ESPN Report: Most NBA GMs Would Not Trade Wiggins For Love

http://www.fearthesword.com/2014/7/14/5898871/polled-gms-wouldnt-trade-andrew-wiggins-for-kevin-love




ESPN Report: Most GMs wouldn't trade Andrew Wiggins for Kevin Love
By Chris Manning  @cwmwrites on Jul 14 2014, 1:49p 163




In a survey that polled 12 NBA GMs, seven said they would not trade Andrew Wiggins for Kevin Love.


Since LeBron James announced that he would be coming home, there has been increased speculation that the Cleveland Cavaliers would make a deal to acquire Minnesota Timberwolves forward Kevin Love. Of course, any such deal would likely have to incude No.1 overall pick Andrew Wiggins as the centerpiece.

With Cavs coach David Blatt saying that Wiggins won't be traded, it would appear the Cavs won't be Love's ultimate landing spot. And according to 12 NBA GMs polled by ESPN Insider Jeff Goodman, the Cavaliers are making the right call by choosing Wiggins over Love. Seven of the 12 said they wouldn't trade Wiggins for Love.

Here are what some of the GMs on Team Wiggins had to say:

"Kevin is a perimeter big," added one coach. "He needs to have the ball on multiple possessions to be really effective. It will be very difficult for a first-year coach to divide possessions between LeBron, Kyrie and Love."

"Wiggins is going to be really good in time," added an NBA general manager. "Right now he can shoot and defend. Playing off LeBron and Kyrie [Irving] will take a lot of the pressure off him in the present. He could become a go-to scorer in a few years."

"I feel like Wiggins may only be a year or so away from being a legit contributor," one front-office executive said. "And Wiggins is cheap, so you are able to add more. Love is gonna cost a ton."
And here are what some of the GMs on Team Love had to say:

"Why wait on Wiggins when Love makes them better now," one assistant GM said. "And if you don't get Love now, he's going to be a Laker next summer."

"Without a doubt. Cleveland would be a top-five team in the NBA and the top team in the East -- with Chicago and Indiana a close second and third," an NBA exec said.

"Cleveland becomes the favorite to win it all with the trio of LeBron, Kyrie and Love. With Wiggins, it's going to take time. Sure, he'll give you a terrific defender -- but now you have that with LeBron."
There is merit to the idea that Love would take up a ton of both cap space and touches. Both James and Irving are high usage players and that doesn't mention Dion Waiters. And with Love, the Cavs would be close to being capped out in the future and then be tasked with the year-to-year challenge of finding role players that fit on cheap contracts.

Of course, you wouldn't be wrong to suggest that dealing for Love is the right move either. He would give the Cavaliers three stars near or in their prime. If the Cavs are trying to win it all next season, then it would be hard to argue that Love wouldn't the move to make.




bob
MY NOTE:  They only polled 12 out of 30 and it was 7-5 against, so it wasn't lopsided.  The question here is "what would YOU do if YOU were a GM?". To make this deal work, according to the NBA Trade Machine, Cleveland would have to sign Wiggins first, wait 30 days and then include him in the trade. No problem, just set it up in advance but don't pull the trigger until August and it'll work.



.

Hah...

I'd keep Wiggins. His upside is wayyy too high to trade for Kevin Love.



KJ

I would do this if I was Cleveland.
If they traded Wiggins, Bennett and Varajeo, they would still have enough talent in my opinion to get to the ECF, Finals or maybe win the championship.
They would have the best trio in basketball in LeBron, Love and Irving.
Add to that, Waiters, Thompson, and whatever other veterans want to sign to try and win a championship.

The votes that count are the GMs in Minnesota and Cleveland.

k_j_88 wrote:Hah...

I'd keep Wiggins. His upside is wayyy too high to trade for Kevin Love.



KJ

Agreed.
The present roster also has to be considered.
Irving and Wiggins in the backcourt is going to be too good to pass up.
Cleveland has said no way they're trading Wiggins and I don't think it's just talk.

tjmakz wrote:I would do this if I was Cleveland.
If they traded Wiggins, Bennett and Varajeo, they would still have enough talent in my opinion to get to the ECF, Finals or maybe win the championship.
They would have the best trio in basketball in LeBron, Love and Irving.
Add to that, Waiters, Thompson, and whatever other veterans want to sign to try and win a championship.

Tj,

I presume you voted 'other' because the trade you described isn't the one mentioned by reporters nor mentioned here because you leave Waiters out.

Yeah, I'd take that deal too if I was Cleveland.  I wouldn't if I was Minny.


bob


.

Outside wrote:The votes that count are the GMs in Minnesota and Cleveland.

Outside,

Not on this board, unless they register as members.


bob


.

I voted NO

Wiggins has way too much upside to move him.

Love is a good offensive player and an outstanding rebounder but he is a weak defender. He is a high volume, relatively low percentage shooter.

