Author Topic: Minnesota Perspective: Maybe the Garnett Trade Wasn't So Bad  (Read 5491 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline gc1530

  • The Green Kornet
  • Posts: 91
  • Tommy Points: 12
Let me preface this by saying that Kevin Garnett is a far better basketball player than Pau Gasol and Jermaine O'Neal will ever be.

However, after seeing what teams like the Grizzlies and Pacers were able to acquire for their star big men, it's tough to say that the Timberwolves didn't make the best deal.

It was obvious that they weren't going to do anything with Garnett around, and they were able to acquire a young star in Al Jefferson, a serviceable player in Ryan Gomes, and some cap relief through the expiring contract of Theo Ratliff.

In my opinion, this package far exceeds one based on Marc Gasol or T.J. Ford and a draft pick.

Re: Minnesota Perspective: Maybe the Garnett Trade Wasn't So Bad
« Reply #1 on: June 26, 2008, 09:53:51 AM »

Offline Bankshot

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7540
  • Tommy Points: 632
The reason Minnesota got much more for Garnett than Indiana and Memphis got for O'Neal and Gasol is simple.  Garnett is a much better play than those two, so of course he's worth much more.
"If somebody would have told you when he was playing with the Knicks that Nate Robinson was going to change a big time game and he was going to do it mostly because of his defense, somebody would have got slapped."  Mark Jackson

Re: Minnesota Perspective: Maybe the Garnett Trade Wasn't So Bad
« Reply #2 on: June 26, 2008, 09:57:33 AM »

Offline CelticsWhat35

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2904
  • Tommy Points: 353
Let me preface this by saying that Kevin Garnett is a far better basketball player than Pau Gasol and Jermaine O'Neal will ever be.

However, after seeing what teams like the Grizzlies and Pacers were able to acquire for their star big men, it's tough to say that the Timberwolves didn't make the best deal.

It was obvious that they weren't going to do anything with Garnett around, and they were able to acquire a young star in Al Jefferson, a serviceable player in Ryan Gomes, and some cap relief through the expiring contract of Theo Ratliff.

In my opinion, this package far exceeds one based on Marc Gasol or T.J. Ford and a draft pick.

The national media doesn't want to hear any of that.  They'll just continue with their talk that the only reason the Celtics won the title is because Danny Ainge and Kevin McHale are friends.  Pay no attention to the best young low post offensive player in the game.   ::)

Re: Minnesota Perspective: Maybe the Garnett Trade Wasn't So Bad
« Reply #3 on: June 26, 2008, 09:57:37 AM »

Offline wdleehi

  • In The Rafters
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 34023
  • Tommy Points: 1607
  • Basketball is Newtonian Physics
They alway got a good return.


A young 20-10 guy.  Huge cap relief.  2 draft picks.  A solid young role player.  And two prospects that did not work out.



What more does a team expect when trading a 30+ star that has asked to be traded that can opt out within a year?



Re: Minnesota Perspective: Maybe the Garnett Trade Wasn't So Bad
« Reply #4 on: June 26, 2008, 10:04:07 AM »

Online Who

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 47135
  • Tommy Points: 2401
I thought the Odom/Bynum package was better but I can understand McHale passing and running with Al instead. I didn't have large amounts of confidence in Bynum either.

It was a good deal for the T'Wolves. They weren't going to do much better anywhere else.

Al Jefferson will be a great piece for years to come. Now they have to get rid of Gomes. Already gotten rid of Green. Telfair is a fine backup PG. The C's draft pick doesn't have much value (some, not much) but getting back their own pick is good for them. They're all pretty much irrelevant though because none of them are changing the fortunes of their teams and they're all very very very easy to replace. Al Jefferson is the only one that truly matters and he's better and more proven (fair knock on Bynum at the time) than anyone they could have gotten.

Re: Minnesota Perspective: Maybe the Garnett Trade Wasn't So Bad
« Reply #5 on: June 26, 2008, 10:16:27 AM »

Offline NextCeltic34

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1792
  • Tommy Points: 107
It was a no brainer for Minnesota to trade with us. We had EVERYTHING they were looking for:

1. Young Talent
2. Cap Relief
3. THEIR PICK

I truly believe us having their 1st from the Wally-Ricky deal played a considerable part. McHale knew if he traded Garnett, the team would be in rebuilding mode and he needed a good 1st. Imagine if he traded Garnett somewhere else and had no good 1st to show for it.

Re: Minnesota Perspective: Maybe the Garnett Trade Wasn't So Bad
« Reply #6 on: June 26, 2008, 10:19:57 AM »

Online Who

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 47135
  • Tommy Points: 2401
Theo didn't matter any long term. He turned into Al Jefferson's contract extension. He's irrelevant too.

Re: Minnesota Perspective: Maybe the Garnett Trade Wasn't So Bad
« Reply #7 on: June 26, 2008, 10:20:13 AM »

Offline bf17290

  • Payton Pritchard
  • Posts: 100
  • Tommy Points: 2
Bynum was always off limits.

