Kevin Garnett Trade Revisited

This is an interesting question. As we all know, Andrew Bynum has recently emerge as a crucial part of this team. Some may even consider him the second option behind Kobe Bryant, since Lamar seems to have now moved down as a third option. Given Bynum's work ethic and development, and his age (only 20 years old, less then 10 days older than OJ Mayo), sky is the limit for this young kid.

But giving up a future talent like Andrew Bynum for a 3 year opportunity to win a championship may not sound too bad at first. After all, Kevin Garnett is one of the front runners for MVP so far this season, and one of the best bigs in the entire league. But also keep in mind that Bynum alone would not have netted us Garnett. The Boston deal stripped them of nearly half their roster. Now, having a duo of Kobe and KG would have been magical, but given how many assets we would have given up in order to acquire him, we still probably would not be able to compete with the top notch teams of the west. Two superstars does not equal a championship, you need a good supporting cast as well to win, which we would not have had the trade gone through. Keep in mind that we had no way of landing another name if the trade had gone through, we didn't have assets like Boston did when they landed Ray Allen

Now, I'm not sure exactly what deal was proposed. My guess is that we would probably have to ship out Lamar Odom, who although has struggled, has picked up his game recently, and is averaging 15 and 9. Now, I know Odom has been a huge dissapointment, but keep in mind he returned to the court from surgery, without any training camp, and was forced to play a new role of small forward. He seems to be playing a bit better lately now that we moved him back to power forward. Another player that would have been in the deal was obviously Andrew Bynum, we probably would have also included Jordan Farmar, Kwame Brown, and the 19th overall pick (which landed us Javaris Crittenton).

pg: Fisher, Karl??
sg: Bryant, Vujacic
sf: Walton, Ariza
pf: Garnett, Turiaf, Radmanovic
c: Mihm

^ That is a team with a bunch of holes, epecially at point guard and center. I don't think we would be able to take Phoenix, Dallas, or San Antonio in a 7 game series. There are simply too many holes, and not enough depth

I'm not saying that if the deal was proposed again, I wouldn't even think about accepting it, but hindsight 20/20, I'm actually pretty happy the trade didn't go through

 

I would probably still have done it, no doubt in my mind.But if we would of landed KG we would have attracted many of the Free agents out there. Like Kappono and Posey would have probably been interested in signing with a team that has Kobe and Garnett.I don't know how are cap space would have look.Just if we sign Fisher and lets say Kappono we would have a line up like this:
PG Fisher
SG Bryant
SF Kappono
PF Garnett
C Mihm

Not bad.

 

I'm not sure about the timing of things, but I think we signed Fisher really early with most of our MLE (not exactly sure about the date). Now, unless Posey or Kapono were willing to come play for vet's minimum, I doubt we'd be able to sign them.

And by the way, Chris Mihm is absolutely horrible. Opposing centers would kill us every night. I wouldn't play him any more than 3 minutes per game, let alone start him

 

Yeah, I'm not really happy about how Mihm is playing.He looks like sh!t out there.

 

And for the record, I'm not saying that if the deal was proposed again, I wouldn't accept it. I'm just happy with the way our current roster is playing, and given that, it would take me some time to decide whether or not to make the deal

 

When was Kupchak a teammate of McHale? Obviously that was the primary requirement for trading KG.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Dec 26 2007, 04:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>When was Kupchak a teammate of McHale? Obviously that was the primary requirement for trading KG.</div>
Now if only Bird will trade Danny Granger...

 

I still would have given up Bynum for KG. There is no arguement there.