Minnesota Sports Forum

lipoli390 wrote:

Duke13 wrote:Future -

I agree with you. I was absolutely devastated on draft night when they made the trade. I was at a party last night and friends were having a good time at my expense seeing I'm the only person in the world outside of Chicago who felt the same what. You've clearly stated the reasons why this may not be the best move for the long term future.

I heard Glen's press conference, I believe he was instrumental in putting pressure on the organization to make this kind of move.
Besides Wig and Kat, our team of bare of talent to put around the big 3 to make deep playoff runs, thats the way I see it anyway.

I was in the minority, but I didn't think the wolves had to make the playoffs this year. I get it's hard to argue getting Butler for what we had to give up. All I know is I'm less excited about the teams future then I was before the trade. Weird I know.

I feel the same way Duke. Interesting observation on the Taylor presser. I haven't head it, but after the deal was announced the other night, I turned to my friend and said that Glen Taylor's finger prints were all over this one. But after reflecting, I suspect Thibs would have made this deal even without any prodding or concern about Glen.

I agree Tibs could t of turned this deal down. More just saying I was a bit surprised by Glen assertiveness regarding his desire to move the needle this year and how basically last year was unacceptable.

CoolBreeze44 wrote:While i can understand the championship or bust mentality, hek i wrote the book on it, I don't understand having a major problem with this trade. It definitely hurt to give up Zach. His camaraderie with Wig and Towns was something i wanted to see grow over the next several years. I wanted it to work out that way and have us be a contender that way. But something was missing, we didn't make the leap we should have last year. Dunn was totally underwhelming during his rookie campaign. He may get better but he has some shortcomings which are going to be difficult to overcome. We could have added Zach Collins at #7 and that would have been a good move. But it's hard to argue that we aren't significantly better today than we would have been standing pat.

Here's the other thing, suppose Butler moves on after two years. We still have two huge cornerstones that are only going to be 24 years old to continue to build around. That's an advantage that most teams won't have, and you can reasonably expect competent management to be able to surround those two with the right pieces.

Good points, Cool. Especially good point about where we'll be in 2 years ever if Butler bolts. I'll take you post as the final word for me on this trade. I'm growing increasingly positive about it -- actually excited about it. The more I read and hear about Butler, the better.

Here's the thing:

I've seen some of you (like Khans), if not all of you, badmouth Terry Ryan for not being able to get The Twins past The Yankees/RedSox. And I don't see how this ends any differently. If HOU makes a big move and/or UTH keeps Hayward, I see a 4th seed ceiling. Once again, better than watching KAT sitting next to some kid with cancer in Seacaucus. BUT YOU DON'T GET TO BITCH AFTERWARDS BECAUSE IT WAS ALL THAT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN!!!!!!!!!

The only, and I mean only, chance this has is if Butler is still good 2 years from now and can accept a smaller dealer to fit more than him/AW/KAT under that cap. But as long as SAS/GSW/CLE stay the way they are currently constructed and stay healthy, it's not happening.

One reason why I think it was easier to come around on this trade was how I felt about the 7 pick. I suppose to some extent how you valued the guys available will determine how dropping down to #16 hurts. Glen told Wolfson they would likely have taken Markkanen at 7. Some of us feel like that's dodging a bullet! Lol but in all seriousness I didn't feel that strongly about any player at 7. A few weeks ago I valued it more. I thought we were likely to get a combo forward or wing prospect there or have a PG prospect drop. The only guy that fits that would be DSJ and that's kinda problematic as has been discussed. The guy I'm probably most disappointed not to get is Zach Collins and he went 10 to the Blazers. Personally if Inwas picking at #16 I would have been inclined to go John Collins or OG. Patton is a big with potential in some of the ways Zach Collins was intruiging but I liked Collins better. Patton was a guy Inwas intruiged with but I didn't see him as a guy I would target in a trade down but I am certainly not unhappy with the pick and it has nothing to do with him being a local guy that's just a fun bonus.

So from 7-16 isn't a big drop off for me. I think there will absolutely be worthwhile players from 16 on down. Did we pick the right guy? Idk but NOBODY here were expecting him to be picked which I predicted! :)

JasonIsDaMan wrote:Here's the thing:

I've seen some of you (like Khans), if not all of you, badmouth Terry Ryan for not being able to get The Twins past The Yankees/RedSox. And I don't see how this ends any differently. If HOU makes a big move and/or UTH keeps Hayward, I see a 4th seed ceiling. Once again, better than watching KAT sitting next to some kid with cancer in Seacaucus. BUT YOU DON'T GET TO BITCH AFTERWARDS BECAUSE IT WAS ALL THAT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN!!!!!!!!!

