http://realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/397...nett_or_pierce/

would this be good.

Kind of depends on who they would have to give up. If they would have to gut the team to get him, then no, it wouldnt be good.

The offseason should be interesting.

Anything that brings us Kevin Garnett without losing Chandler, Hinrich, or Deng, is absolutely excellent. It's our only chance to really compete in the next year or two. If we keep those draft picks, we'll probably be a better team in 2008-09 and 09-10 as the guys we draft, Deng, and Chandler keep growing up, but 06-07 and 07-08, we would have the tools to make a quality run at a high playoff spot.

Chandler plays the same position as Garnett, we have to package him in any trade...

I'm all for this as long as Noch, Hinrich and Deng are not included. Otherwise, have at it, just don't give everybody up....

I say Chandler, Our 2nd 1st rd pick and gordon...

Then draft Aldridge or Davis or Thomas or Noah with the 1st pick.

I agree that I wouldnt want to lose them either but, I HOPE TO GOD we do not get Garnett this offseason. His knees are shot and I wouldnt be suprised if he retired in about 2 years because with all that banging around since he was 18, hes been in the league I think about 10+ years now and what isnt he like 30 now? Garnett is now past his prime and though he is still good, not likely for long. I dont want a guy with bad of knees he has. I might like the Idea of Pierce though but he is a SF and so is Deng, so were would they play?

Guys there is no way we get Garnett without giving up some big names. Minnesota has to have SOMETHING to take back to their fans, not just a couple of draft picks and some crap. You would have to think that one of Hinrich/Gordon and one of Deng/Nocioni, plus Tyson Chandler would have to go in addition to draft picks. Look what we got for a hugely inferior Eddy Curry, and tell me how we could get Kevin Garnett for less. There is no way.

The only way we could have him for less than market value is if he demands a trade from the Twolves and states he'll only go to the Bulls.

Basically he'd have to do what Shaq did when he left the Lakers.

Nobody knew the knicks would be that horrible.

Exactly.

I would insist we trade chandler, and it's probably a must because of the big contract.

If chandler, gordon, and the 2nd 1st-rounder was doable, I would not hesitate.

Another good example... Look at what the Lakers got for Shaq, even factoring his injury history, his age, and his weight, plus his demand to only go to Miami, and they still got a bunch for him. Another great reason why we aren't going to able to keep everyone if we want KG

I would have agreed if not for what happened with shaq. I had thought the heat were giving up to much talent and throwing too much money at someone who was on the decline, but now they're title contenders.

If we could make the trade without giving up too much and keeping one of the picks, I'd like it.

I'm just not keeping my hopes up.

And shaq is still much more valueable. The heat turned into true title contenders (So close to the Finals, probably if not for Wade getting hurt). butler was traded for someone even more worthless, and odom is still basically underachiving. And look at where the lakers are.

Kinda like what the White Sox have done...sometimes you gotta take chances.

Just because the Lakers screwed up with their next deals doesn't change what the package for Shaq looked like. Shaquille plays about 50 games a year and maybe the playoffs, the big reason the Heat make it is because of Dwayne Wade and good depth, although there is no denying Shaqs contribution when he does play. KG plays everygame, every year, and puts up numbers right about as good as Shaq, with no supporting cast to speak of. I would have to imagine that along with KGs age makes him much more attractive to a team than ONeal would be.

The Lakers got absolutely Jack Sh*t for Shaq. They literally got screwed.

They got the wonderful pleasure of taking on Brian Grant's contract which was so horrendous they used that amnesty provision to drop him like a rock last summer to avoid the luxury tax on it, Lamar Odom, another overpaid piece that seems to not fit in anywhere it gets plugged, and Caron Butler, who was packaged to Washington with Chucky Atkins for Kwame Brown.

