The following trades are proposed by SI.com, Discuss whether or not you think the trades are good for the Wolves, or the other team. <font size=""4"">New Jersey Nets</font> SI.com's trade: Garnett ($21 million), Madsen ($2.1 million) and Wright ($664,000) for Jefferson ($11.2 million), Jason Collins ($5.8 million), Jeff McInnis ($3.6 million), Ilic ($800,000) and two future first-round picks. Source <font size=""4"">Los Angeles Lakers:</font> SI.com's trade: Garnett ($21 million), Madsen ($2.1 million) and Wright ($664,000) for Bynum ($2 million), Lamar Odom ($12.3 million), Chris Mihm ($4.2 million), Aaron McKie ($2.5 million) and a future first-round pick. Source <font size=""4"">Chicago Bulls</font> SI.com's trade: Garnett ($21 million), Mark Madsen ($2.1 million), Bracey Wright ($664,000) and a 2008 first-round pick for Gordon ($3.9 million), Thomas ($3.3 million), Deng ($2.6 million), Brown ($8.6 million), Malik Allen ($1.8 million) and the Bulls' 2007 first-round pick. Source <font size=""4"">Indiana Pacers</font> SI.com's trade: Garnett ($21 million) and two future second-round picks for O'Neal ($18.1 million) and Danny Granger ($1.4 million) Source
I think the best deal for the Wolves is the Bulls trade but Chicago would never do that. Gordon, Thomas, and Deng are all young players who have the potential to become stars. I can't see the Bulls trading away their future for Garnett who is on the decline. Also, I can't see the Lakers trading away Andrew Bynum and Lamar Odom not to mention all of the other pieces they give away in that deal. I think the most realistic trade up there is the Nets deal because it seems pretty equal and both teams would benefit.
The Nets scenario is the only one that I would even think about if I'm a GM. Why would LA give up Bynum so early in his career? AND Odom? I don't see that happening. Same with Chicago; no way they deal Gordon AND Deng. Indiana giving up Jermaine O'Neal and Granger? No way. O'Neal is basicly 90% of what Garnett is, and Granger is going to be a star. They'd be giving up two 'A' type trading pieces for one 'A' in Garnett. I don't think SI has a clue here. EDIT: I just reread it; they think Chicago would give up Deng, Gordon AND Tyrus Thomas for one star in Garnett That's one of the worst ideas I've ever heard. You sure this is Sports Illustrated, not a Wolves fan posting on some forum? <div class="quote_poster">Pballa Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Deng, a star?...wtf.</div> Absolutely; he's 21 years old, can play 3 positions, is an athletic freak and now is averaging 18.1 ppg, 6.3 rpg and 1.4 spg in his third year. By the time Deng is 24 or 25 we're going be talking about him in the same breath as Richard Jefferson, Rashard Lewis and Rip Hamilton. He's going to be a terrific player.
The Bulls and Lakers ones are pipedreams. No way would those teams give up that much young talent, as well as picks. The Nets one is huge ripoff against Minnesota, because you can't build your team around Jefferson and those first rounders wouldn't be in the lottery. The Pacers deal is pretty even, but it's a lateral move for both teams. I don't see why either would change so much to essentially be in the same position.
<div class="quote_poster">Schaddy Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">EDIT: I just reread it; they think Chicago would give up Deng, Gordon AND Tyrus Thomas for one star in Garnett That's one of the worst ideas I've ever heard. You sure this is Sports Illustrated, not a Wolves fan posting on some forum? </div> And the Bull's 2007 first round pick.