The only, and I mean only, chance this has is if Butler is still good 2 years from now and can accept a smaller dealer to fit more than him/AW/KAT under that cap. But as long as SAS/GSW/CLE stay the way they are currently constructed and stay healthy, it's not happening.

I don't buy our only chance is to sign yet another player. Injuries happen. People forget 3 years ago the flood gates of injuries opened for GS to even make their first finals. Then last year Steph tweaked his knee and they lost to Cleveland. This year Kawhi goes down. You're telling me if KD goes down Butler/Wiggins/Towns can't compete and maybe beat Steph/Klay/Draymond? Shit happens. There's always a degree of luck involved with winning a title. Houston has one star. They'd need to sign two to get where we are going. Utah would need to add another pending they don't lose Hayward and they have no cap and market to do so. LeBron doesn't have unlimited years of great play left and may even leave if they don't win next year. To write us off now is just dumb. The whole level of competition could be different in 2 years when Butler's deal is up and we could be a contender at that time with the ability to offer him the most money and years. I don't know how that doesn't put us in the driver seat to keep him.

Windhorst was on Wolfson's podcast and said some teams are running away from GS. He said the wives are at least running towards them. I thought that was an interesting way to look at it and I am not always a fan of Windhorst.

monsterpile wrote:One reason why I think it was easier to come around on this trade was how I felt about the 7 pick. I suppose to some extent how you valued the guys available will determine how dropping down to #16 hurts. Glen told Wolfson they would likely have taken Markkanen at 7. Some of us feel like that's dodging a bullet! Lol but in all seriousness I didn't feel that strongly about any player at 7. A few weeks ago I valued it more. I thought we were likely to get a combo forward or wing prospect there or have a PG prospect drop. The only guy that fits that would be DSJ and that's kinda problematic as has been discussed. The guy I'm probably most disappointed not to get is Zach Collins and he went 10 to the Blazers. Personally if Inwas picking at #16 I would have been inclined to go John Collins or OG. Patton is a big with potential in some of the ways Zach Collins was intruiging but I liked Collins better. Patton was a guy Inwas intruiged with but I didn't see him as a guy I would target in a trade down but I am certainly not unhappy with the pick and it has nothing to do with him being a local guy that's just a fun bonus.

So from 7-16 isn't a big drop off for me. I think there will absolutely be worthwhile players from 16 on down. Did we pick the right guy? Idk but NOBODY here were expecting him to be picked which I predicted! :)

Good point about who was available at #7. I think that probably made a big difference for Thibs and it certainly makes a big difference to me. Thibs said they explored trading up for what he called "a couple players they really liked." If one of those players had fallen, this trade may not have happened. Hearing that we were going to take Markkenan, I'm among those relieved we made the trade. :). Like you, I would have take Zach Collins at #7. JVG said he thinks Zach will be a great player.

I'm also in your camp wishing we had drafted John Collins at #16. There's no substitute for production as a measure of a player's potential. Collins was a prolific low post score and rebounder as reflected in his college stats. As we all know, rebounding in particular tends to translate from college to the pros. And I loved his athleticism and motor. I think we'll regret passing on his. But I'm intrigued by Patton's upside. He's one of those few who had a huge late growth spurt than transformed him from guard to center or forward size. I like his efficient scoring in college, but his rebounding and shot-blocking were disturbiningly mediocre for a guy his size in college.

My biggest disappointment with the deal is that we didn't hold out for the #38 pick and take Jordan Bell. Chicago sold the dam pick for $3 million in cash so clearly we could have included cash and gotten #38 as part of the deal. Bummer.

lipoli390 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:One reason why I think it was easier to come around on this trade was how I felt about the 7 pick. I suppose to some extent how you valued the guys available will determine how dropping down to #16 hurts. Glen told Wolfson they would likely have taken Markkanen at 7. Some of us feel like that's dodging a bullet! Lol but in all seriousness I didn't feel that strongly about any player at 7. A few weeks ago I valued it more. I thought we were likely to get a combo forward or wing prospect there or have a PG prospect drop. The only guy that fits that would be DSJ and that's kinda problematic as has been discussed. The guy I'm probably most disappointed not to get is Zach Collins and he went 10 to the Blazers. Personally if Inwas picking at #16 I would have been inclined to go John Collins or OG. Patton is a big with potential in some of the ways Zach Collins was intruiging but I liked Collins better. Patton was a guy Inwas intruiged with but I didn't see him as a guy I would target in a trade down but I am certainly not unhappy with the pick and it has nothing to do with him being a local guy that's just a fun bonus.

