Minnesota Sports Forum

kurrdog53 wrote:

khans2k5 wrote:I'll try to do some convincing lol. Lavine's potential is not higher than the player Butler is today. Lavine has a 0% chance to become the defender Butler is and Butler is still a great offensive player who gets better every year. Zach could become a better offensive player than Jimmy, but there is a 0% chance Zach becomes the elite two way player that Jimmy is. Guys just don't go from God awful defenders to elite. They go from God awful to above average maybe.

I don't think people understand how good Butler is. Top 15 doesn't really do justice to what he does on both sides of the ball. He scores 23 points per game, lives at the free throw line, shuts down your best player and was the second most clutch player in the league last year behind Westbrook statistically. The triple doubles of Harden and Westbrook are flashy, but the real grit and grind plays that win games come from a guy like Butler because he does it on both sides of the ball. We just paired that with a generational talent in Towns and now a guy in Wiggins who is a significant mismatch as the 3rd best player on a team. We just paired the second most clutch player in the league with a team who would have been playoff bound last year if they just could have closed games out.

We have two top 15 players now. The only other teams who can say that are the Warriors and Cavs. This makes us a contender. And when you are a contender you just need a break to get to a finals. The Warriors caught a break this year when Kawhi went down. Who knows who wins that series with the way it was started if he stays healthy. I think we are now the 3rd best team in the conference. Jimmy Butler is Harden and Westbrook kryptonite. The Clippers don't have a prayer at stopping a wing scoring combo of Butler and Wiggins. The Jazz might be losing two starters. And nobody else in the conference really has the pieces to make a big jump as of this post.

We have two guys who live at the line in Wiggins and Butler which is old school winning basketball and a generational offensive talent in Towns in the frontcourt none of these teams can stop. If Towns and Wiggins make significant defensive strides I think that overtakes the Spurs for 2nd best team. And when I say 2nd or 3rd best team I don't necessarily mean in regular season record. I mean when it comes to the playoffs and you have to beat someone 4 out of 7, I think we are setup to be the second or third best team at doing that. We have the tools to be a contender. I think that's gonna keep Butler around and we'll be a very good team for years to come and the cost was good potential, but potential that I don't think ever reaches Jimmy's level.

Totally agree with this. If we had hope that LaVine would be Jimmy Butler someday, then we keep him. But, unfortunately, he was never going to be the 2 way player Jimmy is currently. So you make the trade for that reason alone.

KAT is offensively, already a superstar and still scratching the surface. Defensively, he has a long way to go, but I am sure Thibs thinks he can make him better and knows Jimmy will help him. So you make the trade for that reason too.

Wigs has the potential to be a Jimmy Butler offensively and defensively. Butler should help show him how to get there. I worry that he doesnt have Butler's motor or toughness. So you make the trade for that reason too, so you have that tough guy (next to the guy with the potential).

Dunn could be great someday, but I think we had to sell high on him now (if that is what you can call it, next to LaVine in a trade). Coming out of the draft, it sounded like we were getting Damon Lilliard who can be an elite defender. If you think he can be that, trading him was a gamble. But I do not see it. I see Tony Allen, maybe. So for that reason you make the trade.

#16 was icing on the cake and not as helpful as #7, but it was better than not getting anything back.

Shumway wrote:A couple of additional things that I haven't seen mentioned that really support the trade:

First, the potential redundancy between Wiggins and Lavine. Prior to the trade, we had discussed whether there was too much overlap between Wiggins and Lavine as scorers that don't do too much else (i.e. poor defensively and not, as Q has trademarked, 'do shit' players). I loved Lavine's potential, and I expected him to improve and I'm really sorry to see him go. But I have always had a niggling concern that both Lavine and Wiggins are best suited at the 2 and both will always primarily fill the same role as scorers first and foremost. Under this circumstance, perhaps the sum of the parts was greater than the sum of the whole and Lavine's value is greater to another team than to us. Butler is not a perfect fit given floor spacing, but with his defensive mindset, I expect him to compliment Wiggins much better on the wing.

Secondly, I really see this as a Quantity for Quality trade. And in basketball, given the smaller roster sizes, that is almost always a winning trade. The potential of Lavine and Dunn and the #7 pick is appealing. But we will likely have a tendency to overvalue potential over production - particularly when we have our biases to support our own young players. I think the real Quality in the trade is pretty clearly Butler.

Finally, I actually find it pretty frustrating that people would argue against the trade because Golden State have the league wrapped up for the next 5 years so we should avoid peaking any time prior to that. The league is just not that predictable. 5 years ago, OKC were a potential dynasty in the making. 3 years ago, the Heat had a Big 3. Last year Golden State were unbeatable at 73-9 and 3-1 up in the Finals. Stuff changes - and more rapidly than people expect. This point also highlights the risks of expecting we could have just kept our core together over the next 5 years in time to make a run at things. I understand the extremes of things - it is pointless for an aging team in decline to try to hang on for another couple of wins rather than re-building. But the Wolves haven't mortgaged their future for a 28 year old Butler. Our core largely remains in tact and potentially the added experience and leadership is exactly what the remainder of our core actually needs to reach their potential.

So maybe I'm just too much of an eternal optimist, but I agree with the national media on this one that we easily take the points in this trade.

