Minnesota Sports Forum

AbeVigodaLive wrote:It's easier to hide/mask/subdue a malcontent/cancer/rabble rouser when that guy joins a veteran-laden team with clear pecking order.

When that guy has a case for best player on the team... And is the more experienced player... Why would he willingly take a backseat?

Cousins as a veteran leader with so many young guys scares me... Even if his talent impresses me.

If Towns/Wiggins/LaVine are as good as most here think, the Wolves have their foundation. Supplement it... Don't supplant it.

I think what khans and I are saying in this situation is to give those three young guys some major help to make a big leap now and the future. Cousins could carry the load immediately while the other three still produce, contribute and develop as they currently are. The difference is we'd be winning a lot more a lot quicker while still having a great future. It's not as though Cousins is going to be past his prime any time soon either. He'd be 30 when Towns, Wiggins and LaVine are all 25. Not to mention that a move like this (adding a star) is easier to accomplish financially when your stars are on their rookie contracts. We can go over the cap to re-sign them, but once we're over the cap, adding players of that level (All-Star and above) are much more difficult to manage because of the cap situation.

Camden wrote:

Carlos Danger wrote:

khans2k5 wrote:I guess I don't understand why, if a deal is on the table (like the Cousins one for example), we wouldn't want to get better now. Your table says we're 7 years away from our guy's peak play. Why should we build with role players around them and wait 7 years if we could add guys in their peak performing years now and still have our "Big 3" peak in 7 years? Patience is important, but you can't build a team now to all peak together in 7 years. Nobody's saying trade the farm for an Al Jefferson type veteran. We're talking about adding the best Center in the league in Cousins. Or going after guys like Conley, Horford, Batum, etc. in FA who can play major roles to help us win now and then get out of the way in 7 years for our "Big 3". Why are we in role player mode already around 3 20 year olds? You're supposed to take advantage of rookie contracts, not wait them out to pay top dollar and then have nothing left to spend if you find out you actually still need another piece or two. We can always go over the cap to re-sign our guys. We can't go over to sign FA's so get them now when you have the money and go over the cap to re-sign our own guys when it's time.

The Wolves passed on Cousins in the draft for a reason. He's a headcase. And that proved to be a correct assessment. Read some of the reports coming out of Sacramento. Why are they making him available instead of having him be an untouchable cornerstone? This franchise needs stability - not more chaos. Bringing in Cousins would mean Towns would have to change positions/role. Why would we want to screw around with our best player to accommodate a guy like Cousins? Cousins will have two years left on his deal and then he'd walk away. In the meantime we'd give up another rookie contract (our lotto pick) which is good for four years plus one of our starters. That's a move you make when we're ready to make a run at a championship. We're not there yet. We only have five good players - total. We don't even have a long term GM or Coach in place. And our Big 3 are only 20. That's why I say "no" to Cousins and/or similar trades of our starters/draft pick.

No, it wouldn't. We've already seen what a big lineup looks like. Towns has been playing PF/C all season long depending on who's in the lineup with him. The last 20 games or so, he's had plenty of run guarding opposing PFs with Dieng in the starting lineup while still scoring often and at will offensively. You can put any type of big next to Towns and he's still going to be a star. Adding Cousins just means he has someone else that can really help him carry the load while not getting bodied by guys bigger than him.

"Cousins will have two years left on his deal and then he'd walk away." I don't know if that's necessarily true, though it certainly would have to be a concern. Cousins has seemed relatively loyal to Sacramento despite all the turmoil that's surrounded him: losing seasons, poor talent around him, constant head coaching changes and/or issues. I was a little surprised he decided to re-sign with them three seasons ago, but he did. I think if we had Cousins, we'd be a playoff team. I also think we need an established, successful veteran head coach (you all know who I want). Thibs already has a relationship with Boogie from Team USA. I could definitely see him re-signing here with those factors contributing and the high ceiling the other guys have.

Like others have said, we probably won't see a trade like this, but debating the why and why not angles are perfectly fine for a forum.

So we're just practicing?

The entire premise of our side of the argument revolves around winning a top-two pick in the lottery as there looks to be only two potential stars at the top of this draft (Ingram, Simmons). We currently sit fifth in ping pong balls, which gives us a 29.2% chance of landing a top-three draft pick. So, no, we probably won't see a trade like this, but on the off chance that our luck is outstanding, we're discussing what we'd like to attempt to do with the pick. Do you like forum discussions or not? Are you not entertained?

Something that hasn't been mentioned is that Rodman and Sheed won championships playing for 2 of the best basketball coaches of all time. We don't have that right now. Now if Cam got his wish and got Thibs I could see that working out but it's still an if. I don't get why this acquiring Cousins thing is so hotly debated but have at it.

monsterpile wrote:Something that hasn't been mentioned is that Rodman and Sheed won championships playing for 2 of the best basketball coaches of all time. We don't have that right now. Now if Cam got his wish and got Thibs I could see that working out but it's still an if. I don't get why this acquiring Cousins thing is so hotly debated but have at it.

"He's a hard guy to stop," said Bulls coach Tom Thibodeau, an assistant on the U.S. team that included Cousins and Gay. "That's why you shouldn't really formulate an opinion until you work with somebody and get around him. He was terrific. He is as talented as they come. The last game with Team USA (against Serbia), he was unbelievable. He carried the load. And I think he's setting the tone for the team here."

http://www.sacbee.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/ailene-voisin/article4059577.html

I think Thibs and Cousins would actually mesh well, but I'm 100% biased in liking both guys a ton, as everybody knows. I also think Cousins feeds off constructive hardasses as head coaches. He certainly seemed to like Mike Malone, who I feel fits that style of coaching. Lastly, Boogie's been a different person and player since making Team USA and contributing throughout their run. Something about being around the best hoopers and coaches in the world positively affected him.

monsterpile wrote:Something that hasn't been mentioned is that Rodman and Sheed won championships playing for 2 of the best basketball coaches of all time. We don't have that right now. Now if Cam got his wish and got Thibs I could see that working out but it's still an if. I don't get why this acquiring Cousins thing is so hotly debated but have at it.

Where does Thibs fit in a discussion about the greatest coaches of all time?

Camden0916 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:Something that hasn't been mentioned is that Rodman and Sheed won championships playing for 2 of the best basketball coaches of all time. We don't have that right now. Now if Cam got his wish and got Thibs I could see that working out but it's still an if. I don't get why this acquiring Cousins thing is so hotly debated but have at it.

"He's a hard guy to stop," said Bulls coach Tom Thibodeau, an assistant on the U.S. team that included Cousins and Gay. "That's why you shouldn't really formulate an opinion until you work with somebody and get around him. He was terrific. He is as talented as they come. The last game with Team USA (against Serbia), he was unbelievable. He carried the load. And I think he's setting the tone for the team here."

http://www.sacbee.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/ailene-voisin/article4059577.html

I think Thibs and Cousins would actually mesh well, but I'm 100% biased in liking both guys a ton, as everybody knows. I also think Cousins feeds off constructive hardasses as head coaches. He certainly seemed to like Mike Malone, who I feel fits that style of coaching. Lastly, Boogie's been a different person and player since making Team USA and contributing throughout their run. Something about being around the best hoopers and coaches in the world positively affected him.

I think it's fair to ask if Cousins has really been that much more mature this year as he has been suspended by the team this year at least once. I am with you on what Cousins is and isn't but you make it sound like he turned over a new leaf or something. I think the time with team USA was valuable for him but there is obviously some negative stuff there and to a certain extent it's hard to blame him for his frustration the way things have gone for him in Sacramento.

CoolBreeze44 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:Something that hasn't been mentioned is that Rodman and Sheed won championships playing for 2 of the best basketball coaches of all time. We don't have that right now. Now if Cam got his wish and got Thibs I could see that working out but it's still an if. I don't get why this acquiring Cousins thing is so hotly debated but have at it.

Where does Thibs fit in a discussion about the greatest coaches of all time?

Well obviously he isn't and that's part of the point. Even if we agreed that Thibs was the best guy for the job (which I know you wouldn't) he isn't one of those guys although his career isn't completed yet. :)

Camden wrote:

Carlos Danger wrote:

khans2k5 wrote:I guess I don't understand why, if a deal is on the table (like the Cousins one for example), we wouldn't want to get better now. Your table says we're 7 years away from our guy's peak play. Why should we build with role players around them and wait 7 years if we could add guys in their peak performing years now and still have our "Big 3" peak in 7 years? Patience is important, but you can't build a team now to all peak together in 7 years. Nobody's saying trade the farm for an Al Jefferson type veteran. We're talking about adding the best Center in the league in Cousins. Or going after guys like Conley, Horford, Batum, etc. in FA who can play major roles to help us win now and then get out of the way in 7 years for our "Big 3". Why are we in role player mode already around 3 20 year olds? You're supposed to take advantage of rookie contracts, not wait them out to pay top dollar and then have nothing left to spend if you find out you actually still need another piece or two. We can always go over the cap to re-sign our guys. We can't go over to sign FA's so get them now when you have the money and go over the cap to re-sign our own guys when it's time.

The Wolves passed on Cousins in the draft for a reason. He's a headcase. And that proved to be a correct assessment. Read some of the reports coming out of Sacramento. Why are they making him available instead of having him be an untouchable cornerstone? This franchise needs stability - not more chaos. Bringing in Cousins would mean Towns would have to change positions/role. Why would we want to screw around with our best player to accommodate a guy like Cousins? Cousins will have two years left on his deal and then he'd walk away. In the meantime we'd give up another rookie contract (our lotto pick) which is good for four years plus one of our starters. That's a move you make when we're ready to make a run at a championship. We're not there yet. We only have five good players - total. We don't even have a long term GM or Coach in place. And our Big 3 are only 20. That's why I say "no" to Cousins and/or similar trades of our starters/draft pick.

No, it wouldn't. We've already seen what a big lineup looks like. Towns has been playing PF/C all season long depending on who's in the lineup with him. The last 20 games or so, he's had plenty of run guarding opposing PFs with Dieng in the starting lineup while still scoring often and at will offensively. You can put any type of big next to Towns and he's still going to be a star. Adding Cousins just means he has someone else that can really help him carry the load while not getting bodied by guys bigger than him.

"Cousins will have two years left on his deal and then he'd walk away." I don't know if that's necessarily true, though it certainly would have to be a concern. Cousins has seemed relatively loyal to Sacramento despite all the turmoil that's surrounded him: losing seasons, poor talent around him, constant head coaching changes and/or issues. I was a little surprised he decided to re-sign with them three seasons ago, but he did. I think if we had Cousins, we'd be a playoff team. I also think we need an established, successful veteran head coach (you all know who I want). Thibs already has a relationship with Boogie from Team USA. I could definitely see him re-signing here with those factors contributing and the high ceiling the other guys have.

Like others have said, we probably won't see a trade like this, but debating the why and why not angles are perfectly fine for a forum.

I think people are bringing up interesting points on both sides. People have brought up signing someone big now because it allows us to re-sign them and exceed the cap. I think almost everyone would be ok with that. But someone like Cousins because of his well documented problems certainly creates another angle.

Regarding moving Towns to PF to accommodate Cousins, I agree Towns could play next to Cousins. But I don't necessary believe that would be the best upgrade for this franchise if they are going to spend big. Put the fact that Cousins is nuts aside and let's look at both of them as Centers and their current year advanced metrics:

Cousins: 23.7 PER, .538 TS%, 18.0 TRB%, 17.2 AST %, 3.2 BLK %
K.Towns: 22.8 PER, .594 TS%, 19.0 TRB%, 10.3 AST%, 4.5 BLK%

That's pretty similar. And Towns is in his first year, while Boogie is in his 6th. Isn't it possible that in a couple years Towns will be equal or better than Boogie? And without the Diva attitude/drama? If I've learned anything in life, it's that don't fix stuff that isn't broken. Moving Towns might set him back. The reason Cousins puts up such big offensive numbers is because he's taking a ton of shots. Nobody in the NBA is putting up more shots per game than Cousins. Not LeBron. Not Steph Curry. Not James Harden. Not Kevin Durant. Cousins puts up seven more shots/game than KAT. Bringing Cousins over would mean he's the Alpha dog and everyone else defers to him. Then I think to myself, that's what Sacramento has now....and they are looking to trade him. Hmm....

The whole Cousins debate brings up the question of how to put together the best team. For example, who would you rather have next to Towns - Cousins or Gobert? Or how about Cousins vs DeAndre Jordan?