If they were (MN) willing to take Waiters and Bennett and a pick or two I would do the deal.

dboss

bobheckler wrote:

tjmakz wrote:I would do this if I was Cleveland.
If they traded Wiggins, Bennett and Varajeo, they would still have enough talent in my opinion to get to the ECF, Finals or maybe win the championship.
They would have the best trio in basketball in LeBron, Love and Irving.
Add to that, Waiters, Thompson, and whatever other veterans want to sign to try and win a championship.

Tj,

I presume you voted 'other' because the trade you described isn't the one mentioned by reporters nor mentioned here because you leave Waiters out.

Yeah, I'd take that deal too if I was Cleveland.  I wouldn't if I was Minny.  


bob


.

Bob,

I did not vote, I just posted.
Wiggins has great upside, but Love is a superstar right now.
Cleveland will be a win NOW team with Love.
That will probably do a lot to convince LeBron to re-sign.

Since when is 7 out of 12 "Most?"  Anything to force a story line.

Sam

Hi,
I voted yes (with Bennett). From Cavs standpoint.
They have 2-year window (at best) before Lebron goes elsewhere. You add KLove to KI, Waiters, LJ and AV. With this starting 5 they have high probability to go to the finals (IMO). If the keep Wiggins, even if he's a super-star, it'd take him at least 2-3 years to reach that level.
Obviously, in both cases there're so many ifs that you'd need a few Cray computers to calculate all permutations and probabilities. But at the first quick glance I'd say that KLove option has better chances. Plus, of course, KLove presence will convince Lebron to stay.


AK

tjmakz wrote:

bobheckler wrote:

tjmakz wrote:I would do this if I was Cleveland.
If they traded Wiggins, Bennett and Varajeo, they would still have enough talent in my opinion to get to the ECF, Finals or maybe win the championship.
They would have the best trio in basketball in LeBron, Love and Irving.
Add to that, Waiters, Thompson, and whatever other veterans want to sign to try and win a championship.

Tj,

I presume you voted 'other' because the trade you described isn't the one mentioned by reporters nor mentioned here because you leave Waiters out.

Yeah, I'd take that deal too if I was Cleveland.  I wouldn't if I was Minny.  


bob


.

Bob,

I did not vote, I just posted.
Wiggins has great upside, but Love is a superstar right now.
Cleveland will be a win NOW team with Love.
That will probably do a lot to convince LeBron to re-sign.

TJ,

This is gobbledy-gook.

You create a new trade, involving Varajao but no Waiters, and say this isn't 'other'.  

You say Wiggins has upside but Love will make LBJ re-sign without saying which is preferable to you. The trade you create appears to be more lopsided in favor of Cleveland and you don't provide any reasons for why Minny would go for it.

In short, you don't state an opinion, you just cite the obvious (Wiggins will be good, Love already is) and that, with your trade that keeps more valuable players in Cleveland, Cleveland would be a better team. Well, sure, that's what often happens when you land a lopsided trade. And then you say you're not voting even though you just fulfilled the criteria for one of the votes without explaining why your 'other' trade, which you don't say is an 'other' trade, makes more sense than the ones on the table.  I understand if you don't want to actually cast a vote but the question posed by the article is "what would you do if you were a GM?".

Sorry, but this just sounds like you doing your "Devil's Advocate" thing and not helping to move the discussion forward.  If you prefer your Varajao trade better, say why it would be more appealing to both front offices and therefore more likely to go through.



bob


.

bobheckler wrote:

tjmakz wrote:

bobheckler wrote:

tjmakz wrote:I would do this if I was Cleveland.
If they traded Wiggins, Bennett and Varajeo, they would still have enough talent in my opinion to get to the ECF, Finals or maybe win the championship.
They would have the best trio in basketball in LeBron, Love and Irving.
Add to that, Waiters, Thompson, and whatever other veterans want to sign to try and win a championship.

Tj,

I presume you voted 'other' because the trade you described isn't the one mentioned by reporters nor mentioned here because you leave Waiters out.

Yeah, I'd take that deal too if I was Cleveland.  I wouldn't if I was Minny.  


bob


.

Bob,

I did not vote, I just posted.
Wiggins has great upside, but Love is a superstar right now.
Cleveland will be a win NOW team with Love.
That will probably do a lot to convince LeBron to re-sign.

TJ,

This is gobbledy-gook.

You create a new trade, involving Varajao but no Waiters, and say this isn't 'other'.  

You say Wiggins has upside but Love will make LBJ re-sign without saying which is preferable to you. The trade you create appears to be more lopsided in favor of Cleveland and you don't provide any reasons for why Minny would go for it.

In short, you don't state an opinion, you just cite the obvious (Wiggins will be good, Love already is) and that, with your trade that keeps more valuable players in Cleveland, Cleveland would be a better team.  Well, sure, that's what often happens when you land a lopsided trade.  And then you say you're not voting even though you just fulfilled the criteria for one of the votes without explaining why your 'other' trade, which you don't say is an 'other' trade, makes more sense than the ones on the table.  I understand if you don't want to actually cast a vote but the question posed by the article is "what would you do if you were a GM?".

