ohiobucks1;1636251 wrote:We will see. Nobody had any reason to lie to me. They've also never lied before. I wouldnt have been told that a KLove trade was on, if it wasnt seriously being talked about, that i'm 100% sure of.

ohiobucks1;1636251 wrote:We will see. Nobody had any reason to lie to me. They've also never lied before. I wouldnt have been told that a KLove trade was on, if it wasnt seriously being talked about, that i'm 100% sure of.

sleeper;1636254 wrote:I'm sure a trade has been discussed but its a Minnesota wet dream to get TWO #1 OVERALL PICKS for Kevin Love with 1-year left on his contract.

ohiobucks1;1636256 wrote:I'm with you. But if the Cavs know that GS is willing to give up Klay, or Chicago is now willing to give up firsts in addition to Gibson and others, we may have just decided to jump the gun. I want to keep Wiggins, but the more I think about it, I'd pretty much give up anyone on the roster to make KI, Lebron, and Love together happen. THat's a TRUE big 3, and if we dont give up any of our 1sts in the trade, we can continue to supplement our roster going forward.

sleeper;1636258 wrote:Love didn't want to play in GS that's why the trade never went through. No one is going to give up anything significant without the 'a-okay' from Love since he ultimately controls signing an extension or not.

By Love stating he wants to play in Cleveland, that gives Cleveland all the leverage, not Minnesota.

ohiobucks1;1636259 wrote:I was under the assumption that the reason Love didnt go to GS was not his unwillingness to go home, but because they refused to give up Klay... He has yet to publicly say "I will only resign for Cleveland" so unless he does that, we do not have all the leverage.

ohiobucks1;1636259 wrote:I was under the assumption that the reason Love didnt go to GS was not his unwillingness to go home, but because they refused to give up Klay... He has yet to publicly say "I will only resign for Cleveland" so unless he does that, we do not have all the leverage.

sleeper;1636260 wrote: every team in the league has leverage over Minnesota and some have more than others.

Why didn’t we ever feel sorry for Carmelo? It’s simple — he placed himself in this situation. He could have waited until the summer of 2011, opted out of his first Nuggets extension and signed with New York as a free agent. Instead, his agents forced a midseason trade that kept his previous contract in place (more money, more leverage). Here’s what that extra money effectively cost them (and Carmelo): Danilo Gallinari, Wilson Chandler, their 2014 first-round pick (turned out to be 11th overall), and a first-round pick swap in 2016. Four super-tradable assets … out the window.

A few other players were involved, including Felton and Timofey Mozgov (sent to Denver) and Billups (sent to New York). And that’s where this deal gets darker. After the 2011 lockout ended, the Knicks used their amnesty on Billups solely to create cap room to sign Tyson Chandler. When Amar’e degenerated into The Artist Formerly Known As Amar’e two seasons ago, they didn’t have an amnesty left to snuff out his remaining $40 million. Whoops. Unable to improve their roster last summer, they stumbled into the comically bad Bargnani trade. This summer, they couldn’t sign any impact players.

All in all, that was a catastrophic trade considering Denver didn’t have any leverage whatsoever. And it happened because Carmelo wanted more money — the same choice he made last weekend, again, and the same choice you and I would probably make too. Carmelo inadvertently created the narrative that threatens to defines him. There’s a good chance he will play his entire career, then retire, without ever finding the right team. Unless the Knicks miraculously strike oil next summer, his own version of the 2011 Mavericks can’t happen. His prime will come and go, and that will be that.

ohiobucks1;1636256 wrote:I'm with you. But if the Cavs know that GS is willing to give up Klay, or Chicago is now willing to give up firsts in addition to Gibson and others, we may have just decided to jump the gun. I want to keep Wiggins, but the more I think about it, I'd pretty much give up anyone on the roster to make KI, Lebron, and Love together happen. THat's a TRUE big 3, and if we dont give up any of our 1sts in the trade, we can continue to supplement our roster going forward.

Commander of Awesome;1636267 wrote:Eh I don't agree with this. Kyrie is a good young PG that can score. But he's not an elite distributor and horrible on defense. Plus he's always hurt. Love is a great stretch 4, but again injury concerns, doesn't elevate his teammates, and I'm still not convinced he's even an avg defender (havent had time to go through advanced def stats yet). I see that as 2 good, and 1 elite player. The big difference here is the relative age of the 3 with all being under 30.

robj55;1636269 wrote:Love won't have to elevate his teammates, that's what Lebron does. Love is a walking 20-12 every night easily and can stretch the defense for Lebron and Kyrie to get in the lane. He can get better on defense and certainly would imo playing on a championship level team.

Commander of Awesome;1636270 wrote:Great points, he would def help the team. Still wouldn't give up wiggins for him.

Commander of Awesome;1636270 wrote:Great points, he would def help the team. Still wouldn't give up wiggins for him.

Mulva;1636271 wrote:Anyone seeing this stupidly overblown Waiters twitter controversy?

Mulva;1636271 wrote:Anyone seeing this stupidly overblown Waiters twitter controversy?

lhslep134;1636275 wrote:What, Waiters saying he wouldn't accept a role coming off the bench, at 4 in the morning?

lhslep134;1636275 wrote:What, Waiters saying he wouldn't accept a role coming off the bench, at 4 in the morning?

SportsAndLady;1636276 wrote:Right. And his response was "noooooo"

People are retarded and like to stir up shit

ohiobucks1;1636244 wrote:Fair, just figured i'd tell you guys what I heard. I am not sure whether i'd rather be right and get love, or wrong and keep wiggins.

KI
Dion
Lebron
Love
AV

Mike Miller
TT
Delly
Harris
?
?


That's a pretty loaded team. I think we could easily win 60 games with that squad. We'd certainly shorten our window of success though...

lhslep134;1636275 wrote:What, Waiters saying he wouldn't accept a role coming off the bench, at 4 in the morning?

SportsAndLady;1636277 wrote:@ChrisMannixSI: One exec on Cavs chance at K-Love w/out including Andrew Wiggins. "No way. If I'm Minnesota, I want Wiggins, Dion Waiters and two No. 1's."

Lol I would end all communication with Minnesota if that is the case.

Love hasn't even gotten to the PLAYOFFS. I know he's really good but you don't mortgage your future for Kevin love.