Minnesota Sports Forum

Lip, I understand your fascination with Turner, and frankly your guy Rosas craves him too. He's an elite shot blocker, and I would have no problem pairing him with KAT. My concerns about Turner are 3-fold:

- health: He says he is healthy, but let's not forget he's only averaged 65 games per year in his career

- rebounding: I mean, how can a guy that big and athletic only average 6.5 RPG?

- 3-point shooting- He's not bad (33% last year) but a below average 3-point shooter should not be taking almost half his shots beyond the arc.

If the Simmons dream were dead, I's have no problem with a Beasley for Turner trade. But I'd prefer to use Beasley as a Simmons chip.

lipoli390 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

CoolBreeze44 wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:

Camden wrote:Harry Giles signed a one-year, non-guaranteed contract with the Clippers.

I just saw that. As Rosas keeps his remaining powder dry for a possible run at Simmons, other opportunities slip away. Not that Giles was a jewel the Wolves shouldn't have let slip through their fingers. But he remains an interesting, high-upside PF who I would have liked this Wolves to try out on a cheap non-guaranteed contract. Meanwhile, Hartenstein remains available, but I don't see the Wolves signing him as they continue to pursue Simmons. I can't get down on Rosas for passing on players like Giles and Hartenstein to preserve flexibility for a run at a player like Simmons. But there are opportunity costs associated with Gersson's Simmons gambit. At the end of the day, Rosas can't ensure he gets Simmons and he could end up overpaying to get him.

If I were in Gersson's position, I'd join the vast majority of NBA teams who are not pursuing Simmons. Instead, I'd turn my attention to shoring up the roster we have by signing Vanderbilt and J-Mac while also trading Layman for some more salary space and signing Hartenstein. Meanwhile, I'd explore possible deals for Myles Turner, who could probably be obtained for a fraction of what it would take to get Simmons. Myles is also a great defender and an elite rim protection, which is something we don't have on this team.

Hang in there Lip. We need Simmons first and foremost. These end of the roster guys really don't mean much in the grand scheme of things. Myles Turner excluded of course.

What's the chances a guy like Harry Giles becomes even a solid rotation player? 25%? I think there is a legit chance that the Wolves could get Simmons for a price Lip could be talked into reasonably easily. Lip you are obsessed with Turner I'm concerned you would overpay to get him here. :)

Lol. Good one, Monster. I know you think Myles Turner is permanently on crutches. :) Note, however, that Turner apparently did not opt for surgery on his toe. He said he's doing fine and back practicing on the court. So he remains my #1 obsession. Rosas could get my obsession for far less than it will cost to get his newest obsession. Simmons. My obsession is not only an elite defender, but an elite rim protector. He is a precise fit for the Wolves biggest need, i.e, a defensive PF. And he can hit threes and free throws. Is Simmons a better overall player and talent? Definitely. But give in the Wolves current core and the much smaller price we'd have to pay to get Turner, I'd pursue Turner more aggressively than Simmons. But that's just my obsession. :)

That's good news for Turner that he is healthy.

This is bad news for your obsession. :) I'm proud of you that you have admitted your problem as that is the first step. Q can help you with this as I believe he is in a better place now and hasn't received a restraining order from attempting to have contact with Jeff Adrian in over 2 years! Well done Q!

Lip what is the most you are giving up for Turner and what is the most you would give up for Simmons?

monsterpile wrote:Lip what is the most you are giving up for Turner and what is the most you would give up for Simmons?

Great question, Monster.

1. Most I'd give up for Turner: Beasley and two future 2nd-round picks

2. Most I'd give up for Simmons: DLO, Layman or Okogie, Bolmaro rights, Vanderbilt or Naz, two future 1st-round picks (one of them unprotected the other lottery protected) and a handful of future 2nd-round picks.

lipoli390 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:Lip what is the most you are giving up for Turner and what is the most you would give up for Simmons?

Great question, Monster.

1. Most I'd give up for Turner: Beasley and two future 2nd-round picks

2. Most I'd give up for Simmons: DLO, Layman or Okogie, Bolmaro rights, Vanderbilt or Naz, two future 1st-round picks (one of them unprotected the other lottery protected) and a handful of future 2nd-round picks.

Now Turner is healthy and you are only going to offer that for him? Lol A few days ago you suggested a 3 way deal with the Sixers and you said a deal including Beasley, Naz a 1st round pick and a 2nd was fair. What has changed?

monsterpile wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:Lip what is the most you are giving up for Turner and what is the most you would give up for Simmons?

Great question, Monster.

1. Most I'd give up for Turner: Beasley and two future 2nd-round picks

2. Most I'd give up for Simmons: DLO, Layman or Okogie, Bolmaro rights, Vanderbilt or Naz, two future 1st-round picks (one of them unprotected the other lottery protected) and a handful of future 2nd-round picks.

Now Turner is healthy and you are only going to offer that for him? Lol A few days ago you suggested a 3 way deal with the Sixers and you said a deal including Beasley, Naz a 1st round pick and a 2nd was fair. What has changed?