Sorry, but this just sounds like you doing your "Devil's Advocate" thing and not helping to move the discussion forward.  If you prefer your Varajao trade better, say why it would be more appealing to both front offices and therefore more likely to go through.  



bob


.

Bob,

I didn't mean to not give an opinion.
Waiters/Bennett/Wiggins is a lot to give up for Love, but I would probably do it if I was Cleveland.
I think Cleveland could win the championship next season with a core of LeBron/Love/Irving.

Boy how things have changed for the Cavaliers.
Five months ago they were beaten handily by the Lakers who were on a 7 game losing streak and who were down to 4 eligible players due to injuries and foul outs. The Lakers starting lineup that game was Blake, Farmar, Kelly, Johnson and Sacre. The next day they fired their GM. Now we or at least I am talking about them as a championship contender.

bob what do you expect from this guy, hes the same guy who claimed Nash's broken leg 2 years ago wasn't a serious injury and Kobe playing manically close to 48 minutes a game for 6-7 games in a row until he got injured at 35 had nothing to do with his injury.....everyone on the board expressed how wrong his reality/thinking was, but hes never wrong.

cowens/oldschool wrote:bob what do you expect from this guy, hes the same guy who claimed Nash's broken leg 2 years ago wasn't a serious injury and Kobe playing manically close to 48 minutes a game for 6-7 games in a row until he got injured at 35 had nothing to do with his injury.....everyone on the board expressed how wrong his reality/thinking was, but hes never wrong.

It's amazing how you can determine reasons for injuries like no one can, even team doctors...
The board buffoon is back again...never a well constructed opinion. Just bashing with green blinders on...

tj you were the ONLY one with that WRONG opinion, ofcourse the trainer is gonna try not to get the incompetent coach in trouble, there is a reason theres 12 active players on a team and no players in this era play 47-48 minutes a game, show me a 35 year old that averages 48 minutes a game and I'll show you an injured player, oh coaches and teams don't do that as they know the body won't hold up....go ahead deny, deny deny.

Still think Nash's injury wasn't serious? he hasn't been the same since, shame too cause I really like Steve Nash.

Right now, with Irving, Wiggins, LeBron and co., Cleveland is sitting pretty. Wonderful combination of youth and experience, scoring and defense, potential to be deadly next year and for years to come. I don't like it, but if I were them, I wouldn't trade that core. If Wiggins lives up half the hype,(and I think he'll exceed that), LeBron will stick around. Hawk

cowens/oldschool wrote:tj you were the ONLY one with that WRONG opinion, ofcourse the trainer is gonna try not to get the incompetent coach in trouble, there is a reason theres 12 active players on a team and no players in this era play 47-48 minutes a game, show me a 35 year old that averages 48 minutes a game and I'll show you an injured player, oh coaches and teams don't do that as they know the body won't hold up....go ahead deny, deny deny.

Still think Nash's injury wasn't serious? he hasn't been the same since, shame too cause I really like Steve Nash.

Sorry, I am not going to get into a long conversation about this.
Myself, Outside, others here along with numerous doctors have said that Kobe's injuries were not related.

Nash's injury? I don't remember who said what.
At first Nash was going to miss a couple of weeks.
Then his leg didn't heal.
Was it a torn Achilles or an ACL tear? No.
But since he didn't heal well, it turned into a long process.

What player averages 48 minutes per game?
Why do you continue to hijack others threads with hatred and to fulfill your own agenda?

you said the 48 minutes played didn't effect Kobe, obviously it did, sadly thats the last we saw of the great Kobe, obviously if they would have played him reasonable minutes, maybe you still would have been able to see the great Kobe....I'm done.

I have no hatred, you called me a buffon, I haven't lowered myself and called you names.....really done.

hawksnestbeach wrote:Right now, with Irving, Wiggins, LeBron and co., Cleveland is sitting pretty. Wonderful combination of youth and experience, scoring and defense, potential to be deadly next year and for years to come. I don't like it, but if I were them, I wouldn't trade that core. If Wiggins lives up half the hype,(and I think he'll exceed that), LeBron will stick around. Hawk

Agreed. Wish they weren't in the East.

Interesting point that Wiggins could be the key to James longer term. Could well turn out that way.

cowens/oldschool wrote:I have no hatred, you called me a buffon, I haven't lowered myself and called you names.....really done.

Your passive-aggressive post to Bob about me ("this guy") is hatred.

Instead of being so blinded, you should try developing some interesting points to share here.
My points may not be popular for obvious reasons, but I am generally pretty fair, accurate and knowledgeable with my posts.

Okay guys.  Time to wrap up this topic.  Sorry to horn in on your thread, Bob.

Sam