Minnesota Sports Forum

Camden wrote:

bleedspeed177 wrote:Cam, If the Kings offered Stauskas for LaVine today would you make the trade?

I would, and I know that may get scoffed at on this board. I still think Stauskas could be a heck of a player, and at worst he's a floor spacer who understands the game. Now, I do like LaVine and his potential, but I think he's a bigger gamble.

I am kind of with you. I also like the idea of him playing with Wiggins on the national team. I wonder if there is anyway we could get him without giving up LaVine. I wonder if they would do KMart for him.

There are really so few good potential trades out there for our club. We need to buy low or find desperate situations. Could be a buy low time on Larry Sanders. How about Pek for Sanders straight up? Either player is a high risk commodity.

thedoper wrote:There are really so few good potential trades out there for our club. We need to buy low or find desperate situations. Could be a buy low time on Larry Sanders. How about Pek for Sanders straight up? Either player is a high risk commodity.

Sanders seems like a cancer. Not sure he would be worth it.

LaVine for Stauskas is utter stupidty.

Now I would certainly entertain Bennett for Stauskas...

bleedspeed177 wrote:

thedoper wrote:There are really so few good potential trades out there for our club. We need to buy low or find desperate situations. Could be a buy low time on Larry Sanders. How about Pek for Sanders straight up? Either player is a high risk commodity.

Sanders seems like a cancer. Not sure he would be worth it.

Totally could be. But either him or Pek is doing nothing for their respective squads at present. I see Pek's situation as very problematic for us as well. My point is that there really isn't much we can do other than taking a flyer on yet another high risk player.

According to Doogie, the first answer to this question is settled...it's Adrien. I understand the appreciation for his play, but let's face it...the guy couldn't shoot, from the field or from the line. And he was being asked to guard guys much bigger than him. If Doogie is correct about his release, they must have finalized a deal with Raduljica. I don't know much about him, but being able to play a guy with his size when Gorgui needs a break has to be good for this team.

Rumor has it that Sanders doesn't even want to play basketball anymore. Pair that with his mindless behavior at a night club last year and I'll stay far, far away from having that guy on my team.

Hate to see Adrien go. I'm not a fan of that move, but clearly Flip wants more length on the team. There's no other reason for this. I will miss Adrien's nastiness on the court, more specifically, in the paint. Thought he played well enough to stay throughout this year and maybe go into next year as a our backup PF, but oh well. Good luck to him.

Tim, why is LaVine for Stauskas "utter stupidity"? Neither of them have been that great this year so to act like LaVine is so much better is a homeristic view from you.

I'd entertain a trade of Bennett for a new set of bath towels.

longstrangetrip wrote:According to Doogie, the first answer to this question is settled...it's Adrien. I understand the appreciation for his play, but let's face it...the guy couldn't shoot, from the field or from the line. And he was being asked to guard guys much bigger than him. If Doogie is correct about his release, they must have finalized a deal with Raduljica. I don't know much about him, but being able to play a guy with his size when Gorgui needs a break has to be good for this team.

(not if he plays power forward.....)

So, on one hand, me not wanting to trade a 19 year-old kid with loads of athleticism AND some basketball skills for a guy who played two years in college, is not particularly athletic, and is flaming out worse than Bennett did in his first year is homeristic, but trading Bennett for a new set of bath towels is common sense?

Need I say more?

Unlike Stauskas, LaVine has show some good stuff this year. But he isn't ready to be a starting NBA PG, especially when PG will likely not be his natural position.

Stauskas is a 3 point specialist at best moving forward. He's simply not athletic enough to be a good defender against 2's and he is struggling mightily with the speed of the NBA game. Lavine has starter potential because he has the size (minus the weight he needs to add) and athleticism to be a 2 in this league on both sides of the floor. He has a good looking jump shot and he would probably have better percentages if he would take the first open look instead of letting the defender recover and then put up a contested look off the dribble. He has a good handle and looks like he could possess the skills to be an effective secondary ball handler as opposed to primary which he is being forced to do now. I don't see why trading for an older player with less potential is the right move going forward when they are both playing around the same level. You take the uber athletic 19 year old playing on a similar level 10/10 times on a rebuilding team. What does Stauskas project to be better than Lavine at? Shooting is the only thing I can think of and I would take Lavine in every other basketball category. How is that a smart deal for a team looking for starters or better level of players? We can pay Troy Daniels next to nothing to hit 3's at a good clip. I don't see what some of you see in Stauskas. He came in with more experience and a body supposedly beefed up to handle the NBA competition better and he has been overmatched. The shooting will get there, but what else can you honestly expect to get there given his athletic ceiling? I'm not giving up on Stauskas as a player. I just can't see how he is going to turn out to be a better player than Lavine given how big of a physical advantage Lavine has on him and we can't afford to lose a trade like that if Lavine turns into a starting level player in 3-4 years.