Minnesota Sports Forum

I would keep the pick and draft ingrahm or Simmons. Both have great potential.

I also like the idea someone else suggested a while back. Essentially trading back for a player and still getting a 1st round pick. On the surface, it would be the best of both worlds. We could possibly get a nice defensive type veteran player for our bench. And still have the hope of a draft pick. There seems to be a few Bigs that have some potential mid to late 1st round. Think about what Flip did when Tre Burks for Bazz and Dieng except get a veteran player instead of Bazz.

I will trade simmons for favors if it comes to it. I believe favors to be the perfect fit next to towns. As cam emphasized on his posts, the guy is only 24 and keeps on improving and adding something to his game every year. He is also a top notch defender. Put favors in the starting lineup with towns,wiggins,rubio and lavine and you got 5 players who compliment each other very well and are going to peak right around the same time.

Simmons is a big time talent, but favors is the perfect fit to this team right now. He isn't going to make towns, wiggins, lavine and rubio play any differently. Those 4 can continue to progress and play to their strength when playing with favors.

Carlos Danger wrote:I also like the idea someone else suggested a while back. Essentially trading back for a player and still getting a 1st round pick. On the surface, it would be the best of both worlds. We could possibly get a nice defensive type veteran player for our bench. And still have the hope of a draft pick. There seems to be a few Bigs that have some potential mid to late 1st round. Think about what Flip did when Tre Burks for Bazz and Dieng except get a veteran player instead of Bazz.

In theory #2 for faired and #10

Quality over quantity is the motto, or should be the motto. Think the chance of drafting Ingram or Simmons, or moving Simmons for Favors, would be much more ideal than getting a role player (Crowder, Faried) and a lesser first rounder.

I know some of you are very high on Crowder, but once again I have to tell you to proceed with caution. This guy's having a breakout year for him and he's still not anything that special. I get the fact he has a reasonable contract, but he's not THAT much of a difference-maker, IMO. He's a guy that can help a winning team, sure, but not one of the integral pieces of said winning team. Also, he's still a below average 3P shooter despite the uptick in attempts and makes this year. And with Brad Stevens as his coach, you have to wonder if Crowder's really just the product of some elite coaching and if he'll be as affective for a different staff. That is a legitimate concern.

I think it'd be a huge mistake to move any top-five pick for Crowder for these reasons.

Camden wrote:Quality over quantity is the motto, or should be the motto. Think the chance of drafting Ingram or Simmons, or moving Simmons for Favors, would be much more ideal than getting a role player (Crowder, Faried) and a lesser first rounder.

I know some of you are very high on Crowder, but once again I have to tell you to proceed with caution. This guy's having a breakout year for him and he's still not anything that special. I get the fact he has a reasonable contract, but he's not THAT much of a difference-maker, IMO. He's a guy that can help a winning team, sure, but not one of the integral pieces of said winning team. Also, he's still a below average 3P shooter despite the uptick in attempts and makes this year. And with Brad Stevens as his coach, you have to wonder if Crowder's really just the product of some elite coaching and if he'll be as affective for a different staff. That is a legitimate concern.

I think it'd be a huge mistake to move any top-five pick for Crowder for these reasons.

Agreed cam. Crowder has been talk up around here that you would think he is better than he has been. Don't get me wrong, he is a solid role player but he isn't worth a trade that revolve around our 5th pick. Having a big game vs wiggins recently certainly boosts his stock among guys here but like cam said, he is not that special. A good contract but we can find similar players without giving up that much.

Camden wrote:Quality over quantity is the motto, or should be the motto. Think the chance of drafting Ingram or Simmons, or moving Simmons for Favors, would be much more ideal than getting a role player (Crowder, Faried) and a lesser first rounder.