As I explained, that wasn't a deal I was proposing. It was just an example of a potential three-way with Indiana. Turner is apparently healthy, but he clearly has the durability issue hanging over him. That's why he's gettable for a reasonable price. It's been reported for at least a year that the Pacers would like to move Turner. I think my package would be a reasonable one for him. Remember that the Hawks reportedly offered Collins for Beasley and a future 1st-round pick, but Rosas declined. I think there's a Turner deal out there for Rosas if he want it and I don't think it would take much more than Beasley and a couple picks. Maybe it would require a lottery-protected first along with Beasley and a 2nd-rounder. But I don't see Turner commanding more than that.

lipoli390 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:Lip what is the most you are giving up for Turner and what is the most you would give up for Simmons?

Great question, Monster.

1. Most I'd give up for Turner: Beasley and two future 2nd-round picks

2. Most I'd give up for Simmons: DLO, Layman or Okogie, Bolmaro rights, Vanderbilt or Naz, two future 1st-round picks (one of them unprotected the other lottery protected) and a handful of future 2nd-round picks.

Now Turner is healthy and you are only going to offer that for him? Lol A few days ago you suggested a 3 way deal with the Sixers and you said a deal including Beasley, Naz a 1st round pick and a 2nd was fair. What has changed?

As I explained, that wasn't a deal I was proposing. It was just an example of a potential three-way with Indiana. Turner is apparently healthy, but he clearly has the durability issue hanging over him. That's why he's gettable for a reasonable price. It's been reported for at least a year that the Pacers would like to move Turner. I think my package would be a reasonable one for him. Remember that the Hawks reportedly offered Collins for Beasley and a future 1st-round pick, but Rosas declined. I think there's a Turner deal out there for Rosas if he want it and I don't think it would take much more than Beasley and a couple picks. Maybe it would require a lottery-protected first along with Beasley and a 2nd-rounder. But I don't see Turner commanding more than that.

So you wouldn't do Beasley and a lottery protected 1st and a 2nd rounder for Turner correct?

monsterpile wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

CoolBreeze44 wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:

Camden wrote:Harry Giles signed a one-year, non-guaranteed contract with the Clippers.

I just saw that. As Rosas keeps his remaining powder dry for a possible run at Simmons, other opportunities slip away. Not that Giles was a jewel the Wolves shouldn't have let slip through their fingers. But he remains an interesting, high-upside PF who I would have liked this Wolves to try out on a cheap non-guaranteed contract. Meanwhile, Hartenstein remains available, but I don't see the Wolves signing him as they continue to pursue Simmons. I can't get down on Rosas for passing on players like Giles and Hartenstein to preserve flexibility for a run at a player like Simmons. But there are opportunity costs associated with Gersson's Simmons gambit. At the end of the day, Rosas can't ensure he gets Simmons and he could end up overpaying to get him.

If I were in Gersson's position, I'd join the vast majority of NBA teams who are not pursuing Simmons. Instead, I'd turn my attention to shoring up the roster we have by signing Vanderbilt and J-Mac while also trading Layman for some more salary space and signing Hartenstein. Meanwhile, I'd explore possible deals for Myles Turner, who could probably be obtained for a fraction of what it would take to get Simmons. Myles is also a great defender and an elite rim protection, which is something we don't have on this team.

Hang in there Lip. We need Simmons first and foremost. These end of the roster guys really don't mean much in the grand scheme of things. Myles Turner excluded of course.

What's the chances a guy like Harry Giles becomes even a solid rotation player? 25%? I think there is a legit chance that the Wolves could get Simmons for a price Lip could be talked into reasonably easily. Lip you are obsessed with Turner I'm concerned you would overpay to get him here. :)

Lol. Good one, Monster. I know you think Myles Turner is permanently on crutches. :) Note, however, that Turner apparently did not opt for surgery on his toe. He said he's doing fine and back practicing on the court. So he remains my #1 obsession. Rosas could get my obsession for far less than it will cost to get his newest obsession. Simmons. My obsession is not only an elite defender, but an elite rim protector. He is a precise fit for the Wolves biggest need, i.e, a defensive PF. And he can hit threes and free throws. Is Simmons a better overall player and talent? Definitely. But give in the Wolves current core and the much smaller price we'd have to pay to get Turner, I'd pursue Turner more aggressively than Simmons. But that's just my obsession. :)

That's good news for Turner that he is healthy.

This is bad news for your obsession. :) I'm proud of you that you have admitted your problem as that is the first step. Q can help you with this as I believe he is in a better place now and hasn't received a restraining order from attempting to have contact with Jeff Adrian in over 2 years! Well done Q!

2 years and 23 days to be exact! I credit mindful meditation, a plant-based diet, and the threat of jail time and personal bankruptcy as the key factors to my recovery....Ok, yeah, it was mostly the last two.

monsterpile wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:Lip what is the most you are giving up for Turner and what is the most you would give up for Simmons?

Great question, Monster.