So from 7-16 isn't a big drop off for me. I think there will absolutely be worthwhile players from 16 on down. Did we pick the right guy? Idk but NOBODY here were expecting him to be picked which I predicted! :)

Good point about who was available at #7. I think that probably made a big difference for Thibs and it certainly makes a big difference to me. Thibs said they explored trading up for what he called "a couple players they really liked." If one of those players had fallen, this trade may not have happened. Hearing that we were going to take Markkenan, I'm among those relieved we made the trade. :). Like you, I would have take Zach Collins at #7. JVG said he thinks Zach will be a great player.

I'm also in your camp wishing we had drafted John Collins at #16. There's no substitute for production as a measure of a player's potential. Collins was a prolific low post score and rebounder as reflected in his college stats. As we all know, rebounding in particular tends to translate from college to the pros. And I loved his athleticism and motor. I think we'll regret passing on his. But I'm intrigued by Patton's upside. He's one of those few who had a huge late growth spurt than transformed him from guard to center or forward size. I like his efficient scoring in college, but his rebounding and shot-blocking were disturbiningly mediocre for a guy his size in college.

My biggest disappointment with the deal is that we didn't hold out for the #38 pick and take Jordan Bell. Chicago sold the dam pick for $3 million in cash so clearly we could have included cash and gotten #38 as part of the deal. Bummer.

Agreed Lip. I'll say this though...we see Collins production as a sophomore and it's impressive. Even though Patton is basically the same age he clearly is a guy that has some reason to not look as good at this point because of his growth spurt etc. He is a projection guy that is probably a year or so behind where he should be but has reason to be. He sorta reminds me of Thon Maker or even Skal. What if Patton had returned to college and put up 20-10 next year? Just sayin. I think we are basically on the same page here.

Ok so the Bulls are clearly rebuilding and yeah they didn't throw in that #38 pick to the Wolves which makes sense it was a pretty decent asset. And...then they sold it to GS. WTF would you do that for? It makes no sense for a team looking to rebuild and they have a couple spots with expanded rosters. Now my guess is they wanted to move the #38 to a team other than the Wolves and GS ponies up the money. Maybe thy even took a little less to send it to GS over what the Wolves offered in cash. I don't think that's even petty I wouldn't want the Wolves to have another shot at making me look stupid if all I was going to do is sell it off. No way I sell it off though. Terrible. Basically I don't think that #38 pick was available to the Wolves unless they ponies up some other asset to beat out another team

Duke13 wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:

Duke13 wrote:Future -

I agree with you. I was absolutely devastated on draft night when they made the trade. I was at a party last night and friends were having a good time at my expense seeing I'm the only person in the world outside of Chicago who felt the same what. You've clearly stated the reasons why this may not be the best move for the long term future.

I heard Glen's press conference, I believe he was instrumental in putting pressure on the organization to make this kind of move.
Besides Wig and Kat, our team of bare of talent to put around the big 3 to make deep playoff runs, thats the way I see it anyway.

I was in the minority, but I didn't think the wolves had to make the playoffs this year. I get it's hard to argue getting Butler for what we had to give up. All I know is I'm less excited about the teams future then I was before the trade. Weird I know.

I feel the same way Duke. Interesting observation on the Taylor presser. I haven't head it, but after the deal was announced the other night, I turned to my friend and said that Glen Taylor's finger prints were all over this one. But after reflecting, I suspect Thibs would have made this deal even without any prodding or concern about Glen.

I agree Tibs could t of turned this deal down. More just saying I was a bit surprised by Glen assertiveness regarding his desire to move the needle this year and how basically last year was unacceptable.

Thanks for the posts. Glad a few here see both sides as well.

Glen is getting older and older, and isn't extremely healthy. He has been looking to further fraction or sell his ownership.Members of my family have done business with him for over 30 years. Some speculation, but making the playoffs for a few years and watching competitive basketball may be his desire right now. Enjoy the revenue, valuation, and basketball play increase while he can. Doesn't mean it's the best future overall. More so instant gratification. For similar reasons Thibs has an incentive to win asap after last season. 2 years of Butler makes great sense for him to do just that.

Was there a Glen Taylor press conference after the draft? Or are we referring to his talk with Doogie?

I hate to say this, but I couldn't help but wonder if Glen is suffering from some form of dementia when I listened to him on Doogie's Scoop podcast. And once again, I thought he let more info out of the bag than Thibs/Layden would have liked...