The worst part of that was Brian Grant's albatross. They gave up Shaq to get one of the worst contracts outside of Manhattan, and that screwed them out of any decent salary cap space for several more years, to the point that Kobe may start wearing down before they can bring in anyone to play alongside him.

i am in the same place i do not want to give up half our starting line up just for KG he will olny be in the league for 2-3 years he is good but not for long. i would rather keep our draft picks and be a playoff caliber team in two years then give up all of our young good talent for one old excellent talent. if we get Aldridge or Tyrus and then get Roy or Brewer we will be a good team.

Garnett makes our team a lot better, but it's not really going to help if it costs us Hinrich or Deng and Chandler. I'd pray that Gordon, Nocioni, and the two picks is enough (yeah, I know, not too likely). Otherwise it's not really worth the deal.

How are his knees shot? Did I miss something? Last I checked he's still playing every night, and doing it damn well. He's still extremely athletic, and he's still putting up over 20 points, 10 boards, and 4 assists. This is his 11th year and he's 30 in May, but that still doesn't mean he's close to the end. He could easily have 5 good years left. Getting Garnett or O'Neal is the only way we are any kind of threat in the near future. No two players in this draft make us an immediate conference finals threat: those guys do if we can get them without gutting the team.

Plus Pierce has been a 2 guard for some time now, which would fit in well if we deal Gordon.

The package was a lot more impressive at the time of the deal, although obviously now it looks like crap. Odom was coming off an All-star level season, Butler was a fairly promising young forward that already was playing pretty well, and Grant was still a somewhat productive forward at the time. Yeah, it wasn't really an acceptable package for Shaq, but they were desperate to move him, and that was the best they could do. They didn't get a decent big man back in the deal, which has really killed them.

Again, why wouldn't you wanna trade tyson in a package for Garnett???

If it could be tyson instead of a draft pick along with Ben and Noc, I'd do it in a heartbeat. And that's probably more on par depending on how the salaries need to match up...

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2389608
Wolves owner comes out and says he won't trade KG.

I don't really have anything angainst trading Tyson, but trading one big man and another pick that could get us another decent one seems like it's a little much. I don't really see that as a lot of progress even though Garnett is about 10 times better than anyone we have right now. We'd need to find another center, which we're already having problems with. If we could somehow keep the Knicks' pick, which I'm not sure we could, then yeah, I'll even pack Tyson's bags.

Until KG asks to be traded.

This would probably be one of the very few times I side with a player if he asks to be traded. KG is known as a class act and a fiece competitor who wants to win. He's done all that he could with the wolves, but the right pieces have not been put around him and he's getting too old to go through rebuilding since it does seem that he would really want a ring.

I wouldn't want to trade Tyson in a deal for KG because KG is the compliment Tyson needs. Tyson can play some excellent defense down low and rebound damn well, but he just can't handle it as an offensive player.

If we were to move Tyson for KG and also had to drop our #1 draft pick...KG would basically be our big guy. By taking on KG, we'd have blown all of our salary cap room, so we'd basically be totally unable to sign anyone, and if getting KG costs us both Tyson and our #1 pick, then we would have no way as far as I can see to effectively have both a center and a power forward. Literally, that Schenscher or whatever the hell his name is would probably wind up in our starting lineup. That, I see it, would simply be terrible. We couldn't compete with teams at the top of the division if Garnett had to guard both Rasheed and Ben Wallace, for example.

If it was Tyson, and we still got to keep our #1 pick...I could tolerate that, if our draft pick was top 2-3. You can't give up both though.

But they're both PFs, and KG is light years ahead of tyson. They play the same position, and it's just weird to me keeping tyson along with the player he's supposed to at least be half as good as at this point. Neither is a C. Plus I feel that tyson is overpaid.

And it said in my post that you quoted that I would only wanna give up one draft pick. Unlikely, I know.

I doubt they'd take tyson, ben, and the 2nd 1st-rounder instead of the 1st, but I'd cream my pants if that happened. It's possible if KG really wants out and is a huge closet Bulls fan? He doesn't seem like the disgruntled type. Anyways, I'm not a big fan of playing GM and these make-believe scenarios since I'll probably always be wrong.