Rubio Plays Squash (the trade rumors)

[mrhockey89]

So....The veteran leader of the Wolves...the current best player..our PG who is a top rebounder/assist/steals/intensity at his position in the league, whose on/off court numbers clearly state his value...you think we should shop him because he is a poor shooter, even though he takes less than 10 shots a game and makes everyone around him better. He's literally 1 made shot away per game from being considered a solid shooter for his position. I find it hard to believe people can't wrap their heads around the idea that he can make that up in other areas of his game. I think the fact that there's a lot of elite level point guards doesn't make Rubio more expendable, but rather more valuable...because you need a PG in this day and age..and we saw what happens when you've got JJ/Flynn/etc running the show as your starter...all the sudden it doesn't feel like PGs are plentiful.

Is he worth trading for the rights to draft Russell? Some think it's a no brainer, and I'd be tempted, because I think Russell has considerable upside and I really see him becoming very good in the NBA, but it's certainly not a slam dunk, and it'd set out team back further rather than powering our team forward, at least in the short term. We all saw what happens with the Baby Bulls..and that's basically what we'd be putting together. It'd be a consideration, but it's still giving up a known GOOD player for an guy who could be a star, or could be a bust...and even if he's a star, he still might be the 7th best PG in the NBA...so is it worth the gamble to move up 5 slots at PG in 4 years? I'm not sure.

[Monster]

Here is the thing for me. If you can't make your team better with the assets the Wolves have without giving up guys on the team that are young and showed some actual on court production lets just fold this franchise now. The Cavs just went up 2-1 in the Finals starting 2 undrafted players. Sure they are playing with Lebron and so on and so forth but let's build this team like the truly good teams by getting some players that aren't top picks. Flip has done just enough to give me some faith he might be able to get some of the right guys. We have Wiggins and another #1 overall pick plus some other good talent. Trade up to get a 1st rounder get the right guy and take a big step forward. I know I am asking a lot but if we want to be good we need to nail some of these lower picks even if it's just for a solid rotation player. Imagine if our 2nd player drafted turned out to be as good as Nick Collison and we kept him around like OKC franchise has. That's a pretty important player. We have Wiggins we have another #1 overall pick we should be able to hit on some other guys to add to the talent we already have.

[SameOldNudityDrew]

A couple thoughts.

1. I love Rubio, especially his passion. We need that on our team. But he's clearly not the star a lot of people here thought he would be. He does make other players better, but his glaring weakness also limits our flexibility in building around him (we NEED guys who can shoot the 3 on the wings, and it's not clear that Wiggins, LaVine, or Bazz can do that). Plus defenses just sag on him and it clogs everything up for our offense. He gets guys open shots with his passes, but it's offset by the fact that makes life tougher for everybody offensively with his terrible shooting. I agree with those who worry about us trading vets and getting younger and then becoming the Sixers or the Baby Bulls. I do think we need to keep some veteran leadership on the team. But in the long run, I'm actually open to trading him in the right situation. I just don't think he's that good, and his injuries worry me. Even when he was healthy, it felt like we were overmatched at PG pretty regularly.

BUT

2. This is the time of year when the value of draft picks is most overrated and the value of veterans is most underrated. That means we wouldn't get good value for him in trading him for a pick, and that should make us wary of trading Rubio for any picks.

3. Rubio's trade value is very low right now given his injuries. Nobody is going to trade a relatively decent pick for him, especially now that his big contract is kicking in. There is no way you're going to get Russell and probably not even Mudiay for Rubio.

4. LaVine was really terrible at the pg spot. We saw what happened last year with that. If we traded Rubio and got a young PG, we'd probably still have to rely on LaVine at the point, and that is no good.

So especially because of points 2 and 3, I just don't think trading Rubio at this time makes much sense. But down the line, I'd be open to it. I love the guy, but I don't see him as an untradeable player by any means.

[Q12543 [enjin:6621299]]

We should be open to trading nearly anyone for the right deal, including Rubio. That "right deal" simply isn't going to happen this offseason unless Minnesota is willing to trade him for 50-cents on the dollar.

He's an elite role-playing PG. Most contending teams have elite role players in the starting lineup: Jason Kidd with Dallas; Ben Wallace with Detroit; Derek Fisher with the Lakers; Dennis Rodman with the Bulls.

There is absolutely no reason he can't quarterback a team to contending status. He definitely needs a couple of high-usage scorers as wingmen, but I think some of the guys we've got have that potential.

[Monster]

We should be open to trading nearly anyone for the right deal, including Rubio. That "right deal" simply isn't going to happen this offseason unless Minnesota is willing to trade him for 50-cents on the dollar.

He's an elite role-playing PG. Most contending teams have elite role players in the starting lineup: Jason Kidd with Dallas; Ben Wallace with Detroit; Derek Fisher with the Lakers; Dennis Rodman with the Bulls.

There is absolutely no reason he can't quarterback a team to contending status. He definitely needs a couple of high-usage scorers as wingmen, but I think some of the guys we've got have that potential.

Good point Q. I'll add a name to your list. Delly he isn't quite Fish yet but damn he has been good. Rubio plays with some of that same grit different strengths as a player (different salaries too) but I'd go to war on the court with Rubio. Let's just hope he can get and stay healthy. I just don't see us moving him right now.

Having said all that in the never say never catagory MAYBE the Kings step up with an offer because of how the draft falls for them and someone is there the Wolves like. That's the ONLY thing that seems remotely likely and that's because there is word Kings are wanting to take the next step and I think Karl really likes Rubio a lot. Both teams would have to include more than just Rubio for #6 to make it work both salary wise and basketball wise.