I normally wouldn't disagree with that. But I feel in our specific situation - we do need quantity over quality. Our starting five is just fine IMO. So we don't really need to try and fit another star into that rotation (there's only one ball). But we really have nothing behind our starting five. Bazz, Belly and Tyus are all still sort of suspect vs. guys I'm really excited about. The rest of the squad, probably won't be back. We've discussed adding Free Agents - which I'm all for doing. But we've also concluded this isn't exactly the desired landing point for Free Agents either. If we can add a good veteran and still have an opportunity for a mid to late mid round pick - I'd be all on it. We know the draft is always a crap shoot. Using that 2013 draft as an example, the best players (Gobert, Dieng, Plumlee, Greek Freak) all went from pick 15 to 27. Granted, it doesn't always work that way. I'm just saying I'm open to considering it if the stars align. Coming away from the draft with a good defensive vet and maybe another good defensive prospect would be pretty good in my book.

Carlos Danger wrote:

Camden wrote:Quality over quantity is the motto, or should be the motto. Think the chance of drafting Ingram or Simmons, or moving Simmons for Favors, would be much more ideal than getting a role player (Crowder, Faried) and a lesser first rounder.

I normally wouldn't disagree with that. But I feel in our specific situation - we do need quantity over quality. Our starting five is just fine IMO. So we don't really need to try and fit another star into that rotation (there's only one ball). But we really have nothing behind our starting five. Bazz, Belly and Tyus are all still sort of suspect vs. guys I'm really excited about. The rest of the squad, probably won't be back. We've discussed adding Free Agents - which I'm all for doing. But we've also concluded this isn't exactly the desired landing point for Free Agents either. If we can add a good veteran and still have an opportunity for a mid to late mid round pick - I'd be all on it. We know the draft is always a crap shoot. Using that 2013 draft as an example, the best players (Gobert, Dieng, Plumlee, Greek Freak) all went from pick 15 to 27. Granted, it doesn't always work that way. I'm just saying I'm open to considering it if the stars align. Coming away from the draft with a good defensive vet and maybe another good defensive prospect would be pretty good in my book.

I understand the thought process and it's not a horrible idea by any means, to get a productive veteran and a decent-but-not-great pick to go with it, but neither Crowder or Faried are worth it, IMO. Just the wrong way to use a top pick.

As for what I've bolded, I don't necessarily disagree. I think our starting five the way it is currently can compete and has competed, but it's not something that can't or shouldn't be improved. While we've been terrific offensively, it would be shortsighted to ignore how awful we've been defensively. I think a lot of the problem is because Dieng's been playing center while Towns plays PF, and Dieng's just not built well-enough to battle night in and night out with starting centers nor is his rim protection consistently good enough from what I've seen (he gets beat by guards too often for my liking).

In the very fortunate case that we do have a top-two pick and Favors is available this summer, I think that's a great deal for us. Part of my thinking is because I believe Favors is really, really good, but another part of that is because it puts Dieng in a role that I would love to have him in: first big off the bench. I think Dieng's much more valuable there and would still be able to play a lot of meaningful minutes. You could even argue that he'd be one of the best bigs off the bench in the entire league. I think it'd also be a stabilizer for that unit as well. And should Towns or (insert really good big here) get in foul trouble at some point in the game, what a luxury it would be to have Dieng come in the game and hold it down.

When is favors contract up? How does paying him at the end of this contract affect paying our current players? I think I would rather add another youngster that is tied up realativly cheap longer than a vet who needs to be resigned. Keep growing these youngsters and rebuild bench with free agency.

Camden wrote:

While we've been terrific offensively, it would be shortsighted to ignore how awful we've been defensively. I think a lot of the problem is because Dieng's been playing center while Towns plays PF, and Dieng's just not built well-enough to battle night in and night out with starting centers nor is his rim protection consistently good enough from what I've seen (he gets beat by guards too often for my liking).

I absolutely agree we should not assume the defense will just magically get better without making some sort of changes. Especially now that it appears Mitchell is likely coming back. Personally, I was thinking if we could land a defensive Big that can be subbed for either Dieng or Towns depending on match ups, we might be okay. But I do see your point and it's not wrong thinking either. BTW, you've mentioned Dieng is playing C and Towns PF a few times on here. Are you basing that on your eye balls or is there a site you refer to for that information. From the games I've watched, it always appeared as though Dieng was playing PF and guarding more away from the basket. But IDK - just going by what I've seen. If there is a site to refer to that tracks - please post. Thanks.