bigger Rubio. I think he would fit well on this team as a replacement for DLO. He would bring more dynamic playmaking and better dribble penetration to our offense while also substantially upgrading our defense and our poor rebounding. However, I share your doubts about Simmons physical and mental health. It seems particularly risky to add Simmons to a team that isn't exactly mentally tough. And back surgery is a serious thing.

I don't think the Nets could reasonably expect more than DLO in return given all the issues with Simmons, which include shooting phobia, mental health question marks and now back surgery, not to mention the fact that he hasn't played in a year. But I think the Wolves should make some inquiries with the Nets this summer.

lipoli390 wrote:
I view Simmons differently than you do in relation to how he would fit. I don't view him as a PF who would be an alternative to Vando. I see him as a PG. He's a natural PG - a terrific ball-handler and playmaker with a really good feel for the game. He happens to have the size of a modern PF and that's a huge plus for him at the PG position, but it doesn't make him a PF in my view. I know he's also a poor perimeter shooter. I see him as a more talented and bigger Rubio. I think he would fit well on this team as a replacement for DLO. He would bring more dynamic playmaking and better dribble penetration to our offense while also substantially upgrading our defense and our poor rebounding. However, I share your doubts about Simmons physical and mental health. It seems particularly risky to add Simmons to a team that isn't exactly mentally tough. And back surgery is a serious thing.

I don't think the Nets could reasonably expect more than DLO in return given all the issues with Simmons, which include shooting phobia, mental health question marks and now back surgery, not to mention the fact that he hasn't played in a year. But I think the Wolves should make some inquiries with the Nets this summer.

Q-was-here wrote:Simmons as PG and......then who at PF? Because if it's still Vando or a true big like Drummond, etc. then you can kiss any floor spacing goodbye.

Q-was-here wrote:Simmons as PG and......then who at PF? Because if it's still Vando or a true big like Drummond, etc. then you can kiss any floor spacing goodbye.