[alexftbl8181 [enjin:6648741]]

Why would someone give up a high pick for Rubio, when Lawson is clearly on the block and a much better player then Rubio? Or hell, even sign Rondo, you could probably get on him on the same deal, and you don't have to give up a pick. They are pretty much the same player at this point

[alexftbl8181 [enjin:6648741]]

So....The veteran leader of the Wolves...the current best player..our PG who is a top rebounder/assist/steals/intensity at his position in the league, whose on/off court numbers clearly state his value...you think we should shop him because he is a poor shooter, even though he takes less than 10 shots a game and makes everyone around him better. He's literally 1 made shot away per game from being considered a solid shooter for his position. I find it hard to believe people can't wrap their heads around the idea that he can make that up in other areas of his game. I think the fact that there's a lot of elite level point guards doesn't make Rubio more expendable, but rather more valuable...because you need a PG in this day and age..and we saw what happens when you've got JJ/Flynn/etc running the show as your starter...all the sudden it doesn't feel like PGs are plentiful.

Is he worth trading for the rights to draft Russell? Some think it's a no brainer, and I'd be tempted, because I think Russell has considerable upside and I really see him becoming very good in the NBA, but it's certainly not a slam dunk, and it'd set out team back further rather than powering our team forward, at least in the short term. We all saw what happens with the Baby Bulls..and that's basically what we'd be putting together. It'd be a consideration, but it's still giving up a known GOOD player for an guy who could be a star, or could be a bust...and even if he's a star, he still might be the 7th best PG in the NBA...so is it worth the gamble to move up 5 slots at PG in 4 years? I'm not sure.

That's the dumbest statement in a while. Watch the games man

[longstrangetrip [enjin:6600564]]

So....The veteran leader of the Wolves...the current best player..our PG who is a top rebounder/assist/steals/intensity at his position in the league, whose on/off court numbers clearly state his value...you think we should shop him because he is a poor shooter, even though he takes less than 10 shots a game and makes everyone around him better. He's literally 1 made shot away per game from being considered a solid shooter for his position. I find it hard to believe people can't wrap their heads around the idea that he can make that up in other areas of his game. I think the fact that there's a lot of elite level point guards doesn't make Rubio more expendable, but rather more valuable...because you need a PG in this day and age..and we saw what happens when you've got JJ/Flynn/etc running the show as your starter...all the sudden it doesn't feel like PGs are plentiful.

Is he worth trading for the rights to draft Russell? Some think it's a no brainer, and I'd be tempted, because I think Russell has considerable upside and I really see him becoming very good in the NBA, but it's certainly not a slam dunk, and it'd set out team back further rather than powering our team forward, at least in the short term. We all saw what happens with the Baby Bulls..and that's basically what we'd be putting together. It'd be a consideration, but it's still giving up a known GOOD player for an guy who could be a star, or could be a bust...and even if he's a star, he still might be the 7th best PG in the NBA...so is it worth the gamble to move up 5 slots at PG in 4 years? I'm not sure.

That's the dumbest statement in a while. Watch the games man

I'm not exactly sure why hockey's statement is dumb. Rubio made 3.5 out of 10 shots per game last year for a poor 35%. Hockey said that if he made just one more shot per game, he would be considered a solid shooter, and I don't think that contention can be questioned. One more make per game would put Ricky at a very respectable 45%, and combined with his superb passing, rebounding and defensive skills, would make him an elite PG.

[AbeVigodaLive]

So....The veteran leader of the Wolves...the current best player..our PG who is a top rebounder/assist/steals/intensity at his position in the league, whose on/off court numbers clearly state his value...you think we should shop him because he is a poor shooter, even though he takes less than 10 shots a game and makes everyone around him better. He's literally 1 made shot away per game from being considered a solid shooter for his position. I find it hard to believe people can't wrap their heads around the idea that he can make that up in other areas of his game. I think the fact that there's a lot of elite level point guards doesn't make Rubio more expendable, but rather more valuable...because you need a PG in this day and age..and we saw what happens when you've got JJ/Flynn/etc running the show as your starter...all the sudden it doesn't feel like PGs are plentiful.

Is he worth trading for the rights to draft Russell? Some think it's a no brainer, and I'd be tempted, because I think Russell has considerable upside and I really see him becoming very good in the NBA, but it's certainly not a slam dunk, and it'd set out team back further rather than powering our team forward, at least in the short term. We all saw what happens with the Baby Bulls..and that's basically what we'd be putting together. It'd be a consideration, but it's still giving up a known GOOD player for an guy who could be a star, or could be a bust...and even if he's a star, he still might be the 7th best PG in the NBA...so is it worth the gamble to move up 5 slots at PG in 4 years? I'm not sure.

That's the dumbest statement in a while. Watch the games man

I'm not exactly sure why hockey's statement is dumb. Rubio made 3.5 out of 10 shots per game last year for a poor 35%. Hockey said that if he made just one more shot per game, he would be considered a solid shooter, and I don't think that contention can be questioned. One more make per game would put Ricky at a very respectable 45%, and combined with his superb passing, rebounding and defensive skills, would make him an elite PG.

It's a very simplistic take.

[Q12543 [enjin:6621299]]

Why would someone give up a high pick for Rubio, when Lawson is clearly on the block and a much better player then Rubio? Or hell, even sign Rondo, you could probably get on him on the same deal, and you don't have to give up a pick. They are pretty much the same player at this point

Uh, no. Rubio is the much better defender and rebounder and Lawson is the much better shooter/scorer. I'd put them in the same tier of PGs in terms of overall effectiveness, so I don't see Lawson as being "much better".