1. Most I'd give up for Turner: Beasley and two future 2nd-round picks

2. Most I'd give up for Simmons: DLO, Layman or Okogie, Bolmaro rights, Vanderbilt or Naz, two future 1st-round picks (one of them unprotected the other lottery protected) and a handful of future 2nd-round picks.

Now Turner is healthy and you are only going to offer that for him? Lol A few days ago you suggested a 3 way deal with the Sixers and you said a deal including Beasley, Naz a 1st round pick and a 2nd was fair. What has changed?

As I explained, that wasn't a deal I was proposing. It was just an example of a potential three-way with Indiana. Turner is apparently healthy, but he clearly has the durability issue hanging over him. That's why he's gettable for a reasonable price. It's been reported for at least a year that the Pacers would like to move Turner. I think my package would be a reasonable one for him. Remember that the Hawks reportedly offered Collins for Beasley and a future 1st-round pick, but Rosas declined. I think there's a Turner deal out there for Rosas if he want it and I don't think it would take much more than Beasley and a couple picks. Maybe it would require a lottery-protected first along with Beasley and a 2nd-rounder. But I don't see Turner commanding more than that.

So you wouldn't do Beasley and a lottery protected 1st and a 2nd rounder for Turner correct?

Probably not. But it would depend on what I learn about Tuner's health and on the years of the picks.

lipoli390 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:Lip what is the most you are giving up for Turner and what is the most you would give up for Simmons?

Great question, Monster.

1. Most I'd give up for Turner: Beasley and two future 2nd-round picks

2. Most I'd give up for Simmons: DLO, Layman or Okogie, Bolmaro rights, Vanderbilt or Naz, two future 1st-round picks (one of them unprotected the other lottery protected) and a handful of future 2nd-round picks.

Now Turner is healthy and you are only going to offer that for him? Lol A few days ago you suggested a 3 way deal with the Sixers and you said a deal including Beasley, Naz a 1st round pick and a 2nd was fair. What has changed?

As I explained, that wasn't a deal I was proposing. It was just an example of a potential three-way with Indiana. Turner is apparently healthy, but he clearly has the durability issue hanging over him. That's why he's gettable for a reasonable price. It's been reported for at least a year that the Pacers would like to move Turner. I think my package would be a reasonable one for him. Remember that the Hawks reportedly offered Collins for Beasley and a future 1st-round pick, but Rosas declined. I think there's a Turner deal out there for Rosas if he want it and I don't think it would take much more than Beasley and a couple picks. Maybe it would require a lottery-protected first along with Beasley and a 2nd-rounder. But I don't see Turner commanding more than that.

So you wouldn't do Beasley and a lottery protected 1st and a 2nd rounder for Turner correct?

Probably not. But it would depend on what I learn about Tuner's health and on the years of the picks.

So you are on the fence about giving up 2 legit assets for Turner? Same here. I believe before (weeks ago) I was on the fence about dealing Beasley straight up for Turner. I think now I would probably do it if Turner is actually healthy and ready to go. That is a pretty significant development. So Beasley and the 2nds yeah I would be willing to do that based on the info I have right now. I think that would probably be a reasonable gamble because as high as both of us are on Beasley's value to me he still isn't actually proven as a legit contributor to an even average team. I like the chances of that but still nothing is a sure thing but I think there is a little reason for doubt there. I've started to feel that way a little more about moving him for value than I did previously. I'm not wanting to trade him but if we can get value for him then I'm more open than I was before.

The question is though Lip what is the actual market for Turner? This we can speculate discuss and make our case (Which I think we have done) but we really don't know. What if it is Beasley a 1st and those 2nds? The other question is what will Simmons final price be? I'm pretty sure you would be willing to give up at least 1 more first round pick for Simmons than Turner and consider that a heck of a deal (I suppose unless the actual Turner price was completely outrageous! Lol).

There is a lot of Nuances in comparing these 2 possible trade targets. I think you believe we can get Turner for a lower price than I think it would take. I think you worry that Simmons will cost more than it's worth. For the record I do too because I do have reservations about Simmons although I would love to deal for him and give up legit valuable assets to do so. I think one of the reasons Rosas has seemed to look more toward a Simmons deal is what you and Cam have been saying...Morey and the Sixers have lost leverage and so Simmons can likely be had for less than he is worth. If we can get Simmons for a reasonable price I think that's preferable to what I think it would cost to get Turner. To be fair until one of these guys is moved we won't know what the value of each player is and with Turner he may never be moved or it may be later and then we won't know if that's what his value compared to a Simmons deal would actually be.

Also to clarify I honestly can't put my finger on what It would take to actually acquire Simmons. The variance in what to expect seems pretty high. Part of that is me not getting my hopes up for the possibility while also not wanting to part with something I value for him like McDaniels. I think it's possible Simmons goes for something like the package we got for Butler. I don't expect that type of deal but I do think it's possible. I could also see the return being pretty strong too. We are just going to have to wait and see but until then post on here together to support each other through this time. :)