Minnesota Sports Forum

Why do we have to trade Rubio to develop Dunn?

khans2k5 wrote:

WildWolf2813 wrote:khans2k5- the whole point of drafting a PG in the top 5 is so you don't have to turn around and give someone like George Hill 80 mil for 4 years. Once you make a move like that, it is without question that we can consider Dunn a failure

Where do you come up with this stuff? You get a guy like Hill to be an upgrade over Ricky and Dunn either beats him out or he doesn't. If Dunn beats him out you trade Hill and if he doesn't you trade Dunn. Pretty simple. Good organization's don't have dumb declarations like yours. They accrue assets and let the best ones win jobs. They don't care about draft position. They care about performance on the court and Dunn is either going to earn it or he isn't. You don't hand him the job and you don't declare him a bust just because you get a placeholder that requires him to step his game up to win the job. I can't seem to remember everyone saying Smart was a bust just because the C's went out and got Isaiah Thomas. Oh ya, because it didn't happen. And now they have both and are doing just fine and Smart isn't a bust and Thomas was a great move. Funny how that worked out.

You don't sign a guy to an $80 mil deal to COMPETE with someone (and if that were the case, he's not taking your money). Either way you lose. If Dunn can't beat out a guy he's unlikely to beat anyway, Thibs screwed up picking him. If you paid a guy $80 mil to not beat out a guy fresh off a 7 PER season, you screwed up paying a guy $80 mil. It's pretty cut and dry. I don't see how you're ignoring this, or maybe you don't wanna admit that this is a possible conclusion to all of this, You have to remember, NOBODY envisioned Dunn being in this position right now.

And I wouldn't use Smart as a good example considering they're about 4 months away from replacing him with another PG, and another thing, even with Rondo and then eventually Thomas in the fold (a severely underpaid Thomas, mind you), Marcus Smart NEVER played as bad as Dunn has.

bleedspeed177 wrote:Why do we have to trade Rubio to develop Dunn?

We don't.

If you believe the pundits, this is more about Thibs pursuing Rose than it is about letting go of Rubio just for the sake of dumping Rubio. They make it sound like we're actually interested in Rose the player (as opposed to Rose the salary dump).

It's frankly baffling to me if true. Rose is a total disaster in my opinion.

Q12543 wrote:

bleedspeed177 wrote:Why do we have to trade Rubio to develop Dunn?

We don't.

If you believe the pundits, this is more about Thibs pursuing Rose than it is about letting go of Rubio just for the sake of dumping Rubio. They make it sound like we're actually interested in Rose the player (as opposed to Rose the salary dump).

It's frankly baffling to me if true. Rose is a total disaster in my opinion.

I don't want Rose either but does it change at all if O'Quinn is involved every trade I have seen is he is involved in the trade.

khans2k5 wrote:

WildWolf2813 wrote:khans2k5- the whole point of drafting a PG in the top 5 is so you don't have to turn around and give someone like George Hill 80 mil for 4 years. Once you make a move like that, it is without question that we can consider Dunn a failure

Where do you come up with this stuff? You get a guy like Hill to be an upgrade over Ricky and Dunn either beats him out or he doesn't. If Dunn beats him out you trade Hill and if he doesn't you trade Dunn. Pretty simple. Good organization's don't have dumb declarations like yours. They accrue assets and let the best ones win jobs. They don't care about draft position. They care about performance on the court and Dunn is either going to earn it or he isn't. You don't hand him the job and you don't declare him a bust just because you get a placeholder that requires him to step his game up to win the job. I can't seem to remember everyone saying Smart was a bust just because the C's went out and got Isaiah Thomas. Oh ya, because it didn't happen. And now they have both and are doing just fine and Smart isn't a bust and Thomas was a great move. Funny how that worked out.

Pretty simple, eh? You act like Hill is already on the roster! Snap our fingers and voila! - there's George Hill! Layden and Thibs demonstrated this past summer how easy it was to attract big name free agents to Minnesota - I'm sure they can do it again!

What's the plan if they can't sign Hill?

WildWolf2813 wrote:

khans2k5 wrote:

WildWolf2813 wrote:khans2k5- the whole point of drafting a PG in the top 5 is so you don't have to turn around and give someone like George Hill 80 mil for 4 years. Once you make a move like that, it is without question that we can consider Dunn a failure

Where do you come up with this stuff? You get a guy like Hill to be an upgrade over Ricky and Dunn either beats him out or he doesn't. If Dunn beats him out you trade Hill and if he doesn't you trade Dunn. Pretty simple. Good organization's don't have dumb declarations like yours. They accrue assets and let the best ones win jobs. They don't care about draft position. They care about performance on the court and Dunn is either going to earn it or he isn't. You don't hand him the job and you don't declare him a bust just because you get a placeholder that requires him to step his game up to win the job. I can't seem to remember everyone saying Smart was a bust just because the C's went out and got Isaiah Thomas. Oh ya, because it didn't happen. And now they have both and are doing just fine and Smart isn't a bust and Thomas was a great move. Funny how that worked out.

You don't sign a guy to an $80 mil deal to COMPETE with someone (and if that were the case, he's not taking your money). Either way you lose. If Dunn can't beat out a guy he's unlikely to beat anyway, Thibs screwed up picking him. If you paid a guy $80 mil to not beat out a guy fresh off a 7 PER season, you screwed up paying a guy $80 mil. It's pretty cut and dry. I don't see how you're ignoring this, or maybe you don't wanna admit that this is a possible conclusion to all of this, You have to remember, NOBODY envisioned Dunn being in this position right now.

And I wouldn't use Smart as a good example considering they're about 4 months away from replacing him with another PG, and another thing, even with Rondo and then eventually Thomas in the fold (a severely underpaid Thomas, mind you), Marcus Smart NEVER played as bad as Dunn has.

Or option 3. Hill starts, Dunn gives us a Smart like defensive force in the backcourt between two shooters in Hill and Lavine and we actually have a good team rather than this bogus Dunn has to take over next year or he's a bust.

kekgeek1 wrote:

Q12543 wrote:

bleedspeed177 wrote:Why do we have to trade Rubio to develop Dunn?

We don't.

If you believe the pundits, this is more about Thibs pursuing Rose than it is about letting go of Rubio just for the sake of dumping Rubio. They make it sound like we're actually interested in Rose the player (as opposed to Rose the salary dump).

It's frankly baffling to me if true. Rose is a total disaster in my opinion.

I don't want Rose either but does it change at all if O'Quinn is involved every trade I have seen is he is involved in the trade.

Don't dig Rose. But I've developed a Q and Adrien love affair thing with O'Quinn.

kekgeek1 wrote:

Q12543 wrote:

bleedspeed177 wrote:Why do we have to trade Rubio to develop Dunn?

We don't.

If you believe the pundits, this is more about Thibs pursuing Rose than it is about letting go of Rubio just for the sake of dumping Rubio. They make it sound like we're actually interested in Rose the player (as opposed to Rose the salary dump).

It's frankly baffling to me if true. Rose is a total disaster in my opinion.

I don't want Rose either but does it change at all if O'Quinn is involved every trade I have seen is he is involved in the trade.

Well, that would certainly make the deal less horrible. He'd give us a bit more interior strength. But he reminds me a bit of Aldrich in that he puts up great stats on a per minute basis, yet can never get more than 15 MPG. What gives? He must have some significant limitations, but honestly I haven't watched him enough to know.

Rose to me is a guy that subtracts from a team. In other words, I'd rather trade Rubio for a pet rock and let Tyus Jones/Dunn man the ship at PG. That's how much I dislike the idea of Rose on this team!

WildWolf2813 wrote:

khans2k5 wrote:

WildWolf2813 wrote:khans2k5- the whole point of drafting a PG in the top 5 is so you don't have to turn around and give someone like George Hill 80 mil for 4 years. Once you make a move like that, it is without question that we can consider Dunn a failure

Where do you come up with this stuff? You get a guy like Hill to be an upgrade over Ricky and Dunn either beats him out or he doesn't. If Dunn beats him out you trade Hill and if he doesn't you trade Dunn. Pretty simple. Good organization's don't have dumb declarations like yours. They accrue assets and let the best ones win jobs. They don't care about draft position. They care about performance on the court and Dunn is either going to earn it or he isn't. You don't hand him the job and you don't declare him a bust just because you get a placeholder that requires him to step his game up to win the job. I can't seem to remember everyone saying Smart was a bust just because the C's went out and got Isaiah Thomas. Oh ya, because it didn't happen. And now they have both and are doing just fine and Smart isn't a bust and Thomas was a great move. Funny how that worked out.

You don't sign a guy to an $80 mil deal to COMPETE with someone (and if that were the case, he's not taking your money). Either way you lose. If Dunn can't beat out a guy he's unlikely to beat anyway, Thibs screwed up picking him. If you paid a guy $80 mil to not beat out a guy fresh off a 7 PER season, you screwed up paying a guy $80 mil. It's pretty cut and dry. I don't see how you're ignoring this, or maybe you don't wanna admit that this is a possible conclusion to all of this, You have to remember, NOBODY envisioned Dunn being in this position right now.

And I wouldn't use Smart as a good example considering they're about 4 months away from replacing him with another PG, and another thing, even with Rondo and then eventually Thomas in the fold (a severely underpaid Thomas, mind you), Marcus Smart NEVER played as bad as Dunn has.

Rookie Year Per 36

Marcus Smart

10.4 pts 36% FG% 4.4 Reb 4.1 Asts 2.0 Stls .4 Blks

Kris Dunn

7.8 pts 36% FG% 4.7 Reb 5.5 Asts 1.9 Stls 1.0 Blks

Jimmy Butler (under Thibs)

10.9 pts 40% FG% 5.6 Reb 1.4 Asts 1.1 Stls .5 Blks
*only played 8 min per game his rookie year

Draymond Green

7.7 Pts 32% FG% 8.8 Reb 1.8 Asts 1.4 Stls .8 Blks


[list]I just added Butler and Draymond because they were the 2 players in this years all star games that played 4 years of college. Now in no way does this guarantee Dunn will be the best player to ever play or even become a quality NBA starter but these examples are just to show you don't need to light the world on fire after 1 year (and Dunn is only half way through) to become and elite NBA player. He is a good defender and there is nobody in this draft that has been a net positive in this year (I wanted Murray during the draft) so it is not like the wolves made a huge mistake in the draft.
[*]
[/list]

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

kekgeek1 wrote:

Q12543 wrote:

bleedspeed177 wrote:Why do we have to trade Rubio to develop Dunn?

We don't.

If you believe the pundits, this is more about Thibs pursuing Rose than it is about letting go of Rubio just for the sake of dumping Rubio. They make it sound like we're actually interested in Rose the player (as opposed to Rose the salary dump).

It's frankly baffling to me if true. Rose is a total disaster in my opinion.

I don't want Rose either but does it change at all if O'Quinn is involved every trade I have seen is he is involved in the trade.

Don't dig Rose. But I've developed a Q and Adrien love affair thing with O'Quinn.

Hey, we all have our bromances with certain players. My guess is that Adrien could bench press O'Quinn about 20 times.....with one arm. Once he's out of San Quentin, he's all ours!

Seriously, have you seen O'Quinn play over the years? Why are his minutes so limited, because I get the fact he's been productive as hell (+/- stuff ain't so good though....there must be something).