Re: Minnesota Perspective: Maybe the Garnett Trade Wasn't So Bad
« Reply #8 on: June 26, 2008, 10:20:19 AM »

Offline Chief

  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21216
  • Tommy Points: 2450
In about 5 years, it won't look bad at all. AL will be a top 2 PF still under 30 years old and Garnett will be near the end. And you never know about those picks. Garnett or Paul could get hurt one year and Ray could turn back into his Cleveland series self. Minny could easily have a lottery pick if that happens. Let's just knock on wood now.

Once you are labeled 'the best' you want to stay up there, and you can't do it by loafing around.
 
Larry Bird

Re: Minnesota Perspective: Maybe the Garnett Trade Wasn't So Bad
« Reply #9 on: June 26, 2008, 11:28:36 AM »

Offline zerophase

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2394
  • Tommy Points: 334
  • Anything's Possible
i think that minne got a great deal out of it. it was single handedly the most a team has ever give up for 1 player... there really wasn't much else they could ask for. hell, if kobe were traded, i doubt they would get the same value.

Become Legendary.

Re: Minnesota Perspective: Maybe the Garnett Trade Wasn't So Bad
« Reply #10 on: June 26, 2008, 11:32:38 AM »

Offline libermaniac

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2835
  • Tommy Points: 375
One other factor in the deal that nobody talks about is that Minny is drafting 3rd this year (OJ Mayo or Beasley).  If they had kept KG, they would likely be drafting around 10 or so (assuming they didn't strike it rich with worse odds).  That HAD to play into McHale's thinking, and must be factored into the deal.

Who would you rather have for the long term:  Big Al and OJ Mayo (plus Gomes, Telfair, et al) or KG and Danilo Gallinari (or whoever goes at 10)?

Re: Minnesota Perspective: Maybe the Garnett Trade Wasn't So Bad
« Reply #11 on: June 26, 2008, 11:53:06 AM »

Offline jgod213

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2258
  • Tommy Points: 300
Let me preface this by saying that Kevin Garnett is a far better basketball player than Pau Gasol and Jermaine O'Neal will ever be.

However, after seeing what teams like the Grizzlies and Pacers were able to acquire for their star big men, it's tough to say that the Timberwolves didn't make the best deal.

It was obvious that they weren't going to do anything with Garnett around, and they were able to acquire a young star in Al Jefferson, a serviceable player in Ryan Gomes, and some cap relief through the expiring contract of Theo Ratliff.

In my opinion, this package far exceeds one based on Marc Gasol or T.J. Ford and a draft pick.

AHA! no wonder the Lakers got nothing out of Pau Gasol in the Finals, they accidentally aquired his younger brother instead!

DKC Utah Jazz
http://tinyurl.com/kqjb3cv

Starters:   Bledsoe-Gordon-Hayward-Patterson-Favors  | 6th-Kanter
Reserves: Warren-Hardaway-Plumlee-Larkin-Evans-Mbakwe-Huestis-Hummel-Calathes

Re: Minnesota Perspective: Maybe the Garnett Trade Wasn't So Bad
« Reply #12 on: June 26, 2008, 11:57:53 AM »

Offline Robb

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1560
  • Tommy Points: 128
They alway got a good return.


A young 20-10 guy.  Huge cap relief.  2 draft picks.  A solid young role player.  And two prospects that did not work out.


What more does a team expect when trading a 30+ star that has asked to be traded that can opt out within a year?

A top five draft pick if they would have pulled the trigger earlier.  Heh Heh.

I think the reason the Wolves got the best deal because they were trading the best player.  Neither Pau nor Jermaine O'Neal have won or will win any MVPs.
We're the ones we've been waiting for.

Re: Minnesota Perspective: Maybe the Garnett Trade Wasn't So Bad
« Reply #13 on: June 26, 2008, 02:16:26 PM »

Offline paintitgreen

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1104
  • Tommy Points: 154
Agreed. JO is a huge injury risk, Gasol hadn't proven a ton. KG had proven more than the other two combined.
Go Celtics.

Re: Minnesota Perspective: Maybe the Garnett Trade Wasn't So Bad
« Reply #14 on: June 26, 2008, 02:41:07 PM »

Offline fmf2

  • Oshae Brissett
  • Posts: 68
  • Tommy Points: 11
I totally agree. I read an article recently...(can't remember who wrote it) which stated that the Lakers made a better offer for KG than the C's. However, Odom just proved that he is an overpaid choke artist, and I would still rather have Big Al than Bynum. So, that #3 pick, Gomes, Telfair, and cap space definitely prove that Minnesota did better than The Grizzlies or the Pacers did in terms of getting fair value for what they sent.

Although, one could also argue that Gasol was not such a bargain, since he was so soft in the finals. I doubt he'll ever develop the intensity required of a champion. Like Parcells once said, "if they don't bite when they're puppies..."