Minnesota Sports Forum

TheSP wrote:Anybody else Getting cravings for a butter burger and some custard?

lipoli390 wrote:

kekgeek1 wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:

sjm34 wrote:Seems like Rosas did trade up for Garland, but criticizing him for making the move without knowing where Garland would go is a little silly. If he knew he would drop to six, would phoenix have traded the pick to us???

While I don't believe that he wanted Culver (based on rumors that we were trying to trade back after Garland was off teh board), I have no problem with the pick. While he may be as quck or athletic as some, they say he does everything well and has a feel for the game with good footwork, and great hesitation moves. Hesitation moves are what made Brandon Roy great. That's how you get to the line (Harden)

What is silly is giving up a valuable asset to get someone without knowing for sure that you'll get him. The Suns must have concluded that the Cavs would take Garland and keep him, which as you suggested helps explain why the Suns did the deal to move down to #11. That the Suns were smart enough to know they wouldn't get Garland at #6 makes Rosas look especially silly trading up to get him. Of course, maybe the Suns had no interest in Garland. But that still doesn't change the fact that the Rosas traded up for a guy without knowing he could get him. Again, I get it if Rosas was convinced that Culver was a much better prospect than anyone he could have taken at #11. We'll see.

Lip can I ask you what value you think Saric has around the league. He doesn't have a big contract so its hard to acquire a better/bigger contract because you need to add multiple pieces to the trade. Saric is about to get paid in RFA for being a fringe NBA starter, and in my opinion his value is lower to other teams knowing they will have to pay him next year.

Now if Rosas really believed that after Culver there is a drop off and that there was a chance to get his best player available Garlund I don't blame Rosas for taking the risk.

Now if he legit had Culver a tier below Garlund and that he had Culver in a tier with guys who might be available at 11 then we have a problem but I legit don't believe that. The draft express guys had Culver there 3rd best prospect ahead of Barrett and Kevin O'Conner had him also 3rd ahead of Morant (Now these draft guys can totally be wrong but Its not like other guys didn't have Culver high)

As I said in my response to SJM, it's hard to now what Saric's value was around the League on draft night, but he obviously had enough value to move the Wolves up 5 spots in the draft. He's young, a true stretch 4 with a career 3-point percentage of around 37% and has a very team-friendly salary. He's a good rebounder and plays hard. By all accounts he's a terrific teammate and he has playoff experience. I'd say he had pretty good trade value.

60WinTim wrote:Now that the Wolves can talk about Culver...

Did anyone see Rosas refer to Culver as a "foundational piece"? They certainly seem high on him.

And technically the trade is now one year of Saric at 3+ mil for three years of Layman at 3+ mil to move from #11 to #6 to draft Culver.

60WinTim wrote:Now that the Wolves can talk about Culver...

Did anyone see Rosas refer to Culver as a "foundational piece"? They certainly seem high on him.

And technically the trade is now one year of Saric at 3+ mil for three years of Layman at 3+ mil to move from #11 to #6 to draft Culver.

Tactical unit wrote:

60WinTim wrote:Now that the Wolves can talk about Culver...

Did anyone see Rosas refer to Culver as a "foundational piece"? They certainly seem high on him.

And technically the trade is now one year of Saric at 3+ mil for three years of Layman at 3+ mil to move from #11 to #6 to draft Culver.

We also gave up some euro stash in that Layman deal.

lipoli390 wrote:Has anyone heard whether Culver will play today or tomorrow with the Summer League team?

lipoli390 wrote:Has anyone heard whether Culver will play today or tomorrow with the Summer League team?