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

Shumway wrote:A couple of additional things that I haven't seen mentioned that really support the trade:

First, the potential redundancy between Wiggins and Lavine. Prior to the trade, we had discussed whether there was too much overlap between Wiggins and Lavine as scorers that don't do too much else (i.e. poor defensively and not, as Q has trademarked, 'do shit' players). I loved Lavine's potential, and I expected him to improve and I'm really sorry to see him go. But I have always had a niggling concern that both Lavine and Wiggins are best suited at the 2 and both will always primarily fill the same role as scorers first and foremost. Under this circumstance, perhaps the sum of the parts was greater than the sum of the whole and Lavine's value is greater to another team than to us. Butler is not a perfect fit given floor spacing, but with his defensive mindset, I expect him to compliment Wiggins much better on the wing.

Secondly, I really see this as a Quantity for Quality trade. And in basketball, given the smaller roster sizes, that is almost always a winning trade. The potential of Lavine and Dunn and the #7 pick is appealing. But we will likely have a tendency to overvalue potential over production - particularly when we have our biases to support our own young players. I think the real Quality in the trade is pretty clearly Butler.

Finally, I actually find it pretty frustrating that people would argue against the trade because Golden State have the league wrapped up for the next 5 years so we should avoid peaking any time prior to that. The league is just not that predictable. 5 years ago, OKC were a potential dynasty in the making. 3 years ago, the Heat had a Big 3. Last year Golden State were unbeatable at 73-9 and 3-1 up in the Finals. Stuff changes - and more rapidly than people expect. This point also highlights the risks of expecting we could have just kept our core together over the next 5 years in time to make a run at things. I understand the extremes of things - it is pointless for an aging team in decline to try to hang on for another couple of wins rather than re-building. But the Wolves haven't mortgaged their future for a 28 year old Butler. Our core largely remains in tact and potentially the added experience and leadership is exactly what the remainder of our core actually needs to reach their potential.

So maybe I'm just too much of an eternal optimist, but I agree with the national media on this one that we easily take the points in this trade.

The wait for Golden State argument has swung so far that it's almost comical.

I get it for teams that are already losing to them and who would have to go "all in" right now and STILL be prohibitive underdogs... where's the upside?

But for a team like the Wolves? A team that's YEARS away from being a playoff contender (winning series in the playoffs)? A team that hasn't been over .500 in a decade? A team that hasn't made the playoffs even longer than that? The WORST franchise in NBA history?

I've read it here. And I've heard it by national "experts." It's ridiculous.

The "championship or bust" mentality that's taking over the league's fans/talking heads is an insult to the true fans of the NBA and the people paying money to see these teams...

WildWolf2813 wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

Shumway wrote:A couple of additional things that I haven't seen mentioned that really support the trade:

First, the potential redundancy between Wiggins and Lavine. Prior to the trade, we had discussed whether there was too much overlap between Wiggins and Lavine as scorers that don't do too much else (i.e. poor defensively and not, as Q has trademarked, 'do shit' players). I loved Lavine's potential, and I expected him to improve and I'm really sorry to see him go. But I have always had a niggling concern that both Lavine and Wiggins are best suited at the 2 and both will always primarily fill the same role as scorers first and foremost. Under this circumstance, perhaps the sum of the parts was greater than the sum of the whole and Lavine's value is greater to another team than to us. Butler is not a perfect fit given floor spacing, but with his defensive mindset, I expect him to compliment Wiggins much better on the wing.

Secondly, I really see this as a Quantity for Quality trade. And in basketball, given the smaller roster sizes, that is almost always a winning trade. The potential of Lavine and Dunn and the #7 pick is appealing. But we will likely have a tendency to overvalue potential over production - particularly when we have our biases to support our own young players. I think the real Quality in the trade is pretty clearly Butler.

Finally, I actually find it pretty frustrating that people would argue against the trade because Golden State have the league wrapped up for the next 5 years so we should avoid peaking any time prior to that. The league is just not that predictable. 5 years ago, OKC were a potential dynasty in the making. 3 years ago, the Heat had a Big 3. Last year Golden State were unbeatable at 73-9 and 3-1 up in the Finals. Stuff changes - and more rapidly than people expect. This point also highlights the risks of expecting we could have just kept our core together over the next 5 years in time to make a run at things. I understand the extremes of things - it is pointless for an aging team in decline to try to hang on for another couple of wins rather than re-building. But the Wolves haven't mortgaged their future for a 28 year old Butler. Our core largely remains in tact and potentially the added experience and leadership is exactly what the remainder of our core actually needs to reach their potential.

So maybe I'm just too much of an eternal optimist, but I agree with the national media on this one that we easily take the points in this trade.

The wait for Golden State argument has swung so far that it's almost comical.

I get it for teams that are already losing to them and who would have to go "all in" right now and STILL be prohibitive underdogs... where's the upside?

But for a team like the Wolves? A team that's YEARS away from being a playoff contender (winning series in the playoffs)? A team that hasn't been over .500 in a decade? A team that hasn't made the playoffs even longer than that? The WORST franchise in NBA history?

I've read it here. And I've heard it by national "experts." It's ridiculous.

The "championship or bust" mentality that's taking over the league's fans/talking heads is an insult to the true fans of the NBA and the people paying money to see these teams...

Exactly. This team hasn't earned the right to feel this entitled.

13 years ago, the plan was to wait out San Antonio and Dallas. How'd that work out?