Page 4 of 6
Re: Love has to go. What would you prefer....
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 5:11 pm
by alexftbl8181 [enjin:6648741]
longstrangetrip wrote:Camden wrote:alexftbl8181 wrote:lipoli390 wrote:If the choice is nothing versus something for Love, it should be a really easy choice. You take something.
If it's nothing or getting a 20 cents covered in dog poop, Ill take nothing
This is where I stand as well. If someone told me I had a Ferrari for one more year or I could sell it for $1,000, I'd just enjoy the last year with my 'rari and maybe I'd be able to keep it after that year. No reason to settle.
Hmmm, let's go with that one. You have a lot of fun with the Ferrari for a year (even though the Ferrari doesn't want to be in your garage :( ), and someone is offering you an Audi S-4 now in exchange for you giving up the Ferrari. I let the unhappy Ferrari go and take the lesser car.
Not if the Audi S-4 was covered in dog poop
Re: Love has to go. What would you prefer....
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 5:12 pm
by TheGrey08
lipoli390 wrote:
Lol. Alex - I'll take 20 cents over ZERO any day of the week. And it's only covered in dog poop if it includes more bad long-term contracts like the ones Flip agreed to last summer. That's not what I have in mind and it won't be necessary.
There's a Boston deal to be had that would not include a bunch of bad cap-eating contracts. Olynyk and Smart are extremely reasonable rookie-scale contracts - not to mention the fact that they are talented young players with considerable upside. Add a couple unprotected first round picks and it's far more than 20 cents on the dollar for the Wolves. The only significant contract we'd have to take to match salaries would be Green's, but he only has 2 years left on his deal and would instantly be an upgrade at SF over what we had last season.
Even a Cavs deal without Wiggins would not be covered in dog dung. Waiters and Bennett are on reasonable rookie contracts that's are relatively cheap AND give the Wolves the option not to renew. Not to mention that Waiters and Bennett have talent and significant upside. Add a couple first round picks and it's a decent deal for the Wolves compared to getting nothing more than one more season with Love.
It would be ridiculous to keep Love rather than take deals like these. Otherwise we have Love one more season with nothing more than a chance of making the playoffs - probably a 7th or 8th seed as our best case scenario. Another advantage of trading Love is that we can control where he goes -- including getting him out of the Western Conference.
I'd definitely pass on 20 cents and let him walk, but I also don't believe those 2 deals you describe are 20 cents on the dollar either. The Celtics would need to sweeten the deal for me, maybe simply adding a 3rd pick and I'd want Smart going to another team for sure. No interest in another PG who struggles shooting. I'd flip Smart for a or PF. I like the above CLE scenario a little better, but those deals would have to be the absolute last resort, no chance in hell of getting any other deal. I still think a better deal is out there.
Re: Love has to go. What would you prefer....
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 5:14 pm
by MikeAz [enjin:6636981]
longstrangetrip wrote:CoolBreeze44 wrote:MikeAz wrote:lipoli390 wrote:MikeAz wrote:lipoli390 wrote:If we can get Marcus Smart, Olynyk and a couple unprotected future first round picks from the Celtics for Love rather than simple letting Love walk, it would ridiculous to pass on that deal.
The Celtics have signed Smart already, at what point can they trade him?
They can trade him 30 days after signing. So that won't be a barrier.
In that case maybe the Wolves should be working with the Suns on a deal including TJ Warren.
Dragic, TJ Warren, Markieff Morris and a pick for Love & Bud?
Not bad
That's $21 million in Wolves salary for only $12 million of Suns' salary, so I don't think it works. Love Dragic though.
I guess they could substitute Turiaf for Bud, Fesenko can fill that role anyways.
Re: Love has to go. What would you prefer....
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 5:14 pm
by longstrangetrip [enjin:6600564]
alexftbl8181 wrote:longstrangetrip wrote:Camden wrote:alexftbl8181 wrote:lipoli390 wrote:If the choice is nothing versus something for Love, it should be a really easy choice. You take something.
If it's nothing or getting a 20 cents covered in dog poop, Ill take nothing
This is where I stand as well. If someone told me I had a Ferrari for one more year or I could sell it for $1,000, I'd just enjoy the last year with my 'rari and maybe I'd be able to keep it after that year. No reason to settle.
