Minnesota Sports Forum

One of the other threads I was debating with others our ability to keep all three of our 20 year core guys: Towns, Wiggins, LaVine. I don't want to turn this thread into a continuation of that debate. Rather, I'm curious if we really did have to pick two of the three - which combo would the board keep?

Towns and Wiggins, it's not even close for me.

I went Towns LaVine. But I'm completely on the fence in reality. It's sort of why I posed the question. I'm very curious to read what other have to say.

Anthony, why do you think we'll only be able to keep 2?

I have to ask this question before answering: Is this with both LaVine and Wiggins hitting their hypothesized ceilings? If so, I'll take LaVine.

Probably could have just made this a LaVine vs Wiggins thread, by the way. Towns is a no-brainer for everyone with a functioning brain. I couldn't imagine someone leaving Towns off their list.

BizarroJerry wrote:Anthony, why do you think we'll only be able to keep 2?

I don't. But other do - so I thought I'd pose it as a "what if" poll.

Right now, at this point I'd go with Towns and Wiggins, but I believe there could come a day when it changes to Towns and Lavine. I think it's laughable that a Wiggins and Lavine option was even made available!

:thumb:

Carlos Danger wrote:

BizarroJerry wrote:Anthony, why do you think we'll only be able to keep 2?

I don't. But other do - so I thought I'd pose it as a "what if" poll.

I'm wondering who said that we couldn't keep all three. Maybe I missed that somewhere. I think what was said was that it would be extremely difficult to keep all four of Towns, Wiggins, LaVine and Ingram (Simmons).

Camden wrote:I have to ask this question before answering: Is this with both LaVine and Wiggins hitting their hypothesized ceilings? If so, I'll take LaVine.

Probably could have just made this a LaVine vs Wiggins thread, by the way. Towns is a no-brainer for everyone with a functioning brain. I couldn't imagine someone leaving Towns off their list.

You have to make that decision based on the information we all have now. That's the scenario some state we might be faced with when their rookie deals are up.

As far as Towns being a "no-brainer" - I'll let everyone else decide. He's certainly been good. But some have alluded to him being too weak and getting pushed around inside. Even you have advocated bringing in Boogie to take over Center. Maybe someone might think Towns could be traded for something that meets the board's Jeff Adrien threshold for "big body". IDK - everyone can answer for themselves..

Carlos Danger wrote:

Camden wrote:I have to ask this question before answering: Is this with both LaVine and Wiggins hitting their hypothesized ceilings? If so, I'll take LaVine.

Probably could have just made this a LaVine vs Wiggins thread, by the way. Towns is a no-brainer for everyone with a functioning brain. I couldn't imagine someone leaving Towns off their list.

You have to make that decision based on the information we all have now. That's the scenario some state we might be faced with when their rookie deals are up.

As far as Towns being a "no-brainer" - I'll let everyone else decide. He's certainly been good. But some have alluded to him being too weak and getting pushed around inside. Even you have advocated bringing in Boogie to take over Center. Maybe someone might think Towns could be traded for something that meets the board's Jeff Adrien threshold for "big body". IDK - everyone can answer for themselves..

Who said that?? I can't remember anyone saying that.

And I advocated bringing in Cousins because he's the best center in basketball and would make the Wolves an instant contender in my view, not because Towns isn't already a stud. Don't get that twisted. And if it does turn out that Towns should be moved to power forward for some reason (I doubt it), he'd still be a star player there. I highly doubt anyone isn't drinking all of the Towns kool-aid.