Arco Arena
Bench
Yeah well you trade ANYONE on our team for KG and I'd be for the most part happy.
striker said:Why would the T Wolves do this trade?
Sptsjunkie said:I agree with the general sentiment here that the Wolves would get better offers for KG and probably won't do this trade.
However, I was thinking, if this was a real rumor (even if it doesn't go through), why would the T-Wolves consider this trade?
I think the reason lies with Kevin Mchale and not the Wolves best interest. The Wolves have gotten steadily worse and realistically, Mchale does not have a lot of job security. If they continue to underperform, Mchale could easily be out of a job in the next year or two. So while we are all debating what is in the T-Wolves best long-term interest, Mchale might not feel he has that kind of time.
Dealing Garnett for some young talent and picks (like they could with the Bulls) would mean that the Wolves would likely be rebuilding for another 2-4 years. At which time, Mchale might have made a nice core for another VP/GM. If Mchale wants to make the playoffs this year to save his job, he personally might value obtaining several talented veterans, like Miller and Bonzi, to complement their young players like Banks (assuming they would retain him).
kingsfan916 said:yes i can see it...... Starting at forward or center #21 KEVVVVVVVVVVVVINNNN GARNETTTTTTTTTTTT!
Warhawk said:He'd get punished physically at center, wouldn't he? He should stay at forward, unless a serious case of smallball broke out on the floor.
Warhawk said:He'd get punished physically at center, wouldn't he? He should stay at forward, unless a serious case of smallball broke out on the floor.
kingsfan916 said:yes i can see it...... Starting at forward or center #21 KEVVVVVVVVVVVVINNNN GARNETTTTTTTTTTTT!
nbrans said:Another possibility is that KG quietly gave a list of teams to the Wolves and said, "Get it done before I pull a Vince Carter."
hammystyle said:Hard to believe one of those teams isn't the Bulls. Isn't he from Chicago? I guess it's possible that Chicago just isn't interested, and prefers to build around their current core.
ah this is sacramento so you know wat that means...........................injured.......captain bill said:that team is frighteningly good. actually looks like a better version of the spurs (minus the ridiculous bench)
i'd do any KG trade in a second, but losing bonzi AND the 19 really hurts- our depth evaporates in a second after that trade. i don't think that team is an instant contender, but will need a year or two to add enough depth to truly contend. and of course, having garnett=instantly "windowized."
then again, the pistons won without depth, why cant we?
hammystyle said:Hard to believe one of those teams isn't the Bulls. Isn't he from Chicago? I guess it's possible that Chicago just isn't interested, and prefers to build around their current core.
nbrans said:Unless it's more important to him that he contend than play in Chicago. You add Garnett to their current lineup and even if they're promising I don't know that it adds up to a contender.
If we have to give up b52, let's do it in a heartbeat.sauce-26 said:Maybe we can have a 3 team deal where we keep bibby and bonzi, but to get kg we have to give up b52.
sauce-26 said:Maybe we can have a 3 team deal where we keep bibby and bonzi, but to get kg we have to give up b52.
Venom said:KG + Artest= COMBUSTION
I think it is pretty well documented that Artest does not like sharing the leadership mantle. How much difference is their between O'Neal and KG? How did the supersweet combo of O'Neal and Artest work out? Come to think of it, there is a big difference between JO and KG; KG is even more of a screamer and a grandstander. I think that would mesh well with Artest's approach.![]()
But, I've said this all before, and you guys have ripped me before. Looks like we'll finally get to see who's right. My prediction: this looks like the deal of the millenium for the first four months, and then the wheels fall off shortly after the All-Star Break. I really don't like giving up Bibby either.
sauce-26 said:Maybe we can have a 3 team deal where we keep bibby and bonzi, but to get kg we have to give up b52.
Shouldn't be a problem as KG has never shown much leadership ability and that has always been a constant criticsm of him. Their best run was when they had Cassell who took his leadership skills off to Clipper land and lead them to their best run in forever.Venom said:KG + Artest= COMBUSTION
I think it is pretty well documented that Artest does not like sharing the leadership mantle.
moradi420 said:why would minnesota do this trade, if anything they'd ask for reef instead of kenny, better player, better attitude, and smaller contarct.