Hmmm, let's go with that one. You have a lot of fun with the Ferrari for a year (even though the Ferrari doesn't want to be in your garage :( ), and someone is offering you an Audi S-4 now in exchange for you giving up the Ferrari. I let the unhappy Ferrari go and take the lesser car.
Not if the Audi S-4 was covered in dog poop
LOL...car wash, Alex...car wash
Re: Love has to go. What would you prefer....
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 5:14 pm
by TheGrey08
alexftbl8181 wrote:
Not if the Audi S-4 was covered in dog poop
Poo washes off. The key is what kind of loan you end up having to take out. Short or long? overpaying or underpaying?
Re: Love has to go. What would you prefer....
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 5:15 pm
by thedoper
I don't think 20 cents v zero is the right analogy. Getting into the playoffs with the potential of Rubio stepping up his game in primetime (even with a disgruntled Love) would be worth way more than a bunch of crappy overpaid 3 and 4th year players over the next little while.
Re: Love has to go. What would you prefer....
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 5:16 pm
by TheGrey08
Oh and I'd be much less likely to settle for a weak deal if it was with a very good team. Not about to help a good team become great w/o good compensation. If they really want a superstar they need to pay up otherwise watch him go to a rival. I doubt CLE wants to see him go to NYC or BOS...
Re: Love has to go. What would you prefer....
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 5:17 pm
by TheGrey08
thedoper wrote:I don't think 20 cents v zero is the right analogy. Getting into the playoffs with the potential of Rubio stepping up his game in primetime (even with a disgruntled Love) would be worth way more than a bunch of crappy overpaid 3 and 4th year players over the next little while.
hmm that's a very good point. Rubio getting playoff experience could be huge.
Re: Love has to go. What would you prefer....
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 5:23 pm
by alexftbl8181 [enjin:6648741]
lipoli390 wrote:alexftbl8181 wrote:lipoli390 wrote:If the choice is nothing versus something for Love, it should be a really easy choice. You take something.
If it's nothing or getting a 20 cents covered in dog poop, Ill take nothing
Lol. Alex - I'll take 20 cents over ZERO any day of the week. And it's only covered in dog poop if it includes more bad long-term contracts like the ones Flip agreed to last summer. That's not what I have in mind and it won't be necessary.
There's a Boston deal to be had that would not include a bunch of bad cap-eating contracts. Olynyk and Smart are extremely reasonable rookie-scale contracts - not to mention the fact that they are talented young players with considerable upside. Add a couple unprotected first round picks and it's far more than 20 cents on the dollar for the Wolves. The only significant contract we'd have to take to match salaries would be Green's, but he only has 2 years left on his deal and would instantly be an upgrade at SF over what we had last season.
Even a Cavs deal without Wiggins would not be covered in dog dung. Waiters and Bennett are on reasonable rookie contracts that's are relatively cheap AND give the Wolves the option not to renew. Not to mention that Waiters and Bennett have talent and significant upside. Add a couple first round picks and it's a decent deal for the Wolves compared to getting nothing more than one more season with Love.
It would be ridiculous to keep Love rather than take deals like these. Otherwise we have Love one more season with nothing more than a chance of making the playoffs - probably a 7th or 8th seed as our best case scenario. Another advantage of trading Love is that we can control where he goes -- including getting him out of the Western Conference.
OK the Celt's deal is like if I gave you a dollar, and you gave me back a a slice of Jacks pizza with extra cheese because I haven't eaten in like 10 years (playoff drought). If I don't get something for this dollar, I'm probably going to die of starvation by lets say next season. that piece of pizza is gross but it's better some expensive piece of meat that's gone moldy like the Warrors are giving me (Lee) and better then the piece of gum the Cavs are giving me even though I KNOW they have that free coupon for that all you can eat buffet that they just found (Wiggins). That pizza has extra cheese though (cap space), doesn't do me any good because im lactose intolenent so I can't enjoy it anyway.
So yea long analogy short, I'm gonna starve to death or hold out for someone else to give me something for my dollar, then take any of those offers
Re: Love has to go. What would you prefer....
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 5:27 pm
by alexftbl8181 [enjin:6648741]
TheGrey08 wrote:alexftbl8181 wrote:
Not if the Audi S-4 was covered in dog poop
Poo washes off. The key is what kind of loan you end up having to take out. Short or long? overpaying or underpaying?
Nah man, that stuff gets into the seats. No hot girl is going to let you take her to make out point in that car if she knows it was